Matter Of Intelligence?

By Author: Usman khalid
Total Articles: 1
Comment this article

Nicholas Lovell, for example, one of London's most renowned journalists with a passion for video games (and ... sailboats), in his article about the fact that on average a game in episodes, such as Final Fantasy, so to speak, loses half of its players at each new release, noting that in this field games free-to-play make it, as usual, the master, since, in fact, never come to an end.

Lovell is partially contradicted by its readers that highlight some of the fundamental problems of the gaming industry:

a) If you can play a game in beta-ad-episodes ... the player will certainly do so and will not appear in the final version, because it will already know how the story ends;
b) If it is a game to a stand-alone episodes, players will sell out in stores to know the new history that is behind the new episode.
c) You can always patch a game to make payment for the old players aficionados.
d) When you buy a game and its sequels and / or episodes, the player does not pay for a never-ending story, but for a gaming experience without end.
e) When you launch a game-episode revenues are not so much by ...
... the players who played the previous episodes, but from merchandising related to the new episode.

Bruce Phillips, a researcher at Microsoft Game Studios, however, try to focus on the reasons that push players to stop playing and what attractions you can give them the choice to push them to do otherwise.

Phillips argues that the proper balance lies somewhere in between, ie it is true that most games are by definition complicated, but everyone knows that is not always fun or lose, or win easy. A video game to be successful, must therefore possess a balanced mix between these two aspects.

It seems that the unconventional strategies used by Microsoft to capture the attention of the players are:

1. The manipulation of the difficulty of the game through the use of tutorials;
2. Dynamic adjustment of the difficulty;
3. Ompostazioni of difficulty chosen by the user;
4. Feedback systems;
5. User-friendly commands;
6. Suggestions in the game.

Another interesting aspect is that when a player does not want to know more of the game, is not limited to the nail to hang the controller, but it tells friends and relatives, or worse, write it on Facebook! And this is not good publicity for manufacturers.

Data is that 30% of Xbox gamers LA in 2008 has never reached the end of the games you have bought.

Philips suggests that there are at least two strategies for subverting these percentages:

better relationship with the players and their feedback;
better define the objectives to be awarded to the player

It seems, in fact, that an important factor in the response to the failure of a player is his perception of why the failure occurred. Those who believe that the failure is the result of immutable factors such as innate ability or intelligence, are also those who leave a game more easily.

In essence, you have to convince the player that the failure depends on variable factors that can be modified by trial and changes of strategy. In other words: it's all in the player's head!

Reverse psychology, then: do you believe the player to be a great strategist stupid and will challenge the player to show his intelligence as an incentive to keep playing and applying her incredible talents as a strategist.