4 ms·

> I like exploring and discovering and figuring things out. I understand this is very common, but for me: "discovering and figuring things out" in games often

> I like exploring and discovering and figuring things out. I understand this is very common, but for me: "discovering and figuring things out" in games often becomes: "guess what the game devs want me to do." Oh, is there something on the other side of that hill? Meh, not really. What about at the top of that cliff? Oh I can only sort of climb it? Should I keep trying or am I just going to hit an invisible wall? Is this enemy way too tough for me with my current equipment, or do I just need to get better? Am I doing things in the wrong order and just making things way tougher? Some games are better about it than others, but I already know I'm playing a game. I don't get much enjoyment from "finding" something that was put there for me to find. I like stories, characters, and world-building. I don't need a giant yellow HUD arrow, but there's nothing fun about wandering aimlessly in hopes of finding something mildly interesting. I already know there are N mildly interesting things on the map, each within a focus-tested ~30 second distance from each other. So for me at least, I'll take the map markers.

sfn42 2y ago
For me, this is mostly about what kind of information a player expects to find in a game. For example in Overwatch 2, there are no numbers on abilities. It's just something like "fires a rocket at the enemy" - how much damage does the rocket do? How long is the cooldown? Can it crit if it hits an enemy in the head? In other games there might be items or talents with tooltips like "increases your damage" - how much? Is it additive or multiplicative with other modifiers? I like games where this kind of information is easily available. I won't look up how to complete a quest or something unless I'm completely stuck on it, but I will look up numbers so I can make informed decisions instead of just guessing what might be good.
- lmm 2y ago
  > I like games where this kind of information is easily available. I won't look up how to complete a quest or something unless I'm completely stuck on it, but I will look up numbers so I can make informed decisions instead of just guessing what might be good. Isn't that even more immersion- and game-breaking? Figuring out what kind of attacks have what kind of effect on what kind of enemy is generally part of the game.
  - noirscape 2y ago
    The difficulty with experimenting is that most powerful attacks in games like this tend to have some sort of limit associated with it. Players won't for example feel the need to use this super powerful item they found and see how well it works because they only have one copy of that item. The best way to avoid this is to give players access to low/zero opportunity cost versions of strong items so they can get a good "feel" of when to use stronger things in their arsenal. Players need to be able to safely experiment with their kit but that experimentation also has to happen in an environment where it can be meaningfully tested. (You can see this with the dark souls formula on both ends; because death and healing are both low cost resources to manage, players are more incentivized to experiment, since the cost for a "dud" attempt at a tough boss fight/figuring out a weapon is much lower. Meanwhile rarer items like summoning allies have a much greater cost attached to them, meaning players don't feel driven to use them since if they die, they now lost a rare and valuable resource they could've used elsewhere.)
  - johnnyanmac 2y ago
    it's a bit of an issue experimenting in PvP early on. Because odds are that vets have already distilled out that discovery and know exactly what each attack does, who counters it, and when and how to maximize synergy. Someone already did that legwork and will use the knowledge against you.
AStonesThrow 2y ago
Moon Logic Puzzles: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MoonLogicPuzzle https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MoonLogicPuzzle
keyringlight 2y ago
I'm reminded of one of the developer commentaries on one of the Valve games, that designing games is as much about teaching as it is 'making fun'. It's not just about setting up start and end points, a challenge between them, and informing the player of the mechanics involved at least once beforehand. For any teaching on a topic with a broad audience there will be different attitudes from the students and how much prompting is needed, they may be returning to it after a long break, you might be drawing from lessons a long time ago. Then most games try to put that in an immersive world without breaking the 4th wall more than they can help it and have the challenge fit and be plausible within it. Graphics and detail levels are constantly increasing, and may be variable depending on the user's system which can obscure/reveal any hints/prompts or deliberately hidden elements they needs to see to progress (and similar with other senses). And after all that, the range of players need to hit a Goldilocks "just right" amount of resistance so it feels like a fair challenge to conquer, not be drawn out of the experience, and whatever extra goals are laid on top such as slowing pacing so story/lore/character conversations can play out.
drw85 2y ago
I agree that the busy work in todays open world games are mostly boring and not providing any kind of experience. But that's also part of the problem of modern game design. Side content is mostly boring and useless.
- johnnyanmac 2y ago
  People voted with their wallets for more hours per dollar instead o focusing on the quality of that hour, so that's the way the game design went. Until people stop being sold on "over 200 quests!" not much will change in the AAA world.
  - moduspol 2y ago
    Honestly I think every year that goes by in which the entire market is not consumed by F2P, battle royale, microtransaction-ridden shovelware, we're lucky for whatever we get left. Though perhaps I'm just a bit cynical.

sfn42 2y ago

For me, this is mostly about what kind of information a player expects to find in a game. For example in Overwatch 2, there are no numbers on abilities. It's just something like "fires a rocket at the enemy" - how much damage does the rocket do? How long is the cooldown? Can it crit if it hits an enemy in the head? In other games there might be items or talents with tooltips like "increases your damage" - how much? Is it additive or multiplicative with other modifiers? I like games where this kind of information is easily available. I won't look up how to complete a quest or something unless I'm completely stuck on it, but I will look up numbers so I can make informed decisions instead of just guessing what might be good.

lmm 2y ago
> I like games where this kind of information is easily available. I won't look up how to complete a quest or something unless I'm completely stuck on it, but I will look up numbers so I can make informed decisions instead of just guessing what might be good. Isn't that even more immersion- and game-breaking? Figuring out what kind of attacks have what kind of effect on what kind of enemy is generally part of the game.
- noirscape 2y ago
  The difficulty with experimenting is that most powerful attacks in games like this tend to have some sort of limit associated with it. Players won't for example feel the need to use this super powerful item they found and see how well it works because they only have one copy of that item. The best way to avoid this is to give players access to low/zero opportunity cost versions of strong items so they can get a good "feel" of when to use stronger things in their arsenal. Players need to be able to safely experiment with their kit but that experimentation also has to happen in an environment where it can be meaningfully tested. (You can see this with the dark souls formula on both ends; because death and healing are both low cost resources to manage, players are more incentivized to experiment, since the cost for a "dud" attempt at a tough boss fight/figuring out a weapon is much lower. Meanwhile rarer items like summoning allies have a much greater cost attached to them, meaning players don't feel driven to use them since if they die, they now lost a rare and valuable resource they could've used elsewhere.)
- johnnyanmac 2y ago
  it's a bit of an issue experimenting in PvP early on. Because odds are that vets have already distilled out that discovery and know exactly what each attack does, who counters it, and when and how to maximize synergy. Someone already did that legwork and will use the knowledge against you.

AStonesThrow 2y ago

Moon Logic Puzzles: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MoonLogicPuzzle https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MoonLogicPuzzle

keyringlight 2y ago

I'm reminded of one of the developer commentaries on one of the Valve games, that designing games is as much about teaching as it is 'making fun'. It's not just about setting up start and end points, a challenge between them, and informing the player of the mechanics involved at least once beforehand. For any teaching on a topic with a broad audience there will be different attitudes from the students and how much prompting is needed, they may be returning to it after a long break, you might be drawing from lessons a long time ago. Then most games try to put that in an immersive world without breaking the 4th wall more than they can help it and have the challenge fit and be plausible within it. Graphics and detail levels are constantly increasing, and may be variable depending on the user's system which can obscure/reveal any hints/prompts or deliberately hidden elements they needs to see to progress (and similar with other senses). And after all that, the range of players need to hit a Goldilocks "just right" amount of resistance so it feels like a fair challenge to conquer, not be drawn out of the experience, and whatever extra goals are laid on top such as slowing pacing so story/lore/character conversations can play out.

drw85 2y ago

I agree that the busy work in todays open world games are mostly boring and not providing any kind of experience. But that's also part of the problem of modern game design. Side content is mostly boring and useless.

johnnyanmac 2y ago
People voted with their wallets for more hours per dollar instead o focusing on the quality of that hour, so that's the way the game design went. Until people stop being sold on "over 200 quests!" not much will change in the AAA world.
- moduspol 2y ago
  Honestly I think every year that goes by in which the entire market is not consumed by F2P, battle royale, microtransaction-ridden shovelware, we're lucky for whatever we get left. Though perhaps I'm just a bit cynical.