For all the Haters you should probably start reading the Heading first its called "SECRET TO THE CASUAL" not [secret to what Hardcore fanboys wants!]

of course hardcore can put up with large amounts of texts and cut scenes and tutorials they are fanboys after all !

but you hardcore really think casuals can put up with that crap? that is his main point.. if you guys still dont understand you guys just missed the logic train!

Are you calling me hardcore? If so, you don't know me very well.

Reading through the thread I see pretty rational arguments on both sides, except for yours, fearless.

If he writes for himself, then why is he publishing it?

So people can tear it apart, and he can see what holds up.

He's probably an egomaniac, since, in my experience, they often make endless jokes about their egomania, but then also do something pretty brilliant to back it up.

In Malstrom's case, he properly analyzed the reasons for Wii's success before it occured, while journos, analysts and businesses couldn't. And since then, he's done a pretty good job of breaking down the different contexts that different groups look at the gaming market through, while continuing to predict how the future of Wii will shape up.

He's certainly not a technically good writer. I think (and hope) it's just shtick when he claims to be.

But the point is, no one else has a good, consistent explanation for what's going on in the gaming market from a business perspective.

This particular article does a pretty poor job of putting things into the wider context of art in general, and mixes general design rules (integrate the tutorial, make it fun right away) with things that are just currently at the end of their cycle and should be avoided because gamers are tired of them, not because they aren't ever entertaining (cinematics; story-driven games).

I don't agree, I think there have been plenty of people explaining the success of the Wii better and more accurately.

BTW, Sam Cooke One Night Stand is masterpiece.

celine said: Wait he has a new site ? Bookmark it immediately

 It is the News section on his original site. He has been posting there for weeks =)

Yeah I think that the major problem of that article is that not all the readers know about his "Theory of Cycles".

What he is talking about is in the context of the declining Cinematic Trend with the arising of Social Gaming Trend.

Lol you abviously didn't read Malstrom's "Why Wii Won". That article was released the day of Wii launch and predicted with fairly good accuracy not only that Wii will tears apart competitions but also why .

Not only that article but many of its "wiikly time" works are really great and were all written before Wi launch.

PS: If you want read them apost a link i the first page of this thread.

I really like his previous writings, but he went completely overboard on this one.
Calling games with a tutorial broken games is probably the most dissapointing phrase he ever wrote and it also completely destroys his credibility for me, cause because if this I have the feeling that no longer he uses facts, business principles and scientific theories to prove his point, but merely tries to over-value casual gaming principles.

Why you wonder?

There is a certain game, by the same man he hailes in every article, coincidentally often named as the best game ever that has quite an extensive tutorial.

Wonder what this game is?

It's #1 on both metacritic and gamerankings.

He is just a troll. :) I don't mind him, this guy makes me feel good about owning only 360 and "elitist/hardcorez/broken/blahblah" games. :D

I agree with a lot of his points. Games shouldn't have tutorials, tutorials are boring.

That doesn't mean your game can't be complex, but there are other ways to teach the player. Nintendo games don't have tutorial stages, what they do is they integrate the "tutorials" into the story and the character development. In Zelda, _you_ aren't learning how to handle the sword, LINK is learning it.

Metroid Prime does the same, the first space ship is basically a tutorial, but it doesn't feel that way, because you are thrown right into the action. I think this also his how Nintendo came to the principle of item upgrades in the first Zelda and Metroid games. Your character starts with very few abilities, so you learn how to control it very quickly. Then, as you become more skilled and venture further into the game; you get another ability/weapon, and then you get a lot of game time to master that new ability or weapon before the game gives you more upgrades.

This is the design that is now regarded as classic, and it's a big part of what made the old Nintendo games so popular; very easy to get into, but hard to master.