> > Where Stephen came into this message thread, what he directly replied to was a reply of mine to something Matthew said -- that all gamers are expected to use cheat codes to unlock items that should have been included at the beginning of the game. If I don't want to do that, I should just muddle along with whatever the game actually provides at the beginning. (This conceit is one I find appalling. It is indicative of lazy programming or poor communication between the game designers and the advertising department.)
>
> Lazy programming? I only half agree here. It is not lazy programming to write a storyline that draws a player through 20 scripted levels. It could be consdiered lazy programming to require people to unlock the cars in GT, however, as there's really no reason why the should have to, other than "because we want you to play the game for longer." That's lazy. Half-Life ("because you wouldn't understand what was going on if you could start on any level, and you would find it too easy if you had all the weapons") isn't.

I completely agree with you. I never said or even thought that having to go through an action game's storyline is lazy programming. A story-based game is about the story.

The only time I mentioned the action game -- Half-Life in particular -- is when Stephen asked: "...I wonder if Faux Pas gets annoyed when an action game advertises twenty levels but makes you play through the first nineteen before allowing you to play the twentieth. Should the designers simply give you an option to skip to any level immediately?"

To which I replied yes, if the game says you have an option to skip to any level immediately. If the game says you can skip levels and you actually can't, then you, the consumer, are not getting what you paid for.

Stephen replied to that, saying in part, "I don't think I'd like to start up a new game of Half-Life and have it ask me which level I'd like to start on..."

I never advocated anything like that. Matthew, you agree with what I say can be construed as lazy programming. Like you, I believe that playing through a story-driven game like Half-Life isn't lazy programming.

Stephen is thinking I'm saying all games that have levels should have those levels accessible at any time.

>
> > {various examples}
>
> > Yes. That's why most all copy released to the public by large companies usually goes through a legal department to see if the language used accurately reflects what should be said. "Play through a storyline with 20 levels" indicates that each level is played sequentially. "Features 20 levels" does not. Words have definitions.
>
> This side of the argument I find rather pedantic. The expression "features 20 levels" simply means that the thing has 20 levels. It doesn't mean that they are all available from the start. One of them might even be secret, or only available during a full moon. The game does, however, feature (defn: have, contain) 20 (defn: 20) levels (defn: maps or whatever). RTS games often say "features 30 levels" despite the fact that they are spread over two campaigns, and would require at least two full plays through in order to see them all. It still features 30 levels.

But it does not indicate that all thirty levels have to be played sequentially. The word I was trying to focus on was "through", which indicates a progression.

"Features 30 levels" does not indicate that each level is played sequentially; "Play through 30 levels" implies as such.

> It all comes down to marketing. As I said before, the expression "features 20 levels" is in no way misleading (it makes it through their legal departments for one thing) and it very literally accurate. It also sounds better than "features one level and a training mission," which would be Half Life's alternative statement under your system. GT's marketing boasted an obscene amount of cars, correctly as the game code does contain them. The blurb on the back of the boxes has to sell the game, and that's not going to happen if it restricts itself to telling you what you can do at the start.

Half-Life (and other story-driven games) shouldn't need to draw attention to the number of "levels" contained in the game. To the player, the whole thing should appear as one story. Under "my system", the advertising would emphasize playing through one whole story. Looking at Half-Life's description on amazon.com, I can't see any mention of the word "level" at all.

> "Play one level at a time!"

Or, "Play through thirty different levels!"

>
> I'm not trying to be insulting, even though those quotes were. It's simply a fact that a game wants to state that it contains as much as it does. Some boxes do inform you that you'll need to unlock things. "Compete in races to earn rewards"-style things. The box teases. Wow, there are 200 cars? I want them. I want to play this game.
>
> Marketing.
>
> Matthew

-FP