Why are modern PC games so newb-friendly?

[tokie]

It seems this trend probably started around 2006. Prior to this, games were unforgiving to those who were not skilled. I'm thinking specifically about games like TFC, CS, BF2, UT, WC3, Q3, etc. In these games if you were a newb you were basically demolished by more experienced players to the point where you would either quit the game or got better.

Now it seems every recent PC game I have played is very forgiving to new players. Look at the difference between TFC and TF2 -- TF2 is a joke in that you can give keyboard/mouse to any random person who hasn't played it before and they can probably get a few kills. I don't think this is due to consoles, seeing as how Valve is a PC-centric developer, so please don't turn this thread into a console-vs-PC thread.

Basically, it seems like at some point there has been a paradigm shift among developers where they want to encourage players to remain in-game. Perhaps some future move towards serious in-game advertising?

 

[OOBradm]

console games

 

[PhatoseAlpha]

I expect it's simple business sense, especially with multiplayer games.


The reality is that "Newbie dies instantly, uselessly, for weeks until he's good" may be fun for the experienced players, but it's not much fun at all for the new players.

Not fun for new players = no new players = no new sales. Groups that are hostile to new members don't get new members, and they just die off.


Frankly, I'm grateful. While the highly competitive players may love games where you have to 'do your time' before you have any fun, I've already got a job, and don't need another.

 

[loldoctor]

Yes, it is indeed a surprise that the vast majority of people enjoy games in which they do not die constantly to "pros".

 

[mooncancook]

Yes, it is indeed a surprise that the vast majority of people enjoy games in which they do not die constantly to "pros".

I remember I could never get into any online matches in Quake 2 because newbies had no chance other than being a moving target.

 

[Maximilian]

Ehhh left 4 dead is pretty unforgiving lol... Modern warfare 2 is also pretty unforgiving, the news there are responsible for the team losing and although nobody cares about that too much it must suck having a 2:17 k/d ratio in anything heh.

 

[veri745]

The only game that had an extremely steep learning curve that I've played seriously is Counter-Strike. For some reason. Dying constantly with a 1-10 kill/death ratio was still fun until I finally got better.

For most new games though, I'm grateful that they're more newb friendly. It encourages more people to play online, which hopefully means games will last a little longer and get more support.

 

[rivethead]

I expect it's simple business sense, especially with multiplayer games.


The reality is that "Newbie dies instantly, uselessly, for weeks until he's good" may be fun for the experienced players, but it's not much fun at all for the new players.

Not fun for new players = no new players = no new sales. Groups that are hostile to new members don't get new members, and they just die off.


Frankly, I'm grateful. While the highly competitive players may love games where you have to 'do your time' before you have any fun, I've already got a job, and don't need another.

EXACTLY this.

It's the main reason I've never touched an MMO (or really any multiplayer). Where is the fun for me in getting my ass kicked by a 13 year old who gets to game 20+ hours a week (I'm lucky if I get an hour a night after work/the kids are in bed/the bills paid/the dishes put away, etc., etc., etc.).

It's been single-player campaigns only for me and will likely stay that way for a long time.

 

[Murloc]

1. many gamers are teen and noob, it can't be too difficult or they won't play it.
2. Games have to sell.
3. Games are created for noobs, not for hardcore players.

I hate that games get dumbed down, but as a game publisher I fear I'd be forced to do the same choice.

I don't worry that much about FPSes, because if you are noob you get shooted and you can't shoot good, in any case.
As long as you have to aim that's the way it is.

I hate when they do it in RTSes though, because they become just stupid.

 

[Mursilis]

EXACTLY this.

It's the main reason I've never touched an MMO (or really any multiplayer). Where is the fun for me in getting my ass kicked by a 13 year old who gets to game 20+ hours a week (I'm lucky if I get an hour a night after work/the kids are in bed/the bills paid/the dishes put away, etc., etc., etc.).

It's been single-player campaigns only for me and will likely stay that way for a long time.

There's the magic word - FUN. It's why we play games, and getting smacked around by kiddies without lives isn't it.

 

[Occ]

The reality is that "Newbie dies instantly, uselessly, for weeks until he's good" may be fun for the experienced players, but it's not much fun at all for the new players.

Counterpoints: newbie servers / rankings / tiers matchmaking all alleviate this, games should have reasonable learning curves with high skill ceilings, dying uselessly is dumb, dying and learning something can be rewarding

Not fun for new players = no new players = no new sales. Groups that are hostile to new members don't get new members, and they just die off.

