Hey, people!
Some of us, we've got hands, we've got shoulders, we've got knees and we've got toes
And sometimes a computer game's interface may allow us to use one or more of these
appendages in order to control it.
Sometimes this can be great!
If done with the appropriate technology and great enough accuracy it can
remove a layer of abstraction between you and
your control over your player character, making it easier to get done what you'd like to
get done in a game.
However, improving the fidelity of control in a game, often its an advantage, an
upgrade, a powerup.
Giving a player direct command, the ability to reach their hands right into
the game world to affect their agency, unless a game is designed with this consideration,
well then it doesn't matter how cool and accurate
the motion is, it makes for a bad time… ouf…
I'm getting ahead of myself, bare with me for
a moment…
Last year I made a video highlighting a trio of key factors that in my opinion the complete
set of made for good motion controls in a game, eventually
pleading the case that multiplayer mode of Call of Duty 4 Reflex, the Wii edition, addressed
each of them and so was a great example of a
well-designed motion controlled game.
So, let's recap.
What are those three key factors?
First, the main mechanics of a motion controlled game should be linked to simulative
control.
That's to say, the gestures and actions you perform with through this interface should
be translated with enough accuracy such that if
you're good at the thing you're doing, you'll be good at the game you're doing
it in.
So, if you're good at boxing you'll be good at the simulative
boxing game packaged with Wii Sports… or rather, no, the complete opposite!
Wii Sports, as a whole, is actually a fantastic example if this
first rule being broken but the game "cheating" its way almost to a point where it's acceptable,
more details in my previous video if you're interested, but notably in the boxing game
it totally fails.
Simply put, if you're good at boxing you won't necessarily be good at the boxing
game.
That's because rather than translating your movement to approximate the moves pulled off
the the character, the game actually expects very
specific inputs for each type of punch, those being only X axis rotation, of which there
are only 3 accepted positions, and waggle direction, of
which there are only 2.
Now, not to toot my own horn, but sometimes I forget that I'm officially a
professional at Wii Sports boxing, ha, yeah, cool dude over here, so to me it's clear
why this issue, through to you it might not be.
Lemme give you an example.
You ever pull off an uppercut in the game, and most importantly, mean to?
Odds are no, because see, the gesture you'd typically expect to trigger an uppercut doesn't
actually upper...cut it… ouf, that is unless of
course somehow you think pointing the remote downward and shaking it to the side translates
to the sick punch.
Wii Sports Boxing is a poopoo because the predetermined gestures it expects you to perform
aren't simulative.
So what's one way to fix that?
Well that happens to be our second key factor: give the player some choice in how they'd
like to control things.
I mean, configurable inputs and sensitivities are the norm in most all games
these days, so if you're demanding actual physical
movement of a player in order to act in a game, the least you could do is allow them
do define their own controls and ranges and whatnot.
Call of Duty 4 on the Wii masters this.
The oh so familiar button mapping screen is accessible,
but interestingly not only can buttons be mapped but so to can gestures, controller
rotation, and combinations of both.
Combined with a nunchuck controller, these options allow you to fully
customize your gameplay controls to your liking or to suite an otherwise clunky peripheral
like the Wii Zapper who's default control scheme
uses a single button to throw all grenades, but
depending on if you're tilting your controller to the left or to the right will either throw
your frags or flashbangs.
On top of input mapping however, the player is given a peek under the hood and the opportunity
to make choices about all sorts of other things.
From a fully customizable deadzone, a concept unique to motion-controlled first-person shooters,
complete with different choices for hip aiming and down sites, all the way to things like
sensitivity in all sorts of different states of play, or how
the camera should behave when you do a certain action, or how much force should be
necessary to register a waggle as a knife attack, if of course you've decided to set
the knife to waggle.
There's just, there's just total control over your agency in the game, and most
importantly, and to COD's great benefit, all of these controls are manageable live
in-game at any point.
It's just, I've never played a game with such a unique set of control options that
also thought them out so thoroughly and gave me
complete access to its innards.
Again, I go much more into it in last year's video so check
that out if you're interested, but for now I'm skipping
over.
The third, and arguably most important key factor in whether or not a motion controlled
game works well, the maker or breaker in many cases,
is whether or not the game in question considers its interface, or in other words,
that the game is designed for motion controlled gameplay.
