Support NeoGAF

[Men_in_Boxes]

I heard someone repeat this phrase recently on a podcast while the other cohosts bobbed their heads like dashboard figurines.

It doesn't make sense.

Helldivers 2 may be a great game but this concept has always sounded unintelligent to me.

If you make a game for everyone...then you've made a game for...everyone.

It's like saying "If you try to jump high...then you will jump low."

No. If you try to jump high and fail, THEN you will jump low." The attempt doesn't guarantee the opposite.

A lot of people who aren't traditionally into PvP games are enjoying ARC Raiders now that it's released, and it seems obvious that Embark Studios made this game for multiple types of people with multiple different playstyle preferences. Games that are fun for multiple types obviously have a big advantage over. Should we stop using this phrase?

 

[RetroGamingUK]

Trying to appeal to everyone always results in bland, grey, characterless sludge.

 

[bitbydeath]

You could liken it to "Modern" movies/TV, they are always/often trash.

 

[Radical_3d]

Trying to appeal to everyone always results in bland, grey, characterless sludge.

And you expect the fan of GAAS games to understand this?

 

[analog_future]

You really don't understand the phrase? It's not exactly new (and it's largely true).

 

[Griffon]

It's not new.

And it's something that's been proven true all the time across all medias.

 

[KyoZz]

What's hard to understand here?

 

[Sooner]

No, it's good advice.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

"The Extraction Shooter is gamings new Mario 64 moment"

 

[winjer]

A game for everyone, usually is a game made for the lowest common denominator, resulting in something that has to compromise in so many things, it becomes boring and uninspired.

 

[poodaddy]

How can someone possibly struggle with this concept?

Let's try this thought experiment. Hey OP, mention a game that you think appeals to everyone, literally any game you'd like, and I'll tell ya who it doesn't appeal to.

 

[Holammer]

Why do we have to have dumb threads on Fridays?

 

[poppabk]

It's both.
It's dumb in that you can make games like Mario games that are playable by pretty much anyone
It's smart because trying to design a game for everyone is likely to lead you down a rabbit hole that creates a shitty game.

 

[poodaddy]

Why do we have to have dumb threads on Fridays?

 

[Radical_3d]

Why do we have to have dumb threads on Fridays?

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Trying to appeal to everyone always results in bland, grey, characterless sludge.

This is wrong.

Trying to appeal to everyone AND FAILING results in bland, grey, characterless sludge.

But trying to appeal to everyone and APPEALING TO EVERYONE results in vibrancy.

 

[Durin]

The phrase is fine. Most great stuff that actually appeals to a huge audience usually didn't intend to hit everyone, still had a core demographic in mind, and will have people who don't like it too.

You try too hard to reach everyone from the outset, you'll produce a bland, directionless, low in challenge, and afraid to say anything offensive/provocative game.

 

[TheUnicornGuy]

You can't make a game for everyone, even games that have a huge amount of praise aren't universally liked. I, for instance, don't like Mario 64 or The Last of Us. I recognise that they're good games and understand why they're praised but they're not for me, and if you changed them to suit my tastes then the people that like the originals would likely enjoy them less.

 

[AJUMP23]

No it is just a twist on a business phrase. You target various audiences with your products.

 

[poodaddy]

This is wrong.

Trying to appeal to everyone AND FAILING results in bland, grey, characterless sludge.

But trying to appeal to everyone and APPEALING TO EVERYONE results in vibrancy.

It results in vibrancy....TO YOU! This seems to be what you're struggling with, the opinion part of this whole conundrum. Something that appeals to you will not appeal to everyone, and this is universal by the way. There isn't one IP on the planet, no matter how well it's done, that appeals to everyone.

Not a fuckin one.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

How can someone possibly struggle with this concept?

Let's try this thought experiment. Hey OP, mention a game that you think appeals to everyone, literally any game you'd like, and I'll tell ya who it doesn't appeal to.

So, we have to turn our brains on just a bit when considering this phrase.

There is no game in history that has tried to appeal to everyone. The graphic novel enjoyer + the stealth gamer + the RTS enjoyer + the dating sim lover.

This concept is so known that we can all interpret that Arrowhead did not literally mean every single gamer on earth.

