Has the internet's accessibility ruined the gaming experience?

[Hammettf2b]

I don't mean the ability to play other people online or anything like that, because I really like that part of it. What I'm talking about is the access to information that everyone has due to the internet. Let me explain...

I just got into Hearthstone not too long ago, and while yes, I do enjoy playing it, I feel the accessibility of certain decks makes it so that the majority of people, in order to win, will use those popular decks that everyone sees online. It gets rather stale quick and lacks diversity. It got me thinking.

Back before the internet was available, we had magazines and "cheat sheets" to look at. It had its uses, but it didn't provide the information that the internet has today, especially it being updated on a daily basis.

Take the NHL HUT series for example, or any other sports game really. You have up to date rankings on players. There is so much information on every player in the game, all one has to do is search online to see "reviews" of certain players and they can instantly decide if they want to use that player in the game. This leads to many people using the same players. Again, it gets stale very quickly.

Take a fighting game for instance. All one has to do is go online and look at tutorials on how to perform the best combos and when to use the best strategies and what not. The game gets repetitive.

Back in my day (insert oldman.jpg here) we found out ways to play games on our own for the most part. Sure we played with friends and borrowed techniques with each other but it's nothing like today. We used to see things that were brand new to us and were excited about it because we didn't know every single little thing there is to know about the game.

What say you? Do you think the accessibility we have today makes for a stale gaming experience?

Click to read more...

 

[RandV]

Eh this has been around for a long time now, I first felt the effect about 10 years ago playing Guild Wars.

It's really a matter of personal preference though. Check out Magic the Gathering's definition of their three player types, Timmy, Johnny, and Spike.

Under that classification I'm a "Johnny" like yourself, and what you're talking about can really suck the fun out of games. Unfortunately, it's pretty much exactly what the "Timmy's" and "Spike's" want, which kind puts us firmly in the minority. It's just something you have to learn to deal with.

 

[SniperHF]

FWIW this complaint is exactly what led to the awfulness that is the Diablo III character system. If there's a solution out there that isn't it.

Personally I don't think there is a solution except not doing it. If you're playing a competitive multiplayer game, well it's a competitive game and that's going to happen. No game can ever be so balanced as to not have optimal strategies. Developers (like Blizzard...) which intentionally castrate their game mechanics only hurt those players who weren't using meta-knowledge. The players who were using it are still going to use it and more likely than not the advantage won't even be curbed.

 

[Hammettf2b]

Eh this has been around for a long time now, I first felt the effect about 10 years ago playing Guild Wars.

It's really a matter of personal preference though. Check out Magic the Gathering's definition of their three player types, Timmy, Johnny, and Spike.

Under that classification I'm a "Johnny" like yourself, and what you're talking about can really suck the fun out of games. Unfortunately, it's pretty much exactly what the "Timmy's" and "Spike's" want, which kind puts us firmly in the minority. It's just something you have to learn to deal with.

I deal with it just fine, I just don't like it lol

FWIW this complaint is exactly what led to the awfulness that is the Diablo III character system. If there's a solution out there that isn't it.

Personally I don't think there is a solution except not doing it. If you're playing a competitive multiplayer game, well it's a competitive game and that's going to happen. No game can ever be so balanced as to not have optimal strategies. Developers (like Blizzard...) which intentionally castrate their game mechanics only hurt those players who weren't using meta-knowledge. The players who were using it are still going to use it and more likely than not the advantage won't even be curbed.

Me neither

 

[Ceremony]

Spoiled, not ruined.

 

[MikeyMike01]

No, it just exposes ****** broken games that might otherwise get away with it.

Which is a lot of them.

 

[SpookyTsuki]

Pretty much since the Xbox 360 came out is when the Internet released everything on a game. Probably before that

It would be cool playing games again and having to figure out puzzles yourself and what not. Like ocarina of time

But I hate puzzles. Some I don't understand. And probably would just stop playing the game right there if not for the Internet. Goes both ways for me

 

[syz]

I don't mean the ability to play other people online or anything like that, because I really like that part of it. What I'm talking about is the access to information that everyone has due to the internet. Let me explain...

I just got into Hearthstone not too long ago, and while yes, I do enjoy playing it, I feel the accessibility of certain decks makes it so that the majority of people, in order to win, will use those popular decks that everyone sees online. It gets rather stale quick and lacks diversity. It got me thinking.

Back before the internet was available, we had magazines and "cheat sheets" to look at. It had its uses, but it didn't provide the information that the internet has today, especially it being updated on a daily basis.

Take the NHL HUT series for example, or any other sports game really. You have up to date rankings on players. There is so much information on every player in the game, all one has to do is search online to see "reviews" of certain players and they can instantly decide if they want to use that player in the game. This leads to many people using the same players. Again, it gets stale very quickly.

