Lego Star Wars producer unlocks secret of gaming success

Boy, do I remember how much I loved cheats...

"They dislike waiting for anything"

Ain't that the truth. One of the things I HATE in video games is when they randomly go from cut scenes to game play. That's marred a lot of good games, in my opinion.
Games like Gears of War are guilty of this, from what little I've played and seen. Even games considered classics, like Beyond Good & Evil, I felt were hurt by the amount of cut scenes.
On the other hand though, some games, like Twilight Princess, I felt would have benefited from having MORE cut scenes occasionally.

Of course, nothing's quite as bad as waiting for load times.

He's completely right, I've never even thought about that stuff, but he's completely right.

If you want to make a game that 8 year old boys will love, yeah, test it on 8 year old boys. But you probably won't grab me with a game tested that way, and you'll miss out anyone with tastes similar to mine. I like a good engaging story, don't mind cutscenes at all, absolutely LOVE numbers and stats in a game, think all RPGs should have turn-based battles, etc. There are a lot of tastes out there, and if you ever expect to find a simple and easy way to please everyone at once, you're going to be disappointed. It is impossible.

And don't discount that 'puberty' thing. Besides the physical and sexual maturity it brings, puberty gets your frontal lobe working and developing. Assuming you're not totally sheltered by your parents and are emotionally challenged on a regular basis by controversial, complex, and objectionable content, you gain the ability to deal with complex emotional issues (if you are sheltered, your frontal lobe will not develop fully and you may never gain emotional maturity). Games which deal with complex emotional issues will get passed on by the 8 year old focus group. They won't take to them like they won't take to a steak dinner because their tastebuds aren't developed enough yet.

I'd like to see a world where there are brilliant games that the 8 year old boys love, and an adult public that isn't afraid to entertain their inner 8 year old by playing them, right alongside compelling and emotionally challenging story-rich games. I don't agree with age prohibition of videogames, but I certainly do believe different types of games appeal to different tastes, and I think the entire gaming industry will be better off when the spectrum of tastes being catered to is as broad as possible.

Yeah, that's great and all - except I still haven't forgotten how the PS2, XBox 360, and PC versions of Lego Star Wars II all have the same 2 show-stopper bugs where the entire game freezes. And the tech-support always says "This is the first we've heard of this error, it is most likely your machine" when I personally know of dozens of people for each of the three platforms that have all sent in the same error reports.

That and the fact that the aspect ratio is fucked on the XBox 360 - if you start a game in fullscreen, that game will forever be in fullscreen. If you change your XBox 360 to widescreen after the fact, all Lego Star Wars II does is stretch the full-screen image.

What sloppy sloppy programming. But hey, I'm glad they make 8 year old boys laugh.

I gotta disagree with a lot of this. Lego SW is fun for about 10 minutes and then quite boring. Overall, I think OtakuCODE has it right in comment 4: games tailored for 8 year olds and everyone's inner 8 year old is fine. Making that age the end-all, be-all of gaming is short sighted and will prevent a lot of rich, new, complex gaming experiences.

lol @ otaku
I consider rpg players that think they're on some sort of "higher level" than other gamers the same way that i consider manga fans that read (inc stereotype) YAOI TENTACLE RAPE HENTAI comics that think they somehow will have more clout than those who read marvel: elitist bitches. It's not that the layman gamer lacks maturity (which we do, but that's besides the point), but rather that we lack an inner (inc aforementioned stereotype) JACK OFF TO UNDERAGE BUTTSECKS CARTOONS. I do agree that in order for video games to gain acceptance they have to deal with drama to a degree, but the answer to the "art or game" question will not be a japanese rpg in which an awesome love that lasts through millenia and struggle to save the world from destruction or whatever the fuck most rpg's are about.
If you want to see a mature game that actually uplifts the medium, look at Fahrenheit (Indigo Prophecy).
But if you like Jrpgs, more power to you. This is fuckin america, after all. I'm sorry to rant you out.

http://www.sirlin.net/Features/feature_PlaytoWinPart0.htm

This guy hit the nail on the head. I want every game to be simple enough to beat it quickly and have fun doing it. That is the worst feeling, especially in RPGs, to not know what task you have to accomplish next. Not knowing what the next step is a requirement for a bad game.

