|
5. Play Together
By far the most popular games in our lab were those that sported local multiplayer, particularly if there was a cooperative element. Our class of players found that teaming up together was not only great fun, but also enabled experienced players to guide and protect the novice player.
Local split screen action was notably absent from many of the PS3 and 360 games, with only the Wii consistently sporting this option. Super Mario Galaxy, for example, proved most popular for father-son gaming. Although the dads attested to enjoying helping their kids through the levels, further inspection often told a different story. The kids were often giving their carers essential help and advice -- something they relished.
6. Deep Localization
Game localization is obviously a hot topic these days, with much effort lavished on the likes of Elite Beat Agents or the Phoenix Wright games -- which can lead directly to success. Whilst these are excellent at matching the culture and language of their audience, our gamers were, at times, frustrated by the way the games ignored the finer points of childhood in their locale.
An interesting example was the use of spelling in tutorials. One parent remarked, "I spend all day enunciating letters phonically to help my little girl at school, and then all my hard work is undone by the game joining up all the letters again." These kids are being taught to pronounce letters the way they sound in words rather than (as used to be the case) as abstract concepts. For example, they are taught to pronounce "a" as an "ah" rather than as an "A" sound.
Admittedly, it's a technical point, but this is a key nuance of her children's education. It may seem like nit-picking, but as games court a wider audience, these are the concerns they face. Localization becomes a multifaceted problem, rather than just trying to make jokes funny in another language.
7. Simple Handicapping
Our families included players with different levels of experience. The gap between gamers and those who hadn't previously touched a controller was a real problem when trying to setup balanced multiplayer games.
Some of our games, such as Mario and Sonic at the Olympic Games, had a handicap setting that made the job of creating a level playing field a lot easier. However, other games only provided characters or vehicles with different stats. Successfully applying these to a field of varying players became an overly complex task.
One dad came up with an interesting suggestion for play leveling -- "Why not make the winners a bit worse each time and the losers a bit better -- that would level the field and make you more likely to play again when you have just been beaten." We have to admit that he seems to be onto something here; dynamic difficulty adjustments would really help games with players of differing ability.
|
Printer-Friendly Version
Controllers is another interesting issue. Much of the complexity we see today is unnecessary for most games. They're designed for the most complex games, when a lot of great games barely use half of the buttons. Not to mention that controllers cost $30 each! Games would be much more party-friendly if controllers were cheaper, so everyone can play at the same time. With our huge HD TVs these days, we should be making games for at least 8 players at a time on the same screen.
The dynamic multiplayer handicapping is definitely an interesting idea. It just goes to show, often times people outside the industry come up with surprisingly good ideas. Of course, you'd have to be careful when implementing something like this - it could potentially be frustrating if done poorly.
But as you say, "...build it RIGHT and they will come."
What kind of crazy English is th... oh wait.
Great article!
Yep, the dynamic difficulty has been around in the industry since the dawn of time. Its known as rubber-banding. Though it has to be done very carefully or you can upset the game-play balance.
Although the weaker players feel great that they can then win. The skilled players can feel cheated, that despite their best (better) efforts, they still lose.
Done well, the rubber-banding must be transparent to the players.
I really think it's a stretch to cater to a market that clearly does not have a strong interest in games. While the wii is selling lots of systems, I want to see the sales #'s for the games that cater to these so-called needs of the family.
The wii's main selling point is Wii sports / Wii play, we have yet to see the attach rate of these so called 'casual gamers' who are willing to buy said games designed with features to cater to those audiences.
The comment by the dad about the PS3 costing more then his car is a sure sign that you mind as well be advertising to hillbillies.
Games have been dumbed down enough as it is with gamings increasing massification and many games becoming 'hands off' and gameplay has been increasingly automatted for the user the user.
I call it the "passification of gaming" where games get more and more passive and people basically turn on a robot that plays the game for them, at that point, why bother gaming?