Take a fighting game for instance. All one has to do is go online and look at tutorials on how to perform the best combos and when to use the best strategies and what not. The game gets repetitive.

Back in my day (insert oldman.jpg here) we found out ways to play games on our own for the most part. Sure we played with friends and borrowed techniques with each other but it's nothing like today. We used to see things that were brand new to us and were excited about it because we didn't know every single little thing there is to know about the game.

What say you? Do you think the accessibility we have today makes for a stale gaming experience?

Hah, yea, it's just that easy.

 

[Emperoreddy]

Pretty much since the Xbox 360 came out is when the Internet released everything on a game. Probably before that

It would be cool playing games again and having to figure out puzzles yourself and what not. Like ocarina of time

But I hate puzzles. Some I don't understand. And probably would just stop playing the game right there if not for the Internet. Goes both ways for me

gamefaqs and the like were doing their thing long before that. The 64 bit era had tons of online guides for their games. Especially the popular ones.

Plus there was a comfy market for printed guides going all the way back to the late 80s.

For single player experiences, just play the game like always. Don't look at guides. I rarely use a guide on first playthroughs unless I get hopelessly stuck, and the new focus on insanity mode levels of hard in some games brings back the need for some kind of skill even with a guide.

As for multiplayer games and meta strategies. To me it is just a product of the times. Before the internet word of mouth and print media passed around the best strategies, and ya that limited the amount of people who knew these things, but the number of connected players were also less. Was rare to run into someone who knew how wreck everyone in a game.

Online gaming created ways to play more players than ever before, and now competitive gaming is becoming ever more popular. Players are going to greater lengths to stretch the boundaries to create more damage, finish a level faster, etc. The internet just allows more people to see this.

So I guess my evolving point is competitive and streaming games might of spoiled parts of gaming, as that is where the attempts to almost break games to get better are born. Internet guides just spread them.

That said depending on the genre some strategies are inaccessible to some gamers because of the amount of time, energy, and skill that needs to be sunk into a game.

 

[SpookyTsuki]

gamefaqs and the like were doing their thing long before that. The 64 bit era had tons of online guides for their games. Especially the popular ones.

Plus there was a comfy market for printed guides going all the way back to the late 80s.

For single player experiences, just play the game like always. Don't look at guides. I rarely use a guide on first playthroughs unless I get hopelessly stuck, and the new focus on insanity mode levels of hard in some games brings back the need for some kind of skill even with a guide.

As for multiplayer games and meta strategies. To me it is just a product of the times. Before the internet word of mouth and print media passed around the best strategies, and ya that limited the amount of people who knew these things, but the number of connected players were also less. Was rare to run into someone who knew how wreck everyone in a game.

Online gaming created ways to play more players than ever before, and now competitive gaming is becoming ever more popular. Players are going to greater lengths to stretch the boundaries to create more damage, finish a level faster, etc. The internet just allows more people to see this.

So I guess my evolving point is competitive and streaming games might of spoiled parts of gaming, as that is where the attempts to almost break games to get better are born. Internet guides just spread them.

That said depending on the genre some strategies are inaccessible to some gamers because of the amount of time, energy, and skill that needs to be sunk into a game.

I'm sure there was. It was harder to find though probably (I rarely used the Internet till mid 2000sEither way. I do the same. Go blind first play through. And if I get stuck for minutes then I give up. Mostly In puzzles it only happens.

 

[Hammettf2b]

Hah, yea, it's just that easy.

I didn't say it would instantly make them better. I meant it is easy to find all the info needed to help you become better.

 

[Emperoreddy]

I'm sure there was. It was harder to find though probably (I rarely used the Internet till mid 2000sEither way. I do the same. Go blind first play through. And if I get stuck for minutes then I give up. Mostly In puzzles it only happens.

Between print and the internet it was easy to get guides for any decent game back then.

I guess my point is guide wise things haven't changed that much in a long while.

And on the other side I feel like developers have gotten a lot more creative in hiding things in their game. Indi developers especially. It has turned into games within games in some ways.

 

[RandV]

I deal with it just fine, I just don't like it lol

Oh I was talking about it in general there, not directing it specifically towards you.

And it's really not that hard to deal with. Most single player games be it strategy or RPG you can usually beat without having to min-max everything, and if there's higher difficulties that require it I don't bother. Civ V for example if my own strategies and tactics get me to Emperor difficulty I'm fine staying there, don't need to read guides to play Immortal or Deity.

Same thing with the few competitive online games I've played, I just play casually and don't worry about moving up the ranks. If that means I get stuck in Bronze league in Starcraft 2 then so be it

 

[aleshemsky83]

Pre-Internet was just different (worse) problems.

A lot of Games would not be beatable. You would get stuck at an area and nobody knew what to do if you or your friends didn't have a guide. Games like castlevania would be built around selling guides.

