One thing I hear a lot and want to bring up is the concept of what the "true" Sonic identity is, and "how" Sonic "should be." We can't say that the "true" Sonic is inspired by Action B movies, or Adventure Inspiration because the "true" Sonic, Sega's Sonic, has no "true" identity. He has no one pure and true source of cultural influence he draws from. Sega makes him to reflect and mimick whatever is popular at the time. I have a friend who told me when he was in school he would wear hats or play yugioh just to copy his friend. Sonic Team is the same way with Sonic. They aren't the ones to move the helm of culture and societal influence, they simply are bandwagoners trying to get in on the next big thing.
Sonic 1 first was made to cash in on the popularity of Mario, but it was also inspired by the competitive egotism of the 90's as it sought to be better and "cooler."
Sonic 3 was based on absurd B movies because that's what was popular at the time.
Sonic Adventure 1 was inspired by Super Mario 64, other early 3d collectathons, and the rising popularity of anime.
Sonic Adventure 2 was inspired by the skate boarding fad and Tony Hawk games. It used "Cool, Radical, etc." when skate boarding off of a jump.
Shadow was inspired by grandtheft auto, call of duty, and halo.
Sonic 06 was inspired by realistic Playstation and Xbox games.
Sonic Unleashed was inspired by Pixar, Dreamworks, and the rise of 3d animation companys like them.
Sonic Colors was inspired by the success of casual Wii games like De Blob.
Sonic 4 and Generations were inspired by the success of New Super Mario Bros. Wii and PS3 HD remakes.
Lost World: a result of a resurgence of the interest in simple platformers again. Rayman Legends, Donkey Kong Returns, New Super Mario Bros U, etc.
Sonic Boom: is odd because at it's core it reflects the old age of and shows how behind the times the developers were, when initial creating it, but in terms of writing it's gained it's cultural influence from recent internet meme culture. I'm the leader to local 11 year old scouts and yep, I can definitely say they have the same awkward passion for internet meme culture that Sonic Boom has, so it's actually perfectly toned for the rising generation. It's just that the rising generation's internet meme/ viral youtube videos culture is a cess pool of obnoxiousness.
Sonic Runners: Well if that is indeed going to be the next game from what I can tell of it, it looks like a 3d version of Sonic Dash meant to cash in on it's success. That would be almost prove my pattern because the next game to come out according to it is supposed to be a cheap, crapped out, cash in to take advantage of hype or popularity of some Sonic game that was made. That's actually not a bad strategy on their part. Sonic Dash undoubtedly has exposed a lot of people to Sonic due to it's free to play nature, but for that reason it can only get so much money out of people, so now Sonic Team is making a 50-60 dollar game resembling Sonic Dash and Jump in hopes people brought in by those games will recognize it and buy it.
After that game, in 2016 we the most likely to get a second Sonic Boom game or Sonic Adventure game. A Boom sequel is still possible because the cartoon is doing well and will continue for most of next year at the very least. Sega didn't directly take the hit when Boom failed, After that and according to the pattern, Sega's going to try and reinvent Sonic once again in 2017 with whatever's popular then. The new Stars Wars movies are going to be very popular and all the rage then, and Toy Story 4 is coming out in 2017, perhaps, the 2017 reboot game will be the true Super Sonic Galaxy, or the aesthic and culture influence will be inspired by childlike imagination of playing with Toys like in Toy Story or the Lego Movie. By 2017 I'm expecting a sequel that movie, and Sega knows the best way to spread Sonic is through kids so there's a strong chance we'll see Sonic trying to make Sonic in that vain. Then again we are going to see the new Sonic movie come out and that's going to be PG-13, so perhaps there will finally be two different flavors of Sonic avaible. One for the younger audience and one for the older. So there could be two 2017 Sonic game or one shortly following the other into 2018. The younger one could be Toy Story inspired like I mentioned, and the older one could be inspired by modern day action thrillers like World War Z; so the tone would end up like modern action movie adaptations of old cartoons like the Rock's GI Joe Movie, Micheal Bay's TMNT and Transformers films, perhaps it may even draw inspiration from the success of Marvel and other Super Hero movies.
So what do you think? Does that seem to be accurate and make sense? Any counter observations or arguments?
Saturday, January 3, 2015
"Why Has Sega Suddenly Abandoned Me?" Sega's Marketing Strategy
Contrary to how it may seem Sega has not suddenly changed. They have not suddenly decided to abandon their fans. They've been this way the entire time. Sega's like the confident and aggressive player who covinces you to sleep with him by saying, "Show me your tits." He's different and in an odd way charming, so you give into his demands. After the fact you try to get a hold of him, but he doesn't respond, and if he does he's very rude about it. You then wonder why he suddenly became a jerk to you. In reality, he was always a jerk, you just didn't realize it until he left you, but your traumatized, and now you can't help but crave and desire bad boys. Why does Sega treat it's fans poorly, yet I still crave it? You wonder. Why do fans remain loyal? Others wonder. Why do we still crave the jerk when we have every reason to hate them. In both cases it's the same. It's the psychological response to loss. http://www.caregiverslibrary.org/caregivers-resources/grp-end-of-life-issues/hsgrp-grief-and-loss/psychological-responses-to-loss-article.aspx
Let's face it. Sega' doesn't really care about any one particular type of Sonic. It doesn't favor any one particular type of fans over the other. They just want your money. Much like the player that just wants your body, but just as players are never contempt with one woman, Sega is never content with one group of fans. They have a systematically approach; a pattern for how they go about seducing new fans. Here's how Sega decides to market it's games. First, they make a game to attract new fans. For example Sonic 1. Next, they pump out a sequel as fast as they can to capture and capitilize on the hype of the new audience. For example Sonic 2. Then, they feast on their new found herd of cattle; draining them for every penny they've gone. Lastly, as they're now satisfied, bored of their old meal, and craving more, they go back to step one to once again go on the hunt and seek out new sheep to replenish their herd with fresh, new meat.