It's kinda weird for me. Back when I was bit younger, I loved RPGs and cutscnes and what not. Now, as I'm growing older, my tastes have changed and I have a shorter attention span when it comes to games.

Long cutscenes are lame to me, and actually pull me out of the game. I'll take real-time combat over turn-based anytime. Stats? Pshhh!

Now I'm more into Action games than RPGs...

when i was young, i play so many lego games, they are so nice!!!

I can't remember the last time I read something gaming related that I found so incredibly insightful that it made me question an entire industry's thinking.

Back in the day a end-level-boss could take several hours to beat. But we did it! Why didn't we just give up? After all we're the ADD generation, right?

The bosses of yesteryear gave you hints in their design elements. That part that flashes red/yellow when you hit it?
WEAK POINT! Hit it for massive damage! ;)

In the time before AI and 'thinking' enemies, we found -patterns- and memorized them. In other words, the bosses were challenging but with observation and persistence, we could do it.

FYI - Memories of reference : the 'Ghouls and Ghosts/Ghosts and Goblins' series, the 'R-Type' series, and damn near anything else 8/16 bit that caused fits of rage and understanding... ;-)

That sure doesn't explain the pod race in Lego Star Wars I. I know that a game like this should be challenging, but it shouldn't be frustrating. What a PITA that was.

"In the time before AI and 'thinking' enemies, we found -patterns- and memorized them. In other words, the bosses were challenging but with observation and persistence, we could do it."

Most people beat Raam in insane mode in Gears of War by getting him to get stuck behind a block on the train. So it still goes on. :)

My observation is, in good "kiddie" games, every part of the journey is designed to be purposeful and challenging (as Smith says: "moving forward in a game"), while "mature" games tend to have more uneventful traveling and mindless grinding. There're several "kiddie" games that I've replayed and completed twice, however, I don't even finish the majority of "mature" game I start, not because they are difficult, but because I get bored and I don't feel like I'm making progress towards the end.

LEGO Batman tbh.

What's wrong with making a game for eight year old boys? Let them have something to play that someone actually cared about designing for once. There are plenty of Star Wars games for adults so stop whining. Geez...

I'm all for making games less obtuse, but if 8 year-olds love cheating when they find something even slightly challenging, then I don't want to be playing far too easy games because of them. Whatever happened to a sense of accomplishment?

Jimboz: What are you smoking? Development of the ability to handle emotional complexity is an advancement. I didn't mean to say that RPGs are on a 'higher level'. Games in other genres can have deep dramatic stories just as well. I was just pointing out that young kids aren't developed enough to become engaged in such games. I played a good bit of Fahrenheit and I liked it a lot. In fact, I really ought to go back and finish playing through it.

Bollocks.

Testing games on 8 year olds only proves that an 8 year old would like them. Testing a games intuitiveness is something you can test on anyone of any age group.

Lego Star Wars was a great game. Did he think of licensing the two together into a single game? I think that the combination of Lego and Star Wars is what made it something interesting. Could he have messed it up? Sure. But how do you mess up Lego?

Hey Jimboz - this isn't "fuckin America, after all". This is "the internet", and it covers the whole world.

No. I want a f***ing story with my $70 game, thank you.

From the Gamespot article: "Titles in [Jonathan Smith's] portfolio include Lego Star Wars, Super Monkey Ball Adventure, Finding Nemo, Crash Twinsanity, WRC, and Lego Star Wars II: The Original Trilogy."

That isn't the deepest portfolio in terms of understanding what all gamers want. And it's pretty easy to hit gamers of all ages when you have the Lego AND Star Wars license. I'll take his words more seriously if his company can mimic the same success without ageless brands to back them up.

@ OtakuCODE

Ha, complex emotions. Haha, deep story. Ha, drama--okay I can give ya that one. Many video game stories do have drama, but complex emotions and deep stories? Yeah, I'd have to disagree with you on that one.