 

[analog_future]

This is going to be a pretty glorious backfire thread

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

It results in vibrancy....TO YOU!

No, to everyone. Not just to me.

If you make a hot campfire then you did not make a cold fire. If you try to make a hot fire and fail, THEN you've made a cold fire.

 

[poodaddy]

So, we have to turn our brains on just a bit when considering this phrase.

There is no game in history that has tried to appeal to everyone. The graphic novel enjoyer + the stealth gamer + the RTS enjoyer + the dating sim lover.

This concept is so known that we can all interpret that Arrowhead did not literally mean every single gamer on earth.

Right, so let's turn our brains on a little bit, and realize that this means that the game doesn't appeal to everyone, which you just corroborated.

 

[poodaddy]

No, to everyone. Not just to me.

If you make a hot campfire then you did not make a cold fire. If you try to make a hot fire and fail, THEN you've made a cold fire.

Ok, then name the game that is vibrant to everyone.

Spoiler: Here

This is where you post your shameless plug for whatever GAAS slop you're pushing right now, probably Arc Raiders, insert here.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Right, so let's turn our brains on a little bit, and realize that this means that the game doesn't appeal to everyone, which you just corroborated.

But again, no one in history has tried to make a game for everyone so we have to interpret the meaning behind the phrase.

 

[Radical_3d]

This concept is so known that we can all interpret that Arrowhead did not literally mean every single gamer on earth.

 

[Signalis]

Smart phrase and exactly correct. I like JRPGs and horror games and Gran Turismo. Arc Raiders should have JRPG and Horror in it because they need to appeal to everyone. Why can't I have a mage/thief cross class in Arc Raiders and I want some psychological horror like Silent Hill and Signalis in Arc Raiders as well and some sim racing in it. Why is it not trying to cater to me, they just lost a sale because of that?

 

[Angry_Megalodon]

So, we have to turn our brains on just a bit when considering this phrase.

There is no game in history that has tried to appeal to everyone. The graphic novel enjoyer + the stealth gamer + the RTS enjoyer + the dating sim lover.

This concept is so known that we can all interpret that Arrowhead did not literally mean every single gamer on earth.

It means that you subvert the conventions of a certain genre in order to attract people who would otherwise not be interested in the "core experience" that genre offers.

Normally this ends up in failure because only extremely talented people are capable of blending different genres or sensibilities properly.

 

[analog_future]

But again, no one in history has tried to make a game for everyone so we have to interpret the meaning behind the phrase.

The irony of you not being able to interpret the meaning behind the phrase while trying to explain to others that we have to interpret the meaning behind the phrase is something to behold

 

[poodaddy]

But again, no one in history has tried to make a game for everyone so we have to interpret the meaning behind the phrase.

.....

Jesus Christ

 

[ReBurn]

Why do we have to have dumb threads on Fridays?

At least it isn't a console warz thread.

 

[KyoZz]

The irony of you not being able to interpret the meaning behind the phrase while trying to explain to others that we have to interpret the meaning behind the phrase is something to behold

At this point I'm just waiting for him to be banned again.

Which is sad, because he can be fun but too much astroturfing/shitposting.

 

[spookyfish]

I mean, it's a variation on "If you try to please everyone, you'll end up pleasing no one."

I can see creating a game that everyone can pick up and play -- Tetris, Pac-Man, etc. -- but yeah, trying to please everyone, even in game design, usually doesn't work out.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

You can't make a game for everyone

It's crazy how people in this thread have apparently not considered this.

 

[crackajack]

There is no game in history that has tried to appeal to everyone. The graphic novel enjoyer + the stealth gamer + the RTS enjoyer + the dating sim lover.

This concept is so known that we can all interpret that Arrowhead did not literally mean every single gamer on earth.

naturally "everyone" is an simplification of as many as possible, within the target audience, which is at first ALL gamers but certainly also new gamers, so actually everyone. But someone that likes Tetris is probably more likely to play Lumines than someone that likes actual gardening/touching grass.
Options (difficulty, accessbility, map markers, choices within game story) can provide some more leeway than any other media can offer, but everything will have specific features in the end and some of that will always not be liked by some, while loved by others. Appealing to as many as possible within a sensible range or however you want to rephrase it and make it more vague might make sense. The money suits will push for the "as many" part, while wise devs will focus on "sensible range".