 

[Vegeta]

Hah, yea, it's just that easy.

Agreed. Good luck trying to perform perfect EWGF combos with Kazuya in Tekken, or doing an 80 hit combo in KoF using youtube videos. Fighting games are one of the genres that I think have been enhanced by online communities.

 

[Emperoreddy]

Pre-Internet was just different (worse) problems.

A lot of Games would not be beatable. You would get stuck at an area and nobody knew what to do if you or your friends didn't have a guide. Games like castlevania would be built around selling guides.

So many NES adventure games were built around horrid translations that made them nearly impossible to beat (and in Castlevania 2 they straight up lied). Some of the **** you needed to do was so cryptic too. First Final Fantasy is another game that was such a pain to beat.

Wasn't much better on the PC side. Sierra's point and click games were so ****ing hard. I literally am not sure how some people beat those games without guides. I was proud of myself for beating the original Monkey Island games and the Indiana Jones games from Lucasarts without guides, and they were a lot more forgiving than Sierra's stuff.

 

[PeteWorrell]

I think the internet is great for games like Dark Souls where you can't respec your character.The game is already hard enough.You don't want to make a garbage character that neglected crucial stats in favor of weaker ones.

 

[aleshemsky83]

I think the internet is great for games like Dark Souls where you can't respec your character.The game is already hard enough.You don't want to make a garbage character that neglected crucial stats in favor of weaker ones.

Yeah thats pretty important too, there are so many useless stats in dark souls and you can't respec so its pretty important to use a guide.

Speaking of internet,I was so suprised when I discovered the online community around these games. It is so bizarre. You used a guide to find the hidden bonfire in sens fortress? Git Gud. You actually leveled up? Git gud. This guy pretty much sums up my problem:

 

[Hammettf2b]

So many NES adventure games were built around horrid translations that made them nearly impossible to beat (and in Castlevania 2 they straight up lied). Some of the **** you needed to do was so cryptic too. First Final Fantasy is another game that was such a pain to beat.

Wasn't much better on the PC side. Sierra's point and click games were so ****ing hard. I literally am not sure how some people beat those games without guides. I was proud of myself for beating the original Monkey Island games and the Indiana Jones games from Lucasarts without guides, and they were a lot more forgiving than Sierra's stuff.

That's sort of my point though.

 

[karnige]

no I think the younger generation expects graphics over gameplay with consoles. so much so that its either a triple A title or nothing. which is hurting console gaming companies.

 

[Gooch]

I can see this being an issue. When I played WoW back in vanilla it was a very different experience than when I came back to play vanilla WoW on a private server last summer. The difference being is that everyone playing it more recently was a freaking expert with Best in Slot lists for everything. That really didnt exist back in the day except for maybe the most advanced min/max type guilds. People wore their Tier sets or their dungeon gear because well that was what you were supposed to do, now a good portion of those are considered complete trash. It sort of ruined the fun and innocence of the game.

I also notice now that when I play old games on an emulator or something I am always googling for a FAQ/Walkthrough guide. I feel like if I am not doing it the "right" way I am wasting my time and I know this is self inflicted but I am not experiencing the real flow of the game that way.

 

[Gooch]

no I think the younger generation expects graphics over gameplay with consoles. so much so that its either a triple A title or nothing. which is hurting console gaming companies.

How do you explain the success of Minecraft amongst younger kids? I don't believe it's that people are preferring it but that game companies are assuming that is what is preferred.

Also, back in the day graphics were possibly even more important of an either or decision. If you were around for the Sega CD era all the real video crap that was put on games for that system was sickening, they all sucked.

I think if anything nowadays story driven content is more something I would associate with modern games compared to old games.

 

[PeteWorrell]

Yeah thats pretty important too, there are so many useless stats in dark souls and you can't respec so its pretty important to use a guide.

Speaking of internet,I was so suprised when I discovered the online community around these games. It is so bizarre. You used a guide to find the hidden bonfire in sens fortress? Git Gud. You actually leveled up? Git gud. This guy pretty much sums up my problem:

http://www.thejimquisition.com/its-okay-to-play-dark-souls-however-you-want/

I think what's even worse is that they get mad that people use features that are in the game and working as intended by the developer.For example, they'll comment on videos and say that people use "too much" Pyromancy or magic.You pretty much have to fight your way through the whole game naked as the deprived armed with a club and using pure melee to maybe be acknowledged.

 

[Say Hey Kid]

I think it's great. My son and his friends can game together on Skype w/o being together. You can buy games cheaper, store them in the cloud, get the latest updates when you install them, get guides and help, and play with and against other people online. Except for console exclusives, none of the "cool kids" use consoles anymore except to watch content on services such as Netflix or to watch blu-rays.

 

[dogbazinho]

I do miss the sense of accomplishment from beating a challenging game when solutions are so easily accessible.