Malstrom har altid ret

HGC fra Danmark skrev:
Four Swords (25-årsjubilumsudgaven) synes jeg virkeligt er dårligt. Jeg har ganske vist kun spillet det alene, og det er helt sikkert sjovere, når man er flere, men designet er simpelthen så ringe og kedeligt, at det næsten gør ondt. Det er ultralineært, ingen overworld, så godt som ingen fjender og et elendigt soundtrack. Jeg har kun klaret tutorialen (hvorfor gjorde jeg overhovedet det?), skovbanen og vandbanen, men jeg kan bare ikke få mig selv til at gå videre til Death Mountain, ikke alene i hvert fald.

HGC fra Danmark skrev:
Four Swords (25-årsjubilumsudgaven) synes jeg virkeligt er dårligt. Jeg har ganske vist kun spillet det alene, og det er helt sikkert sjovere, når man er flere, men designet er simpelthen så ringe og kedeligt, at det næsten gør ondt. Det er ultralineært, ingen overworld, så godt som ingen fjender og et elendigt soundtrack. Jeg har kun klaret tutorialen (hvorfor gjorde jeg overhovedet det?), skovbanen og vandbanen, men jeg kan bare ikke få mig selv til at gå videre til Death Mountain, ikke alene i hvert fald.

HGC fra Danmark skrev:
Var der ikke også noget multiplayer i Phantom Hourglass og Spirit Tracks?

Email: Skyward Sword made me hate mazes

[i]E-mail: Hello. I just got Skyward Sword through the post today and after running through the first “overworld” section in the forest, I’ve come across a problem with this game’s design that I haven’t seen mentioned yet. I don’t know if this is what you were hinting at in a previous post but I’ll bring it up anyway. So far we’ve talked about how “puzzles” (chores is a better word) seem to be infecting every part of Zelda’s game design and we all thought it couldn’t get any worse now that combat has become a puzzle. But I can tell you now that Nintendo have made EXPLORATION ITSELF a puzzle in Skyward Sword.

The problem first comes up in Faron Woods where, after helping a random NPC, the game’s helper Fi instructs you to find a character called the “Kwiki Elder” somewhere inside the forest. I immediately found this character on top of a raised platform in the centre of the forest area. But then I couldn’t find a way onto the platform and I realised I had to explore to solve the “puzzle” of reaching this character. The forest was basically a series of branching pathways and platforms with either walls or gaps on either side of the linear paths. Sometimes when I made my way to higher ground, I could push stepping stones to the lower ground and create stepping stones. After a long time wandering aimlessly I eventually found a rope I could swing across to the centre platform, at which point the Elder instructed me to find three more characters, each hidden in such a way that you’ll never find them without the new dowsing mechanic and more aimless wandering.

I’d say that the forest area is designed like a maze but don’t let that trick you into thinking the experience is actually deep and involving. I personally felt like a lab rat mentally marking off dead ends or loops in the maze until I reached my goal. There’s no point where this feels like a natural form of adventuring and there’s no point where I feel like I’d want to explore this maze again. Aside from a heart piece, there’s nothing else to find in this area. But here’s the thing that really grinds with me. If there’s one thing that Xenoblade Chronicles taught me as a player, it’s the value of a 3D overworld. As much fun as it can be to explore fields and plains in top-down 2D, there is a sense of excitement to be found when you climb a hill or mountain and then turn around, look over the landscape and savour your accomplishment as an adventurer.

Xenoblade made me realise that there are different reasons to enjoy 3D games compared to playing 2D games and even though 3D worlds may not be as popular, they can nonetheless be exciting. But Skyward Sword twists that concept, rips out its heart and creates a 3D world that feels entirely soulless. It makes a mockery of 3D worlds altogether. There is absolutely no way that I’d want to explore the new Faron Woods again and I honestly don’t believe that there will be any depth to the other areas in the game.[/i]

Malstroms svar: Another satisfied customer.

It is not mazes you dislike. It is the lack of choice. What makes games interesting is the player having a choice. This is why puzzles do not work in this day and age. There is no ‘choice’ involved. You either solve the puzzle or you do not. How boring. The reason why adventure games became popular on the PC is because it gave an illusion of choice (whereas most it was just dealing with the horrible user interface). And the reason why adventure games died is because everyone realized there was no real choice involved in the games. Player choice is what makes games interesting.

Exploration, by definition, implies choices. Do you go into the cave or not? That is a choice. Do you go up the mountain or not? That is a choice. When we talk about ‘freedom’ and ‘non-linearity’ in gaming, we are referring to being able to make choices.

Even a simple game like Super Mario Brother is filled with choices. Do you stomp on the goomba or avoid it? Do you go down the green pipe or pass it? Do you break the block or not? Do you get the power-up or not? World 1-1 avalanches the player with choices.

The reason why player choices make games interesting is because it illustrates the player’s personality. This is why some games are fun to watch others play (and games that are fun to watch are also ones that correlate to selling well). Games are not about developers expressing their personality. Games are about the gamers expressing their personality.