Balancing Player Input and Developer Vision?

Chris_Jefferson writes "I work on a simple iPhone puzzle game called Combination. Probably the most frequent request I get from users is for an in-game hint system, to help them out on the harder problems. However, when I tried beta testing such a system, almost every user would just hammer the hint button as soon as they got stuck for longer than 30 seconds, spoiling (I believe) their enjoyment of the game. Should games programmers decide they know what's best for users, and not give them features they are crying out for? Has anyone ever seen a good middle-ground, where users are helped, but can't just skip their way through the entire game?" This question can be generalized for just about any game that's being continually developed — where should the game's designer draw the line between responding to feedback and maintaining what they feel is is the greater source of entertainment?

Comments

Re:"Just about any game"?

[Jurily]

You need to give your customers what they want, but not necessarily what they ask for. There is often a very gulf between the two, and unless your customers are professional designers they are very likely to mistake one for the other.

Holy shit that is SO true. If they always get what they ask for, they won't enjoy the game. Nobody enjoys a game they always win.

What you need is an optimum: when they win just slightly more than they lose. Instead of a hint button, you could allow them to give up on, say, 3 of 50 levels and move to the next one. Being limited, the level-skip feature becomes a new aspect of the game, and not just an outside cheat. Say, if you want to beat your high score, you don't skip the level worth the most points. If it's time, you skip the slowest level etc.