Also, it would be better if the title said "easy modes" instead of "easy games".
Which is precisely what you didn't actually reply to. If you want full context, include Udderdude's comment your
own reply and mine. Then again, what is the use of context when combined with zero reading comprehension? The title is fine. The answer is obvious.
Creating a game (not just a mode) that is hardly challenging and compensating it for score will not work. It doesn't have to be fucking DOJ from the get go for everyone, it would be ideal if the challenge built up gradually. Mushihimesama Futari is a great example, Cave did really well with the selection of three modes with both variety and different grades of difficulty. Having an easy mode is not entirely bad ... I wouldn't use it myself, but having an easy game as the primary (and let us say,
only) option totally blows. There's nothing to build up to, except maybe score and only ESH (herein, extreme score hunters) would really be into that.
But regardless, I'm pretty much done talking about the subject.
Oh, we'll see about that. Now that the thread has been split, I will certainly reply to your post:
That's a pretty arrogant and narrow-minded way of looking at it.
Yeah, I guess it's arrogant to hold a point of view opposed to yours right? The way you used "narrow-minded" can either be construed as insane or ignorant. Ignorant because, if you meant I didn't consider the opposing view (which I obviously did, before arriving at my conclusion). Insane if you think that one must hold all points of view simultaneously and in equal weight to be "broad-minded".
Shooters that are easy to get in to might encourage new players to start taking the games more and more seriously.
On the contrary, shooters that are easy are more likely to encourage new players to seek shooters (if they enjoyed their time with it) of similar difficulty, if left to their own accord. No idea what you mean by "more seriously". Do you think it will make them play for score? Please clarify this before I continue on this point.
I can definitely see someone buying the Guwange port due to the style/music/setting, starting off with 360 mode, getting into it, and then moving on to Blue mode, and then Arcade mode, and from there branching out to other shooters.
Well ... there will be exceptions, for example,
perhaps the guys above (if they weren't clearly into shooters previously). For each of them however, ten people will pick up the Guwange port (for whatever strange reason, if they were to stumble upon it RANDOMLY) will play the 360 arrange mode, credit feed it, switch to the blue mode, then wonder why the hell they cannot control the shikigami independently anymore. Then he'll switch to another game and that's the end of that. For your future reference, the only effective way to make use of the novice modes/easy arranges, is to directly introduce a friend to shooters using them. They will rarely take up proper shooters from their experience alone, not without a little bit of encouragement and guidance from an existing player. (More on this later in another reply, coming soon to a thread near you!)
"Taste" isn't something that materializes out of nothing; it has to be developed.
(This notion will be destroyed in a more relevant thread soon as well.)
If Cave just wanted to appeal to casuals alone, their ports would only consist of "dumbed down" Novice modes, which isn't the case.
The point we're discussing is not the inclusion of modes, it's the direction of emphasis on scoring rather than survival as a utility for introducing new players to shooters. The suggestion of exclusion of standard modes (and the idea that Cave wants casuals as their primary audience) is clearly a non sequitur. I don't think many people have a problem with arrange modes that are easier than the original modes, it's just that they are expected to have some standard of quality.
Attitudes like yours are what is killing the genre.
This idea ... it is repeated again and again, ad nauseam with little thought towards the veracity of the claim. "Attitudes" of some individuals alone do not kill off a "genre" (in this context, a sub-genre really, shooters), it takes a mass-shift in "attitudes" to kill off a "genre". The notion is derived from watching someone try out a game and having a child tell them off for not playing properly, or whatever. You can see instantly that it is quite juvenile, what you're saying is that criticism and an eye for quality alone will kill off shooters... that simply isn't true for anything else. A bad community (but exclusively large), filled with people who refuse to help new comers realise which qualities to look out for, is an element that will send shooters into decline, however. Anyway, if you disagree, call a movie critic and tell him to stop bad mouthing an example of genre x because the criticism is causing the death of the genre! LMAO.
But hey, if you want to continue living in your crumbling ivory tower completely isolated from reality, be my guest.
But hey, if I want to continue living in my mountain side apartment completely isolated from the sewers underneath, why not right?
<RegalSin> It does not matter, which programming language you use, you will be up your neck in math.