I'm an English major so I deal with "complex emotions" and "deep stories" in my daily homework, and let me tell you, I haven't played a single game that comes even close to "depth" or "complexity." I've played some games with stories that are good in their own right, but seriously, if you want complex emotions and deep stories, go read a book. Games are for veggin out to, not for philosophical inquiry.

"Hey Jimboz - this isn't "fuckin America, after all". This is "the internet", and it covers the whole world." by Willo

Uh oh, everyone run! It's da PC Po-lice!

@Brad Lee

You are correct and at the same time very very wrong. I don't think that anybody is or was comparing video games as they currently stand to any great philisophical/literary work. But this in no way means that it should not be attempted. On the contrary, I look forward to the day when a game comes out which DOES stand on its own as an artistic and philisophical masterpiece.

You certainly don't have to -want- to play such a game. But it irks me to hear (read?) people say things like 'games are for veggin out to, not philisophical inquiry.' Why do you think this must be so? Do you think a deep or complex game would not be enjoyable to play? It's fine if you feel that way, but I (and I'm sure many others) feel quite the opposite.

Furthermore, and more on topic, a game designed for an 8 year old will have a certain set of merits that the 8 year old in us all can enjoy, and this is a good thing. But such a game will also be lacking certain complexities (Beyond the afforementioned philisophical ones). Sometimes I want to play a game with a slower pace which requires a lot of strategic thinking and careful planning and min/maxing. Sometimes I want a game with rich and intricate mechanics that requires some time to really appreciate. Sometimes I want a game to be, at least, emotionally evocative in ways that an 8 year old would not be able to fully grasp. I want heroes and villains who are not ridiculously 1-dimensional.

Not every game has to be this way, of course, but games of this nature fail the '8-year-old test'. To use that as a benchmark is to cut off some of the reasons that I, and I'm sure many others, play games in the first place. For games designed to be simple, I think it is an excellent idea. But I would question the wisdom of adopting it as a general principle of game design.

Brad Lee: I agree with you. But if we hand over QA to a room full of 8 year old boys, we'll never see the development of deep games. Most likely, we never will anyway because of the ESRB and their game rating system. Gamers give up so easy to an ultraconservative rating system that they would never even THINK of imposing on books. If people don't come to their senses and either start demanding AO rated games with mature themes (which will hopefully make their way into kids hands like the books that would qualify as AO rated do all the time - including as school assignments), we'll never see truly meaningful games.

In high school I had to read The Grapes of Wrath for an english course. It ends with a guy breast feeding from a woman. It was an extremely powerful illustration of their desperate position. We will never see a scene with that much power in a game as long as the ESRB exists, and all of society will be the poorer for it as generations grow up with no ability to empathize with people because they've never been allowed to be exposed to content that takes them out of their comfort zone and into someone elses shoes while their frontal lobe was developing.

I agree with everything OtakuCODE says. And I add my own flavour to the pot.

What a load of shit. I don't have the same tastes as an 8 year old. I don't get excited about 8 year old issues. I don't get scared of the dark or thing monsters live under my bed. I can get a stiffie. And most of all I don't want to play no kids game.

@ Adran

It's not that I don't think a deep or complex game would be fun to play, rather that I don't think a game with a deep/complex story is even remotely possible.

I mean think about it. Although video games may appear to be a wide-open form of expression, it really isn't. A video game designer has so much to think about when making a video game. The designer must impose limitations on the player without making it seem like it, otherwise it is just no fun to play (see: invisible walls).

Beyond just the game design though, a storyline makes the design of the game even more limited. Being thrust into the eyes of a main character creates a disconnect from the story if the gamer does not identify with the main character. For example: Prey. Many reviewers thought that game was kinda awkward because Tom would randomly say stuff the reviewer wasn't thinking of. In other words, a story-based game forces the gamer into a role, and if the gamer doesn't like that role then that gamer is not going to feel connected to the story at all.

