Slashdot Mirror


New Super Mario Bros. Wii To Include Official "Cheat"

phlack writes "Yahoo Games has an article describing a new mode in Nintendo's upcoming New Super Mario Bros. Wii that will allow the player to activate a 'demo' mode to get out of a hard situation. Nintendo plans on incorporating this into future games. Is this a good idea (to help relieve frustrations) or just sanctioned cheating?" They actually patented this system as well.

58 of 275 comments (clear)

  1. Only for casual gamers by s1lverl0rd · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Winning by cheating just isn't the same as winning 'for real'.

    I may catch on with the casual gamers, though.

    1. Re:Only for casual gamers by murdocj · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Winning by cheating just isn't the same as winning 'for real'.

      True, but sometimes it's necessary to bypass some ridiculously hard part of a game. For example, in one WWII game (Medal of Honor?) I was stuck at this one point where I was in a town with a sniper. I tried everything I could to get the guy and he just kept nailing me. After hours of game time spread over a few weeks of realtime, I finally activated a god mode code and went outside and looked for him where a walkthru said he would be. Even with all that, he was hard to see. Once I nailed him, I switched off the cheat and enjoyed the rest of the game. If I hadn't done that, I would have simply given up.

      I recently have had an experienece in a game where I was really frustrated by the final battle. I looked it up and it turned out I simply wasn't strafing around that much, I was trying to use cover, which didn't work. That was cheating too, to get the strategy, but it's the same thing... I gave it a good try of many, many attempts and finally gave in and looked up a cheat.

      Ultimately, looking up a strategy or using a code isn't as satisfying as doing it on your own, but sometimes you just want to move on and see the rest of the game.

    2. Re:Only for casual gamers by Devout_IPUite · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I would count on this damaging gameplay experience. Gran Turisimo 3 includes an auto-pilot mode. When you first start playing the game it's not infeasible that the auto-pilot is a better race car driver than you... So you might end up using it a bit and before you know it, you can only use the auto-pilot because you're not good enough to compete on your own at the current difficulty.

      Personally, when this happened to me I went back and restarted without using B-Spec mode on a race I hadn't already won at least once (using B-spec to farm for credits to buy competitive cars for other races was a different story). I enjoyed the gameplay experience MUCH more the second time.

    3. Re:Only for casual gamers by KillerBob · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Part of the problem is that they need to find a balance between hardcore gamers and casual gamers. A level like he's describing from MoH would have me, a casual gamer (well, except for Warcrack) saying "fuck this" and finding a different game.

      Assuming I'd even pick up the game in the first place, which I probably wouldn't.

      The problem is that in order to appeal to the casual gamers, the game has to be easy enough that most hardcore gamers won't touch it. By adding the "demo" mode, they can make parts of the game very challenging, to appeal to the hardcore gamers, but can also give casual gamers the ability to avoid the frustrating and annoying content that presents too much challenge and commitment to keep a casual gamer interested.

      --
      If you believe everything you read, you'd better not read. - Japanese proverb
    4. Re:Only for casual gamers by rjejr · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Many games have a hard part that's too difficult to get through, so using this ocassionally doesn't seem so bad. I don't remember this much uproar when God of War let people play in "easy mode" after dieing a few times, and there are other games that do this as well.
      I would have liked this option in the Jak and Daxter series. In the first admittedly easy but very fun game there is a fish catching mini-game which has absolutey nothing to do with the rest of the gameplay. In Jak 2 there is a mission where you have to destroy 5 ships but I could never get more than 3, so I sold the game back, only to rent it again months later and finally beat it. There is also an on-rails level where you ave to destroy 40 jet-packed bad guys which was really hard. Again, that series is about having fun as I don't think there is a "Game Over" screen anywhere to be found, so if you can't actually lose, is it "cheating" to win?

    5. Re:Only for casual gamers by phaggood · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I consider myself the "poster child" for the term "casual gamer". Having enough frustrations in meatspace, I don't want to the attempt to finish a game to be anything like work. I have a handful of Playstation II games and the closest I've got to a finish is "Kim Possible". My kids had to get me past the agility test early in Kingdom Hearts, and a similar test early in "Ghost in the Shell" has ended my progress in that game (my teen girl has no interest in the game and my 7yr old is too young too see such graphic violence).

