Game Design Discussion

[mcfar45]

Johnathan Blow, the developer of Braid, has stated his views on the way that modern AAA titles are being designed.

He says that there is too much hand holding in games, and I agree with that. He says that there needs to be a moment in the gamer's mind where they realise what they are supposed to do. There can be hints but no hand-holding.

I agree with the majority of his points. Most AAA titles these days tell you what to do, when to do it and remind you constantly. In my opinion this is due to the game industry going mainstream and earning significant money in recent years. The developers are catering to the mass market and making the gamer feel stupid.

Most indie games don't do this and this is why I love playing indie games. I think that mainstream devs could learn a lot from the indie developers. Games need to challenge and to intrigue the player and allow the player to think and make them feel like they can solve the problem.

What are your thoughts on this?

 

[mcfar45]

Bumping this thread as I think it is a worthwhile discussion!

 

[mcfar45]

So...no one has an opinion on this?

 

[Fdbl]

I agree on the categorization.
Categorised as to what you feel when you play the game.

I also concur with the 'joy of discovery' thing.
Great thoughts.

 

[Hawke]

I always considered Valve games a good example of game design, usually proven through the details they describe in their dev commentary. It was usually based on clever touches and artistic design decisions that actually hinted at what you should do next. In a Valve game I would usually get lost or stuck in a spot, then start searching for visual cues into where I needed to go next. I would sometimes quit in a hard spot then return and finish the same spot on the first try. There wasn't much pushing and everything was nicely paced. Also if Half-Life 2 was made like a CoD game you would start getting annoyed by the amount of times your companion Alyx would scream at you to do something specific or to move.

 

[bbgunshot]

I always considered Valve games a good example of game design, usually proven through the details they describe in their dev commentary. It was usually based on clever touches and artistic design decisions that actually hinted at what you should do next. In a Valve game I would usually get lost or stuck in a spot, then start searching for visual cues into where I needed to go next. I would sometimes quit in a hard spot then return and finish the same spot on the first try. There wasn't much pushing and everything was nicely paced. Also if Half-Life 2 was made like a CoD game you would start getting annoyed by the amount of times your companion Alyx would scream at you to do something specific or to move.

And valve is also an independent company too.

 

[Hawke]

And valve is also an independent company too.

Valve is big, like REALLY big. I'm surprised they don't pump out games at a faster rate.

 

[bbgunshot]

Valve is big, like REALLY big. I'm surprised they don't pump out games at a faster rate.

Duh lol. What I mean is they are they're own company.

 

[Creeper]

Valve is big, like REALLY big. I'm surprised they don't pump out games at a faster rate.

They take time making their games.

A really long time.

 

[Hawke]

Also having recently finished Half Life 2: Episode 2, I have now joined the crowd that's beating it's head against the wall wondering why the hell didn't they release Episode 3 already. I figure we can expect it never coming out now.

 

[mcfar45]

Valve is the exception of the big developers. They act like an indie dev and they provide excellent games that make you think!

 

[mcfar45]

Bumping this topic again to say that some hand-holding is acceptable for some games but I think that people are going to get tired of being told what they should be doing and when they should be doing it.

 

[Patchouli]

Somewhat related

 

[mcfar45]

Somewhat related

Megaman is the perfect example of how to get it right!

 

[rsmv2you]

Johnathan Blow, the developer of Braid, has stated his views on the way that modern AAA titles are being designed.

He says that there is too much hand holding in games, and I agree with that. He says that there needs to be a moment in the gamer's mind where they realise what they are supposed to do. There can be hints but no hand-holding.

I agree with the majority of his points. Most AAA titles these days tell you what to do, when to do it and remind you constantly. In my opinion this is due to the game industry going mainstream and earning significant money in recent years. The developers are catering to the mass market and making the gamer feel stupid.

Most indie games don't do this and this is why I love playing indie games. I think that mainstream devs could learn a lot from the indie developers. Games need to challenge and to intrigue the player and allow the player to think and make them feel like they can solve the problem.

What are your thoughts on this?

See the problem with all of this is that main AAA titles are design and appeal to the average person which when it comes to gaming is in fact, stupid. Almost half of the people lets say playing legend of zelda or mw3 are people who are coming into gaming and mw3 or something like that is there "first game". Now once they think," oh all games are like this, this is easy, I know what to do, there is no challenge to this, it is simply what I expect, this is fun to me because I know no other fun." A big gaming company needs to look at indie gaming and hell look back at old games on the n64 or the gamecube. A few of those games had the sense of "I am not going to waist your time with fillers but here is what I have given you, you figure it out" which is what I miss in video games. I mean my god I played a few games for the Wii and I was amazed I found these "fun" years ago.