This must be why Starcraft, WoW, Counter-Strike, Street Fighter, and Quake have all completely died out and haven't had massive communities built up around them. Oh wait.

There are also single-player examples, such as the genre of Roguelikes or the sim Dwarf Fortress.

Frankly, I'm grateful. While the highly competitive players may love games where you have to 'do your time' before you have any fun, I've already got a job, and don't need another.

Some people don't want depth or a high degree of challenge in their game, and just want to relax or "play for fun." That's perfectly acceptable.

It's the main reason I've never touched an MMO (or really any multiplayer). Where is the fun for me in getting my ass kicked by a 13 year old who gets to game 20+ hours a week (I'm lucky if I get an hour a night after work/the kids are in bed/the bills paid/the dishes put away, etc., etc., etc.).

Grinding and the games that require it before you can be competitive are boring, in my opinion. It's why I don't play MMOs. Finding a game you enjoy with depth so you can increase your skill and play better and better opponents is fun. I find this gives a sense of accomplishment and progress I don't get from playing many single player games. Achievements are a poor substitute.

 

[v8envy]

I must now bring up Eve. Yes, you need to be catass-reeking basement dwelling popsocking sperglord to be an alliance head but there is plenty of competitive *fun* to be had (with or without grinding) for the other 99.9999% of the population.

Reflexes of a 13 year old on a sugar high not required.

Oh, and the learning curve is more like a learning wall. But once you climb over it the game is quite simple and logical for the most part.

 

[Pia]

I expect it's simple business sense, especially with multiplayer games.

The reality is that "Newbie dies instantly, uselessly, for weeks until he's good" may be fun for the experienced players, but it's not much fun at all for the new players.

Completely circumvented by good matchmaking, which will match newbies with newbies. And would an experienced player have fun for long in matches they absolutely cannot lose? I know I don't.

Frankly, I'm grateful. While the highly competitive players may love games where you have to 'do your time' before you have any fun, I've already got a job, and don't need another.

MMOs are the only games where you have to "do your time" and they are a joke to competitive players. While you can't instantly become good at a complex game, attitude is an omghueg part of how fast and how far you improve. Someone with the right attitude can play an hour every other day and eventually become really awesome if he sticks with it. Others will grind frags at a public server or pwn noobs on an infinite money map for hundreds upon hundreds of hours and never surpass a certain point.

 

[digitaldurandal]

Having a game where you are not completely useless before becoming "pro" is smart.

It means that people will not give up on your game day one and tell all their friends that the game is bad, even if that simply means that they are not good at the game and perhaps did not give the game enough time to overcome the learning curve.

It means that people who do not devote all of their time to PC gaming can play the game and expands the player base and theoretically the sales of the game.

It means that my wife can jump in a game with me every once in a while and not completely rage at the world around her.

However many of the games you have mentioned still have a significant gap between expert and newbie. There is a huge difference between a skilled pyro, reflecting shots, playing the corners, switching to the axtinguisher and a newbie running around with the flamethrower on.

Also the goal of the game is not to get kills to begin with it is to function as a cog in the machine that is your team with various goals depending on which map type you are playing. A newbie will run around the map oblivous to the common goal wheras an experienced gamer will try to fill gaps and play to the needs of his or her team.

As a further note, I have picked up and played TFC without ever playing before and gotten some kills too.

Want some hardcore games? They are still around!

ARMA II
DOW
COH
to name a few.

Cliffs: Ridiculous learning curve is not good for the player base or sales of the game, but a learning curve and improvement in play definitely still exists to a meaningful extent in today's games.

 

[digitaldurandal]

Completely circumvented by good matchmaking, which will match newbies with newbies. And would an experienced player have fun for long in matches they absolutely cannot lose? I know I don't.
MMOs are the only games where you have to "do your time" and they are a joke to competitive players. While you can't instantly become good at a complex game, attitude is an omghueg part of how fast and how far you improve. Someone with the right attitude can play an hour every other day and eventually become really awesome if he sticks with it. Others will grind frags at a public server or pwn noobs on an infinite money map for hundreds upon hundreds of hours and never surpass a certain point.

Some games have a larger learning curve. This is most notable with RTS series and you are right that good matchmaking plays a role there.

However good matchmaking is not available in all games - though it should be.

A mixture of blizzard skill matching with lobby style join systems (please with max ping options thank you) would be an excellent addition to the FPS genre.

 

[Pia]

There's the magic word - FUN. It's why we play games, and getting smacked around by kiddies without lives isn't it.

Everybody who doesn't actually play games for a job plays for fun. The implication in what you say is that people who have learned to be good at Halo or Uno or whatever, and are doing what they can to win, are not having fun. That's a huge misconception and needs to be laid to rest already.

