Sessler's Soapbox: Changing the Game is a Good Thing

Posted: August 10, 2010
Sessler's Soapbox: Changing the Game is a Good Thing
Adam uses Madden NFL 11 as an example how some innovations can anger the gaming community, even if they're for the better.

Comments are Closed

  • Thogin

    I agree Adam, only a small part of the gaming community scream and shout but those are the people that normally gets heard since their screaming and shouting. I have full faith in people that makes the majority of the games know that fun and entertaining will always trump little complains that we tend to make on small things like what you said in the show.

    But again, if there is nothing for us to complain about we really wouldn't be hardcore...

    We should just be more civil about it in :D

    Posted: August 10, 2010 10:03 PM
  • PSfanboy

    I've always enjoyed the Madden games, and I honestly thought I was going to be upset by this change to the GameFlow mechanic, but I played the demo and really had a lot of fun with it. I'd also like to add that it was pretty smart of EA to allow playthrough of a full 5 minute quarter game on the demo, otherwise I would probably have a harder time determining if I really liked it and am not susceptible to getting sick of it quickly. I haven't gotten a Madden in 2 years, and I'd say theres a good chance I could be picking up this year's version, especially if there is any intention of incorporating the Move into this year's offering.

    Posted: August 10, 2010 9:17 PM
  • DarthHerter

    i could care less how a character looks in a game. what new features are added to a franchise. as long as those features go well with what the game is trying to do. they can put a female character in infamous 2 i would still play it. no body looked at halo and was like " i'm not gonna buy that game because master chief is not in it." i would say that. i just would by a game simply because i don't like it. halo for example... i think its a mediocre shooter that has fantastic marketing. if a person looks at a game and say i don't want this game because i don't like the way the character looks is well, i don't know what i would call them...idiots maybe.

    Posted: August 10, 2010 8:45 PM
  • Wozman23

    I don't complain about much; I'm a very mellow guy... But on the subject of Infamous: Sucker Punch didn't change Sly to an Opossum in Sly 2. I don't mind change, but I do like continuity. Nothing about the character looked the same. I'm okay with adding hair and a different wardrobe, but Cole looked like he went under the knife. It made no sense logically. At that point you might as well say he's a new character.

    I will still buy Infamous 2 regardless of what Cole looks like because I know it will be an awesome game, but if he doesn't at least slightly resemble the Cole I'm familiar with, it will be somewhat distracting.

    Posted: August 10, 2010 8:37 PM
  • fatboy912

    I agree that change always will come weather we like it or not. Some of them good some of them bad. Did EA need to try and change, innovate madden yes, because why would we buy it for other than a new year on the box. Gamers we need to give it time and you will get use to it or dont use the gameflow feature. It personally just needs more fine tuning or incorporate the madden IQ in some way.

    On the subject of Cole's new look people just become attached to character and thats what they expect to see. Think about it like this if your favorite person in a tv show or movie did not look the same would you stop watching or would it matter?

    Posted: August 10, 2010 7:56 PM
  • lsntrack1

    The thing is with madden people complain about not changing the game and it being the same since madden 06 but they have tryed to change things and people complained so much they took it off. So if you want change fine just dont complain when they actually change it.

    Posted: August 10, 2010 7:26 PM
  • Silent-hero

    Personally I don't get what the whole fuss was about in concerns to Infamous 2 Cole's new look. Its new, its fresh, and better than the original (in my opinion). But hey if the game is awesome who gonna remember what he looks like? Artistically I'd say its a major upgrade from the old, and who knows maybe theres a reason for this art direction.

    Posted: August 10, 2010 7:18 PM
  • Darkpuppy

    Change the medium and then see if change is still a good thing, would you easily accept the change of characters appearances between novels or episodes of books and movies? Would you like a change in the style J. R. R. Tolkien wrote between each book?

    Change is great when it improves or when it expands upon a strong base, but seldom is change good when it its for changes sake. (the constant change in appearance of hotmale and facecrack is a good example, its just so some one can get a wage not to improve your experience)

    So some change good, some change bad, its really up to the individual to say which they like, and people are ALWAYS going to complain more than they compliment... So when you hear a compliment pay attention it must mean something is well worth the look at. Hence looking at any game I see the crew compliment on Feedback.

