Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Game Structure

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Game Structure

    I have a question for the community. Do you enjoy the immersion of having to find the next step or do you find that tedious and prefer to be pointed to the next action?

    In a situation like the current MYT game this is a moot point as the next step appears right below the one you have just taken, however in games like the corporate raider series often taking an action with one character would make accessible an option with another character which was not immediately obvious from where you were at in the interface.

    So my question is if you do interaction A with NPC 1 and that activates interaction B with NPC 2 would you rather be informed that interaction B was now available or would you prefer to have to find it on your own?

    #2
    Originally posted by spartacus View Post
    I have a question for the community. Do you enjoy the immersion of having to find the next step or do you find that tedious and prefer to be pointed to the next action?

    In a situation like the current MYT game this is a moot point as the next step appears right below the one you have just taken, however in games like the corporate raider series often taking an action with one character would make accessible an option with another character which was not immediately obvious from where you were at in the interface.

    So my question is if you do interaction A with NPC 1 and that activates interaction B with NPC 2 would you rather be informed that interaction B was now available or would you prefer to have to find it on your own?
    I'm interested in thot son this too!
    Always working behind the scenes

    Comment


      #3
      Personally, I think it feels more immersive to figure out the next step yourself. However, at the same time, it can be frustrating when the game irrevocably punishes you for not choosing correctly, whether it's by missing content or a negative story outcome, especially if you're going to have to go back and replay the entire game in order to correct your mistake. It's a fine line between immersive and frustrating, which I think SC games usually do a good job of walking.

      Comment


        #4
        personally i like non linear games.
        where you have multiple end path and that you feel you actually affected the outcome.

        a great solution is what was done in suit to skirt -> where you have option and choise between several ending and you been given a walk ltrough file for the lazy

        Comment


          #5
          I am stupid and like it when the interface explain things to me. The more complicated a game is the more I appreciate handholding with tooltips. My favorite games are paradox were you get flashing notifications when new options open up. I like storytelling games and I love strategy games but I bloody well hate puzzle games. If a game will not let me do something, I want to know a) why and b) what needs to be done to allow me to do it.

          I hated the interface in Selecta’s early games were you click on a box and nothing happens because some perquisite for picking that option is not fulfilled. I need the game to tell me that I do not have enough action points/money/whatever.

          Comment


            #6
            It depends on whether the choices are interesting and the process for figuring out what to do next is fun and satisfying.

            If it's random, or the cause and effect is unclear, the process of figuring out what to do next can be no more than random button clicking, which is not a lot of fun. OTOH, where the process itself makes sense, it can make for a much more satisfying game.

            Comment


              #7
              Thanks for the great feedback this was just what I was looking for. It seems that people enjoy the immersion, but unless the path is clear tool tips are preferred to avoid excessive hunting for the next step (click fest) or situations where things are missed and difficult to find.

              Comment


                #8
                I like the IDEA of finding things myself. But I dislike the REALITY of not bing able to find them
                But that leads to the interesting topic of game design. If you have to jump through hoops just to take a slightly different route through the game it can be quite frustrating.Perhaps two or three distinctly different, playable story threads would work? But I guess the logistics of that are down to the individual designer.

                Comment


                  #9
                  To jump on this bandwagon somewhat late...

                  I think the "correct" answer ties in with mechanical complexity AND replayability of the game

                  The more replayable a game is (either by using a "save/load" feature or just replaying the game outright), the less transparent you can afford to be, because people are naturally inclined to play through the game over and over again anyway. These multiple playthroughs in turn guarantee the player will eventually uncover more and more stuff just by simple virtue of 'trying something different" each time. As such, the game can get away with not explicitly showing everything.
                  For a game to have high replay value there needs to be
                  (a) very good gameplay (so playing over isn't a hassle, but something the player actually wants to do)
                  (b) inbuilt systems that prevent you from experiencing everything in one go (e.g. mutually exclusive choices, time limits that prevent you from experiencing everything, etc)

                  The more complex the game is, the more transparent it needs to be. MYT is somewhat mechanically complex in that the game has a LOT of things that the player can click on from the moment the game start. Granted, these are all things that the game could (and probably should) clarify with a tutorial of sorts. As a rule of thumb, the more complex a game is, the more it should work to make its mechanics clear... but this isn't always the case, as many games thrive on the complexity of their rules (e.g. D&D.) That being said, whether or not the mechanics are clear, games with complex mechanics involve a lot of decisions that the player needs to make that tie to the "mechanics" of the game, rather than the "narrative" of the game. To help the player make the difference between the two, even games that thrive on complex mechanics will usually separate the two clearly.
                  This might be a bit hard to grasp; take MYT for example; a lot of player "actions' in the game are about building up a stat pool that unlocks the possibility of going for various "sponsors". From a gameplay standpoint, the hard "branching" choice lies with which sponsor your take, the other "actions" being merely "prerequisites" that you need to satisfy. However, unless there's something in the game design (e.g. a sponsor specific screen with clear progression and requirements) that highlights which is which, it is impossible for the player to know what the "narrative" choices are, and what the "gameplay" choices are.

                  Putting it all together

                  1. The more complex a game is, the more clearly it has to advertise the "big narrrative" choices to help the player identify them from the small "gameplay" choices.
                  2. The more replayable a game is, the less transparent it can afford to be with regards to narrative choices but...
                  The player should still have a sense of what the big choices are so they KNOW what to look for when they play again

                  Applying this to MYT in its current state, i'd argue that MYT could do a better job of explaining its mechanics to the player, and would probably benefit from being less "grindy" overall; i'd argue for fewer turns with higher impact/turn (i.e. increase the stat point impact of every click). This would mean that each playthrough would be shorter thereby limiting the player's ability to experience everything in one go, while making each replay more enjoyable (since it takes less time).

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X