The problem of expertise
Penny Arcade today mentioned a essay on the blog "Lost Garden" about game reviewer and the problem of being too experienced to enjoy certain games. So I went to look up the article and it is a brilliant read. If you have any interest in media, gaming, or psychology, check it out here: "Soul Bubbles: A classic game ill treated by expert reviewers".
Essentially the author, Danc, argues that, unlike other linear media like film or literature, games are inherently about learning and exploring rather than reacting to universal stimuli. As such, someone who plays games all the time (a so-called "hardcore") gamer may already know how to play a lot of games and therefore may not derive a lot of the enjoyment a new player might. Or, conversely, they might perceive as fun a game that would be far too challenging to a novice gamer not steeped in the genre.
I can certainly attest to the notion of an "Expert Bias." I've been playing games in the RTS, FPS, TBS and RPG genres (real-time strategy, first-person shooter, turn-based strategy, and role-playing game for the uninitiated) for so long that the conventions of the genre are second nature to me.
A perfect example of expert bias is the game Spore. This recent game from Will Wright is essentially 5 games in one. It took simplified gameplay mechanics from several genres and combined them into one long game following evolution of a creature from a microorganism all the way up to a space-faring race. An ambitious goal to be sure, but for many expert gamers, it felt watered down because we had already experienced much more complex versions of each stage in other games. Whereas Arielle, who has not played many games, delighted in the newness of the experience. So in a way my own expertise undermined my ability to enjoy the game.
In any event, you should read Danc's essay it is very insightful about the whole exercise of criticism and journalism about games.
Enjoy.
Essentially the author, Danc, argues that, unlike other linear media like film or literature, games are inherently about learning and exploring rather than reacting to universal stimuli. As such, someone who plays games all the time (a so-called "hardcore") gamer may already know how to play a lot of games and therefore may not derive a lot of the enjoyment a new player might. Or, conversely, they might perceive as fun a game that would be far too challenging to a novice gamer not steeped in the genre.
I can certainly attest to the notion of an "Expert Bias." I've been playing games in the RTS, FPS, TBS and RPG genres (real-time strategy, first-person shooter, turn-based strategy, and role-playing game for the uninitiated) for so long that the conventions of the genre are second nature to me.
A perfect example of expert bias is the game Spore. This recent game from Will Wright is essentially 5 games in one. It took simplified gameplay mechanics from several genres and combined them into one long game following evolution of a creature from a microorganism all the way up to a space-faring race. An ambitious goal to be sure, but for many expert gamers, it felt watered down because we had already experienced much more complex versions of each stage in other games. Whereas Arielle, who has not played many games, delighted in the newness of the experience. So in a way my own expertise undermined my ability to enjoy the game.
In any event, you should read Danc's essay it is very insightful about the whole exercise of criticism and journalism about games.
Enjoy.