| Avinash_Tyagi said: No actually playing through it for real, not just as a practice that doesn't count is far more effective at teaching, it won't help the time because you'll have to redo it for real. Yeah that's not a legitimate reason to not let people restart the guide, even if the guide died, it could respawn in seconds without a problem. No actually it does, because not every level will necessarily be too hard for the player to need the guide, so that player can enjoy the parts that they can play, and not have to worry about the parts that they don't. Your way just leaves them stuck and they give up and never play again, your way equals failure, also your way isn't what Nintendo is proposing, since I haven't seen anything from Nintendo that supports your argument. The reason to make them watch, is if they want to retake control and finish the level they can, if one part gives them a problem but the rest of the level they feel they can do, they can take control and start playing and finish the level and move on to the next. |
Yes, it does take slightly longer because you have to complete it for real as well, but the amount of time saved by not being killed by an earlier peril is often going to be greater (and if its not then just don't use the guide)
Yeah, cos reviewers and players are totally going to say that. No they aren't of course, reviewers will detract points and players will get frustrated and start to distrust the guide. Obviously Nintendo think it's not a viable solutions as well
Sure, its not exactly perfect linear trend, but the later levels are generally harder. Nintendo's way (ie what you refer to as my way) isn't perfect, but its a great improvement. Your way was tried, and was very disliked, I can't remember the name of the game - it was for the Wii, a horror game, set in New York I think? It was pretty bad I hear, and allowed you to skip levels, which lost it about 10 points on metacritic. Nintendo have said many things that state it is as I have said, such as patenting exactly what I said (and not patenting what you said)
