Hands-on

As a non-game game player, what kind of image would you say video games have to you?

They're a hobby - but not for me, per se. It might not be something I'm completely interested in, but if I go to someone else's house and they have a video game there I will play it. It's fun but usually I like it if the person tells me how to use the game first and gives me an overview of the controller and what I'm looking for -- gives me hints and that sort of thing. I guess it's just something to do - just have some fun.

In general, do you see video games as a "boy's club"?

I think the games are definitely geared towards guys. I don't mean necessarily that the games themselves aren't interesting for girls, but I think the marketing through commercials and the characters - the actual physical characters - are definitely playing on the guys' interests; using sex to sell certain games. I don't think it's a boy's club necessarily. I'm sure there are lots of female gamers but I think the majority of the market is definitely trying to pocket on the younger males.

Okay, so a bit more specific here. Overall, would you say you enjoyed the two games you played today?

Yeah, the first one I found a little bit more harrowing, because I wasn't really sure what I was capable of doing

What the limits were?

Yes, as in the abilities that were available to me. But they were both fun games and I would probably play them again. And I kind of liked the first one better in a way because I like "quest" games. Although if I was just killing time or something, the second one was great.

About the controller - would you say this one is alright?

It worked properly for me I guess. It's just that I had to get used to it a little bit using the left and the right joystick parts. I guess when I got into it I would forget which one was look around and which one was run. I was afraid if I was running I would accidentally just look around at the wrong time.

In terms of controller complexity?

Yeah, definitely for me, since I don't play games that often there's a little bit much I suppose. I mean, I suppose if I played it enough I would get used to it, it's just that there are quite a few buttons and I have to remember what button does what action. There were a couple times where I would press the wrong one and Iactually I did fall off the side. *laughs*.

In ICO, the atmosphere and the "immersion factor" - Did that go over well with you? Did it work at all? Was it a good feeling?

I know what you mean, definitely. It worked, somewhat, but I found it eerily quiet. The only other games that I have played had guns and the sort so there was constant background noise. So I found that a little bit unnerving at times, almost as if that was as stressful because of the lack of sound and music. But I guess I could see getting into that.

How about the logical design of the games?

I guess you could say it was well done. I guess it was successful because it was hard. I wasn't sure which direction I was supposed to go or how to open a door to get to the next part. In the other, Katamari, it was good.but I found a couple places there would be an area or two where there would be absolutely nothing to pick up because I wasn't big enough. It was bizarre but interesting too. Just roll over the objects or mistakenly manage to not roll over the objects.

Are there any general comments you would like to make?

Well I guess the only thing, and this might be a personal issue, is that the last games I played were the original Nintendo - the Super Mario Bros. - so obviously to move forward or in a straight line you just use the "arrow keys." However, the joystick was harder to move in a straight line. That was something that I would have to get used to. Especially when you were on a thin bridge I would feel like I was moving forward but then suddenly I'm veering. About the games themselves - I guess the games, especially the first one, seemed like you should already know enough about the game in order to be able to play it. It would have taken me a lot longer in order to do certain things if you hadn't gone over what I could and couldn't do. Just little quirks you would need to know like swinging on the chains and that sort of thing. If I was just looking at it objectively and just went in to play the game I would not have known what to do.

For the multiplayer - what was your favorite part of that? If there was a favorite part.

Yeah, the drum one was awesome because of the good music. And it felt like you were somewhat competing against each other, but there was also the helping each other out. And in the Pac Man one we were shouting "oh no, he's in the top-right!" or something like that, so that was cool. Yeah, the drum one - I had never played anything like that before so it was fun. That was a good party game.

One more thing. There seems to be an upcoming return to simple game design. Games that don't necessarily rely on complex controllers or input devices or anything like that. Does that sound like something that you would like?

Probably, because I look at it for pick-up-and-play after coming home from work. I would probably be interested in that because it wouldn't take mastery of the controls. You know what I mean?

As in, you wouldn't have to make it part of your lifestyle?

Exactly. Because that's what I would be looking for if I was going to do that. I mean, that's the way I treat them now. I would use them if they were there or whatever, but I would just as well pick up a book and read for a bit.

What are video games to you?

Umm, let's see. Well I basically see them as fun and a lot of them, I suppose, are just "zoning out" sort of thing. But some of them are a little more interesting and challenging and maybe sort of healthy. You know, hone skills and stuff like that. Yeah, I tend to think of them as a little mindless sometimes, but those were fun. I tend to not take them too, too seriously, but sometimes I think it's really cool to see the amount of effort that goes into the design and the graphics and stuff like that. That's what makes it more interesting to me.

Do you feel that video games are geared more towards guys?

Yeah, I guess that I felt that especially when I was a kid and I would have been exposed to playing more of them. And the violence thing. I don't want that to be necessarily associated with guys, but it seems like that sort of stuff appeals more to guys. Like Mortal Kombat and that sort of thing

Did you enjoy your time with the two games today?

Yeah, I think that they were fun.

Okay, was there one that you liked more than the other?

Umm, I could see playing the first one more than the second one, yeah.

ICO was designed to be an immersive game. If we assume for a moment that you weren't necessarily playing it for eight hours on end, would you say that the immersion was a pleasant experience?

Yeah, I think that was something that I kind of liked more in comparison with the other. I kind of felt more "involved" in something instead of just "get targets" and things like that. You kind of want to find out what's coming next.

The controller you were using - how did you find it? Was it too complex or was it okay?

No, I was sort of surprised about that. It was kind of straight forward. And that's kind of something I remember not caring for very much when I was younger and all my friends were into video games. I just wasn't into trying to figure out the sequence of five things you had to do in order to accomplish one action. *laughs*.

So, would you say it's not necessarily the controller that was okay, but rather the game design itself? They didn't require you to have five different inputs at any time?

Yeah, I think it was designed fairly well to be easy to comprehend.

And in that regard, would you say that the game design itself, on the software side here, was sound?

Yeah, the first one [ICO] was interesting that way for sure.

Do you have any general comments that you would like to make here? Maybe something I haven't prodded you for *laughs*.

Well, I definitely liked the first one, and the second one was better for mindless fun; a little goofy and what not. But the first one kind of gets your curiosity going and you wonder "what other things can I do with this?" Yeah, that one kind of grabbed my attention *laughs*.

In terms of those multiplayer games you guys had a chance to play - Did you like playing with the other people? Maybe co-operating in Pac Man?

I do not play well with others *laughs*. That's okay, but I haven't really tried it with that many games before so I don't really have any basis for comparison. But the way the graphics were with that one, it was kind of weird to see how you were interacting with the others - the way it was divided. It would definitely be something interesting to try a game that would be like ICO with a similar setup.

Oh, as in a co-operative sort of deal?

Yeah, like doing that with the girl's character. And maybe it would progress like that, I don't really know.

If there were anything you could change about those two games in particular, what would it be?

Nothing about the first one really immediately comes to mind. I noticed something about the graphics. They were very detailed, but some it just seemed kind of "static", if that makes sense [Editor's note: we talked off the record later on and Cynthia discovered that her feelings on the static "look" could very well be due to the nature of the animation for the shadow creatures, since they were deliberately animated to be jittery.] But I guess if they come up with other "versions" of that then that's not a big deal. Yeah, I found that one to be really cooland fun.

----------

Besides the obvious points about difficulty from complexity, there were one or two notes to be made about these play sessions. One thing that I found very interesting with all three girls is that the puzzles seemed difficult to them simply because of the in-game mechanics surrounding them. For instance, there was one puzzle where you needed to push a crate so that it would slide off of a button. In this particular case, all three girls had problems passing that area because they did not know they could push crates or they simply had a hard time controlling the crate movement. I couldn't help but remark at how these puzzles, which are relatively simple to most weathered gamers, showed that a great deal of difficulty is derived from the fact that they aren't in the game. If you were in the same physical situation in the real world, you would know how to push a crate, climb a rope, open a door, and more. Getting your thoughts translated into in-game actions seems to be a lot more complicated than we think.

The worst part about this situation was that having an interactive environment where the characters are involved in life-like actions inevitably showed the game's boundaries. For instance, Catherine made a comment that I thought was quite interesting when she said that she didn't know what the limits were for the game. So you can climb that chain, hold on to the window, and hold the girl's hand. Can you throw your torch at an enemy running off with the girl? No. You simply can't do that because it's not one of the features that were implemented. In a real-world situation, you can rest assured that some might throw their weapon in a last ditch effort to stop the assailant. This isn't knocking ICO per se, but rather just pointing out an inherent challenge for game designs in general.

The proof is most certainly in the pudding. And even though this is only a small anecdotal sample of what the general "non-gamer" population has to say, it certainly has a powerful ring to it. The industry has a lot of ground to make up if it ever wishes to diversify its audience it would seem. Thankfully, I was fortunate enough to try out a device that might be just what the doctor ordered