I name these 3 target markets:
1. New Potential fans
2. Hype Train People
3. Loyal fansIn my marketing classing I learned businesses actually think and identify groups like this, so I wouldn't be surprised if they actually had some sort of official targets like these. Anyway, here's how it looks when applied to the games.
Sonic 1: New Potential fans
Sonic 2: Hype Train People
Sonic 3: Loyal fans
Sonic Adventure 1: New, potential fans
Sonic Adventure 2: Hype Train people
Sonic Hereos: Loyal fans of Classics
Shadow: New People
Sonic 06: Hype from Shadow's game
Sonic Unleashed: Loyal Fans of Adventure games
Sonic Colors: New Nintendo, casual fans
Sonic Generations: Hype Train of "Sonic's finally good again"
Sonic Lost World: Fans of Sonic Colors
Sonic Boom: New
Sonic Runners?: Hype?
Sonic Boom 2? For Boom Fans? Adventure 3 because boom failed?: Fans?
There's a lot of conclusion we can draw from this. The most mind bloggling of them to fans who see the classic games as the same is that No, Sonic Adventure 1 & 2 are relatively nothing like a Sonic game, as defined by it's predecessors. Yep, that's right the Sonic Adventure 1, the critically acclaimed, fan favorite. The magnus opum of Sonic games was nothing like one. SA1 was a drastically different type of game. The six playstyles and characters was to have broad appeal. It was nothing like a classic Sonic game. It was more or less an "Open World", RPG, inspired by the genesis games rather than a direct sequel to them. Sonic Heroes was the first serious attempt to make a genesis Sonic game into 3d outside of 3d blast. SA1 did exactly what Sonic Boom attempted to do, in other words it introduced new fans (myself included) who at this point have taken over the fandom. It's a good thing for us adventure fans, that Sonic Boom was a flop, if it was a success we'd have found ourselves in the midst of a serious Sonic civil war. A multifactioned war, even more severe than any current disputes within us.
A second conclusion is that the hype train games are the most well known, and so far according to my capacity to perceive the public opinion that idea seems to hold up. Sonic 2, Sonic Adventure 2, Sonic 06, and Sonic Generations are the most well known Sonic games.
A third conclusion is that Sonic 06 is the slammed out the door sequel to capitolize on the success of Shadow the Hedgehog. In a lot of way this statement is correct. It focused on realistic, high fidelity, graphics (something that call of duty and halo fans tend to care a lot about) the story revolves around Shadow. It focuses on hedgehogs in the campaigns and not Tails or Knuckles, so people who only played Shadow's game won't be confused. Shadow's gameplay in 06 was designed to bring back elements from Shadow the Hedgehog. From magazine articles and from when I first played 06 and all other clues, I didn't feel like the game was for me, a fan of the adventure games, but towards the typical Sony and Xbox gamer. The game, it's story. I didn't know it was supposed to be a sequel or connected to the adventure games it felt like a reboot to me.
Another conclusion is that Sonic Unleashed was clearly marketed and made for Adventure fans more than anything else. Even outside of the pattern it was almost called Sonic Adventure 3. As someone who has been introduced to Sonic with the Adventure games, Unleashed feels the closest to a third adventure game.
From there, and the ending of Sonic Boom, it looks like a sequel for Boom might actually be in the works, or at the very least it looks like that's what was planned until Boom and Big Red Button failed. The sheep are wising up to the player's tricks and they're getting old, so I wonder what the Sega has up their sleeve now.
Let's face it. Sega' doesn't really care about any one particular type of Sonic. It doesn't favor any one particular type of fans over the other. They just want your money. Much like the player that just wants your body, but just as players are never contempt with one woman, Sega is never content with one group of fans. They have a systematically approach; a pattern for how they go about seducing new fans. Here's how Sega decides to market it's games. First, they make a game to attract new fans. For example Sonic 1. Next, they pump out a sequel as fast as they can to capture and capitilize on the hype of the new audience. For example Sonic 2. Then, they feast on their new found herd of cattle; draining them for every penny they've gone. Lastly, as they're now satisfied, bored of their old meal, and craving more, they go back to step one to once again go on the hunt and seek out new sheep to replenish their herd with fresh, new meat.
I name these 3 target markets:
1. New Potential fans
2. Hype Train People
3. Loyal fansIn my marketing classing I learned businesses actually think and identify groups like this, so I wouldn't be surprised if they actually had some sort of official targets like these. Anyway, here's how it looks when applied to the games.
Sonic 1: New Potential fans
Sonic 2: Hype Train People
Sonic 3: Loyal fans
Sonic Adventure 1: New, potential fans
Sonic Adventure 2: Hype Train people
Sonic Hereos: Loyal fans of Classics
Shadow: New People
Sonic 06: Hype from Shadow's game
Sonic Unleashed: Loyal Fans of Adventure games
Sonic Colors: New Nintendo, casual fans
Sonic Generations: Hype Train of "Sonic's finally good again"
Sonic Lost World: Fans of Sonic Colors
Sonic Boom: New
Sonic Runners?: Hype?
Sonic Boom 2? For Boom Fans? Adventure 3 because boom failed?: Fans?
There's a lot of conclusion we can draw from this. The most mind bloggling of them to fans who see the classic games as the same is that No, Sonic Adventure 1 & 2 are relatively nothing like a Sonic game, as defined by it's predecessors. Yep, that's right the Sonic Adventure 1, the critically acclaimed, fan favorite. The magnus opum of Sonic games was nothing like one. SA1 was a drastically different type of game. The six playstyles and characters was to have broad appeal. It was nothing like a classic Sonic game. It was more or less an "Open World", RPG, inspired by the genesis games rather than a direct sequel to them. Sonic Heroes was the first serious attempt to make a genesis Sonic game into 3d outside of 3d blast. SA1 did exactly what Sonic Boom attempted to do, in other words it introduced new fans (myself included) who at this point have taken over the fandom. It's a good thing for us adventure fans, that Sonic Boom was a flop, if it was a success we'd have found ourselves in the midst of a serious Sonic civil war. A multifactioned war, even more severe than any current disputes within us.
A second conclusion is that the hype train games are the most well known, and so far according to my capacity to perceive the public opinion that idea seems to hold up. Sonic 2, Sonic Adventure 2, Sonic 06, and Sonic Generations are the most well known Sonic games.
A third conclusion is that Sonic 06 is the slammed out the door sequel to capitolize on the success of Shadow the Hedgehog. In a lot of way this statement is correct. It focused on realistic, high fidelity, graphics (something that call of duty and halo fans tend to care a lot about) the story revolves around Shadow. It focuses on hedgehogs in the campaigns and not Tails or Knuckles, so people who only played Shadow's game won't be confused. Shadow's gameplay in 06 was designed to bring back elements from Shadow the Hedgehog. From magazine articles and from when I first played 06 and all other clues, I didn't feel like the game was for me, a fan of the adventure games, but towards the typical Sony and Xbox gamer. The game, it's story. I didn't know it was supposed to be a sequel or connected to the adventure games it felt like a reboot to me.
Another conclusion is that Sonic Unleashed was clearly marketed and made for Adventure fans more than anything else. Even outside of the pattern it was almost called Sonic Adventure 3. As someone who has been introduced to Sonic with the Adventure games, Unleashed feels the closest to a third adventure game.
From there, and the ending of Sonic Boom, it looks like a sequel for Boom might actually be in the works, or at the very least it looks like that's what was planned until Boom and Big Red Button failed. The sheep are wising up to the player's tricks and they're getting old, so I wonder what the Sega has up their sleeve now.
The Future of Game Consoles
A bit off topic, but I can relate it Sonic as it was me pondering about the direction of Sonic that lead to these ideas....
Instead of Nintendo DS's we need Nintendo phones that play's all you favorites. Instead of home entertainment consoles we need home entertainment Nintendo and Sony tablets that plug into your tv and that you can play with friends. Instead of Play Station One and Xbox 4 we need official playstation and xbox gaming pc's that run operating systems like windows, and can use word documents and google chrome and such. Basically, the big 3 gaming companies need to make their gaming devices more functional and practical if they want to remain relevent much longer into the future. It feels like too much of an investment to now only spend over 60 dollars per game, but then to also have to buy this device that serves you no other practical purpose, but to entertain your and play the expensive game you bought. It'd save people a lot their reserves and money if this strategy was implemented.
I've actually thought of the idea and wanted it for almost a decade now, but I'd really like to have a phone that also plays Nintendo games and such. It's still socially unacceptable and embarassing to be seen in public playing a gaming handheld. There's no problem with this with phones. They can't see what you're doing. For all they know I could crafted my master thesis for the killer presentation I'm going to make to my boss later; So suck you social stigmatizing #$%^#$%$! Buy a Nintendo laptop or a Sony gaming pc would also solve another one of my problems; Feeling like a wasteful spend thrift when I buy a dedicated gaming machine. Not only do I feel bad because it's expensive, but I also feel bad because the entire reason and purpose I'm getting this horribly expensive device is because I want to waste time mindlessly mashing buttons as things happen on screen. It's like needing to spend over dollars on a cack making machine. You can't feel good about yourself for buying it, but; however, if it said crack making machine also produces vegetables.....then you're a golden eagle!
Yeah, so now how this all come from thinking about Sonic...yeah about that....well you see, it all starts with a conversation about Sonic, but it ends with a conversation about drugs. Thinking about Sonic always leads to a maniac depressive drug addiction to cope with the pain...I don't see the current direction of Sonic or Nintendo as hatred or abandonment of the fans or hardcore gamers. No, with my understanding of economics, marketing, personality, and the big picture, I can clearly see that they've been making highly informed and extremely calcuated decision in hopes of making as much money possible. Shocking I know, but here's what makes me think this.
Consider how many people bought the last generation of gaming consoles, and then consider how many bought them now in comparision. It's a HUGE difference. Last generation has outsold this current one by a factor of 9 ! or even over 20 in the case of Nintendo! Game consoles five to seven years ago were selling 9 times the amount of game consoles today, wow. That's some massive deflation right there. The direction and popularity of gaming is changing, and both Sega and Nintendo realize this. They've seen ahead and been aware of this shift in the direction of gaming for a long time, and have been planning, preparing, and executing for it. Sonic Colors sold financially well consider the time and the fact that it only sold on one console. Sega took that as feedback that it's aesthitica style and casual Mario esque gameplay was what Nintendo fans like and would come to expect from now on. Lost World was once again a Nintendo Exclusive and was meant to have the same look and style of Sonic Colors for the purpose of mass identification and marketing. My point being is that they have been choosing how to make the games almost purely off of marketable and appealing the game with be the masse audiences. Basically they were designing purely out to have the most calculated chance of success. Actually if you think back that's almost always been their approach; superficial marketable appeal to the mass audiences.
The quality of a game almost doesn't matter for sales numbers because I'm not going to know just how terrible a game is until I after I buy and at that point it's too late to return it and get my money back. At least that used to be the caes. It used to not matter. With gamers becoming wiser and thinking to check internet reviews and word of mouth more often. A game's poor quality is indeed a problem. The best example of this being Sonic Boom. Unless new comers were to find out about the game purely from tv and then immediately go buy if without looking it up, then sure the quality of the game would matter; however if the whole point is to hook more fans into the series then how is giving them an unpolished game going to convince them to keep coming back for more. Even moments into the game, it looks bad from a superficial level which is just as deep as a person goes when it comes to something new and is all it takes to deter them since they were leerly or expectant of it anyway. So Sega and Nintendo aren't stupid in calculation they're geniouses at that, they're stupid because they are short-sighted and can't see the big picture of things. Since Nintendo makes sure to polish their games and works hard to maintain good customer relations, they're much better at having foresight and looking ahead. Treating your dedicated fans poorly is a sure way to die in the long-run. So, Nintendo doesn't struggle with that, they struggle with looking at the big picture much more.