It's crazy how people in this thread have apparently not considered this.

It's not entirely impossible. I would assume some form of peek a boo, catch, different ballgames where experienced by most of the worlds population.
The wii success was largely based on non gamers suddenly wanting to bowl virtually. Just to be never seen again gaming afterwards.
Literally everyone with videogames might be more tangible once VR get's more advanced and neural implants are done for other purposes too, but I would not be surprised if then the first game for that will be played by a humongous crowd, ie everyone that can afford it, so still not everyone.

 

[Aressa]

Trying to appeal to everyone always results in bland, grey, characterless sludge.

Isn't Mario for everyone though?

 

[RetroGamingUK]

Isn't Mario for everyone though?

It's popular because its great, despite the art style being for kids.

 

[Cakeboxer]

The phrase is smart and DEIlicious

 

[mitch1971]

Why do we have to have dumb threads on Fridays?

Maybe he doesn't work fridays.

 

[Guilty_AI]

This is wrong.

Trying to appeal to everyone AND FAILING results in bland, grey, characterless sludge.

But trying to appeal to everyone and APPEALING TO EVERYONE results in vibrancy.

And what does this "appealing to everyone" looks like exactly?

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

I mean, it's a variation on "If you try to please everyone, you'll end up pleasing no one."

I do see how the phrase can be interpreted to help focus resources more effectively.

But it ignores the advantages that casting a wide net also provides.

 

[panda-zebra]

You can please some of the people all of the time and please all of the people some of the time, but click on a Men In Boxes thread and prepare your reality distortion field well in advance if you want to make it out the other side.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

And what does this "appealing to everyone" looks like exactly?

We're not interpreting the phrase literally.

It simply means an attempt to appeal to a wider subset of gamers. I think the phrase ignores the advantages of casting wide nets in terms of design.

 

[Mownoc]

No it's not a dumb phrase... Never heard "If you try to please everyone, you'll please no one."?

"It's better to do one thing well than ten things poorly" is a similar phrase that is a little applicable here.

If you try and please everyone no matter their wildly different likes and dislikes you will end up creating something that maybe everyone thinks is ok but you'll never make something that everyone thinks is great.

Sometimes you have to make design decisions that one group loves, knowing that another group will hate it and trying to meet in the middle often gives both a mediocre experience.

 

[Tiago Rodrigues]

I mean...that sentence is true and it works for everything.
When you try to be likeable to everyone, you end up being the unremarkable one in the room.
When Xbox started their campaign "Everything is an Xbox" it was when we knew it was for no one and they were literally flopping and it was a disaster of a campaign that did nothing for them.
If you don't have a clear goal set out to be completed, when you do something without a target audience in mind and try to appeal to everyone, chances are something forgettable is about to be released.
Literally when you brainstorm a product to release and to be made, one of the first questions you ask yyourself is "who is this for?" and you go from there. If the answer is "this is for everyone" something is not okay.

Same is for games.

Just my 2 cents of course.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

I mean...that sentence is true and it works for everything.
When you try to be likeable to everyone, you end up being the unremarkable one in the room.

I couldn't disagree more with this.

Popular, personable, gregarious people are generally liked by a larger percentage of the population.

It's when unlikeable people attempt to be well liked by everyone, that things go poorly.

 

[Sethbacca]

Instead of broad sweeping statements, maybe you all should just evaluate each game on a case by case basis to see if it appeals to you rather than twisting yourselves in knots in an attempt to make everything fit within your worldview? You'd all be a lot happier.

 

[Tiago Rodrigues]

I couldn't disagree more with this.

Popular, personable, gregarious people are generally liked by a larger percentage of the population.

It's when unlikeable people attempt to be well liked by everyone, that things go poorly.

I didn't say you are unlikable...i said unremarkable. Yes you are nice and all that but usually you are the person that when you are missing no one notices. I'm talking about "yes people" and peple that fit in every group. Not people with a strong charismatic personality.

 

[corgiix3]

I mean trying to appeal to everyone and end up appealing to everyone are 2 different things. I mean look at Dark Knight 2008 nearly everyone likes that movie. Does everyone liking it make it more unappealing or something?