Slashdot Mirror
'Losing For The Win' In Games
simoniker writes "Designer Ben Schneider (Empire Earth, EyeToy: AntiGrav, Titan Quest) has written a new article exploring the possibility of enticing your players through the power of defeat. From the piece: 'Some of the most memorable moments in games depend heavily on reversals to kick their dramatic arcs forward, from Planetfall to Fable to Beyond Good & Evil to Deus Ex. And yet, as an industry, we clearly have a lot to learn — and a lot to invent. So, then, how do you draw a clear line between player failure and dramatic reversal? It is a question well worth pondering.' In other words, if the game forces the player to get his ass kicked, can the player ever forgive it, or is it the key to some really interesting moments when used in a positive way?"
hara kiri for the win!
Sony ha
I'm a big fan of action games where you can level your dude too.
Then you should check out Crackdown, which comes out next week. The demo is crazy fun.
Wizard Needs Food, Badly
I don't think it's the number of games, although it is a side effect thereof. It's because we now realize that there are other ways to make games fun and hard besides making parts of them impossible. Also games can be a lot longer now. Sure, there were games that lasted a long time in the past - but only because you could play a hundred levels of them or what have you.
Also, games were previously like that because of the legacy of arcade games. You made them have very hard points in them so they would eat the quarters of the game addicts. But now we play console games and we want a game that will more consistently be fun. The arcade was about being a badass. The home console thing (aside from network play) is about having fun. I think this is the real reason - they've simply figured that out.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
There's always the indefeatable boss that you're supposed to lose to. But hey, surprise, instead of a game over screen, your hero is knocked unconcious and the game goes on.
I really hate those. I end up using all my consumables trying to stay alive and win, only to be meant to lose, and end up wasting all my potions.
Of course, the other side of this is when I suspect this is the token unbeatable boss, I don't waste any potions, and just lose on purpose -- oops, game over. I guess this wasn't the token unbeatable boss.
Sounds like your Sam & Max playing friend played one too many early Sierra adventure games, especially ones where one stupid mistake will make it IMPOSSIBLE to finish the game and to pour salt on the wound, there's no "game over" when you do it. Typing "give [item] to [person]" usually resulted in the person saying "Hey, thanks a lot! But now you'll NEVER get it back!" If you gave away or forgot to pick up a plot critical item, you're screwed, and you probably wouldn't know it until several hours and saves later when you reached a critical point in the game and you have to use that item. Because you can't go back and get the item, you got stuck and continue under any circumstances and the only solution was to go back to an old save.
Poor game design elements such as this can sour the player on future games where any sort of loss or setback is considered to be the same as "game over."
What I call a "plot loss" in a video game works once in a while, but definitely needs to be done in moderation. For example, if it's obvious to a seasoned gamer that you will lose a given battle/challenge/etc (needed for a plot element), then it's not as much a hassle. As in, if it's clear from the get-go that you're drastically outclassed by your foe, he/she/it/they has/have no obvious weak points, and/or the battle is blatantly unfair and is over with quickly, it's cool, many gamers will understand this. Even if it's not so much an extreme outclassing, if it becomes clear that you seriously won't win this and this is the way the story unfolds, that's acceptable.
The problem comes if there's no hint to this. Or to put it in other terms, if the game is toying with you. As in, a battle seems to otherwise be fair and "normal", all your attacks and/or moves appear to be behaving properly (i.e. they appear to "hit", not "clang off harmlessly"), but whatever you're challenging just always seems to have a slight edge in that it plain and simply will not lose. Case in point: The field runner in Ocarina of Time. Link is challenged to a race across Hyrule Field. You're never given any impression that this is a fixed race, there's no way to "unfix" it (i.e. this isn't a plot situation where Link has to uncover a cheater), and the only way to discover this is by giving up, wasting your time empty-handed (or use a cheat device, which reveals the problem when he claims he won with a time of -1 seconds). Things like this could easily be taken as direct insults to the player, worse if the player unloaded all or most of a difficult-to-replenish or non-replenishable resource (expensive healing potions, stat-boosting effects, rare one-time attack items, etc) in the process.
So all in all, sure, it works once in a while. Just don't insult the player in the process.
Demanding constant attention will only lead to attention.
If you're going to use Half-Life as an example, I don't think the "end choice" is much of a parallel.
I mean, whether you go out the tram ("yes" to G-Man's proposal) or say put ("no") is only a slight difference in the final cutscene. Saying yes only gets you to the credits sooner; saying no gives you “a situation you cannot possibly win” and also goes to credits. It's the same thing, just two different flavors.
I still think it's in there... let's see... [/me rummages about]
Here it is; at the end of the chapter, Apprehension, the final "scene" pits you against a room full of cloaked assasin-like chicks. The only logical way to proceed is through the large loading-dock doors (...opened by a lever on the top platform; a deadly path unless you get the assassins first.)
As you proceed to the last logical doorway, you see a first-aid station on the far wall. The player has made it through some terribly punishing challenges and is likely thinking, "Oh, yes! I get health now!" (I know I did!)
Walking straight towards it, the lights go out, there's some sounds of a struggle, then the chuckling comments of a clever pair of enemy Marines. You're caught ...and it's an essential part of the story.
Remembering when I played this the first time, it looked like that was it. Game over, you get pummeled. I kept thinking to myself, "What did I do wrong? How do I avoid this after restoring my last savegame?"
Watching in anticipation of the final credits, I realized that I was still playing! The James-Bond-diabolical-slow-death garbage compactor was a puzzle you had only 30 seconds to solve. It was exhilirating! I felt like I'd been given another chance.
In a nutshell, I loved it. It felt like the game had started anew. Brilliant!
Now the question is, how to apply this experience to other games without looking like a knock-off of Half-Life?
This post © Copyrite Duggeek, all rights reversed.
If you haven't played the game yet, stop reading. Stop reading anyway unless you are in the mood for a rant.
Okay, you were warned. In Neverwinter Nights 2 you have two "dramatic" moments. The opening act has you partnered with two childhood friends. A male fighter and a female wizard. Both like you start at level 1 and get maybe 1 or 2 levels during the opening act.
Your village is attacked because of you are the destined one. How original. Young farm person at just the right age to go out into the world has evil (wich for some reason has been laying low between the events of the opening credits and this moment) attack your peacefull village of your youth.
There are even in pulp fantasy variations of this you know. Conan was a slave his entire youth. Willow was a mature adult (well he had kids).
Oh well, you are attacked and for no very good reasing you get a cutscene were the girl suddenly decides to help her teacher out (who doesn't even look like he needs help) and gets herself killed. Drama!
Well no. It has everything wrong with it that the poster talked about. You first think it is your fault, then find it isn't and therefore feel only frustration. What a way to kick of an RPG that is supposed to have a influence system. Oh, and the lesson? Well listen to warnings and don't get in over your head. Good warning, except that it never has to be apllied in the rest of the game. You never meet anyone more powerfull then you that you can't handle. You never are asked to let someone more experienced handle a battle OR do a tactical retreat. So what is the point?
But that ain't the only one to snuff it. Later another girl joins your party and voila, she gets killed too. Again nothing you can do about it. Drama? No not really, hell the game doesn't even allow drama. If you really cared about her, you would be a little miffed you don't even get to kill her killer. At all, not even after you have no use for him anymore.
Oh, and the people from your village that survived the first attack? Well, they are killed off too. What? You are the desitned hero, so everyone you grew up has to die so that no stories of you running around with no pants as a kid can every ruin your heroic reputation. It is a rule!
Drama is nice and all, but the simple fact is that YOU are supposed to be in control. So if the game removes control, then anything that happens that you are supposed to be in control about just isn't "real".
Drama can happen outside your control (that is really totally outside your control, rather then just having the game take control) OR because of a choice you made.
System Shock 1 & 2 and the first Unreal did it very effective. Every bit of "drama" had already happened. You were in total control of events in your own time but naturally NOT in control over things that had already happened before your time started.
Finding out that the person whose emails you have been finding has died a tragic dead WORKS when it is clear it happened outside your time. You couldn't have gone faster or anything. So you do not feel cheated by the game. It worked for me.
Do you want to know one of the most dramatic moments in games for me? Planescape Torment, the dead nations, has an undead NPC who has lost her name. You can help her find it or give her a new one. The way that extremely short non-combat, non-fedex, non-runaround, non-loot, quest is told just worked for me. The entire area is nothing short of brilliant, undeads who are not just cannon-fodder, but that element is just damned good as it impressed upon me the sadness of an undead existence, destined to only rot away further and further while only memories remain of your former live.
Brilliant. And nobody dies, no cutscenes take away control. Just you, and an NPC and a few simple lines.
From the days of Wing Commander games have attempted to get me to feel drama by snatching defeat from the jaws of my hard won victory. It don't work for me.
Games are NOT movies. LEARN this deve
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Arcade games are hard so you'll plunk in more quarters.
Home games are easy so you'll beat it and buy another one.