Although amusing, this video also has an interesting point, hence my putting it here in the Game Design forum.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1ZtBCpo0eU

(love the aldi reference)

Mods: if you think this belongs better in Morbius, please move it.

I found it really borring.

I struggle to see the point of this video....

if you dont like the hints and croshairs in games just play the game in hardcore mode and turn hints/tips off?

same advice goes to the people slagging off bf3 in those comments.

I feel that with games that HAVE a hardcore mode, it should be made the default.
And the
and the old default simplified mode should be renamed "PRE_SCHOOLER'S MODE"

Well, in my opinion its easy: If you don´t like todays games, don´t buy them. But as it seems, the games doing exactly what they don´t like in the video are the ones selling best...
I for example really like linear games with a deep atmosphere even if they aren´t much more than interactive movies, which means that I am completely fine with being limited to a small area and games being kinda easy. I also don´t have a problem with tutorial messages. The only thing that is a no go for me is if a game stops to display information, but happily not many games are doing it and in games like oblivion just doing it during the first 20 minutes its not great but acceptable for me.
So from my point of view, the point the video is trying to make is not really worth anything. I also thought the video was quite boring...

The video absolutely tells the truth (in my opinion).
Today's shooters mostly are garbage, they may look and sound great, be realistic and polished like you haven't seen before, but they aren't fun - and fun is by far the most important thing when you play a game. I've played Crysis2, Battlefield 3, MW2, they simply lack fun. The shooting in Rage was good, but even on Hard way too easy (old shooters kick my ass on hard/ nightmare difficulty).

Yes, the reason is simple, these games are made for the mainstream. A good selling game does not equal a good and fun game, esp. when a shooter sells millions of copies it does not mean that the "shooter community", the fans that've played Doom, Quake, Perfect Dark, Half Life 1 and such, like it.
I know that it's important to make the game appealing to as many customers as possible, but I dislike the current trend.

The argument that you should not buy or play (or even test) current games is pretty stupid, no matter how good old games are/ were, they get old after a while, too.

Superkus' comment remined me on this Duty Calls parody

ps: @redeemer: Aldi is known in America? cO wow, didn't espect that its so famous :-O

I played BF3 and i have to admit that if you play as a lonewolf(without friends, only randomteammates), its just descent. But if you join with friends in a squad and talk over skype or teamspeak its total funny^^.(thanks dice, for not implementing VOIP ingame >.<)

In one game we captured point C on caspians border and kept it during the whole game. We installed c4 traps, AT-Mines and whenever enemies popped in, we blewed them out.

on another round we sneaked from Capture point to capture point. Eliminated the enemies without noticing us, captured and went to the next. Interesting picture on the map when one flag and another etc fall down^^. Or when 3 enemies try to enter with a jeep, you and your friends split up(havent seen us) and everyone takes one enemy from another position in the same moment.

I think the problem with modern shotters today is communication. Since ingame voip does not seem to be standart anymore, its quite a problem if you play with random players. Playing with a group of friends online is totally different(my experience)

Greets
Rackscha

I am in complete alignment with what Superku says, so I won't bother restating what he says.


Aldi is an international brand so you can find some stores here in America, but it's not really famous. I'm familiar with it because my family buys most of our groceries there; the prices are cheap, the location is convenient, and the quality is usually good enough.

EDIT: I didn't see this when I made this post, but I'll comment on it anyway.


That is part of the problem. In many cases, playing against other real people is no different from playing against bots. The experience is very impersonal, and there's very little sense of team effort. Even in games like Team Fortress, which are supposedly very team oriented, players do not collaborate very often. In the worst cases, other players will even attack and destroy teammates and undermine their efforts if they try to accomplish greater things for the good of their team.

I don't agree that VoIP could solve many problems, though. Doom and Quake had incredibly simple chat systems but the teamplay was much more enjoyable there, simply because generally speaking people actually knew who they were playing with and they were more willing to cooperate and play in good sport.

I'm thoroughly enjoying BF3, whether on my own or not. However, playing with someone I know really does make it exponentially more enjoyable. My brother has his own gaming PC a couple of metres away from mine, so we sit back-to-back and play together, coordinating our attacks and so on. For example, recently I was Recon (sniper) and he was Assault (medic). He spotted an enemy sniper and, on his count, he suppressed the enemy sniper from one angle while I took him down from another angle. I got the kill (obviously), but he was also awarded for "Suppression Assist". Sometimes we both go Assault (medic), and revive each other whenever we go down while pushing forward through the front-line.

VoiP makes a huge difference if you can't be side-by-side (or back-to-back), but I think the lack of VoiP outside of parties (you can set up VoiP within your party) is a somewhat smart decision as it avoids CoD's (or XBox's in general) notorious foul-mouthed child syndrome. Once you attempt more than that you have to deal with players wanting to block some players but not others, some assuming others should be able to hear them when they're actually blocked, and even more frustration as the players themselves can rarely agree on how accountable they want to be with each other.

In the end, though, I believe this video is specifically addressing single player. Things like "you're leaving the play area" have been common place and useful ever since the first Battlefield (1942), but I think the video is specifically addressing its use in making an open-appearing world linear (which does happen in BF3's singleplayer). Modern games (especially in the CoD vein) also tend to be too quick to help the player out, removing a sense of achievement, and even frustrating players who feel they could've figured it out themselves given more than 5 seconds to think about it.

I think the big cross-hair thing is more directed at console shooters, and PC ports of console shooters. [hyperbole] A first-person shooter designed not to be stupidly hard on console is automatically relatively boring on PC because it doesn't take advantage of mouse precision or verticality. [/hyperbole]