next »

[PoV]

I don't know if this one deserves the prime time, but an interesting concept for design people.  I'm calling them clicking platformers.  Everybody's played Wik, so I wont talk about Wik.  But I found this by accident on the IndieGamer forums.

Snakey Jake (

)

It's your usual casual game fare as far as graphics and polish are concerned.  What I was expecting was a "click on a spot" sort of game and he'll move to that spot, but it's actually click on the platform and he'll move to the nearest place on the platform.  Either by slithering or jumping, where appropriate.  It's a good example of an intelligently simplified control scheme, as I expect several designers will be toying with more in the years to come.

Personally, I don't like this variation of control.  True, it's harder to make mistakes since you can't click anywhere, but it annoys me as a player.  Mostly because I'm a core gamer, and I'd imagine you could do some really interesting things with this gameplay style without the platform restriction.  It also imposes a restriction of "you can only click on platforms that you can safely jump to from this platform".  Good for casual gamers, but not so much for me when I'm in the mood for a suicide jump.  I'm also totally missing the opportunity for a conversation with myself about how I could or should have sooooo made that jump.  Boo.

If I was still doing the roundup, I'd be bouncing back and forth between 6 and 8.  Higher because of design merit, 'cause I think it's a notable game as far as game design for casual gamers, and the only other game I can think of to compare it to is Wik.  Lower because I personally didn't like the decision to go with platform clicking, as a personal gamer preference.  I'd muddle over that for a day if I wasn't behind schedule, or an hour if I was the one holding us back.

[Zaphos]

I'd worry that a point and click control scheme can make the gamer feel impartial toward their character.  Even when it doesn't affect gameplay, just that subtle detail of how directly you control the character can really make the difference between having the player say, "I am this character," versus "I am telling this character what to do."  An impartial player isn't necessarily a game killer -- obviously games like Diablo are extremely successful -- but it really does affect the experience, and even for games like Diablo I think the negative effects are felt.  Actually the main complaints I've heard about Diablo have been related to the clicking.  Something about the fact that the interface is "just clicking" seems to allow people to be much more dismissive of the gameplay than I think they would be if they had a way to directly control the character.

On the other hand, the added control of a clicking scheme does lend itself to a much more strategic experience, so if you want the game to really focus on the puzzle aspects, it's probably a great way to go.

[charliedog]

Hi

It was cool to read your comments PoV.  Very interesting. The idea for the game was that the mouse control frees the player from worrying about the micro decisions which usually dominate platform games "when should I press a button and which button should I press" and allows them to focus on the Macro - "where do I want to move and When?"

How far did you get into the game?  did you get as far as the match three mechanic?  That's what I really wanted to explore with the game and what makes it interesting I think.  Because the player can reach any platform which is within range just by clicking they are able to tackle much more complicated level designs.  In the puzzle gmae this allows them to build chains of tokens and collapse the chain to make combos.  Combos feed back into the main game by boosting Jakes ability and giving him extra powers.  Going for combos is usually risky though so forces the player to make some interesting decisions.  Because the tokens are randomly spawned on the platforms the game always plays differently.  If you have the chance play through to the cave section and try the level "Purity" this level demonstrates the concept really well.  There is a score multiplier based on how many consecutive combos the player gets without losing a life and in Purity scores up to 1,500,000 are possible with practice and skill.  At that level the game really doesn't play anything like a traditional platform game and comes into it's own I think.

Unfortunately that subtlety is a bit lost on the typical casual player

regards,

Tony Oakden
[email protected]
http://charliedoggames.com

[PoV]

I didn't get to the matching stuff, but I saw it in the videos.  To contrast my seemingly negative post, I don't think your decisions of the platform clicking were bad.  I actually wanted to point out the game because you took this angle.  It's something I hadn't considered, and think it's an excellent point of reference and analysis for those interested in doing more with platformers.

The concept of a freeform clicking platformer is one I've toyed with myself, specifically the idea of simplifying a complex control scheme.  In your case, walking along platforms, jumping to targets, and clicking on enemies to jump on them, all reduced to pointing and clicking.  Nice.  In a traditional platformer, this is something done with complex D-PAD controls and a jump button.  But if clicking on enemies to attack them resulted in some sort of gunfire, and suddenly we're on our way to Casual Contra.  A D-PAD plus 2 buttons of complexity, down to the exact same simple scheme of mouse and 1 button.

I could very well be wrong with the idea that a free click anywhere scheme is easier.  If I remember correctly Wik does this.  One mouse button jumps you to the spot, and the other uses your tounge.  With both of those combined to a single button, without the platform click restriction, there's a very good chance you'll be jumping right beside the enemy (probably being hit) instead of shooting them.

[Radix]

I'd worry that a point and click control scheme can make the gamer feel impartial toward their character.  Even when it doesn't affect gameplay, just that subtle detail of how directly you control the character can really make the difference between having the player say, "I am this character," versus "I am telling this character what to do."  An impartial player isn't necessarily a game killer -- obviously games like Diablo are extremely successful -- but it really does affect the experience, and even for games like Diablo I think the negative effects are felt.  Actually the main complaints I've heard about Diablo have been related to the clicking.  Something about the fact that the interface is "just clicking" seems to allow people to be much more dismissive of the gameplay than I think they would be if they had a way to directly control the character.

On the other hand, the added control of a clicking scheme does lend itself to a much more strategic experience, so if you want the game to really focus on the puzzle aspects, it's probably a great way to go.

It could perhaps also be used to create almost the opposite effect, though. By dissociating the player from the character, it may be possible to lead the player to feel responsible for the character rather than simply controlling them. This differs from a virtual pet-type thing as this empathy could develop by the character being in actual peril from the level environment rather than just pooping too much.

Ever play Galapagos? I didn't, because it ran like arse on my machine back in 1998, but I gather this sort of thing was the intention and apparently it was well received.

Edit:
I should probably clarify that so it doesn't just sound like I'm basing my opinion on an impression of a game I've never played.
I agree that slapping this sort of control into a game that doesn't need it might be detrimental to the player's care factor. On the other hand, if the game is developed with such a level of control abstraction (even if it falls into a genre where this isn't traditional, like a platformer), it might lend a completely different quality to the way empathy is built directly through gameplay, as opposed to using story segments like cutscenes that require active attention from the player. (Not necessarily directly, but through methods that are only possible with a distinction between player and character.)

[Guert]

Just for the information...

There's a post about Snakey jake in the "Feedback" forum...

I always felt like, in an action game, if you're going to give me control over my avatar, give me full control or don't make the game. For instance, the "point and click" plateformer gives me half of the control I want for moving to one space to another, which can be frustrating. On the other hand, this simplified scheme may work for beginners but I have yet to test this theory. Newbies have alot to learn when they start a typical plateformer while in this format, they have less and they still enjoy it...

I have mixed feeling about it. I played alot of Snakey jake, no wik tho, it's on my "to play" list. Perhaps with more titles of this type coming out, there will be a game that'll make me say "Oh! That's it!"

Anyway, I gotta go...
Later!

[Robotacon]

It's definitly a type of gameplay that needs to be explored further.
I wouldn't emulate traditional platform games but instead find mechanisms that are tailormade for point n' click.

Think about what the Zapper did with platform gaming on the NES or what the stylus did to DS. Don't know if there are any wii platform games yet.

[sega]

Think about what the Zapper did with platform gaming on the NES or what the stylus did to DS. Don't know if there are any wii platform games yet.

There's Super Paper Mario, but it was a port of a GC game, so it wasn't built from the ground up for Wii.  During active gameplay, there's no pointing involved.  If you point at the screen, everything pauses.  And all that does is give enemy info, or show hidden (yet obvious) doors.  It's useful, but it's not an active-gameplay element.  The game is awesome, don't get me wrong.  It's just that the Wii-specific controls were added on.

And for those that need examples, the Zapper was used in Gumshoe on NES, and the stylus was especially used on Kirby's Canvas Curse on DS.  The Kirby game was REALLY good in my opinion.  I've seen an indie game or two copy the control style, but nowhere as well.