More often than not you'd expect to see people attribute gimmick controls with
unfairness, clunky gestures and inaccurate readings getting in the way in contrast to
the certainty of a button press.
But when done properly, which is what we care about, you actually
have the complete opposite type of unfairness.
This is what happened in RE4 Wii Edition.
Turning aim into an analog, a continuous event, and
adding a special gesture for knife equipping and use, these overpowered the player in a
lot of ways, they made it very easy to play Resident
Evil 4 at a level that only an extremely skilled player could in the original versions.
Luckily, RE4 had a dynamic difficulty system which meant
players of the Wii version would automatically be faced with harder challenges, unintentionally
balancing this out.
You could certainly understand though how improved controls could totally
ruin a game unready to handle them, designed without them in mind, and you could definitely
imagine the opposite too.
While RE4's original clunky tank-style movement was only aided by motion controls, the twitchy
fast-paced action of Call of Duty was slowed down by them.
Not to bore you, but the then industry standard for Wii fps games, the deadzone
aiming system, it meant that character rotation couldn't be instant as it was no
longer coupled to aiming, that turning was now only a
very deliberate action requiring a very deliberate input, not a byproduct of aim.
This slowed down the pace of player movement and actions
in the game considerably, but of course the campaign wasn't updated or changed in any
way to suit this, and so many levels were just too
hard and unenjoyable.
The lack of this key factor, of the game being designed and enemies and encounters being
balanced for motion controls and their impacts on how they would change the way a player
played the game, the the lack of this broke Call of Duty 4's campaign yes, but it's
multiplayer survived.
Why's that?
Well, in pitting the game's players all against each other, the disadvantages they
had in single-player didn't matter because now they were all on the same playing field!
Later Call of Duty games for the Wii and WiiU supported
more traditional controllers as well, but COD4's multiplayer was, and still is, it's
actually still running I'm not joking!
But it was this magic sort of experience because it's one of very
few first person shooter games that can exclusively be played amongst people using a simulative
motion control systems.
In case you're interested in doing any extra research, cause this is just something that
really really interests me, uh, the only few games
likes that before, you know, the emergence of VR
were the Conduit and the Conduit 2, so the Conduit series, and this uh, this Metal Gear
Solid 4 arcade cabinet that you played with like a
VR goggle headset and you controlled it with your
head and you had a gun also, it was really weird.
But these were really the only games that I'm
aware of at least that were multiplayer focused and only with motion controls, so uh, yeah,
definitely check those out if ever you're interested in uh, looking into this some more.
Now, as games have progressed we've seen a massive decline in support for motion controlled
games and a massive increase in support for networked multiplayer, and as we know
correlation implies causation so people would rather play against others online than play
with themselves, even if it's super realistic and
feels like the real thing, if you catch my drift.
Uh, actually maybe that's wrong.
Motion controls haven't completely disappeared, in fact when they are present they're hella
sicker than they used to be now that the whole industry has converged to gyros as the standard.
So finally, touching on the title of this actual video, in investigating the place motion
controls have made for themselves in multiplayer games,
we can see just how important it is that ALL THREE of those key factors are respected,
that the COMPLETE SET is present, least you wind
up with a crappy game that was better off without such a control set up.
ARMS is a fun little fighting game for the Switch with a really well made motion control
system.
Part a step up from Wii Sports boxing, part its own unique gimmick, ARMS is a game full
of charm and accessibility as motion controls
are used for launching and directing curved punches
as well as moving around the stage and blocking, while easy to reach buttons are used for
dashes and jumps.
Most everything about this fast paced fighting game can be controlled via simulative actions,
on a technical level it totally works, and it's
really impressive.
It feels great making minute adjustments to your punches as your stretchy
arms fly across as far as they can reach, it feels
great shifting to block and breaking out to counter, it feels great affecting grabs from
a long range by physically reaching out your arms
towards your opponent.
It's all really really cool, the motion control system in this game is probably
one of the best commercially available… but that
doesn't mean that ARMS is a good motion controlled game.
See, as a fighting game, ARMS emphasizes multiplayer matchups and ranked fights, and when
getting some experience in these you realize that motion controls just aren't a feasible
option when matched up against opponents who've
chosen to use an alternative control system, the
typical digital one, the controller.
It may not have been the focus of the game's advertisements or box cover or splash screen,
but ARMS supports gamepad controls.
You can play ARMS almost exactly the same with the
controller, the only difference being that you can't curve punches independently of
each other, that feature is only possible when using and
reserved for detached joycons.
But aside from that, the whole game plays the same.
You move, you dodge, you block, you punch, and you grab,
except, and in exchange for one feature, you get the ability to greatly improve your input
speed.
I mean, there's no questioning the fact that it takes less time from thought to execution
of any move when using just your thumbs and fingers
rather than your whole forearms.
In a game such as this which, when you boil it down, is just
rock-paper-scissors with timing, it's almost impossible to expect to be able to put up
a fair fight when you're strapping real punches while
your enemy's fingers are all already hovering over their triggers.
There's just, there's nothing you can do!
You can't react fast enough to counteract enemy moves and pulling off each of your
own actions takes too much time and deliberation and thus is too easy for your enemy to
counteract.
Basically, the super fun super sick way of playing ARMS doesn't give you a fighting
chance against someone of the same skill level who's just mashing at their controller.
Which is true self reflectively also: no matter how good you can grow to be with the motion
controls in ARMS, you'll always be better with the standard controller.
Even if it weren't for the reaction time benefits, just the fact that
your inputs are freaking deterministic sets your
performance up a notch.
Yeah, you know what?
Gyro tilts and waggle are super cool and most of the time they work… but on the off chance
they don't they can ruin a game.
ARMS is especially guilty of matching some actions
to similar gestures that can be confused for one
another in really wacky ways.
So for instance, movement in motion controlled games is often
hard to do and more often than not just ends up being handled by a joystick attached to
one of the motion controllers.
ARMS doesn't do this, instead borrowing and extending a page from the
book of Wii Boxing by making player movement linked to the rotation of the joycons.
You shift them different directions in order to move
those ways, it's okay.
Problem: say someone launches a punch at you and you'd like to
switch directions quickly and then press the dodge
button… well that might work… or it might not because if you accidentally shake your
controllers too hard while intending to change directions,
the game might interpret that as a grab command which is launched by thrusting both controllers
at the same time.
This can happen with blocks too.
Moving quickly to the block stance can easily be interpreted as a grab, or if done while
moving, it might get picked up as a punch with one arm.
So, basically, for as cool and as fun as the motion controls are, they just can't possibly
hold up against opponents who aren't using them
or even yourself without them.
On a technical level yes they mostly work, but in the actual game,
in the multiplayer ecosystem that it presents, they
just don't fit and would have been better off omitted.
If you've ever played a Mario Kart title from the Wii onward, you probably know exactly
what it's like.
Yeah, motion controls are fun, but because the game pools you in with players who aren't
using them, who are basically playing with a different set of rules than you, you kind
of forfeit your success.
You're just, you're at a disadvantage, the properties of the control system you're
using are disadvantageous relative to other players, for instance with motion controls
it's harder to stay straight meaning you can lose some
speed and get overtaken on straight-aways, ouch,
call me taxi fam!
Now, time to time you might rank out on top, after all Mario Kart is luck based, and when
you do, letting everyone know that, yes, you were
using tilt-controls, it's just like this little added bonus,
this piece of honor.
You get to know everyone's tilted looking you saying "Daaaaang that dude
topped our charts AND he waggled himself up there", but that's it.
Nobody's thinking "hmmm maybe I should try those controls, maybe they'll
give me a leg up" no, nobody's saying that
cause it's just, it's a fluke.
Standard controls are always better, they give you more precision and
take less effort, which need I remind you is a function of time, to operate.
Now, clear way to fix this which I've alluded to already is to include filtered matchmaking
that can strictly pair motion controlled players
up together.
These different modes of play, these different modes of control impose certain
additional rules on players, so it's only fair to allow
them a way to play against others in the same boat.
In the example of COD4 which forced this on everyone, players saw how the games mechanics
and systems were the perfect home for a different kind of game, a more slow paced
tactical team shooter.
This only worked because everyone was sitting there pointing remotes
at their screens, there wasn't a single rogue bumbo
running around playing the game like a twitch shooter.
Everyone was slow, so it worked.
If either ARMS or Mario Kart had some sort of option to only match you against players
using motion controls, then they would make much
more sense as an included feature.
You'd think that there'd be less people to matchmake
against but that's not true.
