By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - The rumors were true: Nintendo games can now play themselves!

noname2200 said:
brute said:
I guess it's good for the casuals, but people will attack this alot.

I'M attacking this! Unless a game's difficulty balance is ridiculously uneven (which happens more than it should, I admit), this feature's just hurting the player: you're not learning how to play the game, you're just plain giving up. So what are you going to do the next time you encounter a rough spot (or even rough-er spot)? You haven't improved since last time, so you pause the game and let it play again....and then you repeat this process in a few minutes....and yet again....until you blink and realize that the game's over, wasn't-that-fun?

And I know it's purely optional, which is why I'm not foaming at the mouth here or anything. I'll even admit that I can see some uses for this in co-op games and the like, where the players' skills are very unequal. But it seems to me that this is a mistake overall, for reasons I can't completely explain (I'll try though).

A large chunk of most games' fun comes from the challenge it offers, even if that challenge level is fairly low overall. After all, I don't think anyone has too much fun with a "press A to win" type of game. This feature removes that challenge almost entirely, and the worrying part is that the people who will use it the most are likely to be people who rarely play games (demonstrably, they already have the least interest in gaming). While this may initially seem like a plus (finally my girlfriend will play with me! And if things get tough, we'll just auto her out) I actually think it'll have a negative effect on gaming overall: I fear that people who use this feature will end up simply sitting and watching the game play itself more and more often (why not take the path of least resistance, especially when you're not all that dedicated to the hobby in the first place?). And when that happens, I think it'll be inevitable that increasing numbers of people will get bored of gaming and just walk away. The process may not be logical, but from what I've seen of human behavior I think it'll happen to lots of people, more than this feature helps draw in.

I concede that there's a problem, and that this is Nintendo's attempt to address it. But I really don't think this is the wisest way to go about things. I think Nintendo would be much better served if they took the time to fine-tune the balance on their games, in such a way that even novice players have a chance to test and improve their skills before encountering tougher challenges. I'd even toss in a video service of some sort, as a sort of hint system to show lost players how others do it. But doing it for them? I don't think that does anyone any favors.


I dont like it but it must be done...they need something to play to.

Around the Network

That's great, tbh. That gives Nintendo the leeway to make their games harder.



Xen said:
That's great, tbh. That gives Nintendo the leeway to make their games harder.

I doubt nintendo has made any hard games since gamecube :/



noname2200 said:
brute said:
I guess it's good for the casuals, but people will attack this alot.

I'M attacking this! Unless a game's difficulty balance is ridiculously uneven (which happens more than it should, I admit), this feature's just hurting the player: you're not learning how to play the game, you're just plain giving up. So what are you going to do the next time you encounter a rough spot (or even rough-er spot)? You haven't improved since last time, so you pause the game and let it play again....and then you repeat this process in a few minutes....and yet again....until you blink and realize that the game's over, wasn't-that-fun?

And I know it's purely optional, which is why I'm not foaming at the mouth here or anything. I'll even admit that I can see some uses for this in co-op games and the like, where the players' skills are very unequal. But it seems to me that this is a mistake overall, for reasons I can't completely explain (I'll try though).

A large chunk of most games' fun comes from the challenge it offers, even if that challenge level is fairly low overall. After all, I don't think anyone has too much fun with a "press A to win" type of game. This feature removes that challenge almost entirely, and the worrying part is that the people who will use it the most are likely to be people who rarely play games (demonstrably, they already have the least interest in gaming). While this may initially seem like a plus (finally my girlfriend will play with me! And if things get tough, we'll just auto her out) I actually think it'll have a negative effect on gaming overall: I fear that people who use this feature will end up simply sitting and watching the game play itself more and more often (why not take the path of least resistance, especially when you're not all that dedicated to the hobby in the first place?). And when that happens, I think it'll be inevitable that increasing numbers of people will get bored of gaming and just walk away. The process may not be logical, but from what I've seen of human behavior I think it'll happen to lots of people, more than this feature helps draw in.