    Posted: August 10, 2010 7:05 PM
  • PyroJake78

    I try to branch out by not playing the same true and tried franchises but try to embrace the non-mainstream not only in games, but also in music and movies. All in all though, I have to agree with Adam

    Posted: August 10, 2010 6:44 PM
  • g4fan247

    I totally agree with Adam. I'm ok with the change in Cole's looks for Infamous 2.

    Posted: August 10, 2010 6:25 PM
  • MasterNoble6

    Yeah I try to play as many innovative games as possible for those new FEELINGs each game can give me. It does seem like the game community is a little up tight about change but I am not one of them... instead I find it hard to disagree with any of youre stances on anything gamer related. there were others that used to be on staff that I tend to disagree with quite often, but probably because we are of different generations and I geuss it doesnt take much to amuse us... us old farts 30 n up

    Posted: August 10, 2010 6:00 PM
  • MisterBrown

    Ah, intelligent and humorous all at once. Another good Soapbox.

    But Soapbox is always smart and funny. Always. No change. Oh, no!!!

    Posted: August 10, 2010 5:47 PM
  • ehonda1

    Dude,Normally you are pretty str8 but (BUT) Im not sure what u are running off about. Change, What?Madden didn't change anything. It is the same game as last year. I would think someone like you who reviews thousands of bad games you would know that change isn't always good. I get it revolutionizes the industry but only when you put forth effort. There was a reason Madden with held so much from us. As a Football fanatic, I think it is rather disappointing. The Game flow is ok and yes optional and the Multi-player online is great but other than that, it is just the same as 10. I think one of the biggest selling point this year was they shorten the game time. OK but its optional. If you dont use it, you still have hour long games. If your like me and you play the dynasty mode, you are in for a big disappointed. I am super disappointed with this release. Its kinda like me telling you Hey I got a car that drives it self and then you buy it and I say well its optional if you pay the million dollars to install it. Otherwise you got a 2010 version that we changed the stickers on. Bull crap. As a consumer, Madden needs to stick with what works and try to go forward not 2 years backwards. Do not tell me one thing and sell me something different. Its 60 bucks of my hard earned money. One of the biggest things on the game was the Madden voice and they managed to take that off. On a positive note I would love to sell you a car. Show me some change and Ill show you Madden 10.

    Posted: August 10, 2010 5:31 PM
  • jjblaster

    I agree in many ways with you adam, "change is good, nuff said!" but i think there is a lot of things you can look into about. Such as why their is this specific change, what is the benefit of this change, and how will this impact the players/fans. Anytime someone brings up the idea of drastically changing video games, especially big names like Madden, my mind always goes to Legend of Zelda. A game that really hasn't seen much drastic change since maybe Majora's Mask, and even then i would argue that it still fallows a very strict formula. Especially seeing the new so called "change" they're adding by making it motion control doesn't seem like it'll change the game formula at all, just which controls you use to play it. There are also games like Red Dead Redemption compared to it's predecessor Red Dead Revolver, Thank God For Change!! Now where i think the difference with InFamous 2 is that the change is not coming from a need, an improvement, or something asked for by the public, but as something the developers wanted to do. I remember back to the preview at E3 and the person interviewed, can't remember who, explained that they were making all these changes as what they wanted to make originally for Infamous 1 but couldn't for one reason or another. I understand why a developer would want to go back to their original idea but the way i see it you're taking away what us players enjoyed and saying, "we did that cause we had to. we like this better." I'm not going to go start marching around with a megaphone yelling "CHANGE COLE BACK" i will play infamous 2 and most likely love it as much as the first, i just don't find the reason for such a change is really necessary.

    Posted: August 10, 2010 5:22 PM
  • FatKidsLagIRL

    I agree with ya 100%. Some people need to start realizing that their favorite games weren't made just for them. As for Infamous 2, I do not see what giving Cole hair would take away from the fun that Infamous 1 had and that Infamous 2 is sure to have...

    Change is good in games. Gaming franchises are unique in the way they innovate the next iteration of the story arc. Great developers will nearly always deliver to their fans in a big way and it is nearly always a great thing. Developers should listen to feedback from the fans who buy and play their games but the games should be made how the people actually making them want them to be made. It's their vision and imagination and brains at work.

    A perfect example is the Assassins' Creed series. The 1st game didn't suck but it wasn't the greatest game either. Ubisoft paid attention to that and the 2nd game was very well done, and they did it the way they wanted.

    Just play the game and have fun, don't worry bout what they put in and took out. Shouldn't matter at all if your just in it to have fun : )

    Posted: August 10, 2010 5:19 PM
  • Rinku

    this is going on with skyward sword ppl hate change and i dnt see why they judge games by how they look and no nothing about wat they have on them i agree with adam look even he's goin to play madden lol i dnt like sports games lol but yea skyward sword looks awsome and i like the changes its something new and well ppl stop hating on things

    Posted: August 10, 2010 5:12 PM
  • horseflesh

    I'm going to go with a sort of equivicatory response here, and disagree and agree with you. I think most of what you said is a lot true, but I also think there is a balance to be struck. The impression people have of the game they're playing, the romances they have with parts of the game, the way they write into the game the subtext that makes sense to them is in a way important.

    As well, much more important than people's imagining of the elements of a game, is the idea that game makers could be a little...introverted. That the feedback they get from each other internally could and can become, stagnant.

    Don't think for an instant I think that game maker's games shouldn't evolve. To the contrary, I think they have to to prevent stagnation. But there is a kind of balance that needs to be struck.

    So ultimately a kind of balance needs to exist, I'm sure it's hard to sort through a cacophony of voices on their forums and figure out what the best ideas actually are. And I think we often end up with mob rule as opposed to great ideas being upheld via argument/discussion.

    Sometimes they need to be firm and take a stand, other times they need to relent and come around to an outside idea. Both difficult tasks, and having people poo-poo the changes roundly can sometimes break the resolve of the devs. They've sunk money into this project, spent time building it, and in the face of making none of it back, end up relenting. It seems like right now the wrong elements are the ones that make it in to a lot of games. EA seems sort of good about this however, they "stick to their guns" sometimes to their detriment, but at least they stick to their ideas a good bit. Valve, for all it's great games, crumbles at the first hint of dissatisfaction.

    Posted: August 10, 2010 5:05 PM
  • DarkspineNero

    so is changing ratchet games and gta games is a good thing

    Posted: August 10, 2010 4:45 PM
  • iNuwanda

    In regards to Infamous 2 I feel the character change is a point of discussion. As a "young" person I do embrace and encourage change in the gaming community and other places, however re-skinned characters are not the type of change I'd like to see. In a game like Infamous I cannot express myself through my on-screen character's appearance, so in essence, I have to put myself in that character's shoes. When that character's appearance that I've associated with the events of the first game changes I reject it. That isn't Cole anymore. Sure it's aesthetic, but Cole's appearance is the only static thing in the game. I can choose his actions and I can choose how he bides his time, who he kills and who he saves.
    If an actor is replaced by someone else in a sequel to your favorite movie, you'd feel the same way. Even if the new actor does a stellar job you still think, "that guy was not here before."

    The change isn't bad, but some things must remain consistent.

    More Importantly, I will buy Infamous 2, however I would PREFER if Cole's appearance was closer to the original.

    Posted: August 10, 2010 4:21 PM
  • Zzanzabar

    Adam it is also about an investment of time. When people pour a huge amount of their time into something it is almost as though they have co-oped some part of a game as their own. Look at who plays Madden and other games of this type (i.e. games that if you invest the time you can be BETTER than someone else). These are people that, for a short time in their lives, can feel that they are BETTER than another person, then all of a sudden someone changes the playing field where a neophyte might actually best them in their chosen game.

    Also players begin to identify with a gaming character so that, in their minds, it is like changing a cherished image. Didn't Abbey once say that she would not like to see a movie made out of Mass Effect because the Shepard on screen wouldn't be HER Shepard that she made while playing? This is one of the mind sets of many 'hard core' gamers out there, the idea that to change a game is to change something they had invested a great deal of time in understanding and creating.

    Posted: August 10, 2010 4:16 PM