Official Edge Issue 132 Thread

[D-SG]

There is a reason our NTSC-UK awards this year feature no "most disappointing game" or "biggest turkey" - we just want to celebrate the best and get back to enjoying gaming.

I noticed and appreciated that, although the "Best Console" category is more trouble than it's worth too, IMO.

On topic, this issue of Edge was utterly fantastic and has spurred me on to resubscribe after a couple of years away, not to mention almost - almost - dissipating the hatred for all mewling human life that gaming forums have bred in me over the past year. Who'dathunkit?

And Exxos is back (sort of)! Like, OMG!!11one

[nomenclature]

"If you take gaming seriously you are an idiot"

If you put a 'too' in there you'd be closer to the truth.

[Duncan]

There is a reason our NTSC-UK awards this year feature no "most disappointing game" or "biggest turkey" - we just want to celebrate the best and get back to enjoying gaming.

I noticed and appreciated that, although the "Best Console" category is more trouble than it's worth too, IMO.

On topic, this issue of Edge was utterly fantastic and has spurred me on to resubscribe after a couple of years away, not to mention almost - almost - dissipating the hatred for all mewling human life that gaming forums have bred in me over the past year. Who'dathunkit?

And Exxos is back (sort of)! Like, OMG!!11one

you say the nicest things!

well done on the blessed, BTW. Seeing that you don't post 'there' anymore'

[Shevek]

Not wishing to slam EDGE, but I have found their reviews and consequent scores particularly erratic as of late. Admittedly their prose is still top notch but the magazine has become increasingly callous and fickle. I am enjoying gamesTM though, if only for the occasional flashes of grammatical brilliance (eg - "Were great!!").

I will say this though, for all the mental activity that goes into undermining EDGE's scores and reviews I would very much like to see that mental acivity matched on why EDGE is wrong in the first place.

[kaichunyau]

Picked up my copy from my nearest newstand on Saturday, and I admit that it's been the first issue in months that I've read cover to cover. Hell, even the Frontend section had interesting articles this month. Maybe it's just me though, not the magazine...

Anybody else notice how much Max Payne (review p105, screengrab at bottom of page) looks like Coronation Street's Richard Hillman though?

[Ady]

Some interesting points, but with this issue Edge is either trying to wind up so-called 'hardcore' players for sport, or trying to go for mainstream acceptance.

The 'Difficulty Curve' article is whiney bollocks.

Sometimes, games can be challenging, but part of the fun is rising to and eventually overcoming the challenge. Calling for a mass dumbing down, for games to bend to a player's skill (or lack thereof) is a specious argument, IMO.

And that's not 'hardcore snobbery' either. You don't get something for nothing in life, so why should you do so in a game?

[D-SG]

Sometimes, games can be challenging, but part of the fun is rising to and eventually overcoming the challenge.

Unless you haven't spent the last ten to fifteen years playing games, in which case it's at first embarrassing, then frustrating, and then you don't want to play them any more. And that's a shame.

And that's not 'hardcore snobbery' either. You don't get something for nothing in life, so why should you do so in a game?

Perhaps because games are by nature supposed to be about fun, not hard work? Just taking a stab in the dark, here, obviously.

It's possible to have challenging gameplay and cater to inclusiveness, but it's taking a while for that to catch on. I think the Edge article is just asking that we hurry it along, if only so people like my partner can stop assuming all games are ten minutes of wonder and excitement followed by an unending ritual of abject humiliation.

[martTM]

I am enjoying gamesTM though, if only for the occasional flashes of grammatical brilliance (eg - "Were great!!").

Oh, no - wait. You're jesting, aren't you? Ha, and indeed, ha.

[Ady]

Unless you haven't spent the last ten to fifteen years playing games, in which case it's at first embarrassing, then frustrating, and then you don't want to play them any more. And that's a shame.

If people find gaming so soul destroying, then why bother?

Perhaps because games are by nature supposed to be about fun, not hard work? Just taking a stab in the dark, here, obviously.

I guess it all depends on what one defines as 'hard work' and 'fun'.

I personally enjoy rising to a game's challenge and do not see it as a chore at all. If I didn't enjoy it, I'd find another hobby. What I wouldn't do is whinge, and expect games to bend to accomodate my incompetence.

Developers just cannot win; make games easy and people complain that they're "too short", make them a bit challenging and people complain that they're too hard.

It's possible to have challenging gameplay and cater to inclusiveness, but it's taking a while for that to catch on. I think the Edge article is just asking that we hurry it along, if only so people like my partner can stop assuming all games are ten minutes of wonder and excitement followed by an unending ritual of abject humiliation.

No disrespect to you, but I do think you're being a bit melodramatic, tbh. I firmly believe that if people find gaming so difficult, its obviously not the hobby for them. If they want to look at pretty graphics, stick to cinema.

[D-SG]

If people find gaming so soul destroying, then why bother?

Because surely good games - the ones we bring up every few weeks in the endless Games That Changed Our Lives threads - are astonishing, amazing, immersive, fantastic experiences that deserve to be shared with as many people as possible, not ghettoized.

What I wouldn't do is whinge, and expect games to bend to accomodate my incompetence.

Most of the people I know who aren't very good at games don't whinge either: they just lose interest, or muddle on quietly and wish things made a little more sense. It's not a case of pandering to "incompetent" players, it's about ensuring that a game experience is as open to play as possible, rather than felling prospective gamers at the first hurdle. (And the second, third, fourth and fifth).

No disrespect to you, but I do think you're being a bit melodramatic, tbh

I blame television. But what I've written is practically verbatim from the responses of borderline gamers I've talked to about why the prospect of gaming can be so unappealing. It's not all the stereotyped "games are ****" response; it's "games can make me feel like ****".

I firmly believe that if people find gaming so difficult, its obviously not the hobby for them. If they want to look at pretty graphics, stick to cinema.

You know, this sounds suspiciously like the "hardcore snobbery" you're refuting in your last post.

[Ady]

You know, this sounds suspiciously like the "hardcore snobbery" you're refuting in your last post.

That's not fair. All I'm saying is that mastering a game is a matter of skill. At first you will be 'humilated' (as you put it), but with practice and perseverance, you WILL succeed. You can only get better, after all.

All gaming requires is patience, and I think that's the problem a lot of people who complain about difficulty lack. They like the pretty graphics, but can't be bothered with the effort of actually playing the game.

As such, if it's such a problem, then perhaps gaming is not for them.

[D-SG]

That's not fair. All I'm saying is that mastering a game is a matter of skill.

Then I apologise, but it sounded like "if someone isn't very good at games, they shouldn't bother playing them." I'm with you on mastery, skill, challenge, all those words: but there needs to be more of an acceptance that some people would like to play a game through from start to finish without mastering it, just to have fun, even if they don't have the reaction times, the head for combos, the spatial perception, or the spare time to actually sink 20+ hours into a game.

I suspect that's a part of why cheat magazines are so popular - at least you get your 40 quid's worth rather than getting stuck at the end of stage 2 and being left with an empty unlockable features page.

At first you will be 'humilated' (as you put it), but with practice and perseverance, you WILL succeed. You can only get better, after all.

Like I said before, it's not my words - though I'm fairly rubbish at games, I can't say I'd ever felt that way about them - it's what people I've talked to about it have said: that it's embarrassing, frustrating and even humiliating to hit brick walls that the game (and gamers) assume are trivial, but are completely unnatural to a less-skilled player. And there's generally very little short-term reward involved in the death-retry-death-retry cycle, so you can't really blame them for losing interest.

There's no easy fix - simpler and/or shorter games isn't the answer, rather an appreciation from developers that they're not just making games for themselves, their test department and the blokes they know on a gaming forum. And there's plenty of evidence that this is starting to sink in - you can see it in titles as diverse as Amplitude, Crimson Skies and Kunoichi - although equally there's plenty of evidence that even user-friendly games still aren't setting the world alight in terms of sales.

But I think they could, and the more people playing games the better. Whether they're up for a challenge or just for ****s and giggles.

[Siri]

Sorry to butt into a (possibly) heated discussion, but...

http://www.gamecubeheaven.tk/

Just read on another forum that someone took Redeye's column a little too seriously. Just scroll down a little.

[Oh! My Car!]

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles - 4

getting that for sure, now

[Shevek]

Most of the people I know who aren't very good at games don't whinge either: they just lose interest, or muddle on quietly and wish things made a little more sense. It's not a case of pandering to "incompetent" players, it's about ensuring that a game experience is as open to play as possible, rather than felling prospective gamers at the first hurdle. (And the second, third, fourth and fifth).

The above you describe is most certainly a Western malaise (especially from someone who has lived almost their entire life in Japan and Korea), admittedly I am not advocating a superior form of gameplaying but I do wish the British (and their whinging ilk) wouldn't make so much of a hubbub over gameplay difficulty. It is also very interesting to note, that this malaise is almost entirely exclusive to the various impenetrable fortresses of Western gaming criticism. The average individual on the street almost gleefully welcomes insane difficulty levels (after all didn't Konami boost the difficulty on MGS2 for it's European release?), yet the various "informed" critics all seem to make a botch job of the games they cover.

An inclusive learning curve need not be the main focus of any design, and it is muddying the water of what the medium has to offer (eg - gaming!).

Surely there is nothing wrong with upholding standards?