Instead of Nintendo DS's we need Nintendo phones that play's all you favorites. Instead of home entertainment consoles we need home entertainment Nintendo and Sony tablets that plug into your tv and that you can play with friends. Instead of Play Station One and Xbox 4 we need official playstation and xbox gaming pc's that run operating systems like windows, and can use word documents and google chrome and such. Basically, the big 3 gaming companies need to make their gaming devices more functional and practical if they want to remain relevent much longer into the future. It feels like too much of an investment to now only spend over 60 dollars per game, but then to also have to buy this device that serves you no other practical purpose, but to entertain your and play the expensive game you bought. It'd save people a lot their reserves and money if this strategy was implemented.
I've actually thought of the idea and wanted it for almost a decade now, but I'd really like to have a phone that also plays Nintendo games and such. It's still socially unacceptable and embarassing to be seen in public playing a gaming handheld. There's no problem with this with phones. They can't see what you're doing. For all they know I could crafted my master thesis for the killer presentation I'm going to make to my boss later; So suck you social stigmatizing #$%^#$%$! Buy a Nintendo laptop or a Sony gaming pc would also solve another one of my problems; Feeling like a wasteful spend thrift when I buy a dedicated gaming machine. Not only do I feel bad because it's expensive, but I also feel bad because the entire reason and purpose I'm getting this horribly expensive device is because I want to waste time mindlessly mashing buttons as things happen on screen. It's like needing to spend over dollars on a cack making machine. You can't feel good about yourself for buying it, but; however, if it said crack making machine also produces vegetables.....then you're a golden eagle!
Yeah, so now how this all come from thinking about Sonic...yeah about that....well you see, it all starts with a conversation about Sonic, but it ends with a conversation about drugs. Thinking about Sonic always leads to a maniac depressive drug addiction to cope with the pain...I don't see the current direction of Sonic or Nintendo as hatred or abandonment of the fans or hardcore gamers. No, with my understanding of economics, marketing, personality, and the big picture, I can clearly see that they've been making highly informed and extremely calcuated decision in hopes of making as much money possible. Shocking I know, but here's what makes me think this.
Consider how many people bought the last generation of gaming consoles, and then consider how many bought them now in comparision. It's a HUGE difference. Last generation has outsold this current one by a factor of 9 ! or even over 20 in the case of Nintendo! Game consoles five to seven years ago were selling 9 times the amount of game consoles today, wow. That's some massive deflation right there. The direction and popularity of gaming is changing, and both Sega and Nintendo realize this. They've seen ahead and been aware of this shift in the direction of gaming for a long time, and have been planning, preparing, and executing for it. Sonic Colors sold financially well consider the time and the fact that it only sold on one console. Sega took that as feedback that it's aesthitica style and casual Mario esque gameplay was what Nintendo fans like and would come to expect from now on. Lost World was once again a Nintendo Exclusive and was meant to have the same look and style of Sonic Colors for the purpose of mass identification and marketing. My point being is that they have been choosing how to make the games almost purely off of marketable and appealing the game with be the masse audiences. Basically they were designing purely out to have the most calculated chance of success. Actually if you think back that's almost always been their approach; superficial marketable appeal to the mass audiences.
The quality of a game almost doesn't matter for sales numbers because I'm not going to know just how terrible a game is until I after I buy and at that point it's too late to return it and get my money back. At least that used to be the caes. It used to not matter. With gamers becoming wiser and thinking to check internet reviews and word of mouth more often. A game's poor quality is indeed a problem. The best example of this being Sonic Boom. Unless new comers were to find out about the game purely from tv and then immediately go buy if without looking it up, then sure the quality of the game would matter; however if the whole point is to hook more fans into the series then how is giving them an unpolished game going to convince them to keep coming back for more. Even moments into the game, it looks bad from a superficial level which is just as deep as a person goes when it comes to something new and is all it takes to deter them since they were leerly or expectant of it anyway. So Sega and Nintendo aren't stupid in calculation they're geniouses at that, they're stupid because they are short-sighted and can't see the big picture of things. Since Nintendo makes sure to polish their games and works hard to maintain good customer relations, they're much better at having foresight and looking ahead. Treating your dedicated fans poorly is a sure way to die in the long-run. So, Nintendo doesn't struggle with that, they struggle with looking at the big picture much more.
Wednesday, October 15, 2014
Gamification
Google search, "Extra Credits: Gamification" for the original videos that started this train of thought and to learn more about this topic.
I find that one of the best ways games teach us is through trial and error. I think we should be allowed to take everything in a classroom setting and still be rewarded with points, homework assignment, quizzes, test, projects.etc I really learn a lot from being tested and getting questions wrong. A lot a people do. It's actually sort of exciting to get a test back and see what you got wrong, and after the experience of getting a question wrong, I then know exactly how to do it right; but this never gets reflected in my grade or anyone's grade which makes the grading system a horrible and inaccurate system.
The best format for learning, in my opinion, would be to lecture, have guided practice, independent practice then be tested and retest until everyone understands. It might be a good idea to throw out the ability to fail altogether. Make it so that a person simply completes the class or he/she doesn't complete a class. Make it so that a person must pass all the tests to get any credit for it, but they can attempt the tests as many times as needed. Just like how boss fights can be attempted over and over until the proper method of defeating him is used. If there were no grades, yes, total points wouldn't matter but that's a good thing.
Points should not determine your final grade just as the level of your character in a game doesn't determine if you have beaten the final boss. Points show that you are more likely to succeed when it comes to passing a test, but they don't guarantee it. Making this change is the best change to the structure of a class that could be made.
Currently we have a system similar to Super Mario Land 2: The six golden coins except worse. The school as it stand now, in particular to college, is that a person has to go for 8-16 weeks, respectively, without serious failures otherwise they have to retake the entire class for it to count for anything, and most likely, it wasn't every aspect of the class that tripped them up, but specific parts of it. Super Mario Land could be completed in a much shorter time than a college class, and it could be completed at a person's own pace unlike a college class. In it death, losing all lives, meant all the bosses had to be beaten again which is sort of like having to take a class over again. It's not necessary to make a person beat the first boss that super easy every time they can't beat the super hard levels.
This would also motivate people to study and do research. I've spent tons of time researching how to beat or complete certain aspects of games. If I was allowed to retake a test and I keep failing it, I'd spend a bunch of time studying what I got wrong.
This is exactly what many good games do. Super Mario RPG for example. First it starts with what you know Mario saving Peach from Bowser, then it sets the stage for the new adventure. It tells the objective of the whole game from the beginning, defeat the giant sword and get the seven stars. After that it has toad give you some instructions on how to play. Directly after giving instructions the game helps you apply them with a guided practice. So we have been told what to do and to make sure we understood, we have been hand guided through the process, and they make this part of the game optional for those who already knew, which is the beauty of it. After this the player has a chance to practice their new battle skills on enemies without any assistance from the game. So, the player gets to battle some enemies earn experience which compares to class/homework and points. Then the boss fight comes, tests, and it's more difficult as it requires the player to have LEARNED how to play the game good enough to beat it, but doesn't it just seem silly if a game forced you to continue even if you didn't beat the boss, and if you failed to beat enough bosses at the end you didn't beat the game? What the point of having boss fights if regardless of your performance you progress? It seems silly to me, but this is actually how classes operate.
If you managed to read all of this you are awesome and I thank you for hearing me out."
I find that one of the best ways games teach us is through trial and error. I think we should be allowed to take everything in a classroom setting and still be rewarded with points, homework assignment, quizzes, test, projects.etc I really learn a lot from being tested and getting questions wrong. A lot a people do. It's actually sort of exciting to get a test back and see what you got wrong, and after the experience of getting a question wrong, I then know exactly how to do it right; but this never gets reflected in my grade or anyone's grade which makes the grading system a horrible and inaccurate system.
The best format for learning, in my opinion, would be to lecture, have guided practice, independent practice then be tested and retest until everyone understands. It might be a good idea to throw out the ability to fail altogether. Make it so that a person simply completes the class or he/she doesn't complete a class. Make it so that a person must pass all the tests to get any credit for it, but they can attempt the tests as many times as needed. Just like how boss fights can be attempted over and over until the proper method of defeating him is used. If there were no grades, yes, total points wouldn't matter but that's a good thing.
Points should not determine your final grade just as the level of your character in a game doesn't determine if you have beaten the final boss. Points show that you are more likely to succeed when it comes to passing a test, but they don't guarantee it. Making this change is the best change to the structure of a class that could be made.
Currently we have a system similar to Super Mario Land 2: The six golden coins except worse. The school as it stand now, in particular to college, is that a person has to go for 8-16 weeks, respectively, without serious failures otherwise they have to retake the entire class for it to count for anything, and most likely, it wasn't every aspect of the class that tripped them up, but specific parts of it. Super Mario Land could be completed in a much shorter time than a college class, and it could be completed at a person's own pace unlike a college class. In it death, losing all lives, meant all the bosses had to be beaten again which is sort of like having to take a class over again. It's not necessary to make a person beat the first boss that super easy every time they can't beat the super hard levels.
This would also motivate people to study and do research. I've spent tons of time researching how to beat or complete certain aspects of games. If I was allowed to retake a test and I keep failing it, I'd spend a bunch of time studying what I got wrong.
This is exactly what many good games do. Super Mario RPG for example. First it starts with what you know Mario saving Peach from Bowser, then it sets the stage for the new adventure. It tells the objective of the whole game from the beginning, defeat the giant sword and get the seven stars. After that it has toad give you some instructions on how to play. Directly after giving instructions the game helps you apply them with a guided practice. So we have been told what to do and to make sure we understood, we have been hand guided through the process, and they make this part of the game optional for those who already knew, which is the beauty of it. After this the player has a chance to practice their new battle skills on enemies without any assistance from the game. So, the player gets to battle some enemies earn experience which compares to class/homework and points. Then the boss fight comes, tests, and it's more difficult as it requires the player to have LEARNED how to play the game good enough to beat it, but doesn't it just seem silly if a game forced you to continue even if you didn't beat the boss, and if you failed to beat enough bosses at the end you didn't beat the game? What the point of having boss fights if regardless of your performance you progress? It seems silly to me, but this is actually how classes operate.
If you managed to read all of this you are awesome and I thank you for hearing me out."
Saturday, October 4, 2014
Sonic World is More like Super Mario Sunshine than Galaxy
Despite the obviousness of it's similarities to galaxy. This game is a lot like Sunshine perhaps even more than it is like galaxy. This game has the most moves and ways for Sonic to interact with in environment in the series, the levels are very open so there's a lot of exploration, both involve the player visiting a isolated new place, the biggest gimmick of the games is an addition to the characters permanent moveset (FLUDD/parkour) for the game; The list goes on. Although, this game could use more of Sunshine's spacious level design since
Sonic is finally properly geared up to make exploration and scaling structures styled platforming fun. These levels feel too small with too little scaleable objects and other interact pieces, for all the crazy things Sonic can do. Large non tubular, with more scaling, and less death pits, levels would be much appreciated here.