      Really, it's play, I don't wanna work that hard. There are serious sports players and there are "beer-belly" leagues where overweight men hit softballs and sorta jog around the bases - to each his own. If "Ghost" had a demo mode, I might actually know what's in the rest of the damned game nearly two years after I purchased it.

      My other console is a Wii, and the types of games I have purchased for it, Wii Play, Playground, Wii Sports, Wii Fit, Wii Music, Cooking Mama, Game Party, Endless Ocean; further demonstrate I purchase games to have fun, not increase my frustrations. Perhaps this is why some of the few meatspace sports I do enjoy are tennis and softball - it seems easier to find casual players for these than say basketball or football which seem to be dominated by guys trying to relive their high school glory days or at least prove they "still got it".

    6. Re:Only for casual gamers by elrous0 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What were the hard parts on HL2 you're talking about? I generally thought the game was pretty well designed. But there were two areas that did give me trouble too, though. There is one area where you have to shoot off a certain lock. I didn't know this and flailed around forever trying to figure out how to get past the area before I finally looked it up in a walkthrough and realized I was supposed to just shoot off the lock. Another part was the part where you have to take down the helicopter in the speed boat. It took me forever to finally do it, but MAN did it feel good when I did. That fucking helicopter had been a constant annoyance throughout that entire section of the game, and watching it fall felt GOOD!

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    7. Re:Only for casual gamers by ThePhilips · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I may catch on with the casual gamers, though.

      I wouldn't count on that.

      I have to agree.

      For casual players (I consider myself being one too (at least in context of consoles)) it is important that game just flows, either guiding you or making you to explore the possibilities. It is bad game where you hit a bump - "demo" mode wouldn't solve it.

      Only thing "demo" mode would achieve is to solve an ancient puzzle of hard core games when you buy an expensive game but get stuck in the middle. It is hard to justify the situation provided that you forked a pretty hefty money for the whole game, but can't enjoy it fully. Add here all the "lockable" crap and you have a case of potentially angry customer.

      --
      All hope abandon ye who enter here.
    8. Re:Only for casual gamers by haddieman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I can relate to that. Even though I consider myself a hardcore gamer, I really only enjoy putting in massive amounts of work in certain games (e.g. Super Stardust HD). When I play a game I'm looking for one of two things depending on my mood; when I'm worn out after a long day at work and I just want to relax, I'll throw in Burnout Paradise and just drive fast, but on weekends when I have more time, I will spend hours playing Killzone 2 or trying to get 100% on Metroid Prime 3. Of course, the game still has to be fun. If a game isn't fun it doesn't matter how hard or easy it is, I'm not going to play it. That's why I think that having a "demo mode" is a good idea (at least for Nintendo) because if you want to experience the challenge (if that's what makes the game fun for you) then you can. On the other hand, if you just want to relax and enjoy the game world you can do that as well.

    9. Re:Only for casual gamers by camg188 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Winning by cheating just isn't the same as winning 'for real'." - lighten up, Francis.
      1. - A game is software. Good software gives you options and the more customizable, the better it is. God mode is just another option. If the user likes the option, it is good. This is no different than having adjustable difficulty level. If you don't like it, don't use it.
      2. - It's not cheating. It's users entertaining themselves. It would only be cheating if it was multiplayer and one of the players did it unbeknownst to the others
      3. - How is this news? God mode has been available in games since games have been made
      4. - It can be fun. Who hasn't played Unreal and messed around with god mode, playersonly, loaded, fly, ghost and summon?

    10. Re:Only for casual gamers by vux984 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I would count on this damaging gameplay experience.

      Did idgodmode ruin Doom? Of course not.
      Did being able to get Castle-9 lives in Super Mario Brothers ruin it? Even today I still can't beat World 8 without a healthy stack of lives going in.

      What about updownupdownleftrightleftrightabab in umpteen million other games for extra continues, ammo, whatever, etc?

      How is this really any different? I mean idgodmode made you invincible with unlimited ammo.

    11. Re:Only for casual gamers by ground.zero.612 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I would call you an apathetic gamer rather than a casual gamer. Playing games is either about solving problems, competition, or both. Being unwilling to do either is not what I would call a gamer at all. Not in any sense of the word I've been accustomed to using since I first played Pong when it was *gasp* new.