The standard for gaming is, make something that appeals to the mainstream majority and then get the money and fix what needs to be fixed in the game and then forget it and move onto the next half assed game because people are, to no surprise, get bored of that game.
Look at Call of Duty. It is a very prime example of appeal to mainstream masses. They put out a game every year. Now, most people that go from game to game each year are usually bored half way through the year and spend the other half of the year grueling on through the cod there on waiting for the new one.

If they made a game and took there time and said "Hey, lets actually take out time on this. Lets not half ass this, lets put out a beta, lets think of something new, lets go with something that no one has done and lets take out time with it." But you see, doing this would appeal to the smart, determined gamer that enjoys this but you look at what, 85% of the world which are simply gamers that bought there first system which was an xbox a year ago and these people will be disappointed. They will be confused, they will be lost. The fun will be taken from them because they are not used to such things because the level for games is set for someone who is, indeed, stupid. Which is why people get, bored of the game, and lost of people find these games "easy".

Most games that are design for "the creative, the look at this situation and make of it what you can but It wont take you too long but it proves a challenge". These games are indie games, and they are old games and this should be something a lot of AAA titles should look at.


Just my opinion/observation on the situation.

 

[mcfar45]

One key piece of hand-holding I can remember was, when I played a preview of the Battlefield 3 Single Player, there was a constant mark over one guys head that said "Follow Him". It stayed there throughout. They could have had it there once and then distinguished him in some way (like a yellow highlight around him or something) rather than holding my hand in case I forget.

 

[mcfar45]

See the problem with all of this is that main AAA titles are design and appeal to the average person which when it comes to gaming is in fact, stupid. Almost half of the people lets say playing legend of zelda or mw3 are people who are coming into gaming and mw3 or something like that is there "first game". Now once they think," oh all games are like this, this is easy, I know what to do, there is no challenge to this, it is simply what I expect, this is fun to me because I know no other fun." A big gaming company needs to look at indie gaming and hell look back at old games on the n64 or the gamecube. A few of those games had the sense of "I am not going to waist your time with fillers but here is what I have given you, you figure it out" which is what I miss in video games. I mean my god I played a few games for the Wii and I was amazed I found these "fun" years ago.

The standard for gaming is, make something that appeals to the mainstream majority and then get the money and fix what needs to be fixed in the game and then forget it and move onto the next half assed game because people are, to no surprise, get bored of that game.
Look at Call of Duty. It is a very prime example of appeal to mainstream masses. They put out a game every year. Now, most people that go from game to game each year are usually bored half way through the year and spend the other half of the year grueling on through the cod there on waiting for the new one.

If they made a game and took there time and said "Hey, lets actually take out time on this. Lets not half ass this, lets put out a beta, lets think of something new, lets go with something that no one has done and lets take out time with it." But you see, doing this would appeal to the smart, determined gamer that enjoys this but you look at what, 85% of the world which are simply gamers that bought there first system which was an xbox a year ago and these people will be disappointed. They will be confused, they will be lost. The fun will be taken from them because they are not used to such things because the level for games is set for someone who is, indeed, stupid. Which is why people get, bored of the game, and lost of people find these games "easy".

Most games that are design for "the creative, the look at this situation and make of it what you can but It wont take you too long but it proves a challenge". These games are indie games, and they are old games and this should be something a lot of AAA titles should look at.


Just my opinion/observation on the situation.

I definitely agree with that but I also think that, someday soon,people are going to get sick of being treated like they are dumb by the AAA devs.

 

[rsmv2you]

I definitely agree with that but I also think that, someday soon,people are going to get sick of being treated like they are dumb by the AAA devs.

I am waiting for the day in call of duty where your in the middle of a fire fight and they add that fucking annoying breach door effect to the fire fight because thats how dumb they think the gamers are.

 

[mcfar45]

I am waiting for the day in call of duty where your in the middle of a fire fight and they add that fucking annoying breach door effect to the fire fight because thats how dumb they think the gamers are.

I'm waiting for them to make a COD game where they pause the game before each fight to remind you to push the right trigger to shoot!

 

[Fdbl]

Guys... Guys listen.. No.. Really listen to this..
What if.. We made cod like in.. Slow motion?
Like in the entire game. Else the players wont be able to like... Keep up.