Sonic is finally properly geared up to make exploration and scaling structures styled platforming fun. These levels feel too small with too little scaleable objects and other interact pieces, for all the crazy things Sonic can do. Large non tubular, with more scaling, and less death pits, levels would be much appreciated here.
Monday, September 1, 2014
How Zelda Dungeons and Puzzles Should Work
the most fun I've ever had in a video game is when I play as Luigi in Super Mario 64 DS and discover ways to break the game with his added jump height and amazing spin jump.The feeling I get when I've gotten the star in a way the designers didn't intend is one of the best feeling I've ever had. That feeling , more than anything else is what I think Zelda games need to capture.
Have an obviously solution for the noobs, but make the items more powerful, so if a person knows what each item's capabilities and limites, then they can break the puzzle and finish it a different way. Like the cheat trick in the water temple in ocarina of time where you use the hookshot to attach to a treasure chest; getting you to a floor you otherwise would be able to get to, or the trick that allows you to use a deku stick against Ganon at the end, or the trick in the Wii version of twilight princess where you take the iron boots off in the middle of being sucked up into a magnetic force field, and then you walk normally on the magnetic surfaces. This is why sometimes older games are better, there's more fun glitches and more loop holes the designer missed. Oh yeah, there's a way to get a fifth bottle in ocarina of time too. Super fun and rewarding to do stuff like that.
There should pretty much always be more than one solution for every puzzle and task. Here's how it could work. There's tons of environment activity. Like many more things are explodable and changeable. If I shoot a bomb arrow at a tower it falls over. If I stake crates I may be able to hook shot to the top and get up somewhere higher. Rather than them spending a lot of time testing to make sure the player can't get trapped, they should instead impliment a room reset and undo system. Even give the option to reset the whole dungeon which would vital when a person has so many options. Then when you get more items you at times will be able to complete the dungeon in a different way or a lot faster.
Have an obviously solution for the noobs, but make the items more powerful, so if a person knows what each item's capabilities and limites, then they can break the puzzle and finish it a different way. Like the cheat trick in the water temple in ocarina of time where you use the hookshot to attach to a treasure chest; getting you to a floor you otherwise would be able to get to, or the trick that allows you to use a deku stick against Ganon at the end, or the trick in the Wii version of twilight princess where you take the iron boots off in the middle of being sucked up into a magnetic force field, and then you walk normally on the magnetic surfaces. This is why sometimes older games are better, there's more fun glitches and more loop holes the designer missed. Oh yeah, there's a way to get a fifth bottle in ocarina of time too. Super fun and rewarding to do stuff like that.
There should pretty much always be more than one solution for every puzzle and task. Here's how it could work. There's tons of environment activity. Like many more things are explodable and changeable. If I shoot a bomb arrow at a tower it falls over. If I stake crates I may be able to hook shot to the top and get up somewhere higher. Rather than them spending a lot of time testing to make sure the player can't get trapped, they should instead impliment a room reset and undo system. Even give the option to reset the whole dungeon which would vital when a person has so many options. Then when you get more items you at times will be able to complete the dungeon in a different way or a lot faster.
They should keep shortness of the dungeons in LBWs or even shorter. This would be so fricking awesome! When you get a new item that's what really makes you excited. "Oh man what are all the things I can do with this."
I'd be okay with starting with all of the main items, like in a LBW, but instead of still having dungeons where you're mostly using one item make in each dungeon it's possible to use a lot of items in a way of way. I'd want this to be open enough where the ideal that even the designers don't know of all the ways the puzzles in a dungeon could be solved.
If they could manage to make a such a complex system work, they make even be able to go a step further and implement a random dungeon generater, that could theoretically dish out nearly endless dungeons. I get the idea from the platformer game like that. The randomization process is designed to only put together levels that are solvable. Brilliant concept for Zelda dungeons.
Sunday, August 31, 2014
Mental Health (uncut)
Just a heads up because it's discussed in this post, I'm a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of LDS or Mormon. I was emailing my friend on his mission, and during the process my creativity channels were opened and I received a lot of insights into mental health and other topics. It took a long time to write, and I'm winded, but I want to share it, so here it is. I'd say I might get around to revising it, but realistically I won't.
"I was thinking about something. I don't get sick, my mom doesn't get sick, my ESTP brother doesn't seem to get sick another ESTP guy I used to home teach said he doesn't get sick. Now, all of can get infected and sick or get diseases. You get sick easily and get allergies and so does your dad, but you personally, claim you aren't affected by anything, swearing, crudity, dark humor, etc. things that can be equated to mental germs, which cause mental sickness, poor health, and diseases. I think a person's type is genetic, considering it's basically the software-operating system, running inside of the brain, what else would it be; Resilence to germs and disease may be genetically greater for sensors; thus, sensors may be in part born resistentt to physical toxins while intuits may be resistent to mental diseases.
I hypothesis we can compare the body to mind and say that the laws of physical health can be applied to the brain as well.
Laws of Health
1. Eat immune system strengthening and cancer fighting foods which contain immune system and cancer fighting minerals vitamins and minerals. Vitamin c from Lemons, Limes, and oranges, vitamin A from carrots, vitamin E, K, Herbs and spices, orengano (Italian seasoning), etc.
2. Build up the immune system through gradual exposure to toxins. Pretty straight forward and explanatory. I would say using hand sanitizers, and washing hands and cleaning foods and touched surfaces too often hurts a person in the long run.
3. Exercise to release toxins from the body. It releases toxins through the pores and sweat. When overwhelmed with toxins, fat is stored and created in a body deal with the excess ive amount later to protect the body; to engulf and pacify toxins to the body such as chemicals, viruses, bacteria. When that fat is burned off the toxins should be burned off and exit the body throught the digestive track which the body can do now that it isn't overwhelmed with toxins to eliminate; Also, the increased body temperature during exercise likely also helps kill harmful, viruses, bacteria, and microrganisms. This is probably another reason I like to take really hot baths so much. The high heat: first, kills the bacteria on the skin and surface of the body, then increases a person's internal body temperature killing germs on the inside, anf finally the high heat as well as the waters expands and loosens the pores to allow toxins and germs to exit into the water. So the water doesn't just deal with macro germs and dirtines (dirt and visible stains), but micro-germs and dirtiness.
So then the mental laws of good mental health are....
1. Strengthen the minds mental immune system with immune building and nutrious mental food. When thinking about what mental food is we have to understand how our minds work. First off, our minds are basically the embodiment of all the information we've taken in and how they are connected in the brain. So this makes the information itself the food and how it's connected is the digestion of the food. This concept that information, like nutrients, are the primarily source of nourishment for the brain that strengthens it. So, if the information is mental food, then it's we need to be careful about what we physically drawing from our environments as well as how we interpret it which is digestion. So what's healthy and opposingly unhealthy?
Healthy mental food is, thoughts and ideas that are: positive, powerful, uplifting, motivating, and helpful etc. Imagination is the ability of man to see in his mind what is possible. If something is impossible, logically imposible, we can't even imagine it. A square circle can't even be imagined.
Here are some supporting examples for my hypthesis that exposure to information is literal food. There was this story I heard from a video with black and white pictures of the father and girl. The father kept the girl locked away inside away from other people with scarce and few interactions until she was around 10. When social services or someone, found her she couldn't talk, I'm certain of, or do basic things kids her age could do like walk, dress or feed herself, I believe. Then, I'm pretty sure they, overtime, they were able to teach her these things; so, there you go; if a person does take in information: ideas, and thoughs, from the outside world, then there brain atrophies, and they become inept. Of course the properties and amounts needed are likely different than food and water. A person may be able to go longer without mental food and water than they can physical food, but as seen in people who develop alzheimers and other brain degenerate diseases in old age, the brain will suffer and break down, if a person ceases, to feed, nourish or exercise it. Social interaction seems to be an excellent way to feed and exercise the brain which is probably why I love and need it so much and frequently. I haven't looked anything up, but from what I can observe at all the churches I've been to as well what I know and have observed about the apostales, the development of alzheimers and other brain degenerative diseases is lower inside of the church than outside. There are plenty of super old high priests, bishops, stake presidents, and apostales their minds fail none of them. The information of the Gospel is very nourishing studying it requires a lot of exercising, and system 2 thinking. So, there is inherent worth and value in the gospel afterall. It isn't simply about the reward in heaven to come. Living the gospel brings physical and mental health.
The Gospel gives us not only a physical health code, but also a mental one. This is a personal gripe that I probably shouldn't have and need to work on. My gripe is when a general conference talk, general authority message, or anything said at church, is critical, chastizing, and negative. Because and when I'm hungry and starving for mental nourishment, it can at times hurt a lot of be lectured and scolded at the dinner table. Well, hmm, vegetables don't always taste good. Perhaps positive thoughts are sweet and tasty foods like are fruits, nuts, and honey, that are good for the body in only in only if you don't each too much. On the other hand negative critical thoughts are vegetables, perhaps some forms of beans, fungus, and meat. They're foods that don't taste good, but are good for you. Huh, so maybe there is such a thing as eaching to many vegetables. Vegetables are high in fiber, so perhaps if you eat too many vegetables, and too much fiber, then the body won't be able to digest it. The fiber and the negativity block out the positive and physical nutrients. Hmm, so positive thoughts and ideas are fuel; they are sugar. All food in the body is converted into glucose which is sugar; however, if a person eats too much sugar they'll get fat. If a person is never constructively critisized they'll get mentally fat. On the flip side, too much negativity can block and prevent the sugar from being digested
2. Build up the immune system. So, gradual exposure to harmful mental food with toxins makes a person mentally stronger in the long-run. Going to public school probably actually makes a person mentally stronger while home schooling kids, or even possibly really strict private or charter schools probably makes them weaker.
3. Mental exercise, solving problems, using creatively to build or create something helps expunge toxins as well.
I'd add the pure knowledge, sensations and definitions of words, compare to proteins and carbohydrates which seem to be the foundation and staple of a healthy diet. The common analogy of "It's my meat and potatoes," seems to be based on what conventional wisdom has discovered through experience; that protein and carbohydrates are the bare minimum, essential nutrients of a diet. My nutrition class at school I'm taking confirms this. Alright, well that's about it.
In summary and conclusion
All people should be aware of what information and intepretations come into their mind if they want to be mentally healthy. They need to monitor, sense data, thoughts, and any form of communication.This shall bring all ultimate happiness and glory."
Hmm, I'd like to add to my thoughts, that information with no redeeming value will feed the mind, but's it is analagous to empty calroies. Cotton candy is pure sugar. The sugar probably could sustain a person's life for a while, but it has no nutrients.
"I was thinking about something. I don't get sick, my mom doesn't get sick, my ESTP brother doesn't seem to get sick another ESTP guy I used to home teach said he doesn't get sick. Now, all of can get infected and sick or get diseases. You get sick easily and get allergies and so does your dad, but you personally, claim you aren't affected by anything, swearing, crudity, dark humor, etc. things that can be equated to mental germs, which cause mental sickness, poor health, and diseases. I think a person's type is genetic, considering it's basically the software-operating system, running inside of the brain, what else would it be; Resilence to germs and disease may be genetically greater for sensors; thus, sensors may be in part born resistentt to physical toxins while intuits may be resistent to mental diseases.
I hypothesis we can compare the body to mind and say that the laws of physical health can be applied to the brain as well.