      --
      "Be prepared, son. That's my motto. Be prepared." --Joe Hallenbeck
    12. Re:Only for casual gamers by 10Neon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Some difficulty spikes, however, vary from player-to-player, and will crop up no matter how well the game is otherwise designed. For example, I have a tendency to get stuck in FPSs because I forget to go through some obvious door (I tend to go for the less-obvious doors first, since that's where they like to hide the health and ammo.) Other players, more attentive than I, wouldn't find any kind of difficulty spike, because the door is right there, and it's not fighting back. A "demo mode" would be useful in situations like this because, within seconds of activating it, it would basically tell me, "hey stupid, why not turn right instead of left at this intersection, for once?" In this case, it's not a matter of learning a new mechanic in order to continue, but remembering to use one that you've previously demonstrated mastery over (in my case, turning right.) Watching my casual-gamer sister play, I notice that most "spikes," for her, are things like this. Difficulty in gameplay is not always the result of the skill curve, so it would be reasonable to include a system that would allow players to move past parts of the game that they're getting stuck on, even in a game with a "perfect" skill curve, simply because players' do not apply their skills to each situation in a uniform manner.

      --
      The Guide is definitive. Reality is frequently inaccurate.
    13. Re:Only for casual gamers by murdocj · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I would call you someone who doesn't have any empathy. You apparently can't conceive that someone might want to "play" in way that is different from the way you like to play. Some people like to play full out and backcountry ski down mountains, risking their lives every second. Others want to relax with a bit of solitaire or bejeweled. The level of challenge that you want in your "play" is by definition something personal. I've "played" by running marathons, so I know something about challenging myself, but I don't consider you to be apathetic if you haven't run a marathon.

    14. Re:Only for casual gamers by dzfoo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You have a very valid point, as do others who have said the same thing about other games. However, as also stated by other commenters, such highly difficult and frustrating parts are signs of a poorly design game.

      It's one thing to look online for "cheats" or walkthroughs to aid you in overcoming some unreasonably difficult part of an otherwise enjoyable game, which you already purchased; you probably couldn't tell such challenge was part of the game until you encountered it, and therefore had no recourse except that, or stop playing altogether and forfeit part of your investment in the game.

      It is another thing entirely to build this facility into the game itself--in essence making "cheating" part of the experience of playing, ab initio. At such, the game designer has little incentive in correcting his practice and invest resources into making a better gaming experience for the user. They are, to all intent and purposes, accepting as a matter of course that the game experience is going to irritate or frustrate you, and so it is easier to offer you a crutch or "cheat" than to actually improve it.

              -dZ.

      --
      Carol vs. Ghost
      ...Can you save Christmas?
    15. Re:Only for casual gamers by TheSambassador · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You have a very narrow-minded view of games. Games are only about 2 things? Problem solving or competition? Really?

      Have you ever played a sandbox game? I don't think that me driving around in GTA aimlessly is either problem solving or competition. The bottom line is that games are supposed to be FUN. And as you yourself admitted, a person's sense of fun is subjective. If people find that they have fun "playing" some sort of weird autopilot version of a game, then I have no problme with it.

    16. Re:Only for casual gamers by mwvdlee · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Playing games is either about solving problems, competition, or both.

      I thought playing games was about having fun.

      You seem to confuse the means by which a goal can be achieved with the goal itself.

      Walking isn't about putting one leg in front of the other, it's about going somewhere.
      Eating isn't about moving your jaw and swallowing, it's about getting nutrition in your body.
      Gaming isn't about solving problems or competition, it's about having fun.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
  2. Sounds like a good idea. by Bluebottel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Getting rid of the stupid moments and rushing towards the fun ones. Hope they include a 'unlock-all-so-i-dont-have-to-just-to-play-the-whole-game' cheat as well.
    Way to many games assume that i want to grind 25 hours to get that tiny little game mode which just happens to be the most fun part of it all.

    1. Re:Sounds like a good idea. by socrplayr813 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But I'm interested in the value of the the reward itself. I don't care about meaningless value attached to it because I worked for hours. While the sense of accomplishment is sometimes nice, I play for fun. If I want a sense of accomplishment, I'll do something that's actually meaningful.

      --
      The confidence of ignorance will always overcome the indecision of knowledge.
    2. Re:Sounds like a good idea. by gbarules2999 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You may find that the reward doesn't seem as valuable if you haven't had to spend 25 hours of your life working so hard just to get it.

      The above sentence is the dumbest comment on this story yet.

      It isn't a "reward." It's part of the game. Why do I have to play ten hours of a shitty single player to unlock a mode in Super Smash Bros.? Why are all of the good courses locked off until you sell your goddamn soul to the game?

      That's not rewarding, that's just annoying as hell. When I buy a game, I assume that I'd be getting everything important unlocked out of the box. Unfortunately, I have to "earn" it, which just pisses me off even further. I don't play games to "defeat" and "earn" things, and then go to my friends on the playground and brag about how I beat the hardest mode. I play games to unwind and enjoy myself.

    3. Re:Sounds like a good idea. by MasterOfMagic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Holy totally missing the point!

      With nothing to aim for or look forward to, life gets boring pretty quickly.

      Imagine how much more enjoyment someone who had to work months/years to afford their car gets out of it than someone who was born into an incredibly rich family and has everything handed to them on a plate.

      It's. Just. A. Game.

      Here's what I look forward to: getting married, starting a family, being able to pay off my bills, a promotion, several more pranks from/to my friends, and so forth. Not getting 100% in Super Hyper Sequel Roster Update 2010 Mark IV.

      If you are the type of gamer that feels they must unlock and earn everything, that is perfectly fine. However, all gamers are not like you. I have a day job that's 8-10 hours a day. I have friends that want to go out into the real world for drinking, driving fast cars, golf, shooting, pranking, talking with girls, more than talking with girls, and generally being social while not being behind a headset or a controller. This leaves a small amount of time for me to play video games, and, consequently, cuts into my ability to unlock things.

      However, you'll note, that I paid the exact same amount of money for the game as you did. I bought the exact same content that you did. Our discs are likely identical at the bit level. I already worked to afford the game - I worked hard and saved my money to hand over for the disc. This is why a game that already has everything unlocked is not like getting an expensive car without working - I already worked to buy the game!

      If anything, having things locked without the option to put in a cheat code to unlock them is akin to working for years to buy that shiny new car, paying for it, driving it home, and finding out that until you've spent another $4,000, you can't go any faster than 45. Make the full unlock option be a cheat code, and then color the icon of the save to, say, red instead of blue. If you have a blue save, then you haven't unlocked everything with the code (and have done it through your hard work).

    4. Re:Sounds like a good idea. by dzfoo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Or you could complain to the game manufacturer about your experience, and if enough users do, they would probably listen to you and improve the gameplay on a sequel.

      This is pretty much what happened with Boom Blox for the Wii; the game was primarily a single player game with a "party mode" tacked on. Although innovative and fun, the single player game required you to go through repetitive stages in order to advance to other levels, and after a while it became boring. However, the "party mode" turned out to be the best of it, allowing you to play casually with friends in an interactive manner, though it was mostly a secondary or terciary feature of the original game.

      The support and review fora where filled with comments from users stating how fun it was to play in "party mode"--though you still had to finish each level in order to "unlock" the next, with a friend this wasn't such a necessity, as the challenge and fun of the multiplayer interaction made the selection of a particular level less important.

      And now a sequel is out, and what is it? It's essentially an expanded version of the "party mode" as a full-blown game. Designed from the start as a multiplayer party game, you do not need to grind in order to "unlock" every single level.

      Believe it or not, some game designers actually want to make games other people enjoy, so letting them know what works or doesn't is usually a good idea.

              -dZ.

      --
      Carol vs. Ghost
      ...Can you save Christmas?
    5. Re:Sounds like a good idea. by socrplayr813 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Rereading my post, I see how it was a bit ambiguous. I don't usually play games that require that kind of work to unlock things. If the game is fun in its own right, then I'll play it, but I generally refuse to put hours into something if I'm not enjoying it.

      I think for some people, the work they put into achieving high levels or unlocking things in games does make it more fun. However, I think that's partially because many of them don't get enough of a sense of accomplishment from the rest of their life. That's not universal, of course, but I've gone through a couple of low points in my life in which I fell into a bit of a game addiction. Life sucked; games gave me some small sense of accomplishment and let me be important/powerful somewhere to make up for what was missing elsewhere.

      --
      The confidence of ignorance will always overcome the indecision of knowledge.
  3. Good idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    I did my grind through Super Mario Brothers. I dropped a missile or twenty on mother brain. I actually beat Tyson after a couple of months. I flipped through contra, shooting my red, oversized, round bullets the entire way. Kid icarus was my bitch. It was all hard as balls, and I didn't have any built in cheats (Justin Bailey doesn't count and you know it.)

    It makes my elitist heart warm knowing that now I can add one more example into my video game "get off of my lawn" play-book.

    1. Re:Good idea by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Justin Bailey doesn't count and you know it.

      Why, exactly, shouldn't it? For that matter, Contra also had a cheat built-in. Or does that one "not count" too?

      There's nothing wrong with having cheats available, really. For players who want to just breeze through the game, it saves them frustration, and for players who want a challenge, they don't have to use it. Everyone wins.

      --
      "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
  4. Great idea! by ZmeiGorynych · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I want my games to be not very challenging but spectacular looking and amusing interactive movies, little more. Really hard intricate challenges is what work is for (well I'm lucky enough to have one of those).

    If other gamers want to derive a sense of achievement from really hard-to-master games, good for them - but with this, Nintendo is reaching another market, namely people like myself, who couldn't care less about whether it's 'cheating' or not because 'winning' is not the reason why they play games at all.

  5. Both by physicsphairy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Is this a good idea (to help relieve frustrations) or just sanctioned cheating?"

    Yes and yes. It does help who just want to see the next level and it does let people bypass the essential struggle of the game, thereby 'diminishing' the meaning of playing it.

    But, hey, you paid for the game, I say you should be able to access all of its content, regardless of your playing skill. I would never use the cheat option, but I'm not going to fret myself into a furor that elsewhere in the privacy of their own homes people are enjoying the game differently.

    (I will however mercilessly mock any of my friends who are less uber than me. :p )

    1. Re:Both by techtoad · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I agree with physicphairy, even though many users will see this "demo" option as a cheat option that will diminish the game, its a nice idea for those who choose to use it. There have been so many games I have played for weeks, got stuck on a single level and not played the game again for years due to bordem and frustration. What about those times you lose your game saves by accident and want to make a quick journey back to the stage you reached in the game?* I say this is a good idea, cheaters can use it to cheat, genuine players have the option to bypass a stage that ruins their gameplay experience. *Obviously, some games that are more involved with choices and "collectable" itmes may not be this straight forward, but hey, its better than having to go all the way back to the begging after losing your gamesaves!

      --
      Kirk Saywell - Techtoad.co.uk
  6. Re:Instant Satisfaction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Extended frustration isn't good when playing videogames. Most people play them to either relax, have fun, or spend time with friends/family.

    I don't care about this Demo mode, because I won't use it. If someone actually has to use it, then I'm glad it enhanced their game experience. If someone is foolish enough to use it to get to the end quicker when they didn't have to... then thank goodness they'll never have enough patience to get good at the online games I play. :)

    +1 Insightful for you.

  7. Re:Instant Satisfaction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The need for such a feature at all is a design failure in itself though. A game can still be difficult and not frustrating because of it. Instead of this feature, Nintendo should be going back and looking at what they did wrong and fix that instead.

  8. Fantastic by Jarlsberg · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Having kids (5 and 9), I would have to say this is fantastic. Games like Super Mario Galaxy are too hard for my youngest, and I constantly have to step in and help with the levels. Now, Super Mario Galaxy is quite fun, but any game gets quite dull after having to go through the same stuff over and over. Let's have cheat/demo modes and let the kids have fun. :)

    By the way, my youngest have no problems with Super Mario Sunshine - it is a much easier game for kids. Maybe it's the controller?

    1. Re:Fantastic by zwei2stein · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I would be worried myself rather than celebrating it.

      Game with 'easy way out' can make children expect something like that later in their life subconsciously and become frustrated.

      There is big deal made out of fact that most games expose children to very fast and very direct and simple reward-effort situations, that makes them less able to handle distant rewards.

      But again, kids were playing games before computers were around and Deferred gratification was there before computer games too.

      --
      -- Technology for the sake of technology is as pathetic as eschewing technology because it's technology.
    2. Re:Fantastic by sesshomaru · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Up-Down-Up-Down-Left-Right-Left

      Help Me

      Heck, I'm 39, and after being killed by Rift Entities one too many times I decided to go to "Casual" mode in the Ghostbusters video game. You know why? Because I don't care anymore...

      This is because after a hard grueling day of work (or for a child, school), I don't want to come home to a hard/grueling video game, and never did.

      We challenge our kid by making sure she keeps her grades up, if she wants to play Cooking Mama in her free time, that's her own affair.

      I'll admit, I always thought it was dumb to play through a game on God mode from the very start. I knew kids who did it, and I didn't understand the point. I never thought it was bad to have God mode though.

      On the other hand, the games where I get to "that one boss" and give up in frustration, what do those teach a child? If life is too hard you can always give up?

      --
      "MIT betrayed all of its basic principles."
  9. I like options by Phoenix · · Score: 4, Insightful

    For the hard-core gamer I'm sure that this is considered the height of EVIL and is something of a hell-worthy trespass for them.

    However for the casual gamer (say someone who doesn't have the time required to develop the "Mad Skillz" needed to play these games) this is a godsend.

    There are games out there with very in-depth stories and as the game progresses and gets harder, many find that a particular section is flat-out beyond them and the only way they'll ever get to see the end of the story is to look up cheats, walkthroughs...or now this new system.

    There are times when I've asked someone to get me through one little annoying section that I've tried for hours to defeat...at times even WITH the walkthrough. Being told how to do something is not the same as being able to do it with some of the "twitch" games out there where the solution involves precise timing that many hard-core and/or avid gamers develop. I get help with that "one" spot and I'll beat the rest of the game on my own in my own time.

    This is a good thing and it gives an option and a choice for the players. They can choose to beat the game on their own, or they can choose to get a little help. Let the game give these options and let the players decide. It's the best way.

    --
    -- Wiccan Army, 13th Airborne Division "We will not fly silently into the night"
  10. w...t...f by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    So I'm almost finished reading the article summary, already thinking up my response and about to post, when as I get to the end of the summary I read

    "They actually patented this system as well."

    Just like that. With a link. FROM THE EDITOR.
    Just an offhand reference to something they happen to remember, right? WRONG because it belies the fact that THE EDITOR TOOK IT UPON THEMSELVES TO DIG AROUND BEFORE POSTING AND SERIOUSLY LINK TO PERTINENT EARLIER COVERAGE!! Where am I, engadget? What is happening? Who did this? It must be Taco, right, he's the only one who takes Slashdot for journalism. Nope: the editor is "soulskill". W...T...F

    I have to go for a walk, air out my mind a little. This is some serious shit going on right here.

  11. Probably a good thing... by dr_wheel · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ... especially for casual gamers and kids. I have a young daughter who loves the original SMB that I downloaded through the VC, but her frustration level can get to the point where she doesn't want to play it anymore. Something like this would be nice for her and casual gamers if implemented properly. But I also think they should also insert some sort of bonus ending or perk for players who don't need to cheat to win.

    Is it fair to give her an advantage when I didn't have one myself at her age? I think so. At least maybe she won't start throwing nintendo controllers across the goddamn room like I used to.

    1. Re:Probably a good thing... by SausageOfDoom · · Score: 2, Funny

      I wonder if that's actually something against it. Say what you like about games, but at least they teach children that if you persevere at something you'll eventually succeed.

      Although I guess my relentless practice and eventual awesome skill with quake didn't translate through to relentless revision and eventual awesome skill with exams. Which is why I failed most of them and am now unemployable.

      Never mind.

    2. Re:Probably a good thing... by Spatial · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Assuming it's a 2D platformer, I think one of the most elegant solutions would be alter the level layout after repeated failures, or if you're on your last life.

      It's what I'd do if I were making a platformer. It's really easy to implement and levels the playing field a bit. Perhaps literally!

  12. "cheating" by Tom · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When I'm competing against other humans, "cheating" is an appropriate term.

