Despite being filed back in June, news has just filtered through the interwebs that Nintendo will now play your games for you. Gamasutra and Kotaku have both reported on a patent for an innovative new way of ruining your favourite games. It seems that the man himself, Shigeru Miyamoto, has patented a system whereby a game can essentially solve itself. Those with a talent for deciphering gibberish can check out the patent here.
For the benefit of everyone else we are talking about a potentially platform-wide system whereby a game will show you exactly how to complete it. Imagine simply hitting a button and having the game take control and show you how to complete a given section of a game. Beyond that major function, an increased level of hints and tips would be attached to a game with this system in place.
Although the software will not allow the player to finish a game without playing it, it does present at least one major concern. One of the best indicators that a game has been designed with love and attention is how well its levels are laid out. The right mixture of complexity and intuitive navigation, particularly in an FPS or action game, can be key to how enjoyable a game is. With the ability to simply show a player where to go, the subtle art of level design comes under threat. Developers such as Valve spend months and years lovingly crafting a games difficulty and design. Why bother when as long as there is some way to reach the end of a level or solve a puzzle, the game can simply show it to you.
I have no problem with people seeking out hints online when a game becomes excessively challenging. If you’ve spent £40 – £50 on a game you have a right to experience it fully. However the idea that having the solution built into the game seems patently (pun very much intended) ridiculous. Such an idea actively discourages exploration and experimentation. It implies a level of linearity so strict that it potentially reduces all games to glorified quick time events. There are those who would say it still remains the player’s choice whether to take advantage of such a system. I would argue that it further indoctrinates the player against any concept of challenge. I would hate to see a world where Left4Dead’s innovations in procedurally generated difficulty and sophisticated AI become worthless to all but the hardcore.
iTunes
I seriously think new gamers are starting to get lazy. Seriously, if anyone, ANYONE, who hasn’t played Legend of Zelda for the NES, needs to go play it and see what it was like back in the day. No strategy guide, no in game hints. You don’t even know what you’re supposed to do and can wander the map for screens and screens before you figure out, “Hey that’s a door and I can go in it to get a sword.”
Zelda: Link to the Past and SMB3 in my opinion define how gaming is supposed to be. SMB3 was just plain fun in every aspect. The principle of the game is simple enough, but the actual execution gets harder the further you get. No change in the goal or tools, just the levels. And Zelda… if I have to explain it, you need to play it. Right now. The game is just plain incredible. And I don’t blame you if you jump online for hints… it’s also huge. I think Bioshock may have it mostly right, too… the game is as much an adventure as anything else. Looks pretty, too.