Varying Levels Of Difficulty
So I've been noticing lately a lot of old school fans of TTG have been doing the bellow of the difficulty of the games are too easy. So here we should have a discussion about the difficulty of games what you would want to see. What is to easy what is to hard? But I will throw out some rules here because I can do this because of the sake of discussion.
1. Discuss do not moan.
2. Be insightful. What do you think is to easy and what do you think is to hard?
3. What do you think is the perfect difficuly?
No this isn't an official discussion for TTG, unless they Hijack it or something. I'm honestly curious what is difficulty because well..I think Professor Layton games to hard, and that Sam&Max and Zelda games are just right. So..with out further ado. DISCUSSION!
1. Discuss do not moan.
2. Be insightful. What do you think is to easy and what do you think is to hard?
3. What do you think is the perfect difficuly?
No this isn't an official discussion for TTG, unless they Hijack it or something. I'm honestly curious what is difficulty because well..I think Professor Layton games to hard, and that Sam&Max and Zelda games are just right. So..with out further ado. DISCUSSION!
Sign in to comment in this discussion.
Comments
But really, I think the difficulty is slightly based on how many interactable objects there are (not necessarily inventory size) and how creative the uses for the objects are. Barring creative uses, how difficult inventory items are to obtain. I still think back to the Curse puzzle for getting the gold tooth for Cutthroat Bill. It was a very involved puzzle that required visiting multiple areas before even being able to access the location where the puzzle was...and then once there, you had to have been nearly everywhere on the map to get the components necessary for solving the puzzle.
This is something that I think would really ramp up puzzle difficulty, needing to explore and talk to people in different rooms before having both the information necessary and the equipment to solve the puzzle. It's something that Sam and Max 204 did very well since you had to time travel to pick up items from different timelines and alter the future to access certain pieces of information, not to mention needing to scan various items and people to gain entry to new timelines. I really think this type of puzzling could be incorporated very nicely into more of Telltale's games.
Rule 1: "Linearity is sometimes a problem, which is why I think there should not only be several puzzles to solve at the same time, but also different solutions to puzzles, and these solutions should not just give alternatives, they should change things later in the course of the game."
Rule 2: Always know your objective first.
And if you can't do that, and make it difficult, then don't make the game.
Short version: put all the puzzles into the game, and let people playing on Easy mode get through the story while solving fewer of them by making the find-3 gates into find-1 gates. Would require some restructuring but would have a lot in common with early Sam and Max episodes. People on Easy would miss out on some of the content but they'd still get the beginning, middle and end of each story.
When all of these actions are condensed into a single click, the player is often no longer required to think very hard at all, and progress can sometimes occur accidentally. Instead of having multiple options and having to think "Which one do I have to use here?", the game decides for you, and deprives you of your freedom to think and choose for yourself. And, in addition to this, the one-click interface sort of removes a bit of the richness of the games, because the player freedoms are being taken away somewhat; the options are fewer, and the player doesn't have the same level of true interactive choice in the world they're supposed to be immersed in.
Now, I don't know if a more complex interface would be possible for Telltale; I understand that it would probably be more difficult and time-consuming to implement. But I just feel that it would be beneficial to the games' quality. It would allow for more difficult gameplay and also enhance the richness of the games at the same time.
Edit: And on this topic, I agree with Alcoremortis's suggestion.
I want there to be hints but only if I ask for them. It can be organic and natural, like in the first two Sam & Max seasons. If you were stuck in an area and you didn't know what to do you could talk to Max and he'd give you a cryptic clue that would point you in the right direction. And even then you only get it if you directly ask for it. Being told by the characters what to do is annoying and just a little patronising.
Edit:
I agree completely. The vurb system used in older games was just clumsy, but the three action interface used in CoMI and Full Throttle was the perfect compromise. It wasn't too complex but it still had you think about how to interact with your surroundings.
Do that.
Also, it displays a good example of how a hint system should be used and integrated. It’s fair to say that the game is quite hard and challenging, meaning that a hint system is actually welcome, useful and even necessary for some players. In some of Telltale’s games, like, say, 'Back to the Future' (most notably), performing the tasks and progressing through the game is just too easy and straightforward at times, and though there’s probably never any need for a hint system, the game still has one, as well as obvious pointers given through dialogue, along with the 'goals' system on top of that. But the lack of challenge that the gameplay presents just simply makes it all completely unnecessary for the majority of gamers.