As we've explored the only reason there are so few players using these
control systems is because they're not viable against those who aren't.
Right now there's no safe space to even begin familiarizing yourself
with these sorts of controls because you always get out-punched by someone else who's
playing a much easier version of the same game.
Providing a strict filtered mode like this though
would give more players that opportunity to measure themselves against others more fairly,
ensured that everyone is playing by the same rules.
And on top of that, like, I know I've brought this up before, but like, just personally,
I think there's something really cool about playing against
others online knowing they're using motion controls
too.
In COD4 on the Wii, everything that you do and that players do back to you is so much
more personal because you know that someone on some couch somewhere had to physically
move their bodies to do it.
Every kill is someone aiming at you and pulling a trigger, every
leaning character is someone tilting their wrist to peek around corners.
It's just, I feel like in a lot of multiplayer games its easy to forget that
each of your allies and opponents is another person
with a life and enough money to pay for a system and a game and an internet connection,
but when playing something like this, it brings
you back to reality and you can really appreciate the
skills of your competitors more.
It's just, it's something else, it's something straight out of a sci-fi
or something.
So, why am I really making this video?
Is it not enough that I actually just really am totally
interested in developments in motion controlled games?
No, it's not.
So few months ago I'm checking the switch store, heart set on picking out a rogue-like
to play in transit, got a few flights planned for the
next year.
Boom, one stands out, Sky Rogue, a half arcade half flightsim ALL rogue-lite and that
trailer just blows me away.
See, as a kid I liked flight sims a lot, used to have this star wars one on pc where you
played as a cargo delivery guy or something, really
liked the rogue squadron series, all the Factor 5
games, ye.
My one issue though was their structure.
Like, I like flying, I like dogfighting, and I
like commanding my wing-mates, but what I don't like is having only 3 lives and being
forced to restart these long drawn out missions again
and again just to progress the story, especially when the missions are already broken into
chunks.
Like, the content is there, I just never felt like
it was delivered in the right way.
But suddenly I'm watching this trailer and it's all clicking.
Rogue-like, that's it!
That's what fighter pilot games are meant to be!
That's how they should be structured, this is amazing!
And then… ooooooh and then… they show off the Danger Zone mode, holy crap my jaw
is on the floor!
Danger Zone is a mode exclusive to the Switch that lets you control the game with the
joycon motion controllers.
One controler mimics your flight stick, the other your throttle, and from
the way they're showing it off it looks like so much fun.
Spoiler alert, I bought the game, and decide from the get-go that I don't even wanna
bother with the regular controls, I don't wanna have
anything to do with them, I only want to familiarize myself with the simulative set up and become
a freaking ACE pilot!
Spoiler alert…
I haven't bothered with the motion controls since, wanna guess why?
Well lets go over those three key factors to find out!
Are the controls simulative?
Yes!
It feels sooooo cool flying the plane like this.
The cockpit view helps really seal that immersion in.
Your flight stick in the game moves one-to-one with your
joycon, and the throttle sits neatly on the side and moves along with you also, you can
see your actions and movements reflected in-real time
in the game.
It's just, it's something else.
Banking and turning and pushing full power and pulling
up at the last second to avoid crashing, deeking around enemy fighters, using the triggers
on the flight stick to fire weapons, oh my god
everything about this is fantastic.
These are the most impressive casual flight sim controls I've
ever seen, it's so seamless and natural.
Not even a question, this is simulative as hell!
So, how about customizable controls?
Well, as far the general motion goes it's basically as
good as you can ask for.
I mean, flight games aren't really so input-intensive, all you really need
aside from buttons are your speed and pitch and yaw controls, which the pair of joycons
is more than enough to handle.
Those buttons though, well, I'd say they're not ideal but really they're just not fair.
For context, let's look at how it works when you're using
the controller.
You got speed up and slow down as the two triggers, you've got buttons for
firing, one for launching flares, stick clicks for rolls, you
use the directional buttons to select a weapon from your loadout, of course organized according
to the d-pad, and you've got two buttons for toggling and locking the camera perspective
onto a specific enemy target, this helps for pursuits
and stuff, and you can also use the right stick to
move the camera freely, independent of flight controls, just to have a look around.
Now, you could probably tell this is a fully loaded, this is an all-dressed controller
setup.
Everything, everything on the controller is used, every button is necessary to play this
game.
Now, in removing the joycons technically you have the same amount of buttons available,
right?
Except, the way you're asked to hold it, it makes certain inputs inaccessible.
So, playing with motion controls, the first thing you notice is gone is the quick weapon
select.
The d-pad?
Well, sadly its hidden under your throttle now, on the opposite side of your palm, so
instead weapons are selected by pressing on of the trigger buttons on the flight-stick
while the other is used to fire.
But wait, how you gonna select between 4 possible missile types with a
single button?
Easy, you're gonna cycle through them like a freaking scrub.
In the middle of breakneck dogfighting and tactical planning,
asking a player to properly sift through and distinguish the correct weapon type amid a
few others that are visually very similar, that's
ridiculous, and that's without even considering that this is a game designed originally to
have weapon selection be a single button press.
Then, you notice that your defensive and evasive moves are a little hard to reach too.
If at least one was easy, sure, but both?
It's hard to get to roll and to fire flares, this is kinda of
unacceptable, especially, again, considering this is a game originally designed for each
of these to be a single button press.
So what about camera controls?
Well, free camera is still mapped to the stick, which sadly your
whole hand is wrapped around, forget manipulating that with your thumb.
It's funny because if you try to you'll likely accidentally tilt
the controller to make it easier to reach the stick, but since
this is motion controlled you'll wind up, well, losing [burp] uh your gas.
It's funny because if you try to you'll likely accidentally tilt the controller to
make it easier to reach the stick, but since this is a motion
controlled game you'll wind up, well, losing control.
You've got those perspective locking buttons again also, but as was the fate for the rest
of these inputs, physically reaching those buttons
is harder than their worth.
And it's not exactly related to motion controls, technically this happens in the normal game
but bombs, right, so, when you equip one you get
this marker on the ground indicating where the
bomb will land, but in that view you lose control of the plane and the camera locks
to that perspective as if it were an enemy.
Makes sense I guess I don't wanna shoot bombs upwards
right?
I don't know.
So, this is a little jank but you get used to it… unless of course you're
playing in cockpit view as you likely would for the sake of immersion when going à la
motion control.
When you do this, the camera still locks to the ground, but now the cockpit, or rather
the whole plane can be moved independently and
twist and turn all around.
Now you might say, "well ya freaking idiot, don't do that
then", to which I'd respond "ma how in the heck then you
want me to drop bombs on the ground when my own freaking airplane is blocking my view!?"
So what you've gotta do just to actually see where you're dropping a bomb in first-person
is you've gotta lock onto the ground, then
you've gotta flip your plane upside-down via motion, so
now basically you're horizontal direction is reversed, and then, plane upside-down,
camera right-side-up, you can drop your bomb.
But watch out!
As soon as you switch back to a regular weapon, the camera comes back to normal and
suddenly you'll be upsi-freaking-down and totally disorientate yourself.
That, okay, that, that is, and I don't use this word lightly… but that, is caca.
You know, it wouldn't be as disappointing if it weren't for the facts that the game
is expertly crafted, it's super fun, and that the motion
controls themselves are super responsive and excellent.
Just, it's a shame that they don't work together, like, at all.
Unlike ARMS where at least there's some sort of special ability
reserved for motion, here you're ONLY at a
disadvantage compared to a controler.
Also unlike ARMS though this game isn't multiplayer, so
does it matter?
Well, see the game, like we've said, was originally designed with a certain type of
gameplay in mind.
Danger Zone was closer to an afterthought than a requirement, at least from what I can
gather.
You can definitely understand the perspective of someone with a built, completed game
suddenly having new tech thrown in their lap, building a quick prototype and going "dang
dude this is pretty gnarly", and then not really
adapting the design of the challenges in the game to it.
You can definitely get that, I can definitely get that.
I mean, I've done this.
I've put effort into features before that didn't work exactly
as intended but were super cool, and I've also pushed
live fully-fleshed out features that've been scrapped, and I know that that sucks.
I get what it's like to discover and build something really
cool and want to demo it to people and share it with
people even though it's not completely polished.
And that's what bothers me a lot about this game and how it makes me feel.
I mean, aside from the fact that you can fly out of bounds and
under the ocean if you're a patient ex qa tester type
like myself, this is an extremely well made and polished package, it's a crazy fun game,
it made me re-think fighter jet games as a whole and
realize why I got tired of the ones I played as a kid.
It's just this one feature which ultimately doesn't need to be there that kind of ruins
it for me.
Like, I honestly think I would have more respect for the game if this had been omitted, it
doesn't need to be here, even if it's just intended
as an extra gimmick feature, it should be reserved at
that point for an extra gimmick mode.
I mean, obviously I'm sure there's some better way it could have been included, maybe
have a Danger Zone version of the game where enemies
react slower or have fewer weapons and the hud is transparent and maybe your weapon ranges
are buffed a little bit, I mean that's just some
options to rebalance the handicaps of the motion controls.
But without those the feature kind just lasts until you die enough times to realize
its not a viable way to play when you have an
easier and more accurate control option.
So uh, in case you didn't notice, the third key factor?
We just segued into it super smoothly and covered it, no need to make an awkward flow
breaking announcement and transition to it, such
as the unnecessary one we're doing right now.
So what am I trying to say?
What am I trying to say about freaking video games today?
I'm trying to reiterate that for a motion controlled
game to be good it needs to have the complete set
of the following key factors: 1) Controls need to be simulative in nature.
2) Controls need to be as customizable as possible within reason.
3) And the game's challenges need to be designed around the player's mode of interaction,
i.e them there motion controls.
If a single one of these, most invisibly the third one, is neglected (such is the case
with ARMS and Mario Kart), or overlooked (such is the
case with Sky Rogue), then the quality of the
experience of the player takes a hit, ouch.
I mean, look, in the case of the last key factor this is
understandable.
The first two are pretty easy to nail, this one though?
Yow.
Games are a living medium, software is developed typically iteratively.
Late stage requirements, heck yeah they're gonna bite, trick is to make sure that they
don't sink their teeth in at the expense of the player
though.
Look, if a feature is better off removed for the sake of consistent quality, I say do it,
give it some more thought, some more time to cook
in the oven, let it get gooooood, and then when
it's ready, serve that boi to everyone!
What am I trying to say?
What am I trying to say about freaking video games today?
I'm trying to say, and I've been trying to say for two
videos now, that one really really easy way to ensure
that that most complex third key criteria is met is to replace designer driven challenges
with player driven ones.
Don't put a guy up against a bunch of high performance AI opponents, put
them up against other players!
Motion-controlled multiplayer is fast-track to ensure that the
challenge is fair for all the players and that the super cool motion-controls are a
viable playstyle.
Now, is that a costly feature?
Yes.
Doesn't it carry its own set of baggage like not exactly being
the most accessible thing for all players?
Yes.
Should we care?
Absolutely, I hope to actually cover that in a gimmicky future video, ay,
subscribe to my patriot so I can get a windows vr
headset and not be judged by my whole family for spending my own money on that… its
probably what's gonna happen anyways I'm just gonna do it.
But yeah, both of those.
What am I trying to say?
Oh yeah, I want a multiplayer focused motion-control only mode of Sky Rogue.
That would be cool.
That would be like game of the year every year for the next, like, I don't
know, maybe like one and a half years.
But I mean, it's still really good.
Uh.
I'm gonna go now, I'm gonna make, I'm gonna make like a tree and brexit.
Smell ya nerds later fam.
Peace.
Hello and welcome to the sweaty endscreen!
Uh, let's get it started and lets get it done, brief.
First thing's first, I will not be charging anyone on Patreon for this video.
There are a couple of reasons for that.
First one being that, if you are a patron or you're someone who's at least been
following me for about a year, uh, and as I hinted at the beginning of this video, this
video kinda of started as its own original idea but as
it went I realized I was just kinda reformulating, albeit in
a better way, topics that, and subjects that I brought up in last year's video about
motion controls.
So I felt like it wasnt really fair to charge anybody for that because it kind of just took
on the same purpose of that video with a tiny little
thing at the end, and so, Second being that I wanted to save time by
not reading out the list of names because there's
something I actually do want to discuss that I feel like I should before this video ends.
There's one stone left unturned so to speak.
I'm sorry by the way if I sound weird or artificial in any way,
it's just that it's really sweaty turning off all the fans and everything because it's
humid as heck here!
And I just kinda wanna get this over with as fast as I can, so you know let's just…
HHHHOOO!
So Sky Rogue is evidently an independently developed game.
As far as I can tell, there are two people who worked on it, one programmer, one
artist.
So, um, independent games aren't really anything I've really ever covered in any
of my videos.
Uh, and I feel like it's little bit more personal when you talk about something like
that because, you know, really there's a higher
likelihood that you would reach these people because they're not getting as much feedback
as these big studios, and maybe they're receptive
too cause they're, I don't know, more, closer to
artists than they are just systems pumping out products, you know?
So covering something like this, I thought it would make some sense to actually try to
reach out to somebody on the team who made this.
Uh, this is the sort of thing I would want if people ever
criticized me, god knows people have criticized my work in various different ways and I feel
like that's always the best way, when you're
somehow you know, made aware of these things.
Because tackling an independent developer in the wrong way with the wrong feedback in
the wrong tone, doesn't do anybody any good.
So at a point where I kinda knew where this video was going, I contacted the programmer,
uh and I kinda laid out a full breakdown of the
entire video up to that point, which really nothing
much changed.
Uh and I had some questions and I kind of wanted maybe the opportunity to
clarify some of the things I was gonna say, I wanted to make sure that the assumptions
I was making were grounded, and I wanted to try
to understand why certain things ended up the way
they did in the final game.
And originally he was really receptive, uh he did mention that he was
pretty busy and he might be able to respond, uh, immediately.
But it kinda got to a point where I realized he just wasn't going to after,
uh, laid that out.
It's very possibly my fault!
Uh, the way I, I presented my questions and everything was little bit
unorthodox, but uh, very on-brand, if, if, if I'm gonna do anything I'm gonna do
it right you know?
So all this to say, I'm not trying to throw any shade, I'm not trying to, you know,
I'm not even mentioning this guys name cause evidently
he, he didn't really, I mean I did give him, uh, I
asked him some questions and I asked if he would like to be a part of this and he didn't
respond so, obviously he doesn't want to or didn't
have the time to respond, I don't really know, that's the
thing.
I just wanted to lay out the fact that I'm pooping a little bit hard on an independent
game and I wanna make clear that I didn't just do this
in some little echo chamber, like I tried to reach out,
so, uh, maybe this a little bit awkward to mention in a video endscreen like this but
really it's the first time that I've, you know, I've felt
like I was personally attacking somebody by criticizing their
game when really I, I didn't want it to come across as that.
I want to come across as someone with a lot of questions, and I feel like I
was hoping that just my background in software development would be enough to make sure that
I touched this subject, uh, appropriately and
professionally but I was still worried so I did reach out to this guy, turns he was
Canadian too so, you know, we bonded over that I guess.
Not really, uh, cause, you know, he never wrote back…
But I digress.
That's really what I wanted to get across.
I don't want someone to come out someday and say "this guy said all this
crap and he didn't even make an effort" like I, I did.
That's all I want to say is that I did, and I think that's, even though it failed
this time, even though I didn't get any sort of response, I think
that this, you know, contacting people on these smaller
game projects that I may possibly look at in the future, I think that's a practice
that I would like to keep up because, um, I feel like it's a little
bit garbage not to?
Especially coming from where I am, cause, I mean, obviously I look at games
a little bit differently than some people, like I'll see
something and I'll be like, like, I can really, like, I relate to someone who, who,
is making these things, and I'm always thinking about how
did they develop these, um.
So it feels a little bit crap to just sit there and crap all over a game, um, and not
really give somebody a chance to you know, make all these
assumptions and all drop all this stuff, and really it's just easy to send a quick email,
or a video message, or something to somebody and
be like "yo wassup!
Can I just ask you some questions about your game.
Like, I don't wanna sound like a jerk, but I might accidentally,
so please give me this opportunity to make my myself,
you know, a little bit smarter, and uh, also give you the sort of feedback that you need
based off your input".
But, really that's it so…
And that's that!
Uh, thank you so much for watching!
Again, for the reasons stated, won't be charing anybody so please don't worry about
that.
I know this is, I wouldn't feel right charging anybody for this video.
But I hope you did appreciate all of the, all of the gopro, well not the
gopro but the action-cam footage, uh, I recorded for this video, that I, the action camera
that I purchased with, well not with necessarily,
but I probably wouldn't have if it weren't for patreon.
I really like, I looked and it and was like
"you know what?
I, you know what?
I can pay for this with patreon money, I could buy this camera"
and you know what?
I have some plans, I am going to drive this camera into the ground, you're
gonna see how much use I get out of this, for these
goofy video essays, it's gonna be unbelievable.
Stick with it.
Anyways, uh, thank you guys.
I'm gonna, I'm gonna cool the heck down now,
I'm gonna do a little striptease first, see y'all later, oh
man now you get to see all my rolls!
For more infomation >> Watergate Prosecutor: Paul Manafort Case Is 'A Slam Dunk' | The Beat With Ari Melber | MSNBC - Duration: 15:18. 
For more infomation >> President Donald Trump's Trouble With Time Zones | All In | MSNBC - Duration: 2:43. 
For more infomation >> Senator Bernie Sanders: 'President Donald Trump Has Got To Be Defeated' | All In | MSNBC - Duration: 8:48. 
For more infomation >> Nightly News Broadcast (Full) - August 14, 2018 | NBC Nightly News - Duration: 18:15. 
For more infomation >> People Are FREAKING Out Over What Biker's Patch Said That He Wore To Meet Trump - Duration: 4:53. 
For more infomation >> UCL | Real Madrid vence 2-1 al Bayer Leverkusen con la mágica volea de Zinedine Zidane - Duration: 5:30. 
For more infomation >> Washington National Guard mobilizes to fight Northwest wildfires - Duration: 2:20. 
For more infomation >> Victim of hit and run: 'I do think it was intentional' - Duration: 2:08. 
For more infomation >> Life expectancy figures may spark concerns for future retirees - Duration: 2:10. 
For more infomation >> Goldstein Investigation: LA Sanitation Worker Who Flipped Truck No Longer Employed With City - Duration: 2:10. 
For more infomation >> Kellyanne Conway on the firing of Peter Strzok - Duration: 6:36. 
For more infomation >> Where investors can find value in today's market - Duration: 4:55. 
For more infomation >> Honda HR-V europeu recebe motor 1.5 turbo, do Civic Touring - Duration: 3:36. 
For more infomation >> RHOC: Did Emily Simpson's Husband Kick Gina Kirschenheiter Out? (Season 13, Episode 6) | Bravo - Duration: 1:52. 
For more infomation >> NASA blasted off $1.5B spacecraft to study the sun - Duration: 1:02. 
For more infomation >> 19º Martes del Tiempo Ordinario – 14 de agosto de 2018 – Ciclo B - Duration: 2:25:01. 
For more infomation >> Bruno Mars Taps Boyz II Men, Ciara, Ella Mai & Charlie Wilson to Take Over for Cardi B on 24K - Duration: 4:31. 
For more infomation >> Audi A3 1.0TFSI 116pk Limousine Lease Edition | Navigatie | Parkeerhulp - Duration: 1:08. 
For more infomation >> Volkswagen up! 1.0 Move up! | 5drs. | airco | elek ramen | navigatie | garantie - Duration: 1:06. 
For more infomation >> Trump Calls Omarosa 'Dog' As WH Says It 'Can't Guarantee' President Never Used N-Word - Duration: 2:24. 
For more infomation >> Nissan QASHQAI 1.2 DIG-T Xtronic N-CONNECTA *AUTOMAAT + Design Pack* - Duration: 1:06. 
For more infomation >> Demi Lovato : Révélations sur la visite de son dealer, la nuit de l'overdose - Duration: 10:20. 
For more infomation >> The Best Composer Alive
For more infomation >> BMW 3 Serie Touring 320iA Edition M Sport Shadow Executive | 19 inch | M-Pakket | Nav. Professional - Duration: 1:08. 
For more infomation >> Mazda 3 2.0 skyactiv-g 120 pk GT-M sedan - Duration: 1:09. 
For more infomation >> Mazda 3 2.2d skyactiv-d 150 pk GT-M HB - Duration: 1:06. 
For more infomation >> How to PREPARE for the IELTS EXAM in 2018 - Duration: 40:00. 
For more infomation >> Meredith MacRae Sings! on PETTICOAT JUNCTION (part 2) - Duration: 29:48. 
For more infomation >> Řidič známé aplikace v Praze ZABIL CESTUJÍCÍHO! V ohrožení jsme úplně všichni! - Duration: 4:13. 
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét