IGD: PARENTS VS. STEAM.

Anything else
User avatar
Phoenixwarrior141
Posts: 1433
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2013 12:37 pm
Location: I've lost all sense of direction, I'm quite concerned to be honest.

IGD: PARENTS VS. STEAM.

Post by Phoenixwarrior141 » Tue Jun 03, 2014 5:20 pm

Oh boy, bring out the popcorn, I found something I can start a discussion about!

Here's a link to a post I wholeheartedly disagree with:
http://steamcommunity.com/app/212680/di ... 613578711/


A summary of this post: "FTL is not appropriate for kids and needs a difficulty setting for them, it could teach them things valued at my (And potentially other) companies.

It's a great game that should reach another audience and will benefit them as a result."

That's not it exactly, but that's as nice as I can put it while staying on topic.

That hit home for me, I love and worship FTL (Our god, his son Tree Jesus) so this was an insult and a (SHAMEFRUL DISPRAY) a disgrace to think that he would assume the community would be okay with him going against what FTL tried to be and that the developers would be fine going against their original vision and would make this JUST for him.

I mean, if you played FTL, you know this would never work and that this guy shouldn't have expected anything (He's at least 40 by the way, his own words) because of the nature of the genre, I mean come on, FTL's difficulty isn't going anywhere anytime soon and I doubt that kids would play it even if it got easier, nor would they learn anything.

But this is(n't) a rant, so here's the question of discussion:


On a scale of one to ten (1 being "GO KILL YOURSELF" and 10 Being "WHY ISN'T THIS A THING?") how accepting should gamers be of people like this guy?

I personally like a middle ground of 3-ish, We shouldn't simply cast them away but we shouldn't allow parents to think they own the gaming industry, much less (Occasionally) helpless indie devs who might buckle under all the pressure from parents.

User avatar
Grayswandir
Short end of the stick
Posts: 3655
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 12:37 am
Location: Robbing the cradle.

Re: IGD: PARENTS VS. STEAM.

Post by Grayswandir » Tue Jun 03, 2014 5:27 pm

I don't think this thread needs to go any further because its silly. You're silly, Phoenixwarrior141. Silly man. You silly.

User avatar
EPR89
Posts: 1845
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2012 8:57 am
Location: Germany

Re: IGD: PARENTS VS. STEAM.

Post by EPR89 » Tue Jun 03, 2014 5:47 pm

I haven't played the game, but I really don't get what you are so upset about. He's suggesting an additional easier difficulty. If the game's theme is child friendly, I think this could be done easily. The experience would not change one bit for people choosing to play it at a higher difficulty setting.

User avatar
Phoenixwarrior141
Posts: 1433
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2013 12:37 pm
Location: I've lost all sense of direction, I'm quite concerned to be honest.

Re: IGD: PARENTS VS. STEAM.

Post by Phoenixwarrior141 » Tue Jun 03, 2014 6:14 pm

Grayswandir wrote:I don't think this thread needs to go any further because its silly. You're silly, Phoenixwarrior141. Silly man. You silly.
...

Welp, I don't know how to respond to that...


At all.
EPR89 wrote:I haven't played the game, but I really don't get what you are so upset about. He's suggesting an additional easier difficulty. If the game's theme is child friendly, I think this could be done easily. The experience would not change one bit for people choosing to play it at a higher difficulty setting.
This instance is one of many, many others that have happened on other games (Plague Inc, Half Life: Opposing Force, Gunpoint and others that I don't even own), this topic/ discussion was about whether or not these people are right or not, is turning games child friendly an okay thing?

To actually respond though:

FTL is a roguelike-like game that is about navigating through 8 sectors to beat a boss at the end, it has permadeath, tile based movement and is really hard by nature. Lowering the difficulty is against the original idea of the game.

This game is not meant to be child friendly, though a child could play it without many encounters that parents would consider "Inappropriate". It's difficulty is part of the game.

If you simply say: "The experience would not change one bit for people choosing to play it at a higher difficulty setting." You're kind of wrong-ish:

A game is only as hard as it's easiest difficulty setting, easy in FTL is still relatively hard, but puts more odds in the favor of the player.

You also missed the point that irks me and others:

He wants to do this, not for the sake of the average gamer, but for children.

This is the problem, in my opinion (OPINION, say it with me: O-P-IN-ION), you can do this for the average gamer, but it's stupid to try and appeal to children, expanding beyond your core audience is fine, to an extent.

This is far beyond that extent.

User avatar
Grayswandir
Short end of the stick
Posts: 3655
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 12:37 am
Location: Robbing the cradle.

Re: IGD: PARENTS VS. STEAM.

Post by Grayswandir » Tue Jun 03, 2014 6:23 pm

I think you're reading too deep into one person's opinion of FTL.

User avatar
Phoenixwarrior141
Posts: 1433
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2013 12:37 pm
Location: I've lost all sense of direction, I'm quite concerned to be honest.

Re: IGD: PARENTS VS. STEAM.

Post by Phoenixwarrior141 » Tue Jun 03, 2014 7:25 pm

Grayswandir wrote:I think you're reading too deep into one person's opinion of FTL.
Mine or his...


I'm confused.

User avatar
Retarded Username
Posts: 491
Joined: Tue May 08, 2012 6:00 am
Location: Going over the Trump wall

Re: IGD: PARENTS VS. STEAM.

Post by Retarded Username » Tue Jun 03, 2014 8:01 pm

Okay, 2 in a row. Please don't keep em' coming.

User avatar
Phoenixwarrior141
Posts: 1433
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2013 12:37 pm
Location: I've lost all sense of direction, I'm quite concerned to be honest.

Re: IGD: PARENTS VS. STEAM.

Post by Phoenixwarrior141 » Tue Jun 03, 2014 10:05 pm

Retarded Username wrote:Okay, 2 in a row. Please don't keep em' coming.
I ALREADY GAVE YOU NUMBERS, WORK WITH ME.

User avatar
Grayswandir
Short end of the stick
Posts: 3655
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 12:37 am
Location: Robbing the cradle.

Re: IGD: PARENTS VS. STEAM.

Post by Grayswandir » Tue Jun 03, 2014 10:37 pm

I think, you, Phoenixwarrior141, are over reacting and reading too much into an opinion posted by a parent on a Steam message board.

User avatar
Phoenixwarrior141
Posts: 1433
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2013 12:37 pm
Location: I've lost all sense of direction, I'm quite concerned to be honest.

Re: IGD: PARENTS VS. STEAM.

Post by Phoenixwarrior141 » Tue Jun 03, 2014 11:18 pm

Grayswandir wrote:I think, you, Phoenixwarrior141, are over reacting and reading too much into an opinion posted by a parent on a Steam message board.
No, I honestly don't care if he, a parent, thinks of the game's difficulty differently then I (As much as the genre's standards state the unforgiving difficulty is a norm).

My point of discussion was that PC gamers are attracting children to some games, how accepting should we be of these parents trying to change a game that you love and enjoy (Unless it's minor) for a child?

I'm also trying to bring a larger question to mind here: Are parents the (for lack of a better term) gateway between kids and gamers, are they fine with games (that do not target children) being modified for children?

User avatar
EPR89
Posts: 1845
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2012 8:57 am
Location: Germany

Re: IGD: PARENTS VS. STEAM.

Post by EPR89 » Wed Jun 04, 2014 2:09 am

I still don't understand the problem. He never suggested altering the game as it is now. All he suggested was adding an additional difficulty setting that will be much easier than the ones already available in order to focus on the game mechanics without the sources of pressure like very limited time pressure.
You said that a game is only as difficult as its easiest difficulty. I call bullshit on that one, especially if the easiest difficulty is called something like "Child Mode" with a description like:
"Learn the basic game mechanics of Faster Than Light without having to worry about dying immediately after one mistake. This mode is much more forgiving than the regular game and is primarily intended to introduce new players to this genre. Not suggested for more experienced gamers who want a true roguelike experience."

User avatar
Phoenixwarrior141
Posts: 1433
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2013 12:37 pm
Location: I've lost all sense of direction, I'm quite concerned to be honest.

Re: IGD: PARENTS VS. STEAM.

Post by Phoenixwarrior141 » Wed Jun 04, 2014 2:37 am

Isn't the tutorial good for that?

Or a YOLO run where you just try and get far and learn, there are no penalties for dying, other then restarting.

"He never suggested altering the game as it is now."

He said in his title: "Still needs a Kid's difficulty"

As an avid FTL player, I'll say HELL NO.