Laws of Health
1. Eat immune system strengthening and cancer fighting foods which contain immune system and cancer fighting minerals vitamins and minerals. Vitamin c from Lemons, Limes, and oranges, vitamin A from carrots, vitamin E, K, Herbs and spices, orengano (Italian seasoning), etc.
2. Build up the immune system through gradual exposure to toxins. Pretty straight forward and explanatory. I would say using hand sanitizers, and washing hands and cleaning foods and touched surfaces too often hurts a person in the long run.
3. Exercise to release toxins from the body. It releases toxins through the pores and sweat. When overwhelmed with toxins, fat is stored and created in a body deal with the excess ive amount later to protect the body; to engulf and pacify toxins to the body such as chemicals, viruses, bacteria. When that fat is burned off the toxins should be burned off and exit the body throught the digestive track which the body can do now that it isn't overwhelmed with toxins to eliminate; Also, the increased body temperature during exercise likely also helps kill harmful, viruses, bacteria, and microrganisms. This is probably another reason I like to take really hot baths so much. The high heat: first, kills the bacteria on the skin and surface of the body, then increases a person's internal body temperature killing germs on the inside, anf finally the high heat as well as the waters expands and loosens the pores to allow toxins and germs to exit into the water. So the water doesn't just deal with macro germs and dirtines (dirt and visible stains), but micro-germs and dirtiness.
So then the mental laws of good mental health are....
1. Strengthen the minds mental immune system with immune building and nutrious mental food. When thinking about what mental food is we have to understand how our minds work. First off, our minds are basically the embodiment of all the information we've taken in and how they are connected in the brain. So this makes the information itself the food and how it's connected is the digestion of the food. This concept that information, like nutrients, are the primarily source of nourishment for the brain that strengthens it. So, if the information is mental food, then it's we need to be careful about what we physically drawing from our environments as well as how we interpret it which is digestion. So what's healthy and opposingly unhealthy?
Healthy mental food is, thoughts and ideas that are: positive, powerful, uplifting, motivating, and helpful etc. Imagination is the ability of man to see in his mind what is possible. If something is impossible, logically imposible, we can't even imagine it. A square circle can't even be imagined.
Here are some supporting examples for my hypthesis that exposure to information is literal food. There was this story I heard from a video with black and white pictures of the father and girl. The father kept the girl locked away inside away from other people with scarce and few interactions until she was around 10. When social services or someone, found her she couldn't talk, I'm certain of, or do basic things kids her age could do like walk, dress or feed herself, I believe. Then, I'm pretty sure they, overtime, they were able to teach her these things; so, there you go; if a person does take in information: ideas, and thoughs, from the outside world, then there brain atrophies, and they become inept. Of course the properties and amounts needed are likely different than food and water. A person may be able to go longer without mental food and water than they can physical food, but as seen in people who develop alzheimers and other brain degenerate diseases in old age, the brain will suffer and break down, if a person ceases, to feed, nourish or exercise it. Social interaction seems to be an excellent way to feed and exercise the brain which is probably why I love and need it so much and frequently. I haven't looked anything up, but from what I can observe at all the churches I've been to as well what I know and have observed about the apostales, the development of alzheimers and other brain degenerative diseases is lower inside of the church than outside. There are plenty of super old high priests, bishops, stake presidents, and apostales their minds fail none of them. The information of the Gospel is very nourishing studying it requires a lot of exercising, and system 2 thinking. So, there is inherent worth and value in the gospel afterall. It isn't simply about the reward in heaven to come. Living the gospel brings physical and mental health.
The Gospel gives us not only a physical health code, but also a mental one. This is a personal gripe that I probably shouldn't have and need to work on. My gripe is when a general conference talk, general authority message, or anything said at church, is critical, chastizing, and negative. Because and when I'm hungry and starving for mental nourishment, it can at times hurt a lot of be lectured and scolded at the dinner table. Well, hmm, vegetables don't always taste good. Perhaps positive thoughts are sweet and tasty foods like are fruits, nuts, and honey, that are good for the body in only in only if you don't each too much. On the other hand negative critical thoughts are vegetables, perhaps some forms of beans, fungus, and meat. They're foods that don't taste good, but are good for you. Huh, so maybe there is such a thing as eaching to many vegetables. Vegetables are high in fiber, so perhaps if you eat too many vegetables, and too much fiber, then the body won't be able to digest it. The fiber and the negativity block out the positive and physical nutrients. Hmm, so positive thoughts and ideas are fuel; they are sugar. All food in the body is converted into glucose which is sugar; however, if a person eats too much sugar they'll get fat. If a person is never constructively critisized they'll get mentally fat. On the flip side, too much negativity can block and prevent the sugar from being digested
2. Build up the immune system. So, gradual exposure to harmful mental food with toxins makes a person mentally stronger in the long-run. Going to public school probably actually makes a person mentally stronger while home schooling kids, or even possibly really strict private or charter schools probably makes them weaker.
3. Mental exercise, solving problems, using creatively to build or create something helps expunge toxins as well.
I'd add the pure knowledge, sensations and definitions of words, compare to proteins and carbohydrates which seem to be the foundation and staple of a healthy diet. The common analogy of "It's my meat and potatoes," seems to be based on what conventional wisdom has discovered through experience; that protein and carbohydrates are the bare minimum, essential nutrients of a diet. My nutrition class at school I'm taking confirms this. Alright, well that's about it.
In summary and conclusion
All people should be aware of what information and intepretations come into their mind if they want to be mentally healthy. They need to monitor, sense data, thoughts, and any form of communication.This shall bring all ultimate happiness and glory."
Hmm, I'd like to add to my thoughts, that information with no redeeming value will feed the mind, but's it is analagous to empty calroies. Cotton candy is pure sugar. The sugar probably could sustain a person's life for a while, but it has no nutrients.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)