Let's talk about Gamedesign!

Chat about anything not covered in these forums, but keep it civil!

Post » Sun Mar 08, 2009 8:28 pm

[quote="deadeye":9fk2tq58]If you're complaining about the trial-and-error aspect of gameplay then it seems to me that you just want game content spoon-fed to you. No offense.[/quote:9fk2tq58]

That's exactly what this is not about. You're oversimplifying what I was saying by putting a 'Games should be easy and all users should be able to get through them in the first run' phrase into my mouth.

That's not what I was saying. What I'm saying is that it doesn't make sense to 'surprise' a player by deaths that he can't possibly foresee.

[quote:9fk2tq58]Why should there be a warning that a rock is going to fall on your head? The rumbling room is warning enough. Be careful. Look around. If you get hit on the head, you learned a lesson. Next time you'll be more careful.[/quote:9fk2tq58]

Take any person, I don't care how experienced he is in terms of games - I'm _very_ sure that everyone dies at the first try here. I take a step forward, the rock falls down, 1 second later I'm dead. In reality, I'd hear the rumbling, I would hear the rock falling off the cliff and I could jump away. But in games, especially in 2d games, I can't 'be careful', cause I can't freaking look upwards to see if it's safe to take a couple of steps or if the rock's coming down to kill me. It's about putting the player into a dangerous, risky situation - but the wrong solution is to just kill him 5 times until he learned exactly how the rock is going to fall and then let him follow that pattern. That's no fun, that's just being a marionette.

[quote:9fk2tq58]So you're easily frustrated. I can understand that. I don't have the time or energy to master every hard game that comes my way either, and I get frustrated at hard games too. But that doesn't mean that when I have a moment to play a game, I want every step of the game explained to me. It ruins the experience.[/quote:9fk2tq58]

Again, not what this is about. It's not about making a game idiot-proof, but if a game takes away a lot of my senses, meaning I can't anticipate what's coming cause I don't see it - nor do I hear it - why the fuck am I getting killed at this stage? I had no chance of knowing beforehand what pattern the designer had in mind. Me running forward, stopping, walking a couple of steps backward and forward again - that's retarted. It's like you'd put a safe into a game and just expect the user to know what the code is, but if he fucks up 50 times, you'll tell him.

It's not about me being frustrated quickly, I'm making a living through being frustrated and solving problems all day - And when I spend time on a game, I want it to entertain me, not making me work my ass off by figuring out what sorta idea the designer had in mind.

[quote:9fk2tq58]The only warning or tutorial any game should need, in my opinion, is "It's dangerous to go alone. Take this." The original Legend of Zelda took me literally months to beat. The joy of that game was in the discovery, in the trial and error. You wander into a place where you shouldn't be yet, you're screwed. No warnings. You learn the rules as you go.[/quote:9fk2tq58]

Yet, that was 20 years ago and look at how Zelda has evolved. It's not fucking unfair anymore like Zelda 2 was (worst title in the series), it's fair now. I haven't played the newest title and thought the Cel Shading stuff was pretty boring, but if I compare A Link to the Past with the original Zelda, I mean... there's no comparison in terms of quality.

[quote:9fk2tq58]You want artificially extending gameplay? It isn't getting a nasty surprise that kills you instantly... it's making the player struggle with a wonky, non-standard control scheme for a section of game that has very little to do with the plot. Challenge the Yeti to a snowboarding contest. Fly a bird up the river... and pop balloons. What the hell?[/quote:9fk2tq58]

Yeah, but those are just examples of bad design choices. That doesn't mean that expecting the player to know what'll happen in the next scene is a good design choice. It's just less shitty than what you've listed above.
B
6
S
2
G
3
Posts: 520
Reputation: 2,690

Post » Sun Mar 08, 2009 9:39 pm

[quote:2xwo29ul]Yet, that was 20 years ago and look at how Zelda has evolved.[/quote:2xwo29ul]

For the worse, in my opinion.

Anyway, I don't think surprise deaths are any big issue in games, plain and simple. You die, you try again. You fail, you try something different to succeed. That's the name of the game.

