> It's still a matter of getting to the point quickly where no matter how good you get
> at the game, even if you pick the best moves, it still won't let you clear a level
> until you've played it a million times, and that is where the problem is. That's what
> needs to go away. The King games would be puzzle masterpieces if it wasn't for that.
> With that they are not real games, at least by the definition we grew up with. You
> can't master them. The stages are algorithms of swaying the piece output difficulty
> from 20 moves past impossible to a dipshit could pass it with moves leftover, instead
> of being perfected from the beginning. Changes them from something I'd want to hold
> onto indefinitely into "ok looks like another puzzle game got to 'that point', time
> to delete this crap". At some point it's got to stop.
that mirrors my experience too.
to a degree it feels a lot like the MMORPG / Online gaming trend too tho, and just as those negate the need to create a good single player experience, such algorithms in puzzle games negate the need to actually create well designed puzzles (although at the same time you could argue, add more replay value, because they're different every time)
it does make me sad that people say mobile has revitalized the puzzle genre, and is now the home of puzzle games, when in reality it seems to have killed the genre dead because every single one seems to be designed around how to squeeze as many pennies out of you as possible.
even in the arcades, all the new puzzle games you see now are ticket based games (often based on these mobile games) which are heavily rigged in exactly the same way (they're really are just gambling games - again, you can't master them) unfortunately these are also hugely popular, much moreso than the traditional style arcade games, because people seem to be addicted to winning tickets in order to get items that would actually only cost a fraction of the amount they spent on winning the tickets.
|
Index 
Flat 
Re: update
Reply
