View Single Post
Old 07/06/2011, 01:26 pm   #23
thom-22
Senior Member
 
thom-22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 490
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAISHI View Post
Here's my point. To a person that wants a fair and honest trip to the end, they just want to solve puzzles and get there. They don't want a bug stopping them any more than a programmed dead end because they are in all practical ways the same thing: A stop to the game that forces them to restart. I want to play a game, solve the puzzles, and get to the end.
You say that you just want to solve puzzles, but a dead-end means that you failed to solve a puzzle. I don't buy the argument that because the result of a player having failed to solve a puzzle resembles the unintended result of a programming error the puzzle is therefore unfair or illegitimate or lazily designed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAISHI View Post
I usually like to play a game and finish it within a week's time. Why? Because my life is so hustle bustle and crazy that I don't have time to invest in a game for more than a week. Artificially stopping my progress because I forget something is not different to me than a bug, because they both keep me from finishing the game in a way that has nothing to do with whether I was solving the puzzles or not. Artificial extensions to the game's length only come across as cheap and hackneyed without any attention to real gameplay.
How is a dead-end artificial or cheap? In video-gaming, it is generally the case that when you fail to meet the challenges presented in a game-world, the game takes longer to complete. A dead-end is well within the bounds of this concept, it's just an extreme example.

I have long since given up arguing that games "should" have dead-ends or are "better" with dead-ends. (One has to pick and choose one's battles.) I agree that they can be replaced with other kinds of puzzles and still have a fun and challenging game. It's fine if people don't want to accept dead-ends as "fair game" in their personal video-game choices. I understand they don't want their video-game time spent on repeating large sections. But I have to object when they make the jump from personal dislike to declaring dead-ends invalid or illegitimate or unfair or lazy puzzle design -- it just doesn't wash. chucklas' point is worth repeating:

Quote:
Originally Posted by chucklas View Post
I'm not a big fan of Call of Duty, but that doesn't mean they should change it up because it doesn't fit what I think is good game design. I just shouldn't play it. The same goes for you if you don't like the way the game is designed.
thom-22 is offline