What is "consolisation" and why does it exist? Or Simulated Skill v Player Skill - by SubJeff
Eldron on 8/2/2011 at 21:57
Quote Posted by Koki
Well, all I can really say here is "No."
In any real-time game where you control your character directly precision and reflexes will play a significant role
It's true, that's why consoles have some sticky tracking to keep it fun due to the fact that joysticks weren't the thing for shooters, while still keeping the need for skill intact.
It's not a replacement for skill, it's a part of the input system.
Any pc-fps pro who has never played a console fps before will be thrown around like a wet rag on the battlefield, and vise versa.
Additionally, precision and reflexes were a huge part of old shooters like quake, but with the dawn of team-heavy shooters such as the battlefield series, and more realistic simulators, it has become equally important with placement and tactical approaches where the reflexes and good aims won't help the ambushed squad.
Quote Posted by Koki
Just like books and movies.
I guess we could say that its the difference between a book that has a bigger font and has to have bigger pages, but has the same amount of content, to that of a smaller sized book.
Phatose on 8/2/2011 at 23:20
If sufficiently good aiming skill is insufficient on it's own to overcome all other considerations, then aim-bot cheats should be ineffective, or at the very least not result in all other players being dominated.
We all know that isn't the case.
Quote:
It's true, that's why consoles have some sticky tracking to keep it fun due to the fact that joysticks weren't the thing for shooters, while still keeping the need for skill intact.
It's not a replacement for skill, it's a part of the input system.
This is clearly not the case. Elements that are truly part of the input system cannot be removed without making the game unplayable. Remove the sticky tracking, and the game becomes harder - but still very playable. For reference see: Medal of Honor, PS1.
This is not input - this is "Big Head Mode". It exists solely to replace skill - the entire reason for it's existence is that the skills required are difficult to master, and not worth the time. Skill cliffs like that prevent mass accessibility, and preventing mass accessibility kills your sales.
Eldron on 8/2/2011 at 23:39
Quote Posted by Phatose
If sufficiently good aiming skill is insufficient on it's own to overcome all other considerations, then aim-bot cheats should be ineffective, or at the very least not result in all other players being dominated.
We all know that isn't the case.
This is clearly not the case. Elements that are truly part of the input system cannot be removed without making the game unplayable. Remove the sticky tracking, and the game becomes harder - but still very playable. For reference see: Medal of Honor, PS1.
This is not input - this is "Big Head Mode". It exists solely to replace skill - the entire reason for it's existence is that the skills required are difficult to master, and not worth the time. Skill cliffs like that prevent mass accessibility, and preventing mass accessibility kills your sales.
So if it removes skills out of the equation, how does the competitive scene exist on console shooters?
One example: quake3 has hit-bodies larger than the player, and the railgun will take out a player shot anywhere on the body, in halo it takes a snipershot to the head, but not for the body, now even with some sticky tracking involved, which one is the easier kill?
Bakerman on 9/2/2011 at 00:24
Quote Posted by Sulphur
Yes, pretty much since the beginning. ...
Oh damn, bringing back memories of CS LAN parties at school... yeah, happy days...
Quote Posted by Wormrat
I just want to point out that these are clear examples of why it doesn't make sense to talk about "simulated skill" as something in opposition to player skill. In these cases, nothing about the action has changed, but the game has still been made more challenging because the player has to apply the action more skillfully. In other words, an increase in demand on player skill without a decrease in "simulated skill." Spectrum busted.
Good point. I still think the spectrum is valid, though - you're just at the end where a simulated skill has been removed, and you're adding on more elements of player skill. Arguably there's a level of simulated skill that will never be removed (i.e., your character's steady aim, firm grip as he's flying through the air, not to mention the act of clambering ono a grappled object), and never should be - but with a 'reasonable' baseline of simulated skill on the part of the controlled character, there is somewhat a balance between requiring the player to be skilful, and making his avatar be skilful instead.
Obviously it's not just a linear progression from skill-based to win-button, but I think it's a useful way to analyse games and their mechanics. Not even in a condemnatory way, necessarily, but as a way to classify different elements of the gameplay, and see where the challenge lies.
Phatose on 9/2/2011 at 01:20
Quote Posted by Eldron
So if it removes skills out of the equation, how does the competitive scene exist on console shooters?
One example: quake3 has hit-bodies larger than the player, and the railgun will take out a player shot anywhere on the body, in halo it takes a snipershot to the head, but not for the body, now even with some sticky tracking involved, which one is the easier kill?
Replacing skill is not the same thing as removing it from the equation entirely. I imagine you're familiar with difficulty settings, right? Same principle. Easy mode is easier - you don't need to be anywhere near as skilled. That does not mean you can auto-win - but it requires far less skill.
And after watching a quick halo video - Halo is much much easier. The aim assist aura is huge - I'd say as big as the entire body in Quake 3, the player motion is much slower, there's nowhere near as much vertical movement. This isn't even a contest.
Chade on 9/2/2011 at 01:33
You can have halo tournaments because the difficulty of a deterministic symmetric multi-player game is determined by your opponents - not by the game mechanics.
EvaUnit02 on 9/2/2011 at 04:32
Depending on the game, auto-aim is easily exploitable. Eg in Call of Duty: Black Ops on console, the auto-aim can track players through fucking walls. I'm not joking.
In competitive console FPS games, you aren't really hampered by the lack of "Pro-mods" to enforce rules. You just have to do it the old fashion way, by having human referees.
A relevant post of mine from an older thread:-
Quote Posted by "EvaUnit02"
Take "quick-scoping" for example (basically run and gunning with sniper rifles). It is popular amongst a lot of console Call of Duty 4/Modern Warfare 2 players, they claim it's more skilful, but really it isn't. All they're doing is taking advantage of the game's built in auto-aim. (Quick-scoping has been nerfed significantly in Blops.)
If you ADS in console CoD MP the aiming reticle snaps to the nearest player and tracks their movement for several seconds. In console CoD SP, when you ADS the reticle automatically snaps to the nearest enemy's head.
Contrast that with say quick-scoping in Counter-Strike and it's night and day. A player that can quick-scope well in a properly optimised PC FPS (particularly ones where guns have genuine recoil) like CS:S can genuinely be revered as someone with skill.
Sulphur on 9/2/2011 at 06:32
Quote Posted by Bakerman
Obviously it's not just a linear progression from skill-based to win-button, but I think it's a useful way to analyse games and their mechanics. Not even in a condemnatory way, necessarily, but as a way to classify different elements of the gameplay, and see where the challenge lies.
It works in categorising some things, yes. Specifically, action-based events like QTEs and sticky cover. But how does it work for other factors of consolitis like Vitachambers with unlimited resurrections, Elika in PoP 2008, fast travel in Oblivion/Fallout, or the fact that choosing a good/bad path in Bioshock netted you just about the same amount of Adam and made the game easier regardless of the path you chose?
Eldron on 9/2/2011 at 08:58
Quote Posted by Sulphur
It works in categorising some things, yes. Specifically, action-based events like QTEs and sticky cover. But how does it work for other factors of consolitis like Vitachambers with unlimited resurrections, Elika in PoP 2008, fast travel in Oblivion/Fallout, or the fact that choosing a good/bad path in Bioshock netted you just about the same amount of Adam and made the game easier regardless of the path you chose?
But that's the problem, every time some bad design choice is made, or if it's something the hardcore crowd doesn't enjoy, it's immediately attributed to consoles.
Didn't they revamp the travelsystem in fallout3 from oblivion so you could only travel to places you had been to?
And the complete lack of weight to the choices in bioshock are bad regardless of being on console or pc?
QTE's have their places though, heavy rain and the god of war series are fantastic, but I know QTE is a very personal topic for some people.
Bakerman on 9/2/2011 at 10:15
Quote Posted by Sulphur
But how does it work for other factors of consolitis like ...
I'm going to go right off the deep end here and say those things are all different sorts of skills; managerial and metagame skills rather than finger reflexes and quick thinking. The skill of managing health - knowing when to use your limited healing items and taking the time to hunt for them when you're low. The skill of...
So I couldn't think of any other ways to classify the things you said as skills. The skill of not failing? The skill of being willing to walk across the entire game world? :p
But I don't necessarily regard those things as consolisation either. It's not really consoles' fault that we don't have deep, meaningful, heart-wrenching moral dilemmas in games; heck, I've never experienced that on any platform :p. (Caveat: I'm a relatively young gamer, so I wasn't really around in the halcyon days of the 80s and 90s... maybe PC games were way better back then. I've played Deus Ex and Thief though, they're two of my favourites.)
Anyway. I do agree with you; the skill spectrum isn't all-inclusive. But to me, and apparently to SubjEff, it's an important part of the trend away from the kinds of games we like. What I'm going to take away from this thread is another useful way of looking at the interactions in games. Not the be-all and end-all but something relevant.