Points: - We don't need the game made any easier, Easy mode is fine.

- I don't think we want to alter the game for children, I mean, who would.

"Learn the basic game mechanics of Faster Than Light without having to worry about dying immediately after one mistake. This mode is much more forgiving than the regular game and is primarily intended to introduce new players to this genre. Not suggested for more experienced gamers who want a true roguelike experience."

Easy mode works for this, it's easier then normal but will forgive the player in more ways then one.

Close, I want it to the tutorial could be this.

Besides, I think you missed two points:

1: It's the nature of the genre, I understand easing people into it might be better for learning, but the tutorial works for that, and easy mode is easy.

Plus, you get better playing at the normal difficulty setting, learn things the hard way.

2: You missed my (Horribly written) discussion points:

- Is it okay to modify the game past genre standards and the developers vision for profit? Or even just for one person?

- Is it okay for parents to ask devs to change games to make it suitable for children?

- Are parents the ones ruining video games?

Before you call bias I will post my opinions:

- No, the developer's vision should remain that.

- No, Children can play the games, just don't make it suitable for them, appeal the audience you want to appeal to.

- Depends on perspective, parents try to change games to allow themselves to buy them for kids, and kids in turn ruin some communities and whine to their parents, forcing them to step in again.

User avatar
Grayswandir
Short end of the stick
Posts: 3655
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 12:37 am
Location: Robbing the cradle.

Re: IGD: PARENTS VS. STEAM.

Post by Grayswandir » Wed Jun 04, 2014 3:29 am

Phoenixwarrior141 wrote:- Is it okay to modify the game past genre standards and the developers vision for profit? Or even just for one person?
If someone is developing a game and wants to change it because they want more money or because of community requests, they can.

Also, the hell are "genre standards"? Doesn't the developer decide what genre and standards their game is "supposed" to meet.
- Is it okay for parents to ask devs to change games to make it suitable for children?
Yes. its not like the developers have to listen to what the parents ask for.
- Are parents the ones ruining video games?
No.

User avatar
Phoenixwarrior141
Posts: 1433
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2013 12:37 pm
Location: I've lost all sense of direction, I'm quite concerned to be honest.

Re: IGD: PARENTS VS. STEAM.

Post by Phoenixwarrior141 » Wed Jun 04, 2014 4:23 am

Yay actual discussion!
Grayswandir wrote:
Phoenixwarrior141 wrote:- Is it okay to modify the game past genre standards and the developers vision for profit? Or even just for one person?
If someone is developing a game and wants to change it because they want more money or because of community requests, they can.
Of course it's okay, I worded that wrong. I disagree, I think that a dev should stick with his vision, if he makes a game for profit it'll have to be good anyways to sell.
Also, the hell are "genre standards"? Doesn't the developer decide what genre and standards their game is "supposed" to meet.
A first person shooter isn't a first person shooter if it isn't in first person and a shooter.
- Is it okay for parents to ask devs to change games to make it suitable for children?
Yes. its not like the developers have to listen to what the parents ask for.
True, but some devs buckle under pressure.

My point for that is (A pain in my ass to write) people asking this are beyond the idea of age restriction, they want to change a game for the reason of "Kids could play it" I think these people are in the wrong, they should realize that a game is not intended for kids and shouldn't try to make it happen.
- Are parents the ones ruining video games?
No.
My above points say otherwise.

We need to cut off a part of the issue: Parents trying to change (Indie) games to let their kids play it.

The entire issue is that kids are playing video games, but CAN be a deadly cancer without any chemo (CoD's community was good, then kids started playing it and it broke, they (The devs) started to appeal to them and lost all credibility as generous, developers, the community is virtually gone), cutting off the actual issue part of the larger potential issue (Parents protesting games as violent as they are, trying to make them kid friendly, as a result breaking game communities and thus games) and fix it.

User avatar
Endoperez
Posts: 5668
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 7:41 am
Location: cold and dark and lovely Finland

Re: IGD: PARENTS VS. STEAM.

Post by Endoperez » Wed Jun 04, 2014 6:25 am

Phoenixwarrior141 wrote:Of course it's okay, I worded that wrong. I disagree, I think that a dev should stick with his vision, if he makes a game for profit it'll have to be good anyways to sell.
A game developer has a vision.
A game has to be good to sell.
To make a profit, game has to sell (or have a large userbase, for F2P).

There's nothing here to make a connection between a developer's vision making the game good. How does the developer know if his game is well-received? By getting feedback. You are kinda saying that the developer should ignore all non-positive feedback if it goes against his vision, instead of taking the feedback into account and possibly updating his vision.
Phoenixwarrior141 wrote:
Also, the hell are "genre standards"? Doesn't the developer decide what genre and standards their game is "supposed" to meet.
A first person shooter isn't a first person shooter if it isn't in first person and a shooter.
The definition of roguelikes has been defined by roguelike developers in the Berlin Interpretation. Then they had to update it because all the developers didn't agree.

Out of the 6 high-value factors, FTL lacks two (it's not turn-based, and you can only change the weapon layout and upgrade the ship outside of battles). It's missing at least one out of the 3 middle-value factors, possibly two (not single-player, weapons might not have "uses that are not obvious for the item nature"), and one of the four low-value factors (not ASCII).

The high difficulty is considered a LOW-VALUE factor - the actual roguelike developers consider it about as important for the genre as the ASCII graphics, which FTL doesn't have either. The change would affect FTL, but not its status as a roguelike.

BTW, the FPS definition is more complicated than that, too. Thief 2: The Metal Age is a first-person and a shooter game, yet it isn't an FPS. Rail shooters can be made in first-person perspective, and they're shooters, but they aren't FPS games.

Phoenixwarrior141 wrote:
Phoenixwarrior141 wrote:- Is it okay for parents to ask devs to change games to make it suitable for children?
Yes. its not like the developers have to listen to what the parents ask for.
True, but some devs buckle under pressure.
True, but some devs do not buckle under pressure. How's that!

And some devs consider the argument and decide to change their opinion based on the new factors.

And some devs are told by the publishers that the project is now going to be made in half the time, with half the original budget, and the devs won't get any money yet, and the game should look more cutesy, like an anime.

I mean, the developer changing the game so that more people are potentially interested in buying it is FAR from the worst thing that could happen to a project.
Phoenixwarrior141 wrote:My point for that is (A pain in my ass to write) people asking this are beyond the idea of age restriction, they want to change a game for the reason of "Kids could play it" I think these people are in the wrong, they should realize that a game is not intended for kids and shouldn't try to make it happen.
Parents want their kids to play good games.

Good games where their kids are not A) bullies or B) bullied or C) annoying other people (see your point about CoD community).

Parents, that is people with kids, that is a huge part of the population, specifically the part of the population with enough money to buy games and an incentive to buy things for their kids... THESE parents want to spend money on indie games, that is, games made by game developers who are known for being small, independent and often struggling for money.

Sounds good to me!
- Are parents the ones ruining video games?
No.
My above points say otherwise.

We need to cut off a part of the issue: Parents trying to change (Indie) games to let their kids play it.

The entire issue is that kids are playing video games, but CAN be a deadly cancer without any chemo (CoD's community was good, then kids started playing it and it broke, they (The devs) started to appeal to them and lost all credibility as generous, developers, the community is virtually gone), cutting off the actual issue part of the larger potential issue (Parents protesting games as violent as they are, trying to make them kid friendly, as a result breaking game communities and thus games) and fix it.
Your actual issue is that you don't like the CoD community, and you don't like the new CoD games. Do you have any proof the community changed CoD games, or that parents changed the CoD games?

You claim that CoD community (I guess you mean the multiplayer community?) is gone. Well, let's check... MW2 was released 2009, MW3 was released 2011. MW2 was played for 625 million hours (estimate) since 2009, while MW3 was only played for 263 million hours, onnly about 42 % of MW2's hours. So yes, Modern Warfare 2 was played more than Modern Warfare 3, and MW3 is unlikely to catch up.
[+] Chart
Image
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2014/04/i ... r-games/2/

So yeah, something happened between the two. You think it was little kids coming in, or something. There could be a different explanation. For example, CoD developer Infinity Ward infamously laid off2 big names in 2010, and "following West and Zampella's firings, nearly half of the remaining Infinity Ward employees resigned", with a different team helping to finish MW3.

When you claim the developers lost respect, are you talking about the pre-2010 developers, or post-2010 developers?

The pre-2010 developers have most recently released Titanfall.

Post Reply