I concede that there's a problem, and that this is Nintendo's attempt to address it. But I really don't think this is the wisest way to go about things. I think Nintendo would be much better served if they took the time to fine-tune the balance on their games, in such a way that even novice players have a chance to test and improve their skills before encountering tougher challenges. I'd even toss in a video service of some sort, as a sort of hint system to show lost players how others do it. But doing it for them? I don't think that does anyone any favors.

Interesting perspective. You have a point, but I think you exaggerated it a bit.

But I'm sure the player will be rewarded if he plays it as much as possible without using this "auto-play".



Soriku said:
Vashyo said:
Xen said:
That's great, tbh. That gives Nintendo the leeway to make their games harder.

I doubt nintendo has made any hard games since gamecube :/


FE is supposed to be hard. TP is harder than TWW. SMG is pretty hard at times. And they've made a bunch of RPGs and such which all have their own set of difficulties.

So...what are you talking about?

Even casual games like Wii Sports can be hard. Try getting all platinum trophies...


ARE YOU KIDDEN ME!!!! ...TP is the easiest Zelda ive ever played, and sunshine was harder than Galaxy

Around the Network

I'm just going to copy/paste what I wrote in the news section:

"
There are ways to make this a good thing.

1. Make sure that, as this article states, it doesn't happen automatically when you stop playing.

2. Don't give the player any points or recognition (money, titles, anything the particular game holds of value) when they use this feature.

3. Have some kind of incentive (like extra points, items, or levels) for players to beat the whole game by themselves.

4. Allow the player to go back and redo the parts that the computer did for them.



I mean, this has plenty of benefits.

A) In a Mario-ish game, the challenge isn't in knowing what to do, but in having the reflexes to do it yourself. If someone uses it to see what they need to do, then they can try to do it themselves.

B) In NSMBWii in particular, if a single player needs a bathroom/drink break, they can turn this on, and keep up with the other players while they're away.

Another thing is, this obviously won't do anything other than completing the basic section of the game. It won't find secrets, take hidden passageways, find faster ways of doing stuff, etc.

"

 

This also allows them to make much more difficult gameplay for us core gamers without alienating a newcomer.



Could I trouble you for some maple syrup to go with the plate of roffles you just served up?

Tag, courtesy of fkusumot: "Why do most of the PS3 fanboys have avatars that looks totally pissed?"
"Ok, girl's trapped in the elevator, and the power's off.  I swear, if a zombie comes around the next corner..."

Oh no! Next thing you know they'll be adding warp pipes, that cloudy thing, and P-wings! Really, this isn't much different. It's just that the presentation is a little less creative, and the purpose is more obvious.



"Now, a fun game should always be easy to understand - you should be able to take one look at it and know what you have to do straight away. It should be so well constructed that you can tell at a glance what your goal is and, even if you don’t succeed, you’ll blame yourself rather than the game. Moreover, the people standing around watching the game have also got to be able to enjoy it." - Shiggy

A Koopa's Revenge II gameplay video

Chrizum said:
I can't see how this is anything but great. Think of the possibilities: Nintendo now has the freedom to make extra hard levels, and they don't have to dumb down their games for casual gamers.

Excellent news.

 

Exactly.



 

http://www.shanepeters.com/

http://shanepeters.deviantart.com/

Achievement is its own reward, pride only obscures.

HATING OPHELIA- Coming soon from Markosia Comics!

noname2200 said:
brute said:
I guess it's good for the casuals, but people will attack this alot.

I'M attacking this! Unless a game's difficulty balance is ridiculously uneven (which happens more than it should, I admit), this feature's just hurting the player: you're not learning how to play the game, you're just plain giving up. So what are you going to do the next time you encounter a rough spot (or even rough-er spot)? You haven't improved since last time, so you pause the game and let it play again....and then you repeat this process in a few minutes....and yet again....until you blink and realize that the game's over, wasn't-that-fun?

