| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (13)

Posted: Aug 17th 2006 11:31AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
DK mode for the pro's in Counter-Strike / Battlefield 2.

Posted: Aug 17th 2006 11:37AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Balanced? yes

Rewarding? no

Posted: Aug 17th 2006 11:39AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Handicapping gamers of different skills is nothing new, but this seems beyond anything I've experienced. I support anything that makes games accessible to more people, even if it means losing to people of lower skill than me sometimes. Or especially because of that, since new players are more likely to give up if they never win. More gamers is a good thing.

I had always wondered what will happen once I go blind (which, given my latest eye exam, is inevitable). Will I be able to play video games any more? It seems silly, since the root of the term means "sight", but . One friend has suggested that text adventures would be possible, with appropriate software to read the text to me, but that's a bit more limited than would want. At the very least, any non-reaction-based game should be adaptable for the sightless, so I could still play Disgaea or Dragon Quest without being able to see.

Posted: Aug 17th 2006 11:48AM MartyCota said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I love how you use the Wii vs PS3 screenshot!!!!


OK OK SORRY IT IS A JOKE!!! Just wanted to get it out there before the Sony fanboys tried. Yes I am getting a Wii, No I am not getting a PS3.. so don't start getting enraged!!!

Posted: Aug 17th 2006 12:20PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"Balanced? yes"

Actually, I'm thinking "no."

One way of playing is always going to be easier than another. All this is talking about is asking the more skilled player to use the more difficult interface. But that's not what's actually going to happen, because games are by nature competitive and human nature is to want to win. (Or at least, western cultural norms are to want to win.)

So all I see happening here is that everybody ends up choosing the interface that gives them the best chance to win. If that means auto-fire and auto-movement, then that's what they're going to choose. Nobody's going to choose a first-person tennis interface if it makes it harder to hit the ball than a pong-like interface.

They may do it when they're alone and have nothing to prove, but when you're playing against another person, people aren't going to willingly put themselves at a competitive disadvantage.

Posted: Aug 17th 2006 12:32PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Jeff - speak for yourself. Not everyone needs a GameSharked Mewtwo or headshot hacks when playing games just to win at all costs. Some people prefer to lose honestly than to win by cheating. Some people would rather have a close, competitive match than a complete blowout. I use auto-handicap when playing Super Smash Bros. Melee for just that reason - to make matches close until the end. I find that significantly more fun than winning every time (or, of course, losing every time).

Anyway, there's one important point - what if the easier interface isn't available to everyone? If only people who are legitimately handicapped get the choice of the easy play, then the insecure win-at-all-costs types can't abuse that feature.

Posted: Aug 17th 2006 12:55PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
This is reworded like it's something new. Handicap options have been around forever.
But it's usually of another form. The person who knows they have an advantage increases their handicap so that they can play more fairly with a less experienced player. Why should the less experienced player be dumbed down with an interface that won't help them learn the one the more experienced player is using? You're not going to learn much if you get used to making things easier for yourself. Hence why advanced players even ever use handicaps.

Posted: Aug 17th 2006 2:49PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I would not want to use an interface which gave me an advantage over the competition, and equally I would not want to have someone use one on me.
Taking the fps as a prime example, I relish the time when I am playing against people who are clearly worse than me, and see this as a reward for all the time I spent getting owned when I was new to the game. It is not fun to join a game late in its life when everyone is an expert, for instance I'm not going to start playing Starcraft now. But I think there's a better solution than aimbots and autofire.
Bungie's matchmaking system is such a solution. By matching players based on how many games they've won/lost, you usually end up playing at your own level.
This does require a large game population though, and there is not much can be done about the sad individuals who open new XBL accounts for the express purpose of playing way below their level, but it's a pretty good system.

Posted: Aug 17th 2006 2:52PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Actually speaking of handicaps, we used to use the N64 Goldeneye handicap system for a completely different purpose.
By dialling everyone down to -10 we had it so that pretty much one shot killed if it was a powerful weapon, but weaker weapons took a couple of shots, and body armour was fairly useful. It was much better than License to Kill, where one touch from anything was fatal.

Posted: Aug 17th 2006 2:59PM omdata said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I would like to see more handicapping options for co-op games, especially shooters. My girlfriend and I like to play SW: Battlefront 2 together; I'm at General ranking and she's a newb. It would be a lot more fun if her character had more hp or her weapons did more damage so she could still learn how to play, but simultaneously play closer to my level, so to speak.

I think more people who are inexperienced would be willing to give shooters (and other co-op genres) a shot if they knew they A. Wouldn't constantly be getting pwned and B. Wouldn't feel like they're slowing down their teammate/s.

Also, after you start taking down "expert" songs in Guitar Hero, having to go back to "easy" or "normal" to accomodate a less-experienced player is pretty aggravating.

Posted: Aug 17th 2006 3:02PM omdata said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
In two-player mode. (oops)
/end thought

Posted: Aug 17th 2006 4:29PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'd like to see Metroid Prime-esque lock-on in FPSes. I don't like how most FPSes are competitions between stability in people's hands or thumbs.

Posted: Aug 17th 2006 6:46PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
HOw can a game be fun if there is no real guage of ability?

I play online often on the 360, and as an increasingly casual gamer in my very late 20s, increasingly get beaten by teenagers (for want of a better phrase!). At least know I have been beaten by a dedicated, practiced player.

Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

TUAW

TUAW

Massively

Massively

WoW

WoW