Slashdot Mirror
Best Videogames For Enthralling Non-Gamers?
Thanks to GameSpy for its article discussing the best videogame titles that appeal to those unfamiliar with gaming. The list of these 'gateway' titles, games which "...are usually quite easy to pick up and play and remain addictive", includes EyeToy: Play ("It's immensely entertaining to watch your co-workers move around ridiculously while trying to wash a virtual window or fight a virtual boxer"), Dance Dance Revolution ("sits in a strange purgatory between social awkwardness and coolness"), and The Sims ("...breaking boundaries that many thought impenetrable.")
The obveous game that hooked an entire generation.
I remember my mother being really addicted to it. Although she didn't know how to do anything on the computer (turing the mouse like a steering wheel to go sideways etc.) she could still find and play tetris.
Mouse powered Chips, Open source Processors and Lego
Mariokart and Monkey ball are always classics. Simple yet entertaining. (I haven't played the new mariokart, it looks more complex, but I have high hopes for when I finally get around to getting it.
-Sean
I know Gamespy like their top 10 lists and all, but they really should go to a little bit of effort to compile them. This most recent list seems to completely miss the point.
As I was working my way through the top 10, I kept expecting to see Animal Crossing somewhere in there, but it was nowhere to be found. It is without a doubt the number one game to enthrall non-gamers. I speak from experience as it rapidly had my mother and my sister playing, and neither of them had ever played a console game before in their lives (and I do own other games from that list).
I don't think many of the games on the list would appeal to people who have never before played a game, although many of them would appeal to casual gamers. I don't see how racing games, fighting games, shooting games, sports games etc... will suddenly appeal to people who weren't interested in playing those games a year ago, five years ago, or ten years ago - they aren't a new idea or genre.
While I can accept that Gamespy have listed some of the best racing games (eg Mario Kart), some of the best FPS games (eg Counter Strike) or one of the best sports games (eg Madden) they have only listed one or two simple and innovative games, that might attract someone who hasn't been interested by the normal fare.
The only four games I see on the Gamespy list that might attract new players is the Eye-toy (although I think that it is something that will only capture attention for a short period of time), Karaoke Revolution, Dance-Dance, and the Sims.
Animal Crossing is a glaring exception - not only did my mother start playing it, but she is still doing so 6 months down the track. However Animal Crossing is not the only exception - there are many other games suited to the list, for example nearly any web-based puzzle game, or new games like Donkey Konga.
As a medical resident, someone installed Snood in our computer lab. Prior to the Snood era, these computers were used for research and looking up patient data. However, once installed, the lab became a daily Snood tournament. It's very simple, yet very addictive. Try it, but be careful! www.snood.com
Do take note that it seems to be compiled from a list of 2003 games only. Yes, Animal Crossing should probably be on there. Yes, it is odd that they mention an X-Box version of GtA when far more people have access to one of the PS2 versions released one-two years earlier.
The gateway theory is probably as accurate here as it is in the drugs realm, that is to say not at all. I'm sure most "non-gamers" in the working world have played Solitaire or Minesweeper, or NES games in their youth, so surely they're aware that fun games exist - that's just not their thing, it's yours. So understanding that their non-gamerness is in all likelihood the result of conscious decisions and not lack of opportunity, is it really tactful to attempt to convert such people to your opinion through gradient (read: deceitful) introduction?
How would you feel if someone attempted this sort of conversion on you? Say for instance that an acquaintance perceives that you don't read enough books because you spend all of your time playing games. How would you react to them slowly and obviously crowbar-ing you towards their interests instead of just being overt? Would it be O.K. if they gave you a Nancy Drew book one week (to show how fun reading can be), an Encyclopedia Brown book the next, then a Xanth book, then a Tom Clancy novel? Wouldn't you consider that patronizing and insulting?
Honestly it isn't very difficult to get a non-gamer interested in most popular games so long as you have the time and hardware necessary to show them. Convincing them that the time they currently spend doing other things should be spent playing games is the tough part. For friends, that's best done with words and not cultish gradient plans.
I wouldn't actually say that these games are so diametrically opposed. If you look at them both, they are both games with an underlying mission, but with the freedom to interact with the world however you like. Sure - the interaction is very different in the two games, but they both give you a lot of freedom to do your own thing, whilst still giving you a more focused objective which you can approach at your own pace.
-- Pete.
Monochrome - Probably the UK's largest internet BBS
The two games that I have found non-gamers to really enjoy:
Top Spin -tennis on the Xbox. Like Pong, but a lot better.
Simpsons Hit and Run - If they like the Simpsons, they'll like this game.
Both are easy to get started in, and neither has a lot of stuff to remember. Easy games that are fun.
No reason to lie.
It's a really stupid idea to try to sandwich people into categories like "women will like this game" and "your drunk football buddies will like this game." Here's my theory; it's not that some games are "too cute" or "too violent." It's not that women naturally want to play a game that is like an interactive soap opera. This article reads like the people who wrote it actually believe that non-gamers have never heard of Vice City, or don't know that they also have nonviolent games out there. I think it's more likely that there are three primary reasons for non-gamers.
1. Don't realize there are good plots out there. It certainly could happen. The pure dumb fun of Vice City gets played up, while the homages to Scarface and Miami Vice, and the game's dark humor, get played down. Games like DOOM get all the attention, while games like The Getaway and Beyond Good and Evil get swept under the rug. Even absurdly popular games like MGS and the Final Fantasy series get little or no attention from the non-game media.
2. Some adjustment to the controls is required. For somebody who has never used a gamepad before, the first time can be awkward, annoying, and extremely difficult. This can, in some cases, turn a person away from gaming, and it takes some persistence to get that person to adjust to a controller.
3. Or maybe they just never really got into it. Let's face it, there are people out there who have other things they have to take care of, and other people who just aren't willing to fork over the money for what can be a pretty expensive hobby.
So, what's the solution? Well, for 3, maybe it's best to find some free time that person has, and try to make him/her sit down, shut up, and play. 2, same thing, but it's going to require a lot of persistence, and keeping that person at the game for a while. Games like Soul Caliber II are good for that person, because button mashing still works. Sometimes, it's probably not even worth it, however, if the person can't adjust. As for 1, the solution is relatively simple; show them games like The Getaway, MGS, FF X, etc., maybe bring up your favorite cutscenes if you can find them.
Remember, this is just the short list; I realize there a lot of other reasons why somebody wouldn't be a gamer.