Simple Vs Complicated

Discuss and discover all the great games of yesteryear!

Moderators: mknott, NickThorpe, lcarlson, Darran@Retro Gamer, MMohammed

User avatar
lanky316
Posts: 1418
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 7:32 am

Re: Simple Vs Complicated

Post by lanky316 » Fri Mar 18, 2011 12:42 pm

jdanddiet wrote:Fun? Are we supposed to be having fun?
Personally I still am as are many more people worldwide...

Generally games require the buttons, you can spot the odd game where you're repeating instructions but for the most part these are to give us better control. I remember playing wrestling games on the amiga which would leave you barely able to do anything. Fire button would vary between punch/kick often trying to punch when kick might hit them, you then have a "wiggle joystick move" and on the floor you had to try and pin by holding fire and down, chances are though it'd just use stamp/elbow drop. Practically unplayable and just adding two buttons to play MD alternatives were vastly superior.

Like all games it's design and while some devs might get it wrong for the most part control schemes are fine and games still have a lot of fun. Can't work out why some people started playing games back when there were perfectly good hula hoops and footballs the way they carry on.
Image

User avatar
Freestyler
Posts: 4150
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2009 3:15 pm

Re: Simple Vs Complicated

Post by Freestyler » Fri Mar 18, 2011 2:56 pm

lanky316 wrote:Can't work out why some people started playing games back when there were perfectly good hula hoops and footballs the way they carry on.
Image

Image
Freestyler: A customer that's too hard to please, complains all the time and wants everything for next to nothing.

User avatar
lanky316
Posts: 1418
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 7:32 am

Re: Simple Vs Complicated

Post by lanky316 » Fri Mar 18, 2011 3:08 pm

So your point is that people are morons who've spent hundreds of pounds to do what they could do without computer games? Think Darran should shut down the site and mag as it's clearly a load of testicles this computer lark...
Image

User avatar
Nemesis
Posts: 1967
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 9:55 am
Location: Norwich, UK

Re: Simple Vs Complicated

Post by Nemesis » Fri Mar 18, 2011 4:27 pm

I was bit bored of single button joystick gameplay during the final days of the Amiga's commercial lifespan mainly thanks to the sheer brilliance & depth of gameplay Street Fighter 2 offered. Playing Body Blows or Elfmania just wasn't as good therefore the SNES was a natural progression. However, it is a fine line, & Nintendo realised that gaming was becoming too elitist because the console controller was overwhelming to new audiences. I could understand that viewpoint since squad based games used all of the controllers buttons & then some during the PS2/Xbox era. Ordering my squad member to shoot when I wanted him to crouch or crouch when I wanted to shoot put me off that type of game. The Wii-mote appeared more accessible to non-gamers & potentially offered something new to the hardcore even if that hasn't quite come to fruition.
Oh and if you want to do little social experiments on our forum don't post about them on your own you plum - Darren@Retro Gamer

User avatar
Ferret Oxide
Posts: 2473
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 10:27 am
Location: Loading screen

Re: Simple Vs Complicated

Post by Ferret Oxide » Fri Mar 18, 2011 4:52 pm

Freestyler wrote:Anybody played Mirror's Edge? There's a controller setup that's needlessly complex. You're not doing anything no other game asks (certainly no more than a regular platforming FPS) yet it's mapped to a horrendous layout. Restricting the Devs to 4 buttons would have made a world of difference.

I can see even the Wii struggling with trying to add more button functions, despite Nintendo's belief that you should use either the 1 and 2 buttons or A and B. Not all of them including the Plus, Minus and C as well as Z and the D-Pad. It's just overly complex. Buttons don;t have to be context-sensitive, but maybe... just maybe.. if your game has you doing so many different things in it you're maybe just doing too many different things.

Lower the scope. Reduce the controls. Make it pure. And make it fun!
But simplicity doesn't always equal fun.

Also, think about the average FPS. You typically need the following:

Fire
Aim down sights/scope
Secondary fire/grenade
Melee
Change weapon
Use/activate/take cover etc
Jump

With the possible exception of jump, if you remove any of those features people will moan and your sales will take a hit.

People expect your in-game characters to be able to perform multiple actions. It is part of how games have evolved. Imagine playing Assassins creed where your only functions were jump and assassinate. You'd be cutting out huge chunks of functionality. Would that be an improvement?

User avatar
paranoid marvin
Posts: 14272
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 6:28 pm
Location: 21st Century Earth

Re: Simple Vs Complicated

Post by paranoid marvin » Fri Mar 18, 2011 5:19 pm

I've always been a great advocate for 1-button gaming where only 1 button was required. WOTEF/IK+ and Kick Off/Sensible Soccer are prime examples of games that work fine with just one button with the modern equivalents of Tekken/Street Fighter and FIFA/Pro Evo

Case 1 :

Sensible Soccer (Amiga) vs Pro Evo (PS3)

Sensi requires 1 button; with a little practice the player can select various strengths/height of shot . They can curl and cross a ball , volley and head ; with a bit of aftertouch if required. Sliding tackles , nudges off the ball , dribbling , passing.... it's all possible and with just ONE button.
Pro Evo allows the player to do all this and more , but has a different button for just about every action. The number and variations of things the player can do on and off the ball is incredible - most carred out once the player has pressed the correct combination of the buttons.


