There have been pockets of controversy and argumentative discussion over the last couple days between myself and a number of friends, family, and colleagues. Pretty much every discussion has been about the final announcement and confirmation of Nintendo's 'help' feature, and its inclusion in New Super Mario Bros. Wii.

Now, things are still rather hazy concerning what this feature exactly is. USA Today's Game Hunters described it as something called 'demo play,' where when a player encounters a difficult portion of the level, they can pause the game, and have the CPU take over for a short time to continue the level, flawlessly surmounting every obstacle until the end of the level. If the player decides they wish to wrestle control back from the AI, they can press a button, and resume play from the point the the computer stopped. This point specifically is hazy based on this specific article.

Because of poor wording, it's difficult to understand whether this means that the game would play for you, or the game would simply give you a sample playthrough of the rest of the level, and set you back at where you first paused the game once control is given back.

This seems to be slightly different from the Nintendo patent that appeared on NeoGAF a few months ago, that illustrated something closer to an in-game guide, complete with hints and a video system that suggested one of numerous ways to overcome and obstacle and continue with the game.

Most enthusiast gamers seemed uncharacteristically enthusiastic about the feature, stating that it would be a great way to get gamers with less talent to get through the game. Some seemed incredibly satisfied, citing that this might be Nintendo's chance to make their games more difficult again (this particular argument being a reaction to the tepid difficulty of New Super Mario Bros. for the DS).

Unlike most I've talked to, though, the idea of a game that overcomes obstacles for me rubs me the wrong way.

'Why?' umpteen people have asked me. Obviously, it's just an option, and I don't have to use it if I don't want to. It's true, the feature does not directly affect my own playing experience, but it does contribute to a trend that I find rather disconcerting.

I've always considered video games to be among a group of hobbies that require a certain level of investment and practice to enjoy. The barrier has never been particularly high, as gaming has never been prohibitively expensive when looking in the right places, but it has required a certain time investment. It's wonderful that Nintendo wishes to expand the market to include plenty of new people to the hobby, but to do so at the expense of what makes gaming such a unique and amazing experience rubs me the wrong way.

Maybe that makes me sound incredibly elitest, but my reasons are not so self centered. I worry more that some newcomers might not get to experience what makes gaming such a gratifying and fulfilling hobby without going through some of the trials and tribulations that long time gamers went through.

There's no question that gaming is better without frustration. I also accept that all gamers possess different skills and talents. A readily available help feature like the one described in USA Today only serves to hearken back to one of my parents' major tenets of life: 'Never seek help unless you've tried something multiple times.'

It was a hard and fast rule, sure, and the number of times to try before asking for help was up to my own discretion, but the essence and spirit of the rule was simple. True gratification comes with surmounting a challenge yourself. If the game offered pointers or even showed how a successful action would look, but then forced the player to repeat it, I guarantee that players would feel more gratification, and with that, more fun.

I was truly interested to find out non-gamers thought of this new feature, and so I sat down with my mother last night over a glass of wine, and asked what she thought of the whole thing.

Immediately I realized that if she was probably different from the average person. I originally asked her that if she was in a particularly difficult portion of a game, would she give up, or keep trying. She admitted that she might give up after 10-20 tries, but she would try that many times before giving in. My mother has always been a big proponent of the "blood, sweat and tears" hard work ethic, and it showed through a lot in the way she approached games as well.

I then explained the guide patent, and asked if she would use it if it was available. She admitted that she would, but only after trying and failing and becoming frustrated. I asked that if she had a choice between USA Today's revealed help feature, or the guide feature previously explained, she, without hesitation, chose the guide.

This is something I expected, but also found surprising. My mother is the kind of person who refuses to learn how the DVD player and TV work because it's all very confusing, and I am there to fix it for her. Despite that, I noticed a sense of determination when she talked about how she would approach games. She seemed offended at the idea of the help feature, at least from a societal morality standpoint.

"We shouldn't teach people that when the going gets tough, the world will spoonfeed you a solution," she said. There was something remarkably poignant about that phrasing.

There's no question, though, that the help feature will expand the gaming market to crowds that dont already play them, but at what cost? My father saw it happen to the camera industry years ago, and I see it with gaming. In the case of the camera industry, though, professional cameras took advantage of many of the resisted advances and built upon them with even more complex mechanics. I would like to see that happen with games, if this is truly the start of an unstoppable trend.

One can hope.