    In a single-player game, that I paid for, the interaction is between me and something owned by me. Its purpose is my entertainment. Challenge is part of that, but if I want to use an easy way, what could anyone possibly have against it? Seriously, that's like saying your favourite poet can only be read in candle light on a stormy night, because doing it any other way would ruin the atmosphere.

    No, "cheating" does not describe this at all. There's no party that is being cheated on, after all.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    1. Re:"cheating" by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      In a single-player game, that I paid for, the interaction is between me and something owned by me. Its purpose is my entertainment. Challenge is part of that, but if I want to use an easy way, what could anyone possibly have against it?

      I agree, but there are some jackass gamers out there who feel that the very presence of such a cheat option is something offensive and terrible. It's not enough to challenge themselves, they must force everyone else to take on the same challenge.

      Then again, that's why those idiots have no friends.

      --
      "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
  13. Might be good by Ksempac · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If this means game companies can stop worrying about frustrated casual gamers and start making their game harder and longer then I say "go for it".

    I'm sick and tired of both the debilitating trend and shortening trend in the video game industry. I've got a friend which enjoys video game but isn't good at it and even him was disappointed that he finished Star Wars Force Unleashed in only 7 hours. I thought it couldn't be worse, but I've been proved wrong with a test I saw on the latest Terminator video game : apparently, you can finish it in 4 hours (and I'm not even talking about the price/hours ratio). Sure theses two games use well-known licenses, but this trend is occuring for almost every video game serie.

    On the other hand, I'm currently playing Ninja Gaiden Black, which is reputed for its difficulty. I'm at the 2/3 point, it took me 30h to get there, and I've enjoyed every minute of it.

  14. Thumbs up... for kids games by pinkushun · · Score: 2, Insightful

    But for the rest of us, temptation to try again and again (read:perfect the game) will feel crippled.

  15. The reds have been here for decades by tepples · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The reds aren't "getting closer"; they're already here. Tetris, the greatest Commie plot ever to hit the video game industry, has been on Nintendo platforms for two decades.

  16. Back in my day... by midifarm · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I don't want to come across as an old codger, but cheat codes and the like have ruined gaming. Easter eggs and hidden levels are fun and add some dimension to the games. Cheat codes, continues and even the prospect of getting unlimited extra lives have taken game skill levels to a new low. If you have to cheat you obviously aren't good enough to win. Most of us who played years ago, beat the super hard levels, by A) having great skill at the game or B) got really lucky. Either one is fine with me, but entering in a cheat proves that you don't have either. I say remove the cheats, keep the Easter eggs and hidden stuff, increase the gameplay and quit making games disposable. It's cheaper to rent the game for 2 weeks from the video store, solve it and give it back than buying it. You're going to find the sales figures plummet for marginal games. There needs to be a change in the industry.

    1. Re:Back in my day... by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If it ruins the game to use it, then don't use it. Problem solved. A cheat simply being there doesn't affect you in any way at all.

      --
      "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
  17. Re:Instant Satisfaction by flitty · · Score: 5, Funny

    Extended frustration isn't good when playing videogames

    The most intriguing part of the patent for this "demo mode" was how it was activated. The Wii-mote will detect when it is thrown against the wall and Implement Demo-mode for you.

    --
    Whether or not there is some sort of god, I'm not supposed to say/god is a word and the argument ends there-Smog
  18. Re:Instant Satisfaction by grumbel · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Imagine for a moment that your DVD player didn't have a fast forward button, after all you should watch the movie, not skip through it to the end for instant satisfaction.

    Doesn't sound to great, does it? With video games its the same thing. Sure a challenging game is fun, but being forced to play through those challenging parts is not. It should be the users choice of how he wants to enjoy the game and if books and movies are any indication, it works quite fine when the user has instant access to the end of it.

    The only real trouble I see with this is that games have progression, you learn skills in earlier levels to use them in later ones. So if you skip those learning parts, because you find them to hard, you mind end up being even more screwed later on, as you haven't learned how to play the game, thus a hard game becomes an impossible one.

    But in the end: You payed for the game, so you should have the right to see all of it, if cheats and autoplay allow that, so be it.