Furthermore, storyline-based games are just that, extremely linear. The reason for that is because stories are a series of specific events that happened which all revolve around a common theme. It simply lacks freedom of choice, which is a problem with a medium of expression which requires input from the 'audience.' If there is a story in a game, the player has to follow the path of the story. The story imposes itself on the gameplay.

Ultimately my point is this: to craft a good story, the author must have as much freedom as possible. This is why books are praised so much, they simply have more freedom. The potential of a book is based entirely on the author's skill of the language. Video games, on the other hand, offer very little creative freedom in regards with storyline, because the problem of free will comes in. The only way a game could have a deep story is if it was something like Phoenix Wright. And, as much as I enjoyed that game, I would hardly consider it a "game," more like a mildly interactive story.

I think games would be better off without stories. It's about time the video game industry develops its own unique image, instead of just piggy-backing off Hollywood.

@ OtakuCODE

You just explained another limitation on the depth of story in games: society. Games have been redlighted as morally reprehensible, which places yet another limitation on what can be done with them.

@OtakuCODE
"I played a good bit of Fahrenheit and I liked it a lot. In fact, I really ought to go back and finish playing through it."

If you liked Fahrenheit, don't bother finishing it. The ending truly sucks, and makes the intelligent plotting of the first two thirds worthless.

As for the issue at hand... I'm a mature(ish), educated guy. I love games to have emotional depth and grand designs, and even enjoy over-complicated control systems when appropriate to the game.

I also love Lego Star Wars. Why? Because it's simple, quick, easy, pretty. Seriously, don't knock simplicity - very few games deliver such addictive gameplay.

I don't own any Nintendo systems, but I know that a lot of people think of them as 'kiddies' gaming. Yet I know a fair few people round the world a well into their Nintendoes - look at the fact that here - in the UK - the latest Zelda has completely sold out for the GameCube.

@The Truth "I don't get scared of the dark or thing monsters live under my bed. I can get a stiffie."

Insecure about your maturity? Bragging about your "stiffie" and playing M-rated games are things adolescents do! Real adults are secure enough in their maturity that their ego is not threatened by "kiddie" games.

Most "mature" games are not truly mature. Most "mature" games have a kind of shallow, immature violence that impresses adolescents more than adults. I agree with Brad Lee about the lack of "complex emotions" and "deep stories" in games. The only thing remotely mature in most "mature" games is the blood, because the stories sure aren't mature. In fact, some "kiddie" games actually have deeper emotions and more mature stories than the "mature" games! For example, let's compare two games:

Game A: A young child witnesses his parents being murdered in front of him as he hides in a closet. As an adult, he vows to seek out his parents' murderers for revenge and to restore his family's honor.

Game B: A cyborg defends a space colony from an alien attack.

Game A is Sly Cooper - a "kiddie" game! Game B is "Halo" - a "mature" game. The so-called "kiddie" game has more emotion and a more mature story than the so-called "mature" game!

But Evan, Halo has esplosions!

"They love, more than you can possibly believe, cheats."

Tell me about it... I know a guy with a 13-year-old kid who still won't play anything unless he can turn on God Mode or something. If you get him in front of a game without cheats, he has no skills whatsoever. He tried playing Wind Waker and couldn't even get past the first dungeon (where you have to sneak).

"...that doesn't necessarily mean that it's too challenging..."

That may be true, never underestimate the determination of a kid, but rely on cheats for long enough and it WILL become the case.

Really enjoyed Jonathon Smith's comments. I play both Star Wars Lego Games with my 3.5 year old son, and we love them.

One comment that stood out was about the cheats. The only cheat we've used in both games was Invincibility in the first game as my boy was losing too many studs in the missions to where he couldn't get True Jedi Status, meaning we couldn't unlock the "?" Mission. I did notice the Star Wars Lego Waffles we buy have cheat codes in them...

Couldn't agree more with the "if something is too difficult, that doesn't necessarily mean that it's too challenging, it means that they don't understand what they're being asked to do"...the second game is a little trickier than the first. My boy was somewhat frustrated at first, but once he learned some of the new tricks (pushing boxes, driving vehicles, etc). Once he understood how to do things, all was good in his world.