I don't want to debate whether or not it was a good idea to force players to do a completely arbitrary puzzle that would just cut down their playtime in getting back to where they were. ![]() Essentially, cutting out a piece of content altogether. you could essentially skip it and solve it with the set of actions you already did. If you had completed this puzzle and died afterwards. I think the reason it was changed was because there really wasn't a "save system" in place. So it's not a bad idea to signpost it in very obvious terms, and then still let the player be self-destructive if they wish. One interesting point to consider - if the player is literally told (or understands) "You will die if you go any further without a light source", then why not just have the artificial roadblock? What player in their right mind would intentionally press forward knowing they are about to take an automatic Game Over? I'd argue there are players that would still want to do this (mostly the "Spade" types of Bartle's Taxonomy) just to see how it happens. But when looking back at games to understand why they did what they did, the historical perspective that you mention is a great tool to have front and center in your mind. I think you make a really great point about how audiences from different eras will read something like this!! Obviously, when designing games today, it's the most important to keep the expectations of modern audiences in mind (as anyone playing a new game you make has probably played a few other games in the last decade). Alternately, you can open up something like a character or a special cutscene that is only available if you take the challenge on before a certain point - this is extremely satisfying as a reward, but it also opens you up to dissatisfaction from players who didn't take it on as a "missable".Ĭlick to expand. Getting a spell that deals 3x the damage of what you've been working with so far (even if it also costs 5x as much) will make the player feel a rush of power for a while, and eventually they'll learn spells on par with it (in the midgame) so it's only gamebreaking for a little while. all of this helps and (unless you go for the help text) you probably need to do more than one of these things to make it clear.Īs far as rewards for the challenge, generally you want to reward the player with a single element of either power or variety that they otherwise wouldn't be able to obtain until considerably later in the game. Graphical signs, changes in music or screen tone, character dialogue (especially), really tough (and different-looking) monster upfront, a change in the location name, help text that spells out the player is taking on additional challenge. ![]() You shouldn't have to get halfway into a challenge before you know you're not supposed to be taking it on yet. Or the (for some reason rare and apparently blasphemous, if most JRPGs are to be taken as gospel) approach of simply letting the player into the casino early on, with no restrictions or roadblocks whatsoever, so they can enjoy it as a side activity all game long! Where there's no compelling reason to stop the player from doing something, I tend to like letting the player do it.Ĭlick to expand.Signposting is definitely the biggest issue here. ![]() But in a game that takes itself even the slightest bit seriously, I'd prefer something like proposition of a "Members Only" restriction for an exclusive casino, and/or placing the casino somewhere where you might have to do a sidequest or learn a skill to get near it but once you do you can get in. In an extremely silly game, I guess it would be okay. And I couldn't even ask for the manager and kvetch at him! (I sound like a lovely person right now, don't I?) It would add insult to injury when I do the damned four-part sidequest to 'earn' cat food so I can bait the cat out and get into the casino, and then I walk into the casino and everyone is just sitting there playing casino games happily, like they had no problems getting in. Everything inside me would scream, "I'm a Level 84 Hero! Why can't I grab the cat and fling it behind me with such force that PETA will show up in my next random encounter? (Or simply walk forward and make it run away?)" Click to expand.In my opinion (which should be taken with the understanding that I'm one of the most anti-roadblock people out there), yes it is bad.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |