Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

 
Advanced search

1411276 Posts in 69323 Topics- by 58380 Members - Latest Member: bob1029

March 28, 2024, 12:21:24 PM

Need hosting? Check out Digital Ocean
(more details in this thread)
TIGSource ForumsDeveloperDesignEasy gameplay vs replayability?
Pages: 1 [2] 3
Print
Author Topic: Easy gameplay vs replayability?  (Read 8019 times)
Michaël Samyn
Level 3
***



View Profile WWW
« Reply #20 on: November 07, 2008, 02:18:07 AM »

Would you mind expanding on what you mean and that, Zuper? I hope you're being misunderstood. Liek sirrisly, this isn't about multiple endings in console RPGs is it?

No. It's much more simple than that. It's about a game of exploration where the discovery of most elements is optional to proceed in the game. Optional but nice. Plus we did a lot of work to create those elements. So we want people to see them.

It just seems that players value the discovery more if it took them some effort to get to it. In the case of our game, the effort required is simply patience and persistence (it's not a skill-based game).
Logged

Tale of Tales now creating Sunset
mjau
Level 3
***



View Profile
« Reply #21 on: November 08, 2008, 01:14:06 AM »

Have some faith in your players.  Specially if it's an exploration game, the people playing are probably people who like to explore, you know?  To discover things.  You can't do that if everything is thrown in your face.

Little secrets are nice.  I don't see it as just catering to the OCD'ers, it's also providing more detail to the game, making it richer.  Which is nice.
Logged
Michaël Samyn
Level 3
***



View Profile WWW
« Reply #22 on: November 08, 2008, 02:19:46 AM »

Yes. I think we're going to take the advice given here to heart by adding guides for the players gradually, as rewards for doing certain things. As a bonus this also helps us to introduce these guides and explain what they mean. So rather than giving them the full game with all guides from the start, or giving them all the guides after completing the game, we'll "unlock" the guide systems one by one. We hope to get the best of both worlds that way: a mysterious exploration game in the beginning that gradually offers more help before the exploration risks to become tedious. We hope that by that time, the people who enjoy the mystery will be able to choose whether they even want to use these guide systems.
Logged

Tale of Tales now creating Sunset
Hajo
Level 5
*****

Dream Mechanic


View Profile
« Reply #23 on: November 10, 2008, 01:56:08 AM »

Have some faith in your players.  Specially if it's an exploration game, the people playing are probably people who like to explore, you know?

Make pretty clear though that it is an exploration game. Many people nowadays expect rather strict guidance by a game and will be like "The game does not tell me what to do". Freedom is nice for many, but some players cannot enjoy it it seems. Some will whine at you, if your game gives them too much freedom.

But actually, those are just not your target audience, and if you change your program to guide the players more strictly, you'll loose those who like freedom ... I think you must decide and accept that you cannot cater both audiences equally well with the same game.
Logged

Per aspera ad astra
Neo1493
Level 0
***


View Profile
« Reply #24 on: November 11, 2008, 12:43:06 AM »

I like replayability then again I dont like easy games but anyway I really like the feeling of exploration and freedom in games finding all the secret areas and items feels rewarding
Logged
SpaceBrance
Level 1
*


The one with White Eyes


View Profile
« Reply #25 on: November 11, 2008, 11:21:04 AM »

Easily replayibilty.

Beating a game in one sit down isn't an accomplishment in my books.
Logged
konjak
Level 4
****


Bad to the bone.


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: November 11, 2008, 11:55:12 AM »

I really do love games that are replayable. That usually, for my tastes, mean it's not too hard and not too long. Everything is compacted and not drawn out, which makes me want to experience those moments again and again, instead of making me sick of it the first time. It's also the way I strive to make action games.

It helps that, instead of having a feature be played out within one session, the event is short and sweet, because it will take longer to experience it again because you replay. It makes it fresh for a longer time than if it returned again and again in the game itself.
Logged
Loren Schmidt
Level 10
*****



View Profile WWW
« Reply #27 on: November 13, 2008, 11:16:31 AM »

good observations
I strongly agree with the idea of keeping games succinct. It's also a huge plus if a game is rewarding for players of varying skill, and can be played on multiple levels. That way I'll want to pick up the game again, not only so I can experience it, but so I can get three more chains in stage one, or improve my time for the second tower.