And I know it's purely optional, which is why I'm not foaming at the mouth here or anything. I'll even admit that I can see some uses for this in co-op games and the like, where the players' skills are very unequal. But it seems to me that this is a mistake overall, for reasons I can't completely explain (I'll try though).

A large chunk of most games' fun comes from the challenge it offers, even if that challenge level is fairly low overall. After all, I don't think anyone has too much fun with a "press A to win" type of game. This feature removes that challenge almost entirely, and the worrying part is that the people who will use it the most are likely to be people who rarely play games (demonstrably, they already have the least interest in gaming). While this may initially seem like a plus (finally my girlfriend will play with me! And if things get tough, we'll just auto her out) I actually think it'll have a negative effect on gaming overall: I fear that people who use this feature will end up simply sitting and watching the game play itself more and more often (why not take the path of least resistance, especially when you're not all that dedicated to the hobby in the first place?). And when that happens, I think it'll be inevitable that increasing numbers of people will get bored of gaming and just walk away. The process may not be logical, but from what I've seen of human behavior I think it'll happen to lots of people, more than this feature helps draw in.

I concede that there's a problem, and that this is Nintendo's attempt to address it. But I really don't think this is the wisest way to go about things. I think Nintendo would be much better served if they took the time to fine-tune the balance on their games, in such a way that even novice players have a chance to test and improve their skills before encountering tougher challenges. I'd even toss in a video service of some sort, as a sort of hint system to show lost players how others do it. But doing it for them? I don't think that does anyone any favors.

 

It's optional. Therefore it is incredibly wise. I can't see a single negative to this.

 

Microsoft and Sony knockoff's: Imminent.



 

http://www.shanepeters.com/

http://shanepeters.deviantart.com/

Achievement is its own reward, pride only obscures.

HATING OPHELIA- Coming soon from Markosia Comics!

Shanobi said:
noname2200 said:
brute said:
I guess it's good for the casuals, but people will attack this alot.

I'M attacking this! Unless a game's difficulty balance is ridiculously uneven (which happens more than it should, I admit), this feature's just hurting the player: you're not learning how to play the game, you're just plain giving up. So what are you going to do the next time you encounter a rough spot (or even rough-er spot)? You haven't improved since last time, so you pause the game and let it play again....and then you repeat this process in a few minutes....and yet again....until you blink and realize that the game's over, wasn't-that-fun?

And I know it's purely optional, which is why I'm not foaming at the mouth here or anything. I'll even admit that I can see some uses for this in co-op games and the like, where the players' skills are very unequal. But it seems to me that this is a mistake overall, for reasons I can't completely explain (I'll try though).

A large chunk of most games' fun comes from the challenge it offers, even if that challenge level is fairly low overall. After all, I don't think anyone has too much fun with a "press A to win" type of game. This feature removes that challenge almost entirely, and the worrying part is that the people who will use it the most are likely to be people who rarely play games (demonstrably, they already have the least interest in gaming). While this may initially seem like a plus (finally my girlfriend will play with me! And if things get tough, we'll just auto her out) I actually think it'll have a negative effect on gaming overall: I fear that people who use this feature will end up simply sitting and watching the game play itself more and more often (why not take the path of least resistance, especially when you're not all that dedicated to the hobby in the first place?). And when that happens, I think it'll be inevitable that increasing numbers of people will get bored of gaming and just walk away. The process may not be logical, but from what I've seen of human behavior I think it'll happen to lots of people, more than this feature helps draw in.

I concede that there's a problem, and that this is Nintendo's attempt to address it. But I really don't think this is the wisest way to go about things. I think Nintendo would be much better served if they took the time to fine-tune the balance on their games, in such a way that even novice players have a chance to test and improve their skills before encountering tougher challenges. I'd even toss in a video service of some sort, as a sort of hint system to show lost players how others do it. But doing it for them? I don't think that does anyone any favors.

 

It's optional. Therefore it is incredibly wise. I can't see a single negative to this.

 

Microsoft and Sony knockoff's: Imminent.

Trust me, it won't happen