On May 5, 2008, at 2:05 PM, Jason Zietz wrote:
Jared M. Spool wrote:
By the way, a lot of this comes from people who do a surface
analysis on what makes games popular. In gaming, you can't have it
be too easy. There is a requirement, for a successful game, for
select users to have mastery that most users don't. In my
experience, managers who promote the if-we-make-it-too-easy-we'll-
erode-our-market philosophy often cite the success of video games
as a rationale.
I have to strongly disagree with this sentiment. Look to the
Nintendo Wii and the recent popularity of casual gaming for examples
where this notion does not hold. I have been playing video games
for an embarrassingly long time and yet my Mom can still give me a
run for my money when playing Wii Tennis. That doesn't make it any
less fun nor does has it made the game unsuccessful.
Jason,
I'm sure your mom is very good at Wii Tennis. I'm sure she could whoop
my ass at it. (My confidence in the statement comes from the fact that
I've been beaten by 60-year-old first time players more than once,
even though I've been playing for months now.)
In competitive play (person v. person), the challenge comes from
players who are close. If your mom's skill towers above yours, then
you won't find it fun to play her (since she whips your ass each time)
and she won't find it fun to play you (because you provide a wimpy
challenge). It's only if your skills are close to comparable that
you'll find long term enjoyment from the game itself. (There may be
external factors that make it fun, but we're talking about gameplay
here.)
In solo play (person v. computer), the computer has to adjust its
challenge level to meet yours. It's the same issues: If the computer's
challenges are too great, they scare starting players off. If they are
too simple, the player becomes bored. The best games constantly adjust
the challenges to be slightly more difficult than the player's current
level.
Andrei very wisely brought of World of Warcraft. Because of the multi-
player aspect of this game, it has the issues of both solo and
competitive play. It also is very successful because of its social
aspects (sort of a new-millennium version of hanging-at-the-mall-with-
peeps), which adds a dimension of community and camaraderie not
possible in solo-play games.
But my original point had to do with manager's superficial analysis of
gaming popularity. As I stated before, this is faulty thinking, but
it's the origin of a lot of the don't-make-it-too-easy thinking that I
see.
Jared
Jared M. Spool
User Interface Engineering
510 Turnpike St., Suite 102, North Andover, MA 01845
e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] p: +1 978 327 5561
http://uie.com Blog: http://uie.com/brainsparks
________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
