Good read!
I like a lot of what the author says about having a more open world rather than a linear experience in disguise, but I don't think the original Zelda struck the best balance.
Windwaker is my favorite Zelda game. I loved setting off and having no idea what to expect on the next island on the horizon. It struck a good balance of guiding the journey through the first couple of dungeons and then opening up the world and letting the player figure it out with only vague clues. I played almost the entire game without realizing that you could warp, and I only found out from a conversation with a friend. Because of that experience, I understand the author's points about being able to fail, or at least being allowed to miss out or spend lots of time exploring in the wrong places. I do think that's a vital piece of Zelda that the last few iterations are missing. However, I don't think that bringing back the missing pieces requires Zelda to be transformed into a punishing combat game. Being on the constant brink of death is not the only way to respect the player.
I think it's important to consider what a game should be at its most distilled form, and for Zelda I believe that is exploration, not challenge. However, the newer Zelda iterations (Twilight Princess, Skyward Sword, DS games) fail this litmus test as well. In that sense, I believe that respecting the player means being allowed to get lost, and to feel like you are able to find your own way to your destination. That's not to say it shouldn't be challenging, but they WAY a game challenges you is more important than the exact level of challenge. Being allowed to fail is not always the same as being allowed to die.
On a side note, there was a sentence that jumped out at me as an apt way to describe another modern game that missed the mark, Donkey Kong Country Returns:
"It creates a moment-to-moment pacing problem, inserting pauses, start-stop-repeat, and thus you rarely chain moves together with any sort of fluidity."
The original DKC games had such fluidity, and the new game forces you to stop and flail the controller every few seconds. What a disappointment. It was such a clear example that having the same characters and the same appearance doesn't result in same experience.
You make really good points.
I have never completed the original Zelda game. It's too frustrating. The puzzles are no less "fit key into hole", it's just that the game often lacks any means to deduce what that key is. Random trial and error is not puzzle-solving any more than having obvious "solutions" is.
I don't understand how any contientious parent who would pay attention to ratings would fail to know they exist.
When I was a kid, I wanted to get a DMX CD. I'm fairly certain that my mom did not know about 'parental advisory' warnings on CDs, but it took all of one glance at the case to see it, which gave her enough if a warning to take a closer look (and then reject it because the song names were pretty bad).
Who honestly hasn't caught on yet?
There are always way too many games to buy. I usually wait for prices to go down in order to make it more affordable to play, so the release schedule isn't as vital.
I think what's putting it over the top financially is the Vita. I've been drooling over it since it's announcement. I've never gotten the PSP, so there's a huge backlog of games for me to play. I'm not sure how long I'll be able to hold off before I give in a get it.
This seems a little to close to Doublefine's project to feel like a carefully considered project in its own right. I guess it's a good way to fund projects that get passed up by the publisher, but it seems like Doublefine really put a lot of thought into how they would make this a unique endeavor: they will let the funders weigh in on the IP, and they are documenting the process which will make it feel like we are in on the ground floor. This feels more like a developer getting easy money for a specific game they already want to make with very little accountability.
Obey the Gatekeeper you MAGGOTS!
My dad has always been a techy (degree in electrical engineering, programmer) but he never had any interest in games whatsoever. I am an only child and I used to try to get my parents to play my SNES with me (that I had to save up and buy myself) and they just had no desire to play at all.
When I got the Wii I convinced my Dad to try the bowling. He handed back the controller after about two rolls. He didn't dislike it, it just didn't register with him at all. It's funny that in my mid-twenties, I was still trying to get him to like a game.
The next time my mom visits, I'm going to introduce her to Dance Central. I think it might be a game that she actually get excited about.
Cool then. I guess he know his kids better than I do :).
Well, now I have to go and feel a fondness for you because you are the first person to catch the reference.
This: "That's true in most industries; interviews are so serious and reserved that meaningful information is profoundly lacking and any sense of emotion or humanity on the part of interviewees is virtually impossible." in response to me saying that we should take his offensive remarks seriously. But, let's assume that I misunderstood what you meant.
You made me laugh. You win sir.
Any chances that his daughter would feel any remorse for hurting their feelings have been...shot.
