Have you considered modern gaming might not be for you? Or at least these particular games?
I'm wondering now what his game design class is actually focusing on. I know he's trying to keep current but maybe for all involved 8-bit and 16-bit era games are better to learn from. Less moving parts allows for a more focused study on gameplay and level design. Among other things.
Thanks for your thoughtful reply. But I have to say I am not okay with having no idea what to do in a game. In AC I was running around on the island for 30 minutes getting nowhere, with no clue where to find the enemy. Halo made no sense at all. I wasn't told where I was and what my purpose was. It wasn't even clear from the starting menu how to play a normal game!
Did the game come with an instruction book? Sometimes they're not included if you're getting used software so you might have to find something online. It may or may not help but it should be a reasonable starting point to give you the direction you need.
In general, the learning curve for a new game, especially an RPG, can be pretty high. If you're planning on looking at a number of games in relatively short periods of time you might find it difficult to get comfortable with the controls enough to enjoy the gameplay. The only thing I can think of recommending to help deal with that might be to try a game that's not an RPG or so fast paced until you gain some experience with the controls and with games in general.
Halo made no sense at all. I wasn't told where I was and what my purpose was.
Interactive movies are a type of game, pretty much. The company Telltale Games specializes in making interactive movies like heavy rain.
The games industry actually went though a period know as the "Sillywood" era in the mid 90's when Hollywood tried to cash in on the growing games market. This was probably about the same time that games passed film as an entertainment industry, based on annual sales. Interactive movies were quite common then. In the end folks discovered that there are two basic types of entertainment: passive (books, films, plays, etc), and interactive (games). And when you're in the mood for one, you're not really in the mood for too much of the other, so they don't tend to mix well in large portions. So interactive movies, point and click adventures, and such tend to be niche market products.
The games industry actually went though a period know as the "Sillywood" era in the mid 90's when Hollywood tried to cash in on the growing games market. This was probably about the same time that games passed film as an entertainment industry, based on annual sales. Interactive movies were quite common then. In the end folks discovered that there are two basic types of entertainment: passive (books, films, plays, etc), and interactive (games). And when you're in the mood for one, you're not really in the mood for too much of the other, so they don't tend to mix well in large portions. So interactive movies, point and click adventures, and such tend to be niche market products.
So is a game like Heavy Rain a game at all? Should I be bothering to play it?
So is a game like Heavy Rain a game at all? Should I be bothering to play it?
I believe that there is some debate on what constitutes a "video game", and thus which works are or are not entries in the medium. If I recall correctly, TotalBiscuit has suggested the requirement that a work have some form of "fail state"--even if implicit, such as getting stuck on a puzzle--in order to be classified as a "game". Some point to dictionary definitions of the word "game" to determine what properties a "video game" should have. For myself, I'm inclined to a rather more liberal definition: to me, a video game is perhaps, roughly, "a digital work in which player input is required for more than just the equivalent of turning a page". So, for example, a Kinetic Novel might not be a "video game", but a point-and-click adventure or visual novel (see below) would be.
(Indeed, I view the term "video game" as reflecting the origins of the medium, rather than defining it--I feel that it has branched out significantly from those roots, growing to encompass both works that fit the traditional definition of a "game" as well as other forms.)
As to whether you should play Heavy Rain, that depends somewhat on your purpose in doing so. I gather that you're playing as a form of research? If so, then, as a form of the medium that I take it that you're relatively unfamiliar with, it might well be worth your time to experience it. (That said, Heavy Rain has been criticised for its focus on mundane minutia, if I recall correctly. In addition to the works of David Cage, you might want to look at the works of other developers--TellTale Games comes to mind.)
I mentioned "visual novels" above; you might be interested in looking into the genre. It's a form of the medium that perhaps leans even more towards "pure story"--albeit a branching, interactive story--and away from "pure mechanics". TV Tropes should have a page on the topic here.
Actually, speaking of TV Tropes, they have an index page linking to a variety of topics regarding video games, which might of interest to you. See here.
In the end folks discovered that there are two basic types of entertainment: passive (books, films, plays, etc), and interactive (games). And when you're in the mood for one, you're not really in the mood for too much of the other, so they don't tend to mix well in large portions. So interactive movies, point and click adventures, and such tend to be niche market products.
While the point-and-click adventure is indeed a somewhat niche genre, I disagree that it's a "passive" form of the medium. Such games can be rather mechanically challenging in their puzzles, and can keep the player quite busy, I believe.
As to the contrast between "passive" and "interactive", I somewhat agree. Speaking for myself, I find this to only really be a problem for a game when the balance swings significantly towards the "passive"--point-and-click adventures and visual novels with plenty of choices are perfectly fine to me, for two examples. However, this may well be less so to a more mechanically-focussed gamer (the latter especially).
Q5.
You opened the PS3 disc door? I wasn't aware the PS3 had one. How did you do that?
"Here's the thing: [undecided 2D or 3D]..."
It depends on whether your students primarily want to focus on either Programming or Digital-Art. Both are very time consuming to learn.
Have you decided which you prefer to try?
And no; "Both" is not an option for such a limited amount of time for beginners.
Q. Is "Heavy Rain" really a "game" per se?
Yes and it sold well. And that is the only thing that matters to a publisher.
Q. PC vs Consoles?
Setting up an Internet Café for gamers, are we?
Most PC games are sold online via Steam.
Visiting your local Game Boutique for pre-owned games and consoles might be a cheap option.
Q. PC Requirements?
All mainstream games list their minimum/recommended requirements to run them.
Q. Tutorials in games?
Legitimate copies of games come with a user-manual. Some games have a built-in tutorial, though not all. Otherwise, the player is expected to learn through trial and error. Some developers frown upon the need to include a tutorial as a director would frown upon the need for exposition in movies. Since developers focus primarily on their core customer base, neglecting non-gamers of their need for extensive tutorialization is an acceptable negligible risk.
