next »

[John Sandoval]

I despise main menus and intro credits. They're just bullshit that I have to wait 30 seconds through to get to the good stuff.

[TheLastBanana]

In my experience, it's really jarring to be thrown straight into the game. Yeah, it means less waiting and clicking before you play, but depending on the game it can just look unpolished. That and a main menu lets you consolidate saving, loading, options, et cetera into one screen. You can do all that in a pause menu, too, of course, but again, most people find that very unorthodox.

[boxedlunch]

Auntie Pixelante had some pretty good title screens for multiplayer games, mainly in Chicanery. This game's title almost instantly put players into the game once they are ready to play with almost no delay in getting to the game (save for the delay to see how many people were playing). It also goes right back to the main screen once the game is over and you can pretty much quickly go right back into a game. So it's perfect for quick rounds without a constant barrage of options and useless crap to go through, and any options you have to pick from are pretty much chosen as you press your individual start button.

    

[HyperNexus]

In my experience, it's really jarring to be thrown straight into the game. Yeah, it means less waiting and clicking before you play, but depending on the game it can just look unpolished. That and a main menu lets you consolidate saving, loading, options, et cetera into one screen. You can do all that in a pause menu, too, of course, but again, most people find that very unorthodox.

I think the implementation is pretty important otherwise it can some off as feeling jaring. Braid is a good example of doing this well. You don't even think about the title or menu screen in that game. Computerised versions of games like Chess also tend not to use title screens.

To most people it may feel unorthodox but most people who play games and design games are people already steeped in the traditions about what games are and how they should be presented. So anything that is different will be unorthodox. Just a thought but maybe having a title screen is just an artifact from the arcade era in the same way that limited lives were.

[Noah!]

Yes, it's unorthodox, but remember that you're dealing with a UI here, not a mechanic (such as limited lives), and when it comes to UIs intuitiveness is god. That being said, I agree with you on many of your points, though I would have to stress that the implementation of the non-titlescreen is super freaking important. Aside from that, though, I'd love to see more examples of this kind of thing.

Also, am I the only person here who really likes minimalist title screens? For example, two of my favorites are Raf World and Day of the Idea (up to 0:07). They're simple, clean, and unobtrusive, at least in my opinion.

[Konidias]

I don't really think the answer is to just not have a title screen. To me it just seems like you'd be doing it merely to not be like every other game. Honestly I always get a little concerned when people start doing the "cool kid" thing, where you do things not necessarily because you want to, but because you want to be different from everybody else.

If everyone takes the advice of not having a title screen, eventually title screens will disappear... and then you'll see someone posting about how "someone should really do a title screen, nobody does those anymore, it would be different and unique".

I'm all for creativity... but doing things differently from everyone else "just because" is not really being creative.

[TheLastBanana]

I do agree that you can have a game without a title screen, or one that implements the gameplay as part of the title screen - plenty of games have done it. My point was that because it's unusual for people, it may turn them off of the game. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm all for including unusual things in games that people won't expect or might even make them stop playing, but it just seems like entirely removing the title screen is almost unnecessary. The main thing is that it fits in some games, but not in others.
For instance, it would be a pain in the ass to browse through available servers in an FPS without the title screen. You could include it in-game, but then where do you put the player while they aren't in a server? Now you have to go and make a new map for them to go in, and add in assets that work like a title screen but fit into the game. Sure, you've avoided a standard title screen, but has it actually accomplished anything? The player is still going to realize "okay, I'm not in the game yet, I'm in this empty starting level".
Now, on the other hand, with something like Spelunky's title screen, it definitely fits - you're exploring caves with doors that lead to other places, so it makes perfect sense that the title screen would be just that.

[Danrul]

Title Screens/Menus are fun as hell to make and draw.





I make a sport of it.

[HyperNexus]

Just to clarify, I'm not advocating that all games should not have title screens. I just think that some games could do without them because they are simply not needed, they get in the way. TheLastBanana highlighted a good example where it may be better to have a title screen.

I'm all for creativity... but doing things differently from everyone else "just because" is not really being creative.

Yes that's true because people are just copying the surface of the reasons to make such a decision. That'll(hopefully) be reflected in the final product.

[DancingInTheDarkx]

I don't know if anybody else has this problem, but it's tough to make an aesthetically pleasing main menu while retaining its functionality.  There's just so much space to fill, I never know what to do with it all.
That said, it would be nice to see some examples of really good main menus for reference.  I suppose this could sort of become a hall of main menu fame or something, just to give some interesting ideas for menu design.
I'll start off:
I generally like menus that you can move your character around in, like in Fancypants Adventure or Spelunky.  It's kind of neat to be able to get a bit of a feel for the game before you've even started, and it's far more interesting than just moving a cursor or hitting buttons.  My one problem with it is that it doesn't always work - some more emotionally involving games need the player to be immersed while actually playing.

totes mcgotes.
i dont like my title screens being too distracting cause then people think the game is hard and dont wanna paly it

[pixhead]

Just to clarify, I'm not advocating that all games should not have title screens. I just think that some games could do without them because they are simply not needed, they get in the way. TheLastBanana highlighted a good example where it may be better to have a title screen.

I agree with you 150% one of the things that pisses me off more than anything else is an arcade game that forces you to press start or enter everytime you play it.

[John Sandoval]

Flash games force you to do that in order to activate the flash window.