But I see that you feel really strongly about the issue so I guess I'll just say "agree to disagree" and leave it at that.
Moderator
B
5
S
2
G
6
Posts: 4,348
Reputation: 10,971

Post » Sun Mar 08, 2009 9:47 pm

Yeah, we're not getting anywhere far arguing like that. A cool thing would be to cobble together a _really_ simple game using Construct, the first one using the game design I've described and the second one your design - and let them poll on which experience was more fullfilling, more fun for them. I'd just love to see raw numbers in that case.
B
6
S
2
G
3
Posts: 520
Reputation: 2,690

Post » Sun Mar 08, 2009 9:50 pm

[quote:tnjn8c6z]Anyway, I don't think surprise deaths are any big issue in games, plain and simple. You die, you try again. You fail, you try something different to succeed. That's the name of the game.[/quote:tnjn8c6z]


Where is Kayin when you need him...
also like Bush said "... you just fell for the trap" "... and i refuse to play it."
B
4
S
2
G
4
Posts: 719
Reputation: 2,938

Post » Sun Mar 08, 2009 9:54 pm

[quote="thomasmahler":1tdzn4qq]A cool thing would be to cobble together a _really_ simple game using Construct, the first one using the game design I've described and the second one your design - and let them poll on which experience was more fullfilling, more fun for them. I'd just love to see raw numbers in that case.[/quote:1tdzn4qq]

:roll:

If it's that important for you to be "right" about... opinions... then hey feel free to do whatever you want.
Moderator
B
5
S
2
G
6
Posts: 4,348
Reputation: 10,971

Post » Sun Mar 08, 2009 10:08 pm

I didn't want to be an ass or something, I just think it'd be an interesting study. I'm not a huge fan of unfair passages in games, yet there are thousands of people buying games like Megaman on day one - so it'd be fun to know how people perceive unfair passages that you can only pass using trial and error, especially if you give them two variations, one where it happens and one where it doesn't.

Nothing personal here, I still love you, I just think it'd be interesting to get peoples opinions on this, cause I could of course also be totally wrong about this. That's why we have this nice forum here, to discuss shit like that :)
B
6
S
2
G
3
Posts: 520
Reputation: 2,690

Post » Mon Mar 09, 2009 2:13 am

You can just make a poll thread if you want. Make a few choice options, like;

I like games that are:
A - Super easy, I feel like Rambo, I like to win win WIN!
B - Medium to Hard difficulty, where I will only die from lack of skill
C - Insanely hard, where you will die if you do not posses ESP or a time travel machine

Then let people vote.

~Sol
Tired of crappy file hosts that are crappy? Get DROPBOX - https://db.tt/uwjysXJF
Moderator
B
45
S
17
G
37
Posts: 2,853
Reputation: 25,966

Post » Mon Mar 09, 2009 5:49 am

How about making the games you want to play, your pretty much guaranteed that at least someone will like it.
Screw conformity, screw formulaic design, the context of your presence suggests that's not what you want any way.
thomasmahler, you said games are not entirely regarded as an art form yet, but it is none the less, and as an artist, you should ask yourself "who do I create art for". When you who that is then you will know who you want to make games for.
Image Image
B
161
S
48
G
90
Posts: 7,356
Reputation: 66,767

Post » Fri Mar 13, 2009 10:44 pm

since you're interested in the relationship of gameplay & narration, there is a rather interesting thesis about that. sadly, it is written in german and i could not find a translation. on the off-chance that you can read that language, i'll still post it: it's Britta Neitzel, "Gespielte Geschichten" http://deposit.ddb.de/cgi-bin/dokserv?idn=970619278
B
2
S
2
G
4
Posts: 171
Reputation: 1,792

Post » Sat Mar 14, 2009 11:44 pm

I have read the opening post and wanted to reply, without first reading all replies.
If my message is repeating things that been said already, please forward me back to this topic to let me read all replies first (which I will do after this reply anyway).

In my opinion:
Games can offer amusement like, for example "Horde" in Gears Of War (no story), or very story-driven. Or a mixture of this.
If the story is important, to the creator, don't let the player die too often. It can distract the player from the story.

(gears of war 1 and 2 have a mild story-driven game. There's a (enjoyable) story, but it is not intense, like for example Silent Hill, or Condemned.)

Also, in general, repeating the same things as a player, in intense story driven games, more than 4 or 5 times, is arguably old fashioned and for me a waste of my time if I want to continue with the story.
(If I want a challenge, I change the difficulty to "hard") Prince Of Persia, for example, doesn't let the play die. I like that, personally.

And about linear gameplay: doesn't matter, with intense story driven games.
Tons of good games that are linear.
A movie is not interactive like a game, but people are used to linear storytelling.

Note: perhaps contradictions can be found in my message, but creating (something/a game) deals with making decisions, making concessions. I think I wanted to make that clear.
B
16
S
5
G
7
Posts: 599
Reputation: 5,000

PreviousNext

Return to Open Topic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests