I never realized Mario is a metaphor for real life.
I'd go as far as to even implement a 1-Up mushroom cash-shop, $1 for five 1-Ups
Anon invents arcade cabinets
So many comments about how it is meant to artificially extend gameplay, or motivate the player to continue.
Could it not be as simple as the game cartridge only holds 1MB of game data max, and restarting the level from 0 when you die uses less valuable storage space?
ITT we don't to know to program
For the love of God Gen Z is gonna kill us with sighs
Nintendo is way ahead of these guys. The last few mario games let you pick a character that can't be hurt or killed. And if that's too hard for you, they'll even show you exactly how to play the level.
I can at least support baby mode for, like, extremely small kids and maybe co-op with that one person who's never touched a video game in their life but wants to play along with the other three. You know, the kids are over at grandpa's, and he wants to feel like he's playing and having fun with them instead of just setting and forgetting them on the magic dopamine box, but he's no good at it, so he takes the invincible character. I think that's reasonable, inclusive game design.
What I take issue with is when baby mode drags down the difficulty of the rest of the game modes. For example, you as a game designer benchmark "normal mode" against "being literally invulnerable", and so you now have to play hard mode to even vaguely feel any sort of tension.
I agree completely. Idk why they do it. They got filthy rich off kids 5-10 playing the shit out of NES games.
The way it works is this: The people catch hold of something, and make magic. It makes a ton of money, because people can recognize magic. Then other people with investment money get involved. Gradually, the magic oriented people are outnumbered, the fun of their average working day declines, and they leave or simply get shouldered into some niche somewhere by the unimaginable torrent of motivated people who have something else on their mind.
No one involved in Mario, Zelda, Metroid, or Contra has been anywhere near the design team at Nintendo for decades. These guys own the rights to call it "Mario," but if they weren't making games where you can turn Mario into an elephant, they could be just as happy making sweat pants with writing on the ass. And the magic is off somewhere else, doing its thing.
Mario Wonder both had a “baby mode” mechanic and yet also had some genuinely interesting and challenging levels.
Celeste is extremely difficult yet also has a baby mode feature.
Many games have a “tell me a story” difficulty level which is more or less the same idea.
Games having an easy difficulty without detracting from the game’s main challenge and balance is not a problem IMO.
streamlining
you mean instead of playing the game, i could pay you to not play the game i'm playing instead?
sign me up
I have this same mindset and it's great because it results in 0 temptation to spend money on game progression or items. If I'm playing a game where it feels like spending money like that is the only way to have fun with it, I just drop the game.
Actually, I don't even really bother with any games that I understand to have p2w aspects or any mtx that aren't just cosmetic.
If I’m playing a game where it feels like spending money like that is the only way to have fun with it, I just drop the game.
A big part of the "hook" in GACHA and other whale-hunting games is the initial hook of a fun and engaging setup. Genshin Impact and Sword of Convallaria both stick out to me as initially very fun and captivating games. They draw you in with the cut scenes and ramp up the curve like a normal open world JRPG.
But the longer you play, the more you start tripping over resource requirements and timers on abilities and the need to do "daily" activities that involve logging on every day. All of this is fun in the early cycles but feels more and more like work by the later stages of the game. Dungeons start looking more and more basic - big empty rooms with a bunch of respawns in the center. Fights feel more contingent on having a bigger number than any kind of strategy or skill.
If you've played older traditional JRPGs before, it'll start feeling weird because you know you should be expecting the game to pick up towards a dramatic conclusion after 100 hours of play. But these games just... go on forever. There's no payoff. You get tired and bored and you leave.
But if you haven't played older traditional JRPGs, you're just falling into this skinner box of induced anxiety. The game becomes habit-forming. The induced reflex to trigger a feature or use a power that's increasingly paywalled encourages you to open your (parent's) wallet.
Actually, I don’t even really bother with any games that I understand to have p2w aspects or any mtx that aren’t just cosmetic.
There's a networking effect to a lot of these games. Up front, you're strongly encouraged to get your friends to join in. And friends playing a game together can have enormous staying power. I know people who have been running the same D&D game for 20 years (literally the same characters and world, going on into the level 200+ range as they just crank those numbers higher). I know a couple that's been doing WoW for their entire relationship - they started playing when they started dating and now they've got their ten-year-old son along for the ride.
I think part of what gives these games staying power is that they don't require you to empty your savings account to participate. But I think its naive to discount the addictive power of a community space you're comfortable socializing in.
These places are predatory. I can't discount them just because I'm not one of the ones that got eaten.
I know OP is joking (at least I hope he is), but it reminded me of this thread about Soulslikes:
https://old.reddit.com/r/truegaming/comments/oc1w7g/separating_difficulty_from_drudgery_or_why/
Time-wasting respawns/progress loss seems like a very blunt tool with which to motivate the player to keep playing. It's some 1988 arcade coin-op shit that we really ought to leave in the past.
Time-wasting respawns/progress loss seems like a very blunt tool with which to motivate the player to keep playing.
Tried playing a game of tennis with my friends. 0, 15, 30, 40, Point. Then if you're two scores ahead the game resets. Wtf! Why did the game reset? I was 30-40 and now I'm back to 0? I should be allowed to keep my 30 into the next game.
Now I'm being induced into playing more tennis! I hate this.
And tennis has so few maps! Almost everywhere I go is concrete. Very luck to find a clay court anywhere. You need to buy the DLC to find grass, and only if you're really lucky.
Its repetitive. Its exhausting. The rules barely make sense. And the match-making is completely fucked. I'm either playing people I trounce or getting my ass handed to me almost every time I go to a court.
I think I'm going to try and pick up chess instead. Does anyone know how I can upgrade my pawns to queens, though?
So your claim is souls likes are more like tennis than say, Fortnite is.
It's not quite the same though, souls still keeps the items you dropped, its just up to you to retrieve them.
You can't claim you climbed a mountain, if each time you fell you just resumed from where you lost grip. Falling and reclimbing with renewed tenacity means that when you finally conquer the mountain, the view is all the more sweeter for the huge experience you've gained along the way.
You can't claim you climbed a mountain, if each time you fell you just resumed from where you lost grip.
Sure you can; it's called redpointing.
I think soulslikes are appealing to a certain type of player. Personally I love Dark Souls it's my favorite game.
But I like playing with stakes. I remember stumbling around in the forest, down to my last scrap of health, with no more heals, desperately trying to reach the next bonfire. That for me is fun. Is it frustrating to lose your progress? Sure. But the only "penalty" is you have to try again or change your approach and try something else. And really, is being forced to replay a section inherently punishing? If the game itself is fun, you should still be having fun fighting and exploring even if you aren't progressing.
It can be the only way to punish people in certain games.
If there's no punishment for failure, there's no reason to respect any dangers the game presents.
In Minecraft, what should happen if you walk north for an hour and die? If you respawn with your inventory, why not just do that again and die as a quick way to get back? Why even bother with equipment or food at that point? Suddenly, half the game mechanics have lost their meaning, and there's a lot less to do for the player.
A game is something that has a goal within certain bounds/rules. You accept that when you play and tedium isn't relivent except as maybe a thing you don't like, just like you might not like how a piece feels or character looks or a particular rule.
A toy is something you play with for "fun".
I think people that want a toy accidentally start playing a game then get upset that it isnt a toy.
Recently I re-played Wario Land: Super Mario Land 3 on an emulator and did not feel ashamed by making save points everywhere to avoid re-playing the levels, I had time for that as a kid.
Back in the day games were hard (often in unfair ways) to stretch out the game, because there was only like 4 levels and if it was easy you'd be finished in a single afternoon.
Now games are thousands of hours long and they hold your hand every step of the way to make sure you actually see all that content; and then the majority of players quit after completing only about 1/4th of the total game.
This is probably why I love Soulslikes so fucking much. I grew up with the first kind, and have suffered long enough with the latter kind. Soulslikes are the perfect blend of new and old school design philosophy (when done right). Tough, but also not short. They don't hold your hand, but they don't exactly keep you entirely in the dark on how to play. They reward community action not just in the game with the message systems, but also because it doesn't spoon-feed you everything, certain deeper ideas are discovered more from talking to other players who found things you missed; which is something we did back in the day before the internet.
Kids have it too easy. Back in my day we did it the hard way! (using Game Genie)
Thanks I hate it
"Green Mario" because the kind of people who have these ideas should fear his true name.
other characters... Metroid
It's okay not to like Super Mario. You don't need to try and "fix" it.
I think it was a joke
It would be like 1us for 500 coins, and a pack of 5 life-up mushrooms for 450 coins.
During COVID I beat smb1 for the first time. On Switch. Where you could rewind 😓
I used to play this game when I was like 10 I don't remember it being particularly frustrating it wasn't easy but I don't remember it being impossibly difficult.
Is this for real or am I too tired to understand the point of the text?
I'm genuinely not sure wether or not the first text is sarcastic, but I'm certain the reply is.
*enshittifies
Do we at least get a participation medal, or can we buy one?
What other costly mistakes can we buy ourselves out of?
This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.
Be warned:
If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.