You know how people say they are "playing the opponent, not the cards"? Stuff like that is really, really fun, it just generally requires learning the game to a certain point. I definitely have more fun with games I know, against opponents who also know those games.

 

[Martimus]

I must now bring up Eve. Yes, you need to be catass-reeking basement dwelling popsocking sperglord to be an alliance head but there is plenty of competitive *fun* to be had (with or without grinding) for the other 99.9999% of the population.

Reflexes of a 13 year old on a sugar high not required.

Oh, and the learning curve is more like a learning wall. But once you climb over it the game is quite simple and logical for the most part.

I like that line. I may quote it in my sig.

I have played the game for an hour or two a day for about a year, and I can say that you can be good at it from pretty early on, but mostly because there are an infinite number of ways to play the game. No-one is really good at everything, but you can pick a specialty and get really good at it pretty quickly.

 

[AstroManLuca]

EXACTLY this.

It's the main reason I've never touched an MMO (or really any multiplayer). Where is the fun for me in getting my ass kicked by a 13 year old who gets to game 20+ hours a week (I'm lucky if I get an hour a night after work/the kids are in bed/the bills paid/the dishes put away, etc., etc., etc.).

It's been single-player campaigns only for me and will likely stay that way for a long time.

I'm with you. I've basically given up on multiplayer games because the difference between me and a lot of people is just huge. It really depends on the game, of course, but I've been playing less and less multiplayer. And the single player games I like aren't exactly on the level of Battletoads or Mega Man.

I find it laughable that the OP thinks TF2 is dumbed down. Last time I tried playing I got killed maybe a dozen times without getting a single kill. In many cases I died without even knowing what had happened until the game showed me the guy who killed me.

Anyway, I'm not sure what the argument is. Is the OP complaining that games are too noob-friendly; as in, they make it too easy for newbies to do well? That implies that games are too difficult for experienced gamers, which obviously isn't the case (and if it were, why would experienced gamers be complaining?). Or are you saying that when you pick up a new game, you do really well at it too quickly? In that case, would you prefer to get your ass kicked nonstop for a month or three while you improve your game? Because I sure wouldn't.

 

[TwinsenTacquito]

console games

Cross platforming. Yes.

 

[skace]

I really want someone to make a game that is relentlessly unforgiving. I think that is the reason I enjoyed Nethack so damn much.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Bad Company 2 multiplayer is anything but noob friendly. They don't even give a medic a medic pack at first ffs.

 

[VulgarDisplay]

Want some hardcore games? They are still around!

ARMA II
DOW
COH
to name a few.

Cliffs: Ridiculous learning curve is not good for the player base or sales of the game, but a learning curve and improvement in play definitely still exists to a meaningful extent in today's games.

I would not say Arma II has a steep learning curve. It just controls horribly. I'm all for simulation in aircraft and vehicles, but when driving your character in the game you should not have to hunt and peck to perform actions. That is where they really dropped the ball in that game. The most natural thing a person does in their own life is move around under their own power. The fact that I have to go through 15 text menus to get my character to do something in Arma II is what totally ruins any chance of the game being fun. I don't have to sit there and think for 3 minutes to pick up something in real life so they should have made it much more intuitive as far as infantry controls go.

 

[simonizor]

I expect it's simple business sense, especially with multiplayer games.


The reality is that "Newbie dies instantly, uselessly, for weeks until he's good" may be fun for the experienced players, but it's not much fun at all for the new players.

Not fun for new players = no new players = no new sales. Groups that are hostile to new members don't get new members, and they just die off.


Frankly, I'm grateful. While the highly competitive players may love games where you have to 'do your time' before you have any fun, I've already got a job, and don't need another.

So how do you explain Counter Strike having such a huge following? The game isn't exactly newb friendly, and the community will tear you a new asshole if you're too newbish, yet there are still tons of people playing it after 12 years. Coincidence? No. Instead of making the game accessible to newbs, they focused on making it good. Do you think that people are going to be playing MW2 in 12 years? Hell, just typing that made me lol.

 

[VulgarDisplay]

People play mw2?

 

[coloumb]

Sounds like maybe the OP needs to find an elite group of competitive gamers and only play on the same servers they do? Are you angry that someone who just picked up the game managed to get in a few kills to take away from you being the most elitist prick on the planet?

Or maybe today's MP games are a bit more realistic and have more players per server which increases the chance of you dying and their chance of survival? The old school games you mention were built around the idiotic bunny hopping rocket launching insta-kill methodology.