I think the 2d Mario games and Ikaruga are both good examples of games that are more replayable because of this kind of depth.
Logged
azeo
Level 1
*

Blank slate!


View Profile
« Reply #28 on: November 13, 2008, 10:37:28 PM »

I actually had a conversation similar to this a couple weeks ago in the irc channel. It was about whether or not I should include endings which are easier to obtain (as in, instead of beating level B and getting an ending, you can beat level A and say "no, I don't want to go to level B" and get a different, but just as satisfying ending).

For me, it all depends upon the type of replayability. It often makes me mad where I have go through an entire game again just to see a different cutscene because I made X choice. I feel the best kind of replayability is one where you can load your old save and go back and change it. Say, in fable, you can load up your end of game save where you were good and just be evil, and you'll get basically the same experience. Or, if the first time playing Knytt you find one of the secrets. What I'm basically saying is that I like replayability if it is only to go back and finish things, such as finding all the hidden items, stuff that never gets "cut off".

Easy gameplay? If by easy, you mean not challenging, then I think that it should be avoided unless you were not going for a gameplay game. If you mean easily rewarding, then go ahead, you should always try and make the game as rewarding as you can. Pack in that fun.
Logged
Michaël Samyn
Level 3
***



View Profile WWW
« Reply #29 on: November 13, 2008, 11:14:21 PM »

This question runs the risk of getting of topic. But how do you feel about the challenge of the game being the requirement to motivate yourself as a player rather than relying on the game to do so? In such a game, setting up traditional game "challenges" actually makes the game easier because it clearly tells the player what to do.
Logged

Tale of Tales now creating Sunset
ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)
Level 10
*****


Also known as रिंकू.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #30 on: November 14, 2008, 12:08:37 AM »

Easier in one sense, more difficult in another, two different planes.

I think it's best to have layers. In other words, have things in the game which would appeal to different kinds of people, and don't require that they focus on one or the other. As an example, people had different playing styles in getting through Immortal Defense, some chose easy mode (or even used the cheat keys) and just read the story, others skipped the story and played the levels and focused on getting the highest score for each level, and some did a combination of both.

So I'd say a good idea is to make most things in a game optional, allowing players to play it in a way suited to themselves. Some players need challenges as a guide, others don't, so make a way for both of them to enjoy the game.
Logged

Michaël Samyn
Level 3
***



View Profile WWW
« Reply #31 on: November 14, 2008, 12:46:36 AM »

Some players need challenges as a guide, others don't, so make a way for both of them to enjoy the game.

I agree. But I think that finding the right balance could be very difficult and I admire anyone who succeeds in doing that. The risk of this approach is that the tools of one play style can ruin the joy that can be received from the other. Which I guess, leads us back to the original topic of this thread.

I'm torn between finding a right balance to appeal to a large variety of people and leaning over to one side heavily in order to fully satisfy a certain subsection of the audience.
Logged

Tale of Tales now creating Sunset
ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)
Level 10
*****


Also known as रिंकू.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #32 on: November 14, 2008, 12:59:48 AM »

Understandable, sometimes tightly focused can be better, but I don't think there are any necessary trade-offs or compromises required if the layering is done well. I think that as long as the game doesn't force you to pass challenges / view lengthly bits of story / etc. in order to progress in the game, there's no real interference because they can always elect to skip what they don't like and take what they do. Sort of how adding voice acting to a game wouldn't really harm it for people who hate voice acting if there's an option to turn it off and use subtitles instead.
Logged

Michaël Samyn
Level 3
***



View Profile WWW
« Reply #33 on: November 14, 2008, 01:10:29 AM »

I'm not sure if everything should be optional in a game. It does indeed offer the maximum amount of freedom to the player but it could water down your content to a point where this freedom becomes meaningless.

And what about optionality itself? Is it optional? This is actually the case in our games, which tend to never tell the player explicitly what to do, and where there is no right or wrong thing to do.
Logged

Tale of Tales now creating Sunset
ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)
Level 10
*****


Also known as रिंकू.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #34 on: November 14, 2008, 01:18:46 AM »

Well, they already have the freedom to play or not play a game, so granting them the ability to play particular parts and not other parts is no different than, say, the ability of someone reading a novel to skip passages of description that are too wordy (often when I read novels I skip descriptive paragraphs of scenery etc. entirely). I don't think it's watering it down, it's more a matter of convenience, the way games normally allow you to turn the music off if you wish.

It's not right or wrong not to listen to the music of a game, or not to read lengthy descriptions, and I don't think it waters something down if someone skips things like that. It's more like giving the player the responsibility to find the value in a work. Although yes, there's always a chance that they'll never find that value if it's too optional and they turn off the option when they would have enjoyed it if they had pursued it. Making something optional makes it easier for them to give up on it.
Logged

Michaël Samyn
Level 3
***



View Profile WWW
« Reply #35 on: November 14, 2008, 02:10:35 AM »

I don't think you can say that you have read a novel if you skipped parts of it. Or seen a movie if you slept half of the time.

And what about painting? Can we cover up the top half of the Mona Lisa and still understand and appreciate it? Or only listen to the overture of an opera and skip the annoying singing bits? Sure, you might have created a moment of joy for yourself. But you also denied yourself a new experience, a deeper understanding, etc.

Isn't it part of the responsibility of the designer to give his audience the opportunity to enjoy something they may not have expected, and to optimize the chances for the wisdom contained in the work to be considered?

I guess this is another balancing act: only features that are fairly irrelevant should be optional but essential bits should be required. Then again, I think would have enjoyed Half Life 2 a lot better if it didn't have all the shooting... I wish that part of the game would have been optional. That would have actually made the work more meaningful to me. But perhaps in a way that was not intended by the makers.
Logged

Tale of Tales now creating Sunset
ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)
Level 10
*****


Also known as रिंकू.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #36 on: November 14, 2008, 02:17:01 AM »

Not the top half, but the Mona Lisa probably wouldn't be too adversely harmed by losing some of the background. And we do have the option of covering up the top half, you can even learn a few new things that way (for instance, just looking at the smile without the eyes, or vice versa).

I agree that there's the risk of avoiding new experiences, but I think you have to balance that against the risk of them quitting the game and not getting any new experiences at all if they don't like you forcing them to do things that they don't want to do. Or even not downloading the game. In any of those ways they wouldn't experience something.
Logged

Michaël Samyn
Level 3
***



View Profile WWW
« Reply #37 on: November 14, 2008, 02:33:37 AM »

True. But the problem of our type of "game" design is that we don't force players to do anything. And some find this problematic. They want to be forced.
Logged

Tale of Tales now creating Sunset
Hajo
Level 5
*****

Dream Mechanic


View Profile
« Reply #38 on: November 14, 2008, 03:19:23 AM »

True. But the problem of our type of "game" design is that we don't force players to do anything. And some find this problematic. They want to be forced.

Those are not your target audience then. You cannot cater all, really. Make the game your way and for the people who think like you do. You cannot make a game that everyone likes, not even the big companies with tons of money and hordes of developers can.

Just make it clear what kind of game it is, and hope that people will actually read and understand.
Logged

Per aspera ad astra
Loren Schmidt
Level 10
*****



View Profile WWW
« Reply #39 on: November 16, 2008, 12:43:02 AM »

On the topic of optional activities-
Personally, I feel that if a game is well crafted I find myself enjoying activities that I wouldn't ordinarily choose to participate in. If a gameplay activity is important to you as a developer, I think it will come across in the finished product. All the extra love will really make players enjoy it more.

True. But the problem of our type of "game" design is that we don't force players to do anything. And some find this problematic. They want to be forced.
In the DS version of Animal Crossing, if you don't water your flowers they die. If you ask me, being forced to do it doesn't make watering things any more fun. But some people really enjoy running around their towns with a watering can- they enjoy the having a tangible goal. I think both are valid approaches to playing.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3
Print
Jump to:  

Theme orange-lt created by panic