Most teenagers are disrespectful. Ultimately, she was doing the 2012 version of complaining to her friends. She deserved discipline, not humiliation. Eye for an eye doesn't work in parenting.
You need money to make a game. What would you have done?
He develops games. Games are important to me. The attitudes of the people that make those games is important to me because those attitudes are reflected in their products.
All professionals are held to standards. Sexual harassment laws, remember?
Yes, I can see how some people are offended by the Daily Show, but it's generally not guests being interviewed by Jon who are offensive. I was pointing out the absurdity in the idea that if someone isn't being offensive while being interviewed, they can't be fun or have personality. I just happened to be watching it at the time, so it came to mind. And, I do think there is a fundamental difference between offending someone on the basis of things they choose like beliefs or activities, and things they are like gender or race. Being offended because you don't like having what you think called into question is different than being offended because what you ARE is being used to define you. But, everything should be considered on a case by case basis, as Jaffe's statement was.
For example, I'm not offended that you think I'm self-righteous, un-fun, take things too seriously, a hypocrite, or apparently too stupid to form my own opinions without being brainwashed, whatever. You are reacting to my statements, which are my choices. You disagree with everything I say. Fair game.
It's interesting, because while you and many others seem to think that calling out Jaffe is making a mountain out of a molehill, I think that you are making an absurdly huge deal about the idea of a professional refraining from saying whatever they feel like. I'm a professional. I'm not famous, I'm not a politician, I'm not a priest and yet if I said something that was inappropriate, especially to our customers, even just one, I would be held accountable. Jaffe pissed off his customers. Not all of them, not most of them, but some of them and it was completely unnecessary. That's a fuck-up.
I am excited to play the Nintendo staples on the Wii U. I usually resist but I always end up giving in and buying it all :). The special edition Zelda 3DS overpowered my will to wait until they release their first redesign of the system, but I'm having a lot of fun with it.
I had never heard of it, but I just added Tiger & Bunny to my hulu queue!
It's frustrating that the only company they mention is Apple. Not because they are "picking" on Apple, but because it misrepresents the scope of the issue. Foxconn has merely been the most publicized factory, but it isn't the worst.
Let's say Apple says, we heard you. We listened to your concerns and we are changing factories to this one that has all these policies in place to protect employee rights. Without being able to rely on China to actually enforce those laws and rules, how likely is it that a new factory would be better than the old one? And meanwhile, other electronics that we consume would still be made there.
Apple has been very successful, but they can't operate on a different set of rules than the other companies and sustain their competitiveness long term. By singling them out, we put them in a weaker position to affect change and meanwhile all the other companies aren't held accountable for doing the exact same thing. Apple has power, but a collective of companies working together would have a lot more power, and they aren't going to work together if they can sit back and watch one of their competitors get thrown under the bus.
The issue with moving here is supply chain. Since all the major companies manufacture in China, they have the the entire system to get what you need and get it fast, including supplies and a skilled labor force. Moving to the US would require a lot more than just having paying for better salaries and employee conditions.
I would imagine that the store manager can be depended on to forward it to corporate.
Oh lord, I'm accused of ruining fun, the worst possible thing.
Yes, I take professionals seriously. I shouldn't because that's not fun? I am willing to take that risk. After all, there aren't any examples of funny interviews by professionals where people manage to avoid saying offensive things (as I watch the Daily Show), so I guess we all have to choose.
I don't think people need to be offensive to 1)be funny 2)have fun or 3)have personality.
Try to avoid or ignore people who do.
Who are offensive? No. Not going to happen. After all, I am the fun ruiner!
I'm glad that Jaffe came around. We can all be thoughtless on occasion. Decency doesn't come from being infallible, it comes from respect, compassion, and a willingness to recognize mistakes.
Did you actually look for any articles by women on this site before you make that absurd generalization? You clearly haven't been paying much attention.
I've been a reader here for 5+ years, and I think the fact that highly respected professionals continue to participate in this type of juvenile, exclusionary culture, and that people think that it's no big deal, is ridiculous. Thanks to Katie speaking up, maybe Jaffe and other gaming professionals will consider their words more thoughtfully in the future.
