Design Lecture 4

CSE4AT3

Refining The Player Experience

Extrinsic Knowledge

• From the real world

• From other games

• Can be contradicted in the game for logical reasons– Not being able to jump in doom

This was a design constraint.The solution was to make level designs where jumping was neither necessary, nor would be beneficial to the player, high walls, ways to explore most areas, platforms, lots of platforms

Intrinsic Knowledge

• Learnt / Inferred from within the game– Should be consistent with the game / story

• Changes to rules should be explained

– Eg: A type of door that doesn’t open• Headshots inflict more damage• SOF Damage Locations• How weapons behave

E. Adams on Game Development

• 50% Avoiding Errors

• 35% Tuning and Polishing

• 10% Imaginative variations on the game’s premise

• 4% Design Innovation

• 1% Unknown goodness

The Player Experience as seen by E. Adams

• Gameplay comes first

• If a feature isn’t working get rid of it

• Design around the player– If you forget the player POV you will loose the

fun

• Know your target Audience

• Abstract or automate parts of the simulation that are not fun– But remember your audience– I would also include avoid / remove to some

parts• Eg: Postal2 – Paying your Fine• NFS – Tuning your cars

• Be true to your vision– Aka don’t go past your design scope– E. Adams example: The Perfect Sailing

Simulator– Complications arise from Publishers

• Aesthetic Perfection– Always Strive for it

• Not Critical, but adds a lot of appeal

The Challenge Hierarchy

• Used when the player will experience more than one challenge at a time– This is typical of the majority of goal oriented

games

Informing the player about Challenges

• Explicit Challenges– Typically how to win the game (top level)– How to win each level– Atomic Challenges (bottom level)

• Implicit Challenges– Challenges in-between

• Tutorials may explicitly explain how the implicit challenges work

Implicit Challenges

• The Intermediate Challenges are where much of the players fun comes from– Players should be able to figure out the

intermediate challenges based on the Atomic challenges and the Win conditions

– IF this is not the case, your challenge hierarchy is a Conceptual Disaster and needs attention

• In my experience Bioshock was lacking (interesting/engaging) intermediates

Victory by any means

• If a player wins the game, checking that they won the correct way and penalising the player for creating their own path to victory is not a good approach

Stress Skill and Absolute Difficulty

• When players are forced to perform multiple Atomic Challenges at once stress is introduced into the gameplay– It is up to your design team to decide weather

you want stress, and how much you will allow into your game

• The number of types of challenge a player need to address will also affect game complexity

Absolute Difficulty

• Intrinsic Skill required and Stressfulness of the challenge put together.– Difficulty levels can be used to give players a

choice of stress and the skill they posess• Stress is also related to the players skill

– Lower skill will provide a higher stress on the player

Common Challenge Types

• Physical Coordination– Time Pressure– Speed and Reaction– Intuitive Physics– Timing and Rhythm– Combination Moves

• Logic and Mathematical Challenges– Formal Logic Puzzles– Mathematical Challenges

• Races and Time-Pressure

• Factual Knowledge

• Memory Challenges

• Pattern Recognition Challenges

• Exploration Challenges– Spatial Awareness Challenges– Locked Doors– Traps– Mazes and Illogical Spaces– Teleporters

• Conflict– Strategy– Logistics– Survival and Reduction of Enemy Forces– Defending Vulnerable Items or Units– Stealth

• Economic Challenges– Accumulating Resources– Achieving Balance– Caring for Living Things

• Conceptual Reasoning and Lateral Thinking Puzzles– Conceptual Reasoning– Lateral Thinking

Player Actions

• The combination of the player (user) interface and the players actions– Actions should only be able to do atomic

challenges– The Defeat Boss button is not terribly exciting

• Defining Actions– Actions for gameplay– Actions for Fun (Unstructured Play)– Actions for Customisation– Actions for Socialisation (Multiplayer games)– Story Participation Actions– Interface customisation Actions (Game

Settings)

• That was not a complete list of Actions, but gives you an idea of what to consider

• You don’t always have to have the action players want. Sometimes they want something that doesn’t support the experience you are trying to create– Ghost Recon

Game Saving

• To save or not to save?– According to Penny Arcade ‘Jesus Saves’

• I think it is game dependant

• Pros– Short gameplay times are possible– People can ‘hack’ their way through difficult parts of

the game– Players are not penalised for leaving a game after

45mins play by having to re-do much of the level.

• Cons– Players will lower their immersion by playing

in small time segments– Hardware limitations may deny you the ability

to save a players game state exactly (Check-pointing is a solution)

Summary

• I tend to think what works, and/or seems reasonable is the best thing to do

• If there was a set of definitive answers as to exactly what you do to create the perfect games, someone would be very rich!

• Much like a movie, it can be a huge flop, or a surprising success– Experience helps you attain your goals, most of the

time….