Case 2 :

WOTEF (C64) vs Tekken (PS2)

Tekken allos the player to string together a complex series of combat actions. If the player is capable of somehow knowing or remembering a certain combination of buttons and pad directions , some spectacular combos can be achieved.
WOTEF has 16 offensive/defensive moves selected by the 8 directions on the joystick plus an additional 8 with a the press of a the button whilst moving the stick. The player is able to uppercut/flying kick/butt and roundhouse their opponent whilst also deftly somesaulting over their unsuspecting opponent , only to then turn and gut-punch them. All with one button.

I think by now you know which I favour. Whilst there's much to be said for being able to allow the gamer to have the choice of these , I ask the question where is the skill? In Sensi,passing the ball out from the keeper , dribbling down the line and swinging in a curling cross for your striker to bullet-head the ball into the corner of the net took real skill in achieving - and do you know what , there was a real sense of achievement when you did so. Spectacular goals in Pro Evo are ten-a penny , and more often than not are achieved with pressing the right button at the right time.

Stringing together a combo in Tekken or Street Fighter might look good - but let's face it it's a memory test more than anything else isnt it? The player spends more time thinking about pressing the right sequence of buttons than what's actually happening on the screen. WOTEF is all about reactions , getting a quick punch or block in , then getting back out again ; it's a test of the players reactions , and the skill is in having good reflexes.

In short , some games need extra buttons , but not that many. Body Blows/Elfmania and SF2 are good examples of when more buttons is better ; Body Blows tried to fit a multi-button style of gaming into one and (imho) suffered massively as a result , whereas SF2's 6 buttons suited the gaming style , and still was more about dexterity, instinct and reactions than later iterations.
Mr Flibble says...
"Game over , boys!"

User avatar
C=Style
Posts: 9053
Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 4:07 pm
Contact:

Re: Simple Vs Complicated

Post by C=Style » Fri Mar 18, 2011 5:23 pm

When it comes to videogames I'll take simple over complicated every time! But if we are talking about having one fire button that does all like the Amiga days then I'll pass cheers.
Image

User avatar
che_don_john
Posts: 1231
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 11:51 am

Re: Simple Vs Complicated

Post by che_don_john » Sat Mar 19, 2011 5:33 am

Vir_Lucis wrote:if you can't figure out two sticks and four buttons (the majority of what you need for modern gaming) then I wouldn't trust you to drive a manual car either ;)
It's not so much figuring out the buttons that is the problem for people, but simply a matter of dexterity. Contorting one's fingers around a modern controller in the way that we do must feel very unnatural, and would be difficult, for anyone trying out games for the first time.
CheDonJohn's Sale/Trade/Wanted/Giveaway thread

PSN ID, XBL Gamertag and Steam: CheDonJohn
Playfire profile

Image

User avatar
Freestyler
Posts: 4150
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2009 3:15 pm

Re: Simple Vs Complicated

Post by Freestyler » Sat Mar 19, 2011 6:37 am

lanky316 wrote:So your point is that people are morons who've spent hundreds of pounds to do what they could do without computer games? Think Darran should shut down the site and mag as it's clearly a load of testicles this computer lark...
No, the point is that some morons will always use the "Why play videogame football when you can do it for real" complaint without actually understanding that people actually do both. They're not mutually exclusive.
paranoid marvin wrote:I've always been a great advocate for 1-button gaming where only 1 button was required. WOTEF/IK+ and Kick Off/Sensible Soccer are prime examples of games that work fine with just one button with the modern equivalents of Tekken/Street Fighter and FIFA/Pro Evo
And this is exactly the point I was making. Complex control because it's needed for the game, not because as a Developer you have access to it.

I'm playing a lot of PC FPS's with my PS2 Joypad atm (keyboard & mouse is for Gheys) and all the buttons are being used in some fashion. Even the Keyboard is having to be roped in for some things that can't be assigned to button presses. Fine, says I. As long as the buttons are being used for things that are vital and not just used for the sake of it.
Freestyler: A customer that's too hard to please, complains all the time and wants everything for next to nothing.

User avatar
lanky316
Posts: 1418
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 7:32 am

Re: Simple Vs Complicated

Post by lanky316 » Sat Mar 19, 2011 6:51 am

Finally you make sense. So what was the point of yet another modern technology complaint when you agree that if people are enjoying playing games and developers are using them wisely rather than just because it's there? I like the way you tried to turn it into a personal dig though shows real class!
Image

User avatar
Haabermaaster
Posts: 56
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2010 4:17 pm

Re: Simple Vs Complicated

Post by Haabermaaster » Sat Mar 19, 2011 7:20 am

It sounded like a normal discussion until you started with the abuse mate. The guy was just posting to get a thread going. Isn't that the point of forums? :)

User avatar
lanky316
Posts: 1418
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 7:32 am

Re: Simple Vs Complicated

Post by lanky316 » Sat Mar 19, 2011 7:28 am

Who opted to move away from discussion? Wasn't me, I'm not the one who decided that answering posts with sarcastic pictorial replies and ignore what people are actually saying was the way to further discussion. It's much easier than actually having to discuss things properly I suppose.

Off phone so now can go on...

The post which triggered the stupidity finished on a tail end of a very valid point which is that people do have fun and often control schemes are for the benefit of the game design in the first place. I sincerely doubt any of us on here have never played a current gen system, not PS3 et al as current gen is now used, but every system at some stage is current generation. The chances are either us or our families spent bloody good money on them. Something was a spark that got us interested in them and chances are it was something that was fun that we'd seen or had hands on experience of and we decided to pick up. However, the way some people appear to wish we'd stagnated on day one it's hard to understand how it grew.

Perhaps now there are posters on here that got a C64 as kids and never bought a new system and have always played only that one, sincerely doubt it but maybe you do exist. Something made people keep playing through many years and more elaborate systems, is this just people trying to keep up with the Jones' or did people genuinely get an improvement when playing even more cutting edge complicated games from the SNES/Mega Drive? I know not everyone has offered a top 20 but few people have only listed 20 games from one of the very early systems, clearly something made us go out and buy the next big thing?

Fact is that games have often benefited and improved the experience, there are some needless functions on modern games but there's no way some of the games now would have worked in the old days, for one a massively online FPS just wouldn't have been possible and whether they are the best games available or not is open for debate and another topic but on a lot of cases the button presses make sense, in fact Freestyler himself agrees with this in a post shortly above this one. Which raises the question semi-seriously posed what was his point in trying to wind up someone saying the same thing as him? It can only be an attempt to point score and provoke stupidity in a fairly straightforward topic, and for my own impulsiveness I bought the bait!

People are attracted to games for a reason, and presumably that's fun, and gaming now is the biggest the industry has ever been with three massively selling consoles after fairly short times on the market. While I, and presumably every other member on here, get a kick out of the older games with (sometimes...) simplified control schemes some of the games we enjoy now just wouldn't have particularly had the legs or draw now. Let's be honest, some games are deemed incredibly dull and repetitive and I really couldn't imagine how short a period of time some of them would last in simplified terms of just having one button. I'm working on knocking up a game called "Assassination!" for the Speccy myself (will never see the light of day knowing me) but compared to the modern equivalent I'm going to be reducing the vast majority of things you can do just because it's not possible without mapping keys for actions because of potential gray spots.
Image

User avatar
ShadowNeku
Posts: 2135
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 9:10 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Simple Vs Complicated

Post by ShadowNeku » Sat Mar 19, 2011 10:15 am

Freestyler wrote: Lower the scope. Reduce the controls. Make it pure. And make it fun!
But what exactly are you asking here?
Sounds like you want developers to just stop creating anything ambitious or remove content or actions for the sake of making it simpler. And whats to say a game with a large amount of controls cant be fun?

Surely its clear that games like Call of Duty would be impossible to operate on one joystick/1 button. Halo gives you buttons that allow you to fire a gun, throw a grenade and melee attack on the fly, which is a vast improvement in older control schemes where each of these attacks had their own weapon slot and you had to switch between them and use them seperately. I know you said that you dont mind lots of controls provided its necessary, but it also sounds like you want us to start going backwards rather than forwards. I can only praise games that strive to give you as many options and choices as you would in real life. This for me gives your character more life, rather than being nothing more than a polygon confined to repeat the same actions again and again. Though its debateable as to wether this translates into "fun" and well end up arguing as to what makes a game enjoyable in the first place.

For arguements sake, i enjoy games old and new just as much as eachother regardless of control schemes.
I asked for orange. It gave me lemon lime!

User avatar
Nemesis
Posts: 1967
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 9:55 am
Location: Norwich, UK

Re: Simple Vs Complicated

Post by Nemesis » Sat Mar 19, 2011 11:02 am

lanky316 wrote:However, the way some people appear to wish we'd stagnated on day one it's hard to understand how it grew.

I know not everyone has offered a top 20 but few people have only listed 20 games from one of the very early systems, clearly something made us go out and buy the next big thing?
Your first sentence quoted above isn't very fair though. I haven't been as taken with this gen as previous ones but I certainly don't wish that gaming stays in one time forever otherwise my passion may never be re-invigorated. I'm not sure the reason why exactly, perhaps it is age, but then I felt similarly about gaming just before SF2 arrived which carried be through to Ridge Racer then subsequently Halo. However, you raise a salient question within your second sentence. More complex controllers have allowed more complex control systems & gameplay & possibly, something different to before. I avoided the word "better" there of course :) but the new is always tends to be more interesting (or it usually is anyway) so people will buy into it for the right price dependant on how keen they are.
Oh and if you want to do little social experiments on our forum don't post about them on your own you plum - Darren@Retro Gamer

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests