Microsoft does CES - every keynote story listed
Sony stands firm of 10-year PS3 life claim
UGO assures 1UP's been left alone - all details
October 13th, 2008 @ 07:28
Update: IGN’s gone live with its review here. It’s 9.5/10. The video review’s after the break. Thanks, Johnny Cullen!
According to Eurogamer, LittleBigPlanet is worthy of a 9/10 review score. Spanish site MeriStation’s also gone live with a review, giving it 9.5/10.
From Eurogamer:
The promise that anyone could create something simple and fun and personal with LittleBigPlanet hasn’t come true. In a way, it’s the opposite of Spore, which makes it easy and fun for every single player to have creative input, but doesn’t let any of them change the fabric of the game. LittleBigPlanet lets them run wild, with unprecedented results, but it locks the majority out of the creative process, because it’s time-consuming and simply not very enjoyable.
We hoped it could do both those things. That it doesn’t isn’t the let-down it might have been, thanks to the untamed community of brilliant nutjobs that’s already out there, appending their DIY masterpieces to this beautiful, mildly flawed, magnificently multiplayer platform game. We salute them, we salute Media Molecule for making it possible for them, and we salute Sony for its total commitment to this brave, hare-brained project.
The British Official PlayStation Mag’s already given it 10/10.
And that’s that.
Del.icio.us | Digg | Share on Facebook
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
October 13th, 2008 at 7:34 am
“The promise that anyone could create something simple and fun and personal with LittleBigPlanet hasn’t come true.”
-Strange, in the beta i had no trouble creating something simple, fun and personal.
The reviewer’s comments are pretty narrow minded and dumb.
October 13th, 2008 at 7:35 am
Pretty much as expected then. I assume the trolls and fanboys have initiated a melt down on their comments section!
October 13th, 2008 at 7:38 am
I’ll read it through properly in a bit. I know you shouldn’t judge from betas, but after about 20 seconds it was knocked down from “10″ in my mind: the control’s too woolly. Everything after that is all very well and good, but it did immediately annoy me. I’m not surprised at the score at all.
October 13th, 2008 at 7:39 am
Cries salty tears for the future of game journalism.
;_;
October 13th, 2008 at 7:45 am
It is news, Tonka
October 13th, 2008 at 7:55 am
@ Gekidami - you’re clearly not just ‘anyone’ then. The point is that its creative tools aren’t nearly as accessible and user-friendly as was initially mooted. I’m not saying they don’t work, and they’re not incredibly flexible - because they clearly are - but they’re not that intuitive and not simplistic enough for your average Joe.
I personally think that it’d be much simpler with mouse control, and Sony would do well to allow mouse support from the game which could be patched in pretty easily, I’d have thought. I do think the controller has hamstrung the game - from the creative tools down to moving Sackboy himself. Although you could just say the programming’s down to the latter.
October 13th, 2008 at 7:56 am
What a joke of a review. Score’s OK though.
Describing the creative process as “time consuming and not much fun” is only half right.
October 13th, 2008 at 8:01 am
Seems like a pretty fair score to me given the amount of fuss about controls in the beta. If the tools are a bit tricky to use for Joe Punter that might even be a good thing
/elitist bastard mode switched to active
Mind you I’m curious how ‘final’ the code was that was reviewed. From the EG review it was clear some stuff still wasn’t available that would be in at lauch such as decent level search IIRC
October 13th, 2008 at 8:07 am
Nah the score’s fair, some of the comments are way out of line though.
Matters not, I’d be very surprised if this doesn’t end up one of the big sellers on the PS3 this year regardless of whether it’s ‘everyone’s cup of tea’ or not. If the Beta’s been anything to go by it’ll go nuts once the public get to grips with it.
I did notice late last night that content from the “full” version seems to have started leeching down to those community levels which is rather good.
October 13th, 2008 at 8:10 am
lol are the fanboys really angry because a 9 is too low? The internet never ceases to amaze.
I would give it an 8 personally, because it’s an excellent game but it has woolly controls, and controls are hugely important in platform games. The level creator is excellent, but is not as user-friendly as it could have been. Sure it’s simple enough for ‘us gamers’ but I can’t see ‘teh casuals’ having much luck.
All imho so don’t kill me plz k?
October 13th, 2008 at 8:15 am
New York Times: Washington Post gives Braveheart 4/5
October 13th, 2008 at 8:16 am
Idiots. Braveheart’s worth at least a 4.5/5.
October 13th, 2008 at 8:17 am
I think the problem that LBP will highlight is that making something FUN is by no means easy.
The best tools in the world won’t make anything good if the user has no skill, creativity or talent.
Blaming these tools for the user’s inability to make something ‘fun’ is like blaming a pen for the user’s inability to write something interesting.
October 13th, 2008 at 8:20 am
Braveheart’s a 5 for me. All day.
Shatner - In a nutshell, yep. Like buying an expensive camera and assuming you can take good pictures.
October 13th, 2008 at 8:32 am
I think a lot of it will come down to how much you actually want to make levels too. If you’re not bothered either way, you’re going to be a lot less inclined to get to grips with the system than if you were champing at the bit to get going with the creation stuff.
More than many other games, I think the scores here are going to reflect personal taste more than perhaps they should.
October 13th, 2008 at 8:44 am
Will they bundle this with controllers in Europe as well?
/oh, that would be news reporting
Erhhmm… Worse than Halo then according to EG!
/is only half joking but don’t know which smily to use
October 13th, 2008 at 8:44 am
peej:
I actually have the nagging feeling that this will not do so well at retail.
Look at the artwork. Look at the kind of people that mostly buys a PS3. I don’t think it’ll work.
There’ll be enough of us EG and vg247 readers to buy it for it to top the chart - although I’m not even sure of that, what with it being FIFA 09 season at the moment - but I don’t think it’ll have the level of success Sony are hoping for.
October 13th, 2008 at 8:50 am
Tonka - They haven’t announced LBP-DualShock bundles for Europe. If they do, I’ll let you know.
October 13th, 2008 at 8:50 am
I’m guessing it’ll do well at retail purely based on the absolute mania surrounding the beta.
All bets are off though when it comes to the great unwashed games buying public, I guess…
Seriously this shit about the creative tools not being easy. What an utter crock. Like any tool or package, you need to learn how to use it first. Those who were lucky enough to get in on the beta made some phenomenal stuff. Those who bothered to go through the game’s exquisitely crafted tutorials would’ve got to grips with the whole thing even faster.
It’s not perfect, which is why I didn’t quibble about EG’s score, but lazily citing all the problems with the thing as being “because the tools are too hard, and it takes too long to make anything” are crazy. The tools are difficult at first, as is getting used to the three main layers and 5 sub-layers (I lost count of the amount of times I either accidentally welded stuff to things I didnt want to, or vice versa - watched a level cascade to the floor when things weren’t bolted down properly) but once you’re there, and as Blerk said, once you’ve got an inkling of a good idea and want to make it, LBP more than delivers.
October 13th, 2008 at 8:57 am
I suppose the problem they have is in how much power to give the player. Too light, and everyone would moan that they can’t do enough. Too complex, and no one would be able to make anything at all.
October 13th, 2008 at 8:57 am
As it is, even after reading the review, I’m not sure whether this is a game I should pick up or not. Don’t get me wrong, it looks absolutely brilliant and well executed. I’m just not sure I’ll be creating my own levels or even trying out the ‘Cool’ stuff once the novelty wears off.
I’d love it if Sony could put some demo on the PSN, as I couldn’t get in on the beta…
October 13th, 2008 at 9:05 am
How much do they charge for the game in the bundles? If sony could do a Wii play pricing LBP could become a must buy for every new purchase PS3. (so 5 a month :_P sold)
That would lead to a bigger comunity which would generate more levels which (with Maoist logic) would give more great levels which is a good thing.
So heres hoping, controller price + £5.
October 13th, 2008 at 9:10 am
I’ve mailed them about the DS bundles. Hopefully they’ll get back this morning.
LeD - I think that’s it, really. I’ve never, ever wanted to design games. If I had, I would have done it. I lost patience with the level design stuff in the beta very quickly - just felt too much like work.
If you’ve got a burning desire to make platformer levels on a console, though, and see them shared with and played by a large community, then you’re obviously in the right place.
October 13th, 2008 at 9:10 am
I’m pretty certain I’ve read that a bundle is coming out this Christmas in France, that includes LBP with the PS3 at its regular price.
October 13th, 2008 at 9:15 am
He’s talking about the game and controller packs SCEJ announced at TGS last week.
October 13th, 2008 at 9:18 am
There’s enough in the game to never have to touch the create mode. I probably won’t bother with it, and I’m still looking forward to the game a lot.
October 13th, 2008 at 9:25 am
When all’s said and done, you’re creating levels for a very, very good (but, crucially, not excellent) platformer. And no matter how creative you are, those levels are never going to feel as solid or as play as tightly as a game which is designed for that singular purpose. That said, it’s a remarkable, groundbreaking piece of software that some people are going to absolutely adore - some more than any game they’ve ever played. As a piece of software, it’s amazing. As a game, not quite so much.
I really like the EG review. I don’t think any of the criticisms are unfair, and it’s clear the writer is really enamoured with the game.
October 13th, 2008 at 9:26 am
“I suppose the problem they have is in how much power to give the player. Too light, and everyone would moan that they can’t do enough. Too complex, and no one would be able to make anything at all.”
I think it astounds me that they’ve actually given you everything you need to create exactly the same sort of stuff that MM have created.
Though I think it’s fair to say that it’ll take a good month or more perhaps before you’ll start to see properly playtested and good quality levels appearing. The Beta is absolutely fuckjammed with stupid attempts to fix rockets to stuff that inevitably ends up with you being blown to smithereens and quitting the level in disgust.
Hopefully there’ll be some element of moderation that’ll keep shite like that off the “new levels” pages on LBP.
One thing’s for sure, judging by the majority of beta content, quite a few level designers can rest easy in their beds as they’re not going to be put out of a job just yet
October 13th, 2008 at 9:59 am
To me I don’t feel Oli marked the game down because of the create mode. In fact, I don’t think the create mode was the most negative aspect of the review: it was the controls.
Fair enough when people say “it’s not a Mario-type game therefore pixel precision jumping isn’t required” but it seems there are many points within the game that require it. Also, some of the level design is plain infuriating and not “fun”. Also the checkpointing system (at times).
Those points stood out more for me.
October 13th, 2008 at 10:01 am
Also, to suggest the MM could not have created a more user friendly interface but at the same time keeping the same amount of options is wrong, imo. Of course they could. And as they didn’t, that deserved to be pointed out too.
October 13th, 2008 at 10:01 am
Wait, since when did Mario have ‘pixel-precision jumping’? Stupid bloody inertia-heavy git, he is.
October 13th, 2008 at 10:02 am
I’m just quoting.
October 13th, 2008 at 10:03 am
Just spoke to Sony about the DS/game bundles. Doesn’t sound like it’s happening, but they’re checking now.
October 13th, 2008 at 10:08 am
Sides with Blerk on the Mario hate.
October 13th, 2008 at 10:17 am
The level designing has been very well received. Oli appears to be in the minority here, most people I’ve spoken too absolutely love creating their own levels and find it a lot of fun. I took a quick look at GameFAQs where they were talking about reviews, and the general reaction was that of bemusement to Oli’s comments that the create mode isn’t fun.
The control “problems” seem to be entirely subjective, too. Have there even been any 2D platformers that use the analog stick to control with? That’d be the delay right there - the physical process of actually pushing the analog stick left or right is enough to be noticeable when compared to using a digital d-pad.
October 13th, 2008 at 10:24 am
I’d say most opinions were entirely subjective, yeah
October 13th, 2008 at 10:27 am
I haven’t played LBP yet (dunno if it is for me, simpleton you see) but if Forza’s paint job tool could be used as a similar example of when powerful = no fun at all, then I can see the EG reviewer’s point. IF.
October 13th, 2008 at 10:30 am
I wonder if MM could introduce an extra set of options to configure controller responsiveness / z-axis controls etc (which would then be tied to that unique user-created level so that the level and its control settings would get distributed as one).
Design-wise, you build to your strengths, not your weaknesses.
In every game engine there are significant, glaring deficiences in what the game is strong and weak at. One of the skills with good design is to exploit all the strengths and make any weaknesses as transparent as possible. Every legendary game is like virtual swiss-cheese with all the bits it doesn’t handle very well poking holes amongst the chunks that it does. The art is build to your strengths and use smoke and mirrors for the stuff you can’t do.
There’s a reason why good games take dozens of talented people years to make. Untrained designers spending 72 hours with LBP are not going to get similar results.
If it was easy, anybody could do it.
As for the Mario comment - I’ve never seen pixel-precise jumping in Mario since it went 3D. That was the joy of the 2D iterations to some degree and one of my biggest annoyances with UR MR GAY.
October 13th, 2008 at 10:31 am
but his point is that it IS being sold as being so easy to create good things that anyone can do it.
October 13th, 2008 at 10:31 am
I’d say most opinions were entirely subjective, yeah
Well yeah, but it’s not like there’s a flaw you can particularly nail on it. It’s not like with, say, No More Heroes, where the controls in the sandbox area are undeniably terrible.
October 13th, 2008 at 10:36 am
morriss, what the hell was with the trolling from you in the EG thread. I knew you weren’t as blown away by the game as other people, but posting shite like “Braid/Halo 3 > LBP”, I really thought was beneath you!
October 13th, 2008 at 10:37 am
I was just trolling around, winding people up.
October 13th, 2008 at 10:37 am
ecu: but there is. I did it, pat did and now Oli’s done it.
October 13th, 2008 at 10:40 am
Yet I and many others didn’t. I found it a joy to control! Conclusion - you guys are rubbish at games.
October 13th, 2008 at 10:41 am
Oh well, fair enough. I know on here you come across as fairly balanced, so was just surprised to see you posting a load of trolling comments. Some classic Psychotext in that thread though
October 13th, 2008 at 10:43 am
I think the score is fair, and to be honest it’s what I’d expected.
I do think that the tools have been approached wrongly though, because they’re just as intuitive as the tools in Photoshop, or even MS Paint. It’s possible to whip up something fun and ingenious in both, given time and the understanding of those tools.
What bothers me ever so slightly is that it seems like many a commenter (and some reviewers) were expecting to be able to make something special even if they have no design sense and are not at all artistic/creative. It takes a creative mind to grasp tools like this, and I found them amazingly easy to get to grips with. But like painting a picture, playing a guitar, or doing a bit of programming, the problem is rarely with the tools but often it’s more of a PEBCAK issue. And PEBCAK exists everywhere, not just in computing. Simply replace the keyboard with whatever else and the outcome is the same.
I feel that some were expecting Mm to solve PEBCAK. That’s just not fair.
The score was perfect, and I could’ve lived with an 8 because I’m aware of the issues with the controls and why some can’t get to grips with them. I think the rest of theh review is spot on, but I think that in games where one is allowed to create something, I don’t think the everyday reviewer is really qualified to review. A better choice would be someone who’s made something, anything, with games before. Whether it’s using a map editor or just Spore.
Tools cannot be blamed for any one person’s lack of an artistic bent. It’s like those cartoons where the critter blames the hammer after they hit their own thumb, even though the angle and thrust supplied were their own.
It is a good review other than that though, it’s just a review I felt was deserving of a review.
[Edit: There, done cleaning up. I felt that it needed some cleaning as random people on the internet handing out opinions and scores shouldn’t be considered reviewers (I had the Kotaku criticisms in mind too and they don’t deserve to be called reviewers either).]
October 13th, 2008 at 10:55 am
Robo: Cool.
ecu:
Esha: I resent the fact that people see this game as divise: It’s like “if you can’t do something good you’re not creative.”
I hate that. It’s not true either.
And yes, tools can be blamed, of course they can.
October 13th, 2008 at 11:00 am
Whats PEBCAK?, Esha
October 13th, 2008 at 11:03 am
Problem Exists Between Chair And Keyboard.
It’s an old IT support thing.
October 13th, 2008 at 11:11 am
morriss: It’s often a hated statement because it’s true, and often the paintbrush is blaimed for the failings of the artist. I’ve seen artists who can do brilliant things with a few bits of chalk and a pavement. I’ve also seen artists who’ll complain about this brand of pencil not being as good as that brand, and how their work suffered because they couldn’t get their favourite brand.
I’m sorry morriss, but in this case I think we’ll have to agree to disagree. Art is something that a person has to want to do, it’s something that has to be a part of them. And that makes an artist. Someone coming into a game and expecting the tools to make them an immediately professional level is not a creative person, and the tools cannot be blamed for that kind of person.
I actually feel bad for the tools, because just as is true with artists and their brands, there are those who created the tools for Mm’s game. And I’m sure that they put their all into creating those tools, and moreover the LBP official levels were made with those tools, were they not?
The evidence weighs clearly in one direction with this, to my mind. I’m sorry. But I blame constant exposure to artists for this level of understanding. Good artists and bad artists.
My opinion is probably going to get brushed under the mat at the end of the day despite all that though, because I’m a snooty contrarian and not easy to like. But that’s not really important because anyone who’s actually been a part of any art community is going to know exactly what I’m talking about. Unfortunately, I’m probably not going to find a lot of those here.
/sigh
Anyway, moving on…
PEBCAK: Psychotext has it right. But it’s true to any part of life, just replace the keyboard with whatever. Sometimes the problem is with the person, rather than what’s in front of the person. But often the overbearing ego will not allow them to admit this. Anyone who’s ever been exposed to tech-support is going to know exactly what I’m talking about here, no? And you don’t even have to be part of the job for that, there are plenty of horror stories online.
October 13th, 2008 at 11:12 am
“but his point is that it IS being sold as being so easy to create good things that anyone can do it.”
Oh, as a toolset, it’s far easier to get to grips with than others. Unreal Engine, for example, takes a lot more hard work to get a custom, personal, playable level off the ground and up and running with any degree of competence. It’s a lot harder. Plus you have scripting too.
It’s a phenomenal toolset, but I don’t believe I’ve ever seen those selling the product as claiming it would be easy to make fun designs.
Again, look at ANY tool in existence and see if it magically makes the wielder into a master of their art. People have some totally unrealistic expectations. Making something look simple is usually very hard work.
Apart from journalism. That’s easy.
October 13th, 2008 at 11:14 am
It isn’t true Esha. Not true at all. People can be creative in many different ways, you’re forgetting that. Also, tools can and consistently are being tweaked. LBPs tools are the first of their kind, hence by definition they are a kind of prototype. If this type of game catches on, just wait and see how they’re refined over the next few years.
And no, it’s nothing to do with you being “a snooty contrarian”, you’re just wrong.
October 13th, 2008 at 11:21 am
The less complicated they make it, the less powerful the tool. It’s not hard to understand.
They could never have made it totally accessible and as complex as it is. I think they’ve struck a good balance. I really think Oli’s opinion is the minority, as the level creation tool have been really well received from what I can tell. But it was never going to be for everyone.
October 13th, 2008 at 11:21 am
Unrealistic expectations is right.
“People can be creative in many different ways, you’re forgetting that.”
In an argument, some people say things for the sake of saying them because they feel it makes their argument look good.
Look at my post where I point out that pavement artists can be just as brilliant as canvas artists, does it look like I’m ignoring that to you? Of course I’m not, it just makes your argument look better to claim that I am.
I understand that people are creative in different ways, but what I’m trying to explain to you is that some people don’t want to be creative, they want everything done for them at the touch of a button and they’re offended if that isn’t the case. As Shatner pointed out, there are unrealistic expectations of the tools, and if they can’t immediately have what they want, the fault must be–of course–with the tools.
I think that’s bull.
That’s what I think you’re not seeing, but as I’ve said it’s a difference of opinion.
“Also, tools can and consistently are being tweaked. LBPs tools are the first of their kind, hence by definition they are a kind of prototype.”
I’ve never claimed that this isn’t true. But a tool doesn’t go from being broken to suddenly working, the tools are clearly working and working well, what you’re glossing over here is that they’re not currently building the tools, they’re just refining the tools.
Allow me to point out again that the official levels were built with these self-same “prototype” tools, and the designers didn’t have any problems creating them.
You can’t mix up refinement with creation, that’s just not fair either. Sure, the tools need some minor tweaking to make them just that little bit easier, but that’s a luxury, not a necessity, and at the end of the day it’s not going to change the output of the person using those tools, it’s just going to make their lives slightly easier.
“And no, it’s nothing to do with you being “a snooty contrarian”, you’re just wrong.”
So I say it’s a difference opinion and you claim I’m simply wrong?
And people think I have an ego. Good grief.
October 13th, 2008 at 11:23 am
morriss,
If your revision of tools theory was true then it would suggest that I could write a better fictional story using a fully fledged, 5th generation wordprocessor than I could using something like VIM, Notepad or a comments text box.
That’s obviously not true because the ability to do something better is with ME the person and not the tool I’m using.
The tool facilitates the person doing the task.
It doesn’t make them better at it.
October 13th, 2008 at 11:25 am
Gods damn you Shatner for being succinct and saying what I really wanted to say but in so fewer words. I envy that.
I’m going to have to shut up now, because you’re better at this than I am.
October 13th, 2008 at 11:27 am
Oh yes. Succinct. That’s me.
October 13th, 2008 at 11:29 am
What have you done with the real Shatner, you fiend?
October 13th, 2008 at 11:30 am
I care not! I like this Shatner, his logic as far as word processors go is impeccable. I really wish I’d come up with that.
October 13th, 2008 at 11:37 am
“The promise that anyone could create something simple and fun and personal with LittleBigPlanet hasn’t come true.”
That is true to an extent - a lot of the Beta created levels are not fun - Heist is often held up as a good example but I found it had great ideas which were really poorly executed and tested. Why I pull out that quote again was that I think it missed a point. The promise is that anyone can create something simple and fun for them personally. It doesn’t need to be fun for anyone else - much like any art form.
October 13th, 2008 at 11:44 am
Blerk,
I actually deleted a lengthy paragraph on how it would be possible to use notepad.exe and a 2-key keyboard to produce Halo 3.
October 13th, 2008 at 11:46 am
I don’t particularly think the fact that it’s hard to make a really really good level is something to mark the game down on, like no shit of course it’s not easy! The point is that the tools are good enough for a) everyone to have a go and mess around with and b) enable a not insignificant number of people (even if only 1% of the userbase or whatever) to actually make something worthwhile.
October 13th, 2008 at 11:47 am
I started to write this then lost any point I was going to make, but it’s sitting here and I’m not just deleting it… caution!
No-one expects to become a creative visionary because of the tools given in this game, nor write a best seller just because they have a new notepad.
I’m avoiding the game for the simple reason that I don’t like making levels. I’m not creative and don’t want to design levels.
That’s why I buy games and not their tools sets
However, even non arty types do have ideas they would like to see on the screen.
To use the Forza example…
My own feeble imagination can stretch to conceive of a basic cock drawing on the bonnet of the car. If I go a little further and really concentrate I may put a bum on the back. Daring, provocative and original no doubt.
Then I go to the most powerful & user friendly console toolset ever to do this and get bored by sliders and layers in a minute.
Can I conceive of a cock? Yes
Can I have the tools to draw it? Yes.
Can other people draw cocks using these tools? Yes.
Can I? No. I do not have the will to learn these tools.
What stood in the way of me putting my vision into practice? The tools. In a sea of layers, sliders, shapes and knobs they made the process of drawing a cock distinctly unfun and not at all like drawing a cock should be.
Imagine a world where cock drawing isn’t fun? Exactly. No a pretty place.
October 13th, 2008 at 11:48 am
Plus you must have all missed the dude who proposed to his girlfriend using LittleBigPlanet…
How can heartless Eurogamer only give it a 9 now
http://www.destructoid.com/guy-uses-littlebigplanet-to-propose-to-his-girlfriend-totally-not-a-loser-107386.phtml
October 13th, 2008 at 11:50 am
“I actually deleted a lengthy paragraph on how it would be possible to use notepad.exe and a 2-key keyboard to produce Halo 3.”
Typical coders…
And how long do you think it’d take to make a decent non-’coder art’ texture out of 1’s and 0’s eh??
lol.
October 13th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
Oh, ages. But it would be entirely possible - assuming that someone had determination, skill and talent. And a lot of graph paper.
Interestingly enough, I’m reminded of the extras on the TRON dvd where the special FX guys explained that all the camera movements, object models, and all the CG was planned using basic plotting tools of the era. No true 3D CG tools were available to them at the time, they just had to rely on talent and determination. Astonishing really.
October 13th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
LBP might just be the best medicine when the cold winter nights strike…
http://www.gamereactor.eu/grtv/?id=3220 (grtv video review)
October 13th, 2008 at 12:30 pm
I think the creation / tools argument boils down to how you’re wired. Left brainers will absolutely positively hate LBP simply because they are not the sort of people who would let the game keep them up at night with the possibilities it holds. Right-brainers, the sort of people who aren’t fussed with the technicalities of a user interface and will readily embrace its minus points and make the best of the tools provided to let rip with their imaginations are going to love it to bits. I fall into the latter category, because being a right-brainer and mucking about with creative stuff floats my boat whether it’s the tools in LBP or a blank sheet in a photoshop doc, or for that matter a post-it note and a pen.
So essentially, Oli, Pat and Morriss are left brainers. They can’t help it, it’s the way they’re wired…
October 13th, 2008 at 12:33 pm
PC’s right. It’s all about will. If you really want to learn how to make levels in LBP you’ll put up with anything. Just like the people making Tron.
It’s the same with anything. Say you needed a wall plastered. If you really wanted to do it yourself, it’d take years to get it right. You might want to do that, in which case you’d probably go on a building course and practice constantly until you achieved a finish you were happy with.
If you didn’t care, you’d pay someone to do it.
Like, I make really shit drum and bass. It’s becoming progressively less shit because I’m prepared to keep making sense of the software I need to use to do it, and as I become more comfortable with it my “vision” is starting to come through. I stick with it because it’s something I want to do and it makes me happy to progress.
LBP is the same thing. If it turns you on, you’ll forgive its quirks and persevere with it to create good levels. If it doesn’t, you won’t.
I don’t think it’s anything to do with “being creative” at all. It’s about will. If you want to use it, you’ll use it. If you don’t, you won’t.
October 13th, 2008 at 12:37 pm
Oh aye, I mean it goes without saying that you’ve got to WANT to make stuff in it. I mean it’d be daft just to play it because you feel you’re indebted to
Definitely think that if there were three things to pick on with LBP, I’d have chosen the Z-Axis controls, the Search / Rating methods and the slightly annoying network-dependency rather than the creation tools. I seriously can’t see a way that Media Molecule could’ve done things to make it any more approachable without turning the whole thing into some sort of stale “paint package” style dealio.
Ah well, it’s a 9/10 on Eurogamer and if pushed and given the opportunity I’d have given it a 9 too probably (based on the beta at least, no idea what the full version’s like yet).
October 13th, 2008 at 1:29 pm
Going back to the discussion earlier about tools:
I still don’t agree. If you (Esha/Shatner and whoever else) are telling me that over the years, the development of the tools we use to build and create hasn’t a) helped the designer and b) made construction easier then, then…well I don’t know what to say.
Go down your local hardware shop and see how easier all the tools make things for you, then ask your great grandad what it was like when it was all fields etc.
October 13th, 2008 at 1:30 pm
“Problem Exists Between Chair And Keyboard.”
That’s an attitude that belongs in the stone-age of computing. As a rule, if a tool that’s designed for a particular type of user doesn’t do what the user wants to do or expects it do then the TOOL is at fault, not the user. That really isn’t a controversial statement, it’s User Interface Design 101.
I’ve not actually tried LBP yet myself, but from the review I took away that the actual PROCESS of creation isn’t as fun as it could be. I don’t know why people assume the problem is with people lacking the “willpower” (an argument that seems to have come out of thin air). If you’re getting this game it’s likely you already do.
The fact that level designers can make good levels with the LBP tools is irrelevant (as is someone making Halo with notepad). UnrealEd may be aimed at “proper” designers, LBP’s tools are clearly aimed at a different group of users. If the usability of the tools don’t match the target group, it’s fair to note this in the review.
October 13th, 2008 at 1:37 pm
I don’t agree with the left and right argument either:
I can play guitar, I’ve learned how to use a drum machine, keyboard and a 4 track. I have written, designed, programmed and recorded my own songs and it’s all self taught. Not one lesson, not one user manual read.
I’ve written short stories, poetry (blurgh!) and now reviews and copy.
I’d say I was pretty creative. Not very creative. Not beret wearing, overly emo creative, just pretty creative.
I find the tools of LBP off putting and not very user friendly. And according to this thread, I’m creative at all or my brain is wired wrong.
WTF?
October 13th, 2008 at 1:43 pm
Vincent… PEBKAC usually has very little to do with the tools being wrong and a lot more to do with a user not actually bothering to use the tools at all.
October 13th, 2008 at 1:46 pm
@ pjmaybe
“Describing the creative process as “time consuming and not much fun” is only half right.”
Well, I started creating a LBP level the last few days about at 20:00 in the evening and all of a sudden it was 5:30 in the morning …
Yes its’ time consuming, but isn’t all artistic/creative endeavor always like that?
And no, its definitely a lot of fun.
So I totally agree with you pjmaybe!
October 13th, 2008 at 1:47 pm
Vincent - If you don’t have any will to move past knotty parts in any interface, you won’t. It’s obvious the LBP toolset allows the creation of professional-style platform levels, but only to those that can be bothered to learn the UI. All I did with it was build a huge pile of trees, look at it for a few minutes then never use it again.
At least it enabled my tree-piling game design vision to shine through, I guess.
October 13th, 2008 at 1:58 pm
… just in case someone wants to know: My (unfinished) Game is called “Jump Club”.
(It’s a silly name, I know…)
October 13th, 2008 at 1:58 pm
@ Quiick.
Similar story here, in fact it wasn’t even the time I spent with the designer that burned this game into my brain, it was the subsequent time spent daydreaming about what would be possible with the thing, and whether it’d be possible to do X game design nicking bits from Y and incorporating dashes of Z to pretty it all up.
I think though we’re beginning to see why user-created stuff died the death it did back in the late 90s in PC gaming. People can’t be fucking arsed any more to put any time or effort into anything like hacking together their own levels. I could see the same thing happening if (and oh it’s a golden ‘if’) the Trackmania lot ever did a proper under-the-telly console version of the game with user-created content shared over Live or PSN or whatever.
Morriss. Your brain isn’t wired wrong, but you are the very epitome of a left brainer.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left_brain
Look under Left Brain Hemispherical functions…
Writing, music etc - those are left-brain specific as they have a basis in analytical (and mathematical) reasoning. Trust you to take it as a bloody insult
October 13th, 2008 at 2:00 pm
Tree-piling FTW!
October 13th, 2008 at 2:05 pm
@ pjmaybe
LOL! Same goes for me!!!
As soon as I quitted LBP and shutdown my PS3, I started daydreaming about how to do things different in my level and about creating experiences not seen before in LBP.
October 13th, 2008 at 2:05 pm
I’m just jealous as it seems a really rewarding time sink for those that are getting on with it
/considers attending a ‘tree-piling for beginners’ class
October 13th, 2008 at 2:05 pm
One thing the design bit could’ve seriously done with, and it’s gobsmacking that it was left out - is the ability to group and “lock” a bunch of level content. That would’ve made putting stuff together a LOT easier.
October 13th, 2008 at 2:14 pm
@ pjmaybe
Agreed!
You can group several object though, but unfortunately there is no way to lock them.
My wish is a paint-bucket tool which would work like the material-changer tool.
October 13th, 2008 at 2:17 pm
My god LittleBigPlanet hate is really stupid. Who ever thought it would be a pixel perfect platformer?
There needs to be a way to find the best levels thats for sure, becuase a lot of the good ones aren’t prominent enoguh, and people judging their scores on that is ridiculous.
And even if reviews were based on the single player it would be right.
But this score is good, a 10 would have been the correct score though.
October 13th, 2008 at 2:20 pm
Patlike, the whole point of the game is that you’ve got to want to make a level. Or you’ve got to see a level and think… Wow awesome,a nd try it yourself.
That or play some of the awesome levels, I haven’t been on the internet for ages becuase of LittleBigPlanet, and that’s astounding for me, and I wnat the Beta back.
People who are down on it haven’t given it a fair try, it’s fact.
October 13th, 2008 at 2:21 pm
Even the grouping bit’s not perfect. Sometimes it tends to try and take the scenery with it.
One thing I did do - and one thing that saved me a lot of ballache was to make common catalogues of bits that I could re-use easily. Component parts like cogs, lifts and other platformy type bits to use and re-use in the levels. Saves a lot of time.
+1 on the paint bucket tool Quiiick. Lost count of the amount of levels I saw where someone had only managed to paint half of their bits
N_P - Depends on the site, and what their criteria is for a 10. Reading EGs, it SHOULD have got a 10. But a 9 is fine as that’ll account nicely for some of the game’s more irritating bits.
October 13th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
Sorry morriss, your “better tools = better result” argument just doesn’t hold water. Thousands of years of historical achievements show this to be true.
You can use today’s latest technology to facilitate a duplicate recreation of the Sphinx. Regardless, the original still got made with primitive tools.
(Leaving aside a personal appreciation of the examples:) Would the Mona Lisa be regarded as a greater piece of art because it was done in Photoshop? The Venus De Milo would be better if it had been produced in Maya?
History is littered with examples of how exceptionally talented, dedicated, determined, skillful people did incredible things with tools that are incredibly primitive.
Today’s tools may allow us to reproduce similar results with less effort or by re-applying repeated procedures automatically but they in no way replace the human skill and creative flair that the person using the tool must possess in order to make something worthwhile.
Again, take the word processor example - it’s just a tool. It doesn’t make something average into something good and it can’t write your documents for you.
Besides, if you’re always going to wait for a more refined tool then you’re going to procrastinate indefinitely and never ever achieve anything whilst you go about insisting there’s no point until a better tool comes along. With that sort of attitude we’d still be waiting for a better wheel to be invented.
October 13th, 2008 at 2:31 pm
“If you don’t have any will to move past knotty parts in any interface, you won’t.”
But it is fair to note the note the knotty parts in the review, because ideally they shouldn’t exist. If a game has a tedious interface that makes it a chore to play and requires willpower to overcome, you would similarly mark that game down in a review.
And more often than not “willpower” actually means “singleminded perseverance”, which is really not the same thing. If you have the perseverance to put up with a bad interface, good for you, but it doesn’t make you smarter in ANY side of your brain.
October 13th, 2008 at 2:45 pm
Vincent - I think we’re both saying the same thing, essentially. The point I was trying to make was that if a system allows for incredible results you want to achieve, you’ll learn to master the system until you achieve them.
If you don’t want to make a LittleBigPlanet level, you’re not going to have a tinker then suddenly decide you do, no matter how “knot” free the UI is. It doesn’t make any difference to me how good the UI is: I’m never going to make an LBP level because I don’t want to. If I did, I wouldn’t mind if the creation system was complex, a bit broken, or whatever: I’d learn how to do it anyway.
“Will” and “singleminded perseverance” are similar, it’s true
To be honest, what I think a lot of what’s happening here is what Shatner said at the beginning of the thread: creating a “fun” game is extremely difficult no matter what the UI used in actually developing it.
See also: writing a book, making trance in Cubase, editing video, etc etc etc.
October 13th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
Shatner - It’s a circular argument photography hobbyists fight about perpetually. There’s a constant drive among enthusiasts to buy better and better equipment - at huge cost - in the assumption that it’ll make photographs better.
It doesn’t, of course. A Sydney Morning Herald photographer told me a story once about his friend - a famous snapper - who was waiting in the editorial office for his boss, when one of the journalists shouted over, “That camera’s amazing. I bet it takes brilliant photos.”
To which he replied, “That computer’s amazing. I bet it writes brilliant words.”
October 13th, 2008 at 2:56 pm
Bluray is a waste of money.
October 13th, 2008 at 3:06 pm
If this thread has done one thing… it’s made me want to listen to Pat’s music.
Give!
October 13th, 2008 at 3:06 pm
“There’s a constant drive among enthusiasts to buy better and better equipment - at huge cost - in the assumption that it’ll make photographs better.”
Yeah, but when it comes to level building, better tools can create a much better workflow, leading to a much improved creative process and much more quality being produced over a shorter space of time.
That’s just the opinion of someone who’s used about 8/9 iterations of Max and Photoshop and who finds it enjoyable doing things in seconds that used to take much longer.
October 13th, 2008 at 3:08 pm
PT - I’m working on a tune at the moment. I’ll post it when it’s finished
October 13th, 2008 at 3:14 pm
G1 - Yep, you’re right, of course. The final answer in the photo argument is always that better cameras, lenses, etc, don’t take better pictures, but they do make it easier to take better pictures.
October 13th, 2008 at 3:15 pm
It’s not circular patlike, it’s linear and it ends with me being proved right.
I think that the term ‘enthusiast’ is a very important one. If you’re not a game-design enthusiast then it’s unlikely that LBP or any set of game design tools will light your fire.
October 13th, 2008 at 3:17 pm
Speaking of EG, which we weren’t, bang zoom there she goes again…
Beta keys FTW!
October 13th, 2008 at 3:20 pm
It’s utterly flattened. So much for their upgrades and changes.
Nick must be weeping over a dead hamster right now.
October 13th, 2008 at 3:20 pm
Ah, you see, it is circular. You can argue that better equipment does yield better results, etc.
I’m going to do some work
October 13th, 2008 at 3:23 pm
;_; I have to go to work in about an hour. Bets on if it’ll be back by then?
October 13th, 2008 at 3:24 pm
Just loaded for me. Pretty slow though.
October 13th, 2008 at 3:25 pm
Login system no longer seems to work.
October 13th, 2008 at 3:37 pm
All I’m getting now is:
Error 503 Service Unavailable
Error talking to backend
Guru Meditation:
XID: 187652233
Varnish
October 13th, 2008 at 3:37 pm
SNAFU
October 13th, 2008 at 3:38 pm
Back to the drawing board EG. Make a news story Pat.
“Eurogamer hamster on life support, condition is critical”
October 13th, 2008 at 3:40 pm
lolol
October 13th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
I think you should make a news post pat. Something along the lines of EGs beta test makes them look like idiots. FOR THE NTH FUCKING TIME. and at the sametime manages to anger the regulars that provide constant page clicks through the forum and actually reading reviews.
DO IT.
October 13th, 2008 at 3:47 pm
I’d wager he likes his job a little too much to rock that particular boat.
On a related note. Did they move you guys to another server? It seems that you’re no longer having trouble when EG do. You certainly have different IP addresses now.
October 13th, 2008 at 3:48 pm
If I had a link to the giveaway page I’d put something up.
October 13th, 2008 at 3:49 pm
But yeah, probably not quite so scathing
Yeah, we’re on a different box. Always have been.
October 13th, 2008 at 3:50 pm
“Eurogamer hamster on life support, condition is critical”
Euroginny Pronounced Dead.
1999 - 2008.
Back on topic with LBP, IGN has posted their review, written and video!
http://uk.ps3.ign.com/articles/919/919111p1.html
October 13th, 2008 at 3:51 pm
Strange… for a while you shared IP addresses. Maybe the load balancer or something.
October 13th, 2008 at 3:51 pm
Its nicer here anyway :p
apart from morriss
October 13th, 2008 at 3:54 pm
PT - Yeah, will be, I reckon.
October 13th, 2008 at 3:59 pm
Ta Johnny. Added an update.
October 13th, 2008 at 4:11 pm
Your welcome Pat =D
October 13th, 2008 at 4:51 pm
There are several things LBP could learn from the Photoshop-interface. Especially the use of modifier-keys (option-key on my Mac).
For instance: Creating an object in LBP is done by using the X-button. In order to delete/cut-out the same object you need to use the triange-button.
It believe it would be more intuitive to use a modifier-key here: so instead of the triange-button you would use (for example) R2 + X-button for the” delete/cut-out” function.
This is a very minor tweak, I know, but this way you could have several “reverse” functions always having the same modifier-key which makes the UI more consistant.
Again:
ADDING: X-button
DELETING: X-button + modifier-key
October 13th, 2008 at 5:06 pm
I always thought mouse and keyboard support would be nice too. But having played with the tools, I can see why they didn’t go down that route. I think it’d ruin the way people have produced hacked up shapes and rather imperfect designs, which sort of fit with the rest of LBP’s look and feel.
Modifier keys and a bit of consistency right across the board would’ve been very cool though.