Times chief film critic on videogaming

[linkster]

...most stupid people. Christ, most British people find chess baffling!

Hardly stupid. Most people can't see the point in something like Space Invaders. I mean there *is* no point. It's a waste of time. Most people have things they'd rather be doing.

[Mr Spew]

No, that's not what I said you Doraemon toting Wapanese excuse for a middlecore henchman. The lack of inclusion is one thing he highlighted with the gaming experiences he had, that's fine, however he also made historical comparisons on the evolution of gaming. This produces a quandary, after all if he was new to gaming how would he be informed enough to actually comment on the medium's evolution?

This is coming from you Cackface? You're the one that wants to BE Japanese. I just own a Doraemon plushie I found in Chinatown, is that illegal to you? Oh, well, it must be in Cackyland. In his little mind.

Where does he go into the history of gaming? And just because someone's new to something doesn't mean they're not uninformed.

Sorry, I meant "evolution"...

[squirtle]

The lack of inclusion is one thing he highlighted with the gaming experiences he had, that's fine, however he also made historical comparisons on the evolution of gaming. This produces a quandary, after all if he was new to gaming how would he be informed enough to actually comment on the medium's evolution?

Just because he has heard of Atari and knows that videogames exist does not mean he knows how to play them. I would reckon that's the answer to that one.

[mlewis]

No, that's not what I said you Doraemon toting Wapanese excuse for a middlecore henchman. The lack of inclusion is one thing he highlighted with the gaming experiences he had, that's fine, however he also made historical comparisons on the evolution of gaming. This produces a quandary, after all if he was new to gaming how would he be informed enough to actually comment on the medium's evolution?

He's talking about the accumulated knowledge that a gamesplayer is assumed to have. As a newcomer, he's perfectly qualified to identify these instances where something is not obviously explained or introduced to the player, yet is still a required skill.

He means accumulated conventions through the history, which if you had watched evolve you would have seen develop and thus been aware of. Otherwise, it takes much more of an effort to penetrate. In this respect, he is in as good a position to comment as most of us.

[Comrade]

No, that's not what I said you Doraemon toting Wapanese excuse for a middlecore henchman.

Ban request - that's the worst example of an insult I've ever seen in this forum.

[Dimahoo]

Hardly stupid. Most people can't see the point in something like Space Invaders. I mean there *is* no point. It's a waste of time. Most people have things they'd rather be doing.

*edit*

No, but i got the impression this Times fella actually didn't realise how complex they were.

But to your point - all games (apart from something educational like Civilisation or Sim City) are a waste of time. But then, so is any pursuit.

Its about enjoyment, as you know.

[linkster]

Hardly stupid. Most people can't see the point in something like Space Invaders. I mean there *is* no point. It's a waste of time. Most people have things they'd rather be doing.

*edit*

No, but i got the impression this Times fella actually didn't realise how complex they were.

But to your point - all games (apart from something educational like Civilisation or Sim City) are a waste of time. But then, so is any pursuit.

Its about enjoyment, as you know.

I agree. The comment was in response to saying that people are stupid for not playing games.

[Cacophanus]

This is coming from you Cackface?  You're the one that wants to BE Japanese.  I just own a Doraemon plushie I found in Chinatown, is that illegal to you?  Oh, well, it must be in Cackyland.  In his little mind.

I am fine wherever I am and have no intention of "being" anything else.

Where does he go into the history of gaming?  And just because someone's new to something doesn't mean they're not uninformed. 

Sorry, I meant "evolution"...

He makes analysis between how games used to play and how they play now (which specific emphasis on "play" here). Now, if he really was coming in fresh how could he comment on how older games played? After all, he had never played games before (by his own confession).

Moreover, "hearing" about Atari does not equate to making analysis on their older games.

[Graham S]

Cacky, he doesn't have to have played Pong or Space Invaders to know games are more complex that they used to be: just about everyone in the world has a fair idea about what was involved in those games.

The problem for people like me is this: hardcore game players have become bored with the cliches of their chosen pastime, and developers have responded by making the games more intricate, and therefore more baffling to the novice.

I'm not entirely convinced he's well enough informed to know the reasons why games have become more complex, but he's right that they have, that's undeniable, surely? (Please don't give a counter example of how many switches on a PDP whatever were used to play space war, or some other intricate game that was played on a mainframe by white coated scientists, the point still stands)

[Mr Spew]

I am fine wherever I am and have no intention of "being" anything else.

He makes analysis between how games used to play and how they play now (which specific emphasis on "play" here). Now, if he really was coming in fresh how could he comment on how older games played? After all, he had never played games before (by his own confession).

Moreover, "hearing" about Atari does not equate to making analysis on their older games.

Then assuming other people are something which they aren't, is just idiocy.

People are allowed to comment on things like that, you know? It's like commenting on war now and how it was. No one could really know how it was, but can guess.

Maybe he did play games 'back in the day', you don't know that.

[Stroker Ace]

I've said it before, but Metal Gear Solid's codec hints system is the best way forward.

If you're struggling, it detects this and gives you a clue about what to do/where to go. If you still don't get it, it just tells you

Well noted. It's a system that worked very, very well indeed.

[Badger]

How about the number of people watching Bollywood films vs numbers watching Hollywood ones?

Get out of your insular little world. This is like the "discussion" the other week about women playing games. Dominated by one guy going "my girlfriend likes the sort of games I do so women generally do". Do not extend your immediate experience and assume that everyone behaves in the way those that you choose to be around do.

Games people (and this includes the development community) generally underestimate just how much reach other mediums have, and just how niche they actually are. Every other medium goes to much greater lengths to analyse the sort of people consuming their stuff than games people do, largely to tell advertisers, but also to enable them to produce stuff to attract audience to attract advertisers. (Advertisers/brand owners interchangable there). I get the distinct feeling if the games industry was fractionally as comprehensive in it's research as the tv industry is they'd come to some pretty nasty conclusions very quickly, which is why they don't do it, it is easier to bury your head in the sand, as I think you are doing.

I'll try again

Bollywood top grossers of last decade...

Gadar Jun-15-2001 Rs. 65,00,00,000 Rs. 74,43,47,155

2. Kabhi Khushi Kabhie Gham Dec-14-2001 Rs. 45,00,00,000 Rs. 51,53,17,261

3. Koi Mil Gaya Aug-08-2003 Rs. 48,84,16,386 Rs. 51,49,85,756

4. Kaho Na Pyaar Hai Jan-14-2000 Rs. 35,00,00,000 Rs. 41,59,72,722

5. Kal Ho Na Ho Nov-27-2003 Rs. 35,84,86,066 Rs. 37,79,87,354

Just need to figure out a conversion into dollars...

figures from www.ibosnetowrk.com

The top one grossed: 16,252,121.29

Oddly enough, you comparing this discussion with your "discussion" the other week about women playing games is an example of you doing exactly what you presume I am doing:

Do not extend your immediate experience and assume that everyone behaves in the way those that you choose to be around do.

I know that Bollywood is immensely popular. I don't believe that everyone behaves the same way as one or two people.

I do believe that encouraging the critic in this case to try a game such as Halo, which has a cinematic training sequence which follows certain cinematic conventions would have been better than lumping him with Ico.

I disagree when you say that you should inflict a Gangster or Fantasy type game on him because only a few geeks ever watch science-fiction films, particularly when I provided eveidence that they are some of the biggest grossing INTERNATIONAL films of all time.

And if you'd like a different example, what about Conflict Desert Storm. Complicated game but with a fairly good training session.

I'd be interested to hear if he read the instructions for either game for longer than two seconds, or just jumped straight in. I'd imagine the majority would only ever take the briefest glimpse at introductions before then getting into playing

[badgerpie]

I would argue that most of us here are far too close to games (and have played them for too long) to notice how initially diffcult games can be.

Occasionally my lady will watch me playing games, and if it's some kind of story/progress game like ICO of Prince of Persia, she'll see me do an action and her comment will usually be along the line of

"How did you know how to do that?"

or

"I would never have thought you could do that"

But becuase so many cliches have been reinforced over the years we simply don't notice them.

[Smitty]

Basically, this guy wants all games to be incredibly easy. Don't worry mate. As gaming becomes more ''mainstream'' they will!

Tosser. Of course you need a ''gamers skill set'' to play games. Go away and write film reviews.

And the rest of you, for once and for all, stop talking about games as art/movies etc etc. They're games. Games!

[Smitty]

I've said it before, but Metal Gear Solid's codec hints system is the best way forward.

If you're struggling, it detects this and gives you a clue about what to do/where to go. If you still don't get it, it just tells you

No, it's shit. I found one the most crappy, annoying things about the second game. You were told how to do every damn thing, and where everything was. Where's the challange?

Where's the pleasure of finding the hole in the fence by myself? Eh? I don't want to be spoon-fed the technique, the knowledge. To hell with the codec system.

[Pob]

No, it's shit. I found one the most crappy, annoying things about the second game. You were told how to do every damn thing, and where everything was. Where's the challange?

Where's the pleasure of finding the hole in the fence by myself? Eh? I don't want to be spoon-fed the technique, the knowledge. To hell with the codec system.

Maybe there should have been a "la la la I'm not listening" button.

[MNFRMTMRRW]

Totally agree. The problem is, we cannot understand that a control scheme can be very difficult for a newbie. We have played hundreds of games and all have a pretty much similair control scheme. However, if you have never played a game, you are not used to using a controller. You haven't seen this type of control evolving over the years.

This is exactly what Miyamoto has mentioned serveral time. With Super Mario Sunshine, and Super Mario 64 a little bit less, they lost a lot of potential players. And look at your own life. In the past, I have been playing many games with girls for example. Think about Tetris, Super Mario Bros, the first Super Mario Kart. Girls liked those games.

They also like Singstar, Eye-Toy and Dancing Stage. They also like Super Monkey Ball, which only requires them to use the analog stick. Why?

Because they understand how to control those games. It is much more natural and does not require evolved skills we have developed.

This looks stupid to us. For me, its the same as putting someone who has never driven a car in a Ferrari or Porsche. He will crash, believe me. Someone whom some of you might know, Niels 't Hooft once logged about this. His girlfriend was new to gaming as well, and he introduced her to it by starting with Tetris, then Super Mario Bros, then A Link To The Past and so on and now she is playing all other games with him as well.

But I agree with Miyamoto, controlling a game should be more natural so that anyone can play a game, not only the experienced people. Hardcore games will always remain to exist, and we can play those.

[johnj]

so has anyone sent him a link to this thread, Im sure he isnt too busy to respond to his article, I WANT A RESPONSE TO EVERY LAST POST.

That is all.

[badgerpie]

Maybe there should have been a "la la la I'm not listening" button.

Exactly, perhaps the best solution would be something like the codec or some guide that you can toggle the involvement of.

You could have levels

1) I'm new to games and need all the help I can get

2) I like the occasional prompt when it looks like I'm stuck

3) I've seen it all before, let me work out how to do it.

[roadkill]

I'll try again

Bollywood top grossers of last decade...

Gadar Jun-15-2001 Rs. 65,00,00,000 Rs. 74,43,47,155

2. Kabhi Khushi Kabhie Gham Dec-14-2001 Rs. 45,00,00,000 Rs. 51,53,17,261

3. Koi Mil Gaya Aug-08-2003 Rs. 48,84,16,386 Rs. 51,49,85,756

4. Kaho Na Pyaar Hai Jan-14-2000 Rs. 35,00,00,000 Rs. 41,59,72,722

5. Kal Ho Na Ho Nov-27-2003 Rs. 35,84,86,066 Rs. 37,79,87,354

Just need to figure out a conversion into dollars...

figures from www.ibosnetowrk.com

The top one grossed: 16,252,121.29

Oddly enough, you comparing this discussion with your "discussion" the other week about women playing games is an example of you doing exactly what you presume I am doing:

I know that Bollywood is immensely popular. I don't believe that everyone behaves the same way as one or two people.

I do believe that encouraging the critic in this case to try a game such as Halo, which has a cinematic training sequence which follows certain cinematic conventions would have been better than lumping him with Ico.

I disagree when you say that you should inflict a Gangster or Fantasy type game on him because only a few geeks ever watch science-fiction films, particularly when I provided eveidence that they are some of the biggest grossing INTERNATIONAL films of all time.

And if you'd like a different example, what about Conflict Desert Storm. Complicated game but with a fairly good training session.

I'd be interested to hear if he read the instructions for either game for longer than two seconds, or just jumped straight in. I'd imagine the majority would only ever take the briefest glimpse at introductions before then getting into playing

Did you lose your own argument with yourself there or is it just me?

If all those Bollywood lovers paid as much to see them as we do to see Hollywood films the balance would be different.

Halo etc. are way too complex to get someone new to games into them. It's first person for a start. Bizarrely third person seems a lot more intuitive because you can understand better how you fit into your environment.

As others observe, most people here only seem to know other people that also play games. If you know absolute gaming virgins (most of the population by miles) then you'd know they are that way partly by choice, and partly due to initial complexity.

Games are a dead transitory medium already though. They only exist to enable take up of next generation STB technology. They're already becoming too expensive to make, risky for the returns, and this will only increase moving into the next gen. We're already seeing more publishers/developers hitting the wall with Acclaim looking dodgy and Interplay gone. Mobiles and handhelds will provide a temporary outlet for medium sized companies, but come the likes of XBox3 (if it ever arrives, most likely it will be a spec listed on an STB sheet) it will probably get a grand total of 4 premium games in it's lifetime because that's all the collective user base would be able to fund. All other games will be either retro remakes or branded for advertising purposes.

This is, of course, until virtual prostitution becomes possible. At that point, and no time before, will the medium go mainstream. Unfortunately society will simultaneously collapse because we'll all be otherwise occupied.

[john square]

Only thing I wanted to say is that Gaming does have it's own idiom and conventions and these are a trifle baffling to a newcomer.

I remember spending Xmas one year playing Bust a Move on my new playstation. BAM is one of the games that is cited frequently as an entry level game. I was at my partner's home, and my father-in-law was sat in the lounge for much of the time the console was on, gawping at the new technology. After five days of watching me and Mrs. Square play, he asked if he could have a go. After 20 minutes he asked why sometimes the coloured balls would vanish, and sometimes they wouldn't.

He hadn't sussed that you needed three of a kind to make 'em pop.

He knew it had something to do with colours, but hadn't got the numbers, and the chain reactions confused him further.

Consider all the other little standards (power-ups in crates, big switches to open domestic doors, etc.) that bear no relation to any real life experience, and then think about the way gaming looks to the rest of the world.

[pancho]

Basically, this guy wants all games to be incredibly easy. Don't worry mate. As gaming becomes more ''mainstream'' they will!

Tosser. Of course you need a ''gamers skill set'' to play games. Go away and write film reviews.

And the rest of you, for once and for all, stop talking about games as art/movies etc etc. They're games. Games!

No-one mentioned the games as art debate. Nor did anyone state that games were films. The point of the article commission was to examine the synergy between the two forms.

I don't think he wants games to be easier- he simply stated that the difficulty in games inherent in their unwritten intiation laws will hinder their progression into the mainstream.

[Smitty]

Excuse me, I was a little mad earlier.

[pancho]

Excuse me, I was a little mad earlier.

you ranting bastard

[Badger]

Halo etc. are way too complex to get someone new to games into them. It's first person for a start. Bizarrely third person seems a lot more intuitive because you can understand better how you fit into your environment.

As others observe, most people here only seem to know other people that also play games. If you know absolute gaming virgins (most of the population by miles) then you'd know they are that way partly by choice, and partly due to initial complexity.

Games are a dead transitory medium already though. They only exist to enable take up of next generation STB technology. They're already becoming too expensive to make, risky for the returns, and this will only increase moving into the next gen. We're already seeing more publishers/developers hitting the wall with Acclaim looking dodgy and Interplay gone. Mobiles and handhelds will provide a temporary outlet for medium sized companies, but come the likes of XBox3 (if it ever arrives, most likely it will be a spec listed on an STB sheet) it will probably get a grand total of 4 premium games in it's lifetime because that's all the collective user base would be able to fund. All other games will be either retro remakes or branded for advertising purposes.

This is, of course, until virtual prostitution becomes possible. At that point, and no time before, will the medium go mainstream. Unfortunately society will simultaneously collapse because we'll all be otherwise occupied.

Do you just like to repeat cobblers?

I know at least 3 or 4 people who have started playing Halo despite not playing any games before. Now I know this is extrapolating from my own experience, but without grabbing people off the street, it's the best i can do.

My argument, in case you choose to listen, is that it would make sense to give a novice gamer who has chosen to try and play games, a game with a training mode incorporated into it. Therefore using the same methods as learning to drive a car etc, by giving them a guiding hand.

I don't just mix with gamesplayers you know. I do occasionally meet people in the course of my life who don't have a Neo Geo or worship Shigsy....

Gaming will become mainstream becuase the younger generations are now reaching adulthood and are still playing. Look at the average age of this forum and I bet it'll increase over the next couple of years...As these kids become adults, and then parents, so gaming will continue to grow...

Gaming will have to continue to evolve with technology, but to suggest that games are way too complex is missing the point of gaming....Why do people prefer playing poker to snap?

[Badger]

Oh and roadkill.

You never explained how science fiction only appeals to geeks, yet half of the highest grossing International films are about science fiction.

And yes, I take your point about differences in prices leading to a difference in box office receipts, but considering you have providded cock-all evidence to abck up any of your assertions, I couldn't really give a toss. Bollywood films will also benefit from a much larger audience according to you, as they appeal to a whole population, as opposed to the Sci-Fi films that just appeal to a few geeks. So surely they should still earn money, even at a lower price point?

[Sprite Machine]

Gaming will have to continue to evolve with technology, but to suggest that games are way too complex is missing the point of gaming....Why do people prefer playing poker to snap?

I think you miss his point.

Would someone who's never played a card game before be better off playing Snap or Poker? Exactly.

Now, imagine the game of Snap no longer exists, and all card games are as complex as Poker (or more so)... how you gonna get people into playing cards now, eh? You could teach them Poker, but it's a heck of an uphill struggle for someone who doesn't even know how many cards are in a deck.

[Badger]

I think you miss his point.

Would someone who's never played a card game before be better off playing Snap or Poker? Exactly.

Now, imagine the game of Snap no longer exists, and all card games are as complex as Poker (or more so)... how you gonna get people into playing cards now, eh? You could teach them Poker, but it's a heck of an uphill struggle for someone who doesn't even know how many cards are in a deck.

But my point is that you don't have to have played Snap to play Poker.

IF, you have the right tuition, you could be led into playing Poker straight off...

E.G.

Driving a car. Many people have never driven one before. They have probably seen over people do it, the same as they may have seen people play video games. They are then taught from the basics by the instructor.

Some games do that, such as Halo and Conflict: Desert Storm, for example.

So why not give those two, to a film critic to play, consdering they both cover genres especially prevalent in cinema, and both have certain cinematic conventions.

Roadkills response was that sci-fi films are for geeks only......

As a seperate answer to yourself, it may be an uphill struggle to jump straight into Poker, but it is possible, and it's the complexity that makes it fun.

And kids these days are seemingly able to cope with ever increasing technological complexity, and that's where any growth into the mainstream will come.

Kids are using mobiles for instance at an ever younger age, and therefore dabbling in games like Snake etc...

That's your Snap....

There's no point worrying about a generation that remember the invention of TV....the middle-aged and above will be a case of us reaching that point...

[Sprite Machine]

But my point is that you don't have to have played Snap to play Poker.

IF, you have the right tuition, you could be led into playing Poker straight off...

E.G.

Driving a car. Many people have never driven one before. They have probably seen over people do it, the same as they may have seen people play video games. They are then taught from the basics by the instructor.

As a seperate answer to yourself, it may be an uphill struggle to jump straight into Poker, but it is possible, and it's the complexity that makes it fun.

So you agree that it would be harder, yes? So when games do (and they will, as they have always done) get more and more complicated and intricate it will become increasingly more difficult for newcomers to 'get into' them, meaning more and more people put off of them, yes?

No-one is suggesting it isn't possible to play Poker without having played Snap first, but the point is for those who have played Snap, Poker is far easier. It's the struggle into the unknown which will put people off.

[squirtle]

Pfft! Snap! Where's Go Fish! when you need it?