Mise said:
Quote-box monster go! EDIT: Isn't 1. a common thing in gaming anyway, even when the content is completely static? The kind of replaying isn't just playing the level over and over. He specifically said "real world time" based. Which means that some things would unlock over time, or on a certain day. So tell me how common it is to play a specific game at a specific time when normally once you've beaten a game, you can borrow a friends game and play that. Games used to be played over and over when there was no such thing as a save system. But now it's more uncommon. Especially with 5-10$ games at gamestop or friends or piracy or the library, or friends....yadda yadda yadda. 2. This is ok if the content is user generated. However, that either means that users needs to be in on the ground floor, as designers, which means they should probably be getting paid, which means that the bonus of user generated content (free content) is moot.
I don't think he meant that ALL content in the game is user-generated, unless there's some sort of design contest planned before the release - which would most likely be completely infeasible and costly as hell. That's right, he didn't mean all content. And niether did I. I think you'd prefer that I said that so that you could have a point, but my whole point was that it would cost more to have content that only some gamers would be able to play if it was done by the designers themselves. This was in response to people saying that the extra content would come in before the game was sold, not afterwards by other gamers for download. A "design contest" which you are suggesting is also completely infeasible, which was my whole point from the get-go. That it MUST cost more than it would have normally which leads into the next part about why it is still infeasible to even do this post sale by the users themselves. 3. Even if the User generated content comes post sale, there is no guarantee of quality, regularity, consistency, accessibility, piety, or likability.
Which is a permanent problem with any and every game that supports (or is made to support) custom content. Also - Piety? Since when did 2D platformer levels have to adhere to religious values? I forgot to mention that they would also have to build an editor which would more inefficient for devs to use for programming the levels. So that would also cost more. But yes, this is a problem with every custom content game, except that it is specifically a problem for Nintendo for these reasons. Lack of a "Nintendo network" to monitor what is offensive and what is not on top of inability to have a youtube like ratings system for comments and suggestions from people other than your people on your friends list, which significantly affects the amount of content and interaction. Finally, yes, Nintendo cares about its consumers and would never let anyone play a Mario game, specifically, if it could offend people and tarnish the brand name. So yes, piety is important to the clean cut character of mario. 4. Those games you listed change very small aspects of the levels. For example, water is simply a speed change, enemy list change, and background color change. User generated content is not simply changing the enemies.
Maybe, but the changes don't have to be that minor. For example, a rainy weather effect could affect your jumps, flight capabilities and powerups (ie. Fire and ice flowers, frog suit), make certain surfaces slippery, raise the present water level so you can (not) access some areas, unlock some lightning-based puzzles, raise or lower some areas of the level etc. I pretty much already summed this up in the next part. This is done in almost every single game nowadays. This is not a vision, or an idea. Which is why Malstrom never meant it in this way. He meant large design changes. But kudos to everyone who is trying to protect their master mal by deliberately misinterpreting what he said. His vision is infeasible, just as you agreed earlier, and for various other reasons that I've mentioned. And having drastic level-changing effects and custom content in a game also means that levels should be designed with a high level of redundancy in order to guarantee their quality, which is not something your average gamer will even consider. Bingo 5. Even if you think that slightly changing levels is enough, it's certainly not what this guy is talking about. He's talking about ever changing levels, a living environment of change.
Which would be completely infeasible in this case since there's no real way to implement quality control in a game where the maps are completely random. It's a nice vision, though. But like I've said, infeasible. And, for the most part, kinda dumb. It takes all the best parts of Little Big Planet, and then takes away the ability to select the level you want, and when you want to play it. You are dependant on the game deciding when and what to show you. Any claim other than this, that maybe he's saying there would be a way to pick the levels you want, is untrue. The feel of the game would be different, it's also not what he said, and finally it becomes little big planet with mario characters. He's basically talking about LBP:Mario edition, where the levels you select are on a level map, rather than a globe like in LBP. And user made levels get incorporated into the existing map groups. So instead of picking the maps you want to play, they pick themselves for you.
I don't think Malstrom was going for just a Mario game with a physics engine and downloadable levels. I think you meant to say "I don't think SO. Malstrom......" To which I will disagree in part. I never said anything about a physics engine, but this is what he wants. A game that evolves on it's own based on DLC from users and other programmed elements of time like the kind in Animal Crossing. Which, from what I've pointed out, is infeasible for many reasons including: extra cost, management of online content, server space, does not appeal any more than other marios to expanded audience, lack of an open online network, among many other reasons. |
I also think it's interesting that an important part of my argument was never addressed or quoted. The fact that almost every game does this now.
