Was Metroid really the first sidescroller where you had to go left first?
>>3233453
No
The Legend of Kage came out a year earlier(ignore the 1984 title in the video that's the year it was in development)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVhAlxIAuG8
>>3233453
You didn't have to go left first. You go right first to learn that you have to go left.
>>3234390
>You didn't have to go left
>you have to go left.
lol no seriously though it was a real creative way to immediately make the non-linear mechanics clear.
>>3234476
I never thought about this before but it's true with Super Metroid too. Once you get on Zebes anyway.
>>3234476
Take a moment to imagine how that scenario would be implemented in a modern game. Then either shudder or puke
>>3233453
>>3234740
/thread
>>3234798
In Pitfall 1 you can go either direction.
>>3234814
try reading the thread. It's not that long, and it covers that remark
>>3234658
Modern games do it. Like a good example is that my 3 year old really wants to play Little Big Planet. The very first stage explains simple running and jumping with voice overs and the whole nine yards and lets you play for a while and introduces new mechanics at a nice pace but when he got to the grappling, he struggled with that for weeks as his brain developed and he learned a gaming concept like that. He went back and played the non-grapple levels, he had me beat the grapple levels he got frustrated many many times but eventually he learned to do it and now he's struggling with the cake shooting hat. Most "modern" games use this gradual, easy introduction to their mechanics at a similar pace which is to say that most modern games treat their audience like a 3 to 5 year old challenge-wise. Lowest common denominator as it were.
If you mean what if a modern game kept you from being able to play for more than a minute and fight a couple enemies until you fully understood a mechanic, with no explanation and no choice but to learn or die you're looking at games like Dark Souls. It's funny when people come around asking for "the retro Dark Souls" and they're mostly referring to the difficulty ramp the answer is "Many if not most retro games"
>>3234824
>The very first stage explains simple running and jumping with voice overs and the whole nine yards
That's exactly the problem. They hammer that message home, with popups, texts, tutorials, cutscenes and all that bullshit, because they're afraid of the player being too retarded to get it on their own
>what if a modern game kept you from being able to play for more than a minute and fight a couple enemies until you fully understood a mechanic, with no explanation and no choice but to learn or die
Have you played Metroid? It's a relatively safe area, for a reason. Plenty time to think and work it out. A small location giving you few other options. That's intentional.
>>3234830
>because they're afraid of the player being too retarded to get it on their own
Forgot the second, equally important reason: because the devs forgot how to build levels that teach. Popup texts, cutscenes and tutorials are the cheapest, most dumbed down way to support the player
>>3234830
Yes I agree there's just enough space to feel jumping and shooting an enemy or two but it's still learn or die - I suppose one might die from boredom.
Hm I wonder if Metroid would be be better with slow damage over time like Gauntlet. I should work on a game genie code that does that.
I like the direction the thread is going but just to ad, Jungle Hunt and Spartan X both start out heading left. I'm sure many other arcade games do if I wracked my brain.
>>3234837
>but it's still learn or die
how is that a bad thing? That said, you have infinite ammo and very few enemies. Plenty time to defend and think, and explore the 3 or 4 screens of movement you have. While trying to figure out how to escape these 4 screens you automatically familiarize yourself with the controls, including shooting controls, and are better prepared for the rest of the game.
>I suppose one might die from boredom
what? If you're trying to play devil's advocate you're failing hard. You have to be willfully ignorant to fail that section in the game
>>3234843
>I like the direction the thread is going
left?
>Jungle Hunt and Spartan X both start out heading left
good contributions, thanks. Makes you wonder why. It has to be an intentional decision
>>3234845
Or you would have to be too stupid to try going left. I don't know why you think I'm trying to play Devil's Advocate. There are people who are too stupid to try going left, ever and they probably should know within that first few minutes of play that Metroid is not for them. It's best for everyone that way. Modern games all try to appeal to everyone by both having very minimal challenge as well as shameless pandering (hand-holding). It gets the games to sell the widest and make the most money to dump into more of the same.
Herein lies the problem with even the "hardcore" modern gamer who wants a product made specifically for the intentionally narrow audience that he places himself into and yet if a game comes out with that challenge level but less polished because of lower budgets or smaller teams he shits all over it. THAT attitude is the real horrible thing about /v/ and that type of gamer in general and why they will never ever truly turn /vr/ into /v/ because all our games have already came out and already succeeded or failed based on the /vr/ era demographics that /v/-tier neckbeards and their mortal enemies the casuals can never go back in time and wreck.
The worst (and most inevitable) thing that will happen is that the most kid-friendly cutesy games will invariably be the only "vintage" games that make their way into the zeitgeist and finally the trend will be over and actual enthusiasts can get back to doing what we've always done but honestly I don't mind being seen as an OG right now. It doesn't offend me or anything.
>>3234854
I think it's natural to go left to right because that's the direction we read in and that reversing it was an early cheap way developers came up with to help a game feel fresh.
>>3234881
>There are people (...) they probably should know within that first few minutes of play that Metroid is not for them
duh?
>Modern games all try to appeal to everyone by both having very minimal challenge as well as shameless pandering (hand-holding).
Your point being? I called that attitude shit, you seem to think it's shit, so what the hell is your point, other than making fart noises?
>>3234885
The Japanese read right to left and made most retro games.
>>3234898
I'm trying to have a discussion? They don't necessarily have to be adversarial and just because we feel similar ways doesn't mean we need to gang up to shit all over people who don't. It's good in a lot of ways that video games have become more accessible to a wider variety of people.
>>3234915
>It's good in a lot of ways that video games have become more accessible to a wider variety of people
not if it's at the expense of quality. For some reason you seem to think the section in Metroid is "difficult". It's a fucking tutorial. It just assumes the person in front of the controller is a thinking and reasoning human being. If that's too much to ask for, then breaking games for that is not the right answer. You're saying turning novels into picture books is a good thing, because it makes them accessible to a wider audience. The reality is, it fucks with the quality of the writing, for worse.
>>3234908
No they don't. In cases of vertical text they read from top to bottom and go left to go to the next line which if rotated 90 degrees counter clockwise becomes reading from left to right then shifting down one line exactly how we do and exactly how they do 90% of the time.
>>3234908
If the text is aligned vertically, they read the lines from top to bottom, right to left. If the alignment is horizontal, they read the lines the same way we do.
>>3234926
First of all, while Metroid isn't "difficult" by any standard there is some amount of "difficulty" involved in going to the left. It's saying "You're going to have to search for items to be able to play this game" and it's saying it right away which is great. But now, even games that become quite difficult by the midpoint (of which there actually are plenty) the casual or low skill gamer is suckered into believing he'll be able to enjoy the entire thing while it's too late to really complain about it. That's actually a whole additional level of shittiness that happens in modern games. It would be great if modern games immediately alienated a certain percentage of players in just a few minutes but it's really only Souls that dares to make it clear what kind of game it is from the very beginning.
The original question of "what if that mechanic were implemented in modern games" isn't anything I'd shudder or puke from I fucking WISH I could just play a few minutes of a game and get a feel for how it really is instead of having to infer it from some youtube video of mid-game at great spoiler risk or just trust some dipshit critic's review. Like how that one heavy metal game with Jack Black turned into a real time strategy game halfway through. WTF? I still don't know how to feel about that shit.
>>3234915
I do not consider severe dumbing down of narrative and introductory mechanisms, or dropping any appeal to player curiosity as "making a game 'more accessible' ". I consider it a design failure, and that's me using kind words
>>3234958
They're dumbing games down as a whole to make them more accessible to a wider audience but the broadened appeal just creates tons more space in the marketplace so there are tons more games including games that are made for you they're just not the AAA+ games but you shouldn't need for games to be AAA+ games to enjoy them.
>>3234958
>>3234956
>there is some amount of "difficulty" involved in going to the left
none. Sparking curiosity is not difficulty. Never will be, never must be.
"You're going to have to search for items to be able to play this game"
last I checked it's not saying anything like that. It's important, because your little statement is assuming the answer, while the game does no such thing. It just expects the player to give up and look elsewhere. Not more, not less. It's not saying where, it's not saying what to look for. That's important.
>and it's saying it right away which is great
That's you cheering on Mario because the game tells you early on you need to jump. It has nothing to do with difficulty, it's an exposition of a game mechanic, or a few of them.
>It would be great if modern games immediately alienated a certain percentage of players
It's a tutorial not a casual filter. The designers expect people to finish that section with ease, because it only relies on player curiosity, experimentation, and a tiny search space. That you even consider it difficult at all is very sad. Fortunately you don't seem to be a developer, so the damage is small.
>and get a feel for how it really is
You completely missed the point, well done
>>3234969
>including games that are made for you
I am not looking for difficult or hardcore games. Metroid is, in this context, not an example of a difficult game. The point of the morph ball was introducing core gameplay mechanics without a tutorial, cutscene or text boxes. It is not meant to be difficult, or to filter players. Just like tutorials don't filter players.
The comparison to modern tutorials was meant to expose that modern game design completely lost the concept of learning through observation and reasoning, and replaced it with explicit messages, telling the player what to do. The result is an unthinking, uncreative, unobservative player. People are not dumb, or unskilled. They're just actively taught by modern games to not think, and I consider that a VERY bad thing
>>3235002
>People are not dumb, or unskilled
It's interesting how someone as obnoxious as you can actually have a much higher view of average people than I do. There are dumb people out there, Bro. Really really really fucking dumb people. There are people who have different skill sets from you and who enjoy different things for different reasons and they deserve to play video games too. I'm glad they play video games.
>>3235025
>and they deserve to play video games too
so let's damage narrative and introductory mechanisms for everyone, so your straw men, which don't rely on that damage, can play games?
Tutorial text boxes are not more accessible. They require reading, they disappear, the chance to learn from them is once and it's over.
Let me give you an example how much of a hardcore player I am: GTA San Andreas gave me a really hard time, because it introduced tons of mechanics during every single mission, in the form of text boxes, followed by a failed mission, because you're not given a chance to learn, or repeat. I failed several missions, including the bike chase at the very beginning, because the tutorials are not helpful. Of course on the second playthrough the very same tutorials still showed up, and only annoyed, because I understood it last time, but the game was unable to acknowledge that. It's downright terrible game design, yet for some reason you seem to consider it "more accessible". Meanwhile a game like Metroid halts all progress until you're familiar with any newly introduced mechanic. The only difference is, it shows you how to apply the mechanic, instead of telling you to. For some reason that's too far out there for people.
No sir, I do not understand your position at all. I consider it insulting to the intelligence of dumb players, I consider it insulting to the intelligence of curious players, I consider it an attack on player agency, I consider it insulting to developers that actually follow good narrative design (it's the game equivalent of "show, don't tell"). If you want to maintain that position, be my guest. I refuse to support it though, and hope people reading the thread will be able to see the problems in your position.
>>3234854
Games didn't really have a precedent for scrolling did they? Defender is the earliest scroller I can think of and you go both directions there. It seems to me like it was up to the designer whether they thought going left or right was better.
Maybe games like Donkey Kong set a precedent for characters moving right first, or perhaps it all boils down to written language inspiring the choice?
>>3235073
I do suspect written language dominating the RTL movement, and as >>3234390 pointed out beautifully, even Metroid "expects" you to go right first. That's why I said there must be some intention behind doing LTR movement. It's "uncommon" and goes a little bit against the culture. So, maybe to trip people up? Or to convey something? But what could you convey with that?
>>3235106
>Let me just say that narrative can start out right in the trash can
I expect no less from you, thinking it is about some written story. The right-left-morphball-right section in Metroid is a narrative mechanic, whether you like it or not. It tells part of the story, with the player being the co-author.
>you just don't like to fail
swing and a miss
>San Andreas doesn't even force you to attempt missions at all
The missions are the core narrative of the game, and the extended tutorial and unlock mechanism. They're the meat of the game.
>Like least half of them you need to actually read the manual to even know how to even play correctly
That's a disappointingly low ratio. Manuals are important. They tell a player the controls and fundamental actions, so the game can assume the player knows them. Notice how in Metroid a mechanic is introduced, not just a control (several, in fact, but I suppose the focus is on the morph ball. The rest probably went over your head)
>You just die and die and die and die getting a teeny tiny bit better each time
Your point being? You have noticed the exchange used to be about the way of introducing gameplay elements and not difficulty? How did San Andreas introduce its new mechanics? A text, disconnected from the action, followed by a stress situation. No chance to familiarize yourself with it. Followed by repetition, that not only repeats the action sequence (good idea), but also the text (bad idea)
>>3233453
No, because you don't have to go left first.
You could go either way in pitfall. I know some autist is going to sperg about it not being a scroller so fuck you in advance.
>>3235052
just chiming in, as a gamedev who's considered taking the 'easy way out' before, your statement really puts it in a clearer perspective.
My only concern is with mechanics that aren't necessarily obvious. With how much minutia can be in some games these days, it can be helpful to have some things to read. However, the big focus on games is still to somehow make them perfectly understandable and playable to a total newcomer who is (likely) going to be walking away from your show floor booth with his first (and forever) opinion of your game, and will have little/no interest in stopping to read a manual (which is what I would traditionally point to as a good place to put the minutiae of a game's less obvious mechanics).
I guess the question to me is that when you're trying to get a small slice of attention from what seems to be an increasingly fractured attention span, how do you really get through and shotgun them through a game that has finer points?
Maybe the real problem is that big showy booth events aren't the place to really take in games anymore. The widespread usage of the Internet has eroded the wall of information that used to make magazines and TV shows so important to know anything about new releases. Maybe it's better now to just push your game hard online? That might also be where the crowd for a 'thinking man's video game' spends more of its time, so that could be a boon as well. I'm really just thinking out loud here, so I'm curious to hear any input on this.
>>3235107
I liked how Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde had you progressing and regressing as the two characters. It was pretty basic but I like how it expresses (to me at least) the idea of how you grow stronger or weaker as a person as you either stay vigilant and true or succumb to the violent urges within.
>>3236038
funny thing about that, the manual has a message from David Crane about the game, and he actually tells you to go left instead of right, because the logs roll to the left no matter which direction you go, so you can go left and easily avoid some obstacles.
>>3236105
True. It makes for a much faster/easier game.