  19. The Game Genie by Dusthead+Jr. · · Score: 2, Interesting

    When we first got the NES SMB was the only game we played for it for a while. So with all the frustration of playing the damned game we did eventually beat it. And that was that. The we got a Game Genie and played it again but we kicked the games ass. In a game where getting touched once or twice by any enemy kills you It felt good to get a permanent invincibility and plow through the game. That's how I uses cheating now days, beat the game at least once, then cheat. I extends the life of the game IMHO.

  20. I don't know...Eg: Street Fighter 4 (read) by emanem · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Hi all...

    I don't know if it's ok or not...but I think if it's needed then a game is not well balanced (against CPU I mean, not the game itself).
    For example, if you play in the easiest mode at SF4 the final boss is able to destroy you anyway, while in all the other enounters the opponents are really...easy.
    Now, I think that SF4 is a great game, well balanced etc etc. Really I stopped WoW to play SF4 PvP.
    But as a single player game the fact the last boss is very hard even in easiest mode is a bit depressing, considering the quality of the game itself.
    But to be 100% honest there could be a reason for that...in order to unlock all the characters you have to defeat the final boss some times straight without losing a game...so CAPCOM knew that everyone would play the game at easiest mode just to unlock all 25 characters...so basically this could be seen as a possible motivation to implement this hard boss as the fact everyone will face him at easiest mode...but still I don't like this.

    I'm against demo mode but in favour of balanced games.
    Cheers,

  21. Re:Instant Satisfaction by MBCook · · Score: 3, Insightful

    But what a 7 year old or someone who is 60 and has never played games finds frustrating may be pretty easy for a 30 year old who has played games off and on since they were a kid.

    This would allow the game to occasionally present a challenge to the 30 year old and give the 7/60 stuff to work against. If it's too hard, they can use it to "skip" that one moment.

    How many people here have had a brother/sister/friend get through a "hard part" of some game for them?

    --
    Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
  22. More like a tip video than a cheat.. by Millennium · · Score: 4, Informative

    Cripes, people; read the patent before going all WHARRGARBL.

    You cannot save progress that the game makes for you. It's right there in the patent, explicitly specified in no uncertain terms. When you turn off the demo mode, you're dropped back where you left off, not where the computer did. The computer can show you a path, but you still have to take it yourself. Except in puzzle games, knowing the path and walking the path are two very different things, and if knowing what to do makes it easy then something is wrong with the game design.

  23. Could this mean harder games? by Quackers_McDuck · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I am all for this if it means that they'll make the game actually difficult now. Recently Nintendo games have become way too easy, presumably because they don't want to frustrate casual players. With this demo feature, they can make the games provide more of a challenge without risking alienating casuals.

  24. Re:Is the really that new? by loftwyr · · Score: 2, Informative

    And most games picked it up from Nethack as you could use the Wizard Mode to change into invulnerability and complete the game. You couldn't keep your score but that's never stopped people from using it.

  25. Similar to Blizzard's new content by farker+haiku · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is very similar to what I've been seeing out of Blizzard, but the opposite approach (and I think Blizzard has this right). Instead of pushing the "Easy Button", how about making all the content easy and making hard modes that you can do for mad props/cool cut scenes/phat loot/self gratification.

    --
    Your sig(k) has been stolen. There is a puff of smoke!
  26. What's "content"? by johannesg · · Score: 2, Interesting

    But, hey, you paid for the game, I say you should be able to access all of its content, regardless of your playing skill.

    If you think of content as just the graphics, or the levels, then I suppose this lets you access all the content. But if you think of content as the gameplay, then rather than letting you access it, this is taking it away from you (if you let it of course).

    I certainly understand the sentiment though. I've seen enough games with ridiculous difficulty spikes (usually when a boss appears) where I used cheats as well - or simply gave up.

  27. In the menu? by Riddler+Sensei · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Oh I always rather liked having a little hidden cheat code that you had to look up to activate. It was kind of charming in its own way. But is this just going to be straight up in the menu? "Start Demo Mode New Game"? That would seem a bit hokey.

  28. It's a *Game*. It's supposed to be *Fun* by mitbeaver · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Way I see it, I bought it, I should be able to do whatever I want with it. "Cheat" only applies when competing on uneven term, e.g. online play. Also a "Cheat" can just as easily be a quick fix to bypass a poorly play-tested or unbalanced portion of a game. Games are designed by people, not infallible game-creating Gods.