A way of utilizing the hint system is to provide challenging gameplay, but have a hint system on offer for the less experienced adventure gamers. This way, the hint system is actually worth something, AND it solves the issue of satisfying both the hardcore adventure gamers and the casual adventure gamers (the issue that Dennis mentioned). A way to please both/all adventure gamer demographics is simply to bump up the difficulty from Telltale's standard level, and apply an effective hint system. This is one of the simplest ways of catering to the fan base as a whole - implement a good, optional hint system over challenging gameplay.
It sounds simple, but the fact is that I haven't yet seen it done by Telltale.
Classically it seems like there were 2 steps to each puzzle. First, figuring out what the puzzle even was and second, actually figuring out how to solve it. A lot of people tend to get frustrated at step 1 where they find themselves in a situation and have no idea what it is they're even supposed to be trying to do. I think a lot of attempts have been made to clarify that first step, in many cases so that it ends up just being that the puzzle intentions are overly telegraphed at times.
This is obviously a tricky balancing act where giving too little information can leave players unnecessarily frustrated while too much can subvert the puzzle. It seems like many of the suggestions here are trending toward recognizing the need for puzzle clarity, but erring on the side of players maybe not fully understanding how the mechanics are supposed to work as opposed to hitting people over the head with the solution. So basically a game that trends toward more difficulty, but with a more robust hint system.
Currently, a lot of effort goes into providing a hint system that integrates more naturally into the normal dialog of the game. I almost wonder if somehow the playing styles of more old school adventure gamers are actually resulting in the games actually giving more hints that are seamlessly built into the natural dialogs you have with characters. I'm going to check into this today.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FpigqfcvlM
Its the idea that a game should allow the player to learn each aspect of the game individually, and then let them figure out how to combine those elements to progress.
Adventure games should do more of this.
Just show the player maybe, one or two possibilities with the items they pick up via NPC's or some sort of character commentary.
(I know the analyse function sort of does that, but its not exactly fluid going into a menu and clicking on each thing all the time)
Different types of puzzle is the main thing that an adventure game needs in the end of the day though.
Just making harder and more vague versions of the same puzzle or type of puzzle can cause a bit of burnout on the player's part.
(Though that can be avoided a bit, by combining elements together to find a unique solution (But straight combining items is very cliche and a bit boring though))
I'd like to see Telltale do more experiments with different sorts of puzzles.
After all, adventure games existed before the 3 trials! XD
Types of puzzles I'd like to see:
- Investigative puzzles
(Explore the game world, interview characters ect.)
- Time based puzzles
(Not enough adventure games do this. I like to use Pokemon as an example. Pokemon Gold/Silver is great because different events occured at different times of the day/week, which would work great with adventure games. Maybe a puzzle that involves constructing and then setting a trap at the right time, or trying to grow a tree in a lab by figuring out what time of day the sun is the most intense, then placing the plant pot under a magnifying lense angled to concentrate the sunlight and with the special fertilizer you added to the plant earlier, instantly grow a tree, (which then you can comically stuff into your inventory pocket for later use (While its in there, the player would leave a trail of leaves as well! XD)))
- Logic puzzles (Like in Puzzle Agent, but obviously more dispersed with other types of puzzles)
- Skill puzzles (Puzzles which require some kind of input on the player's part. QTEs are cheap though, and should have died with Shemnue tbh)
- Physics puzzles (not as complicated as like The Incredible Machine, but an occasional light one here and there, (maybe combined with one of the other types of puzzle).
I personally have a really interesting and unique puzzle system for an adventure game I've been thinking about, but I'm not going to share it though, as one day I may ACTUALLY make something of it!
(Though thats pretty unlikely though... XD)
EDIT: (Its times like these that make me wonder why I am doing a business degree... -_-)
Yes. And we get really angry when that actually doesn't work like in S&M Season 3.
Getting stumped is part of the fun in adventure games. Solving a puzzle on your own wihout hints after being stumped is the greatest thing you will ever experience in an adventure game. Forced hints are destroying all of that and just lead to anger. Anger leads to hate and hate leads to suffering.
Yes, I do turn them off before starting the game. Unless I forget to do it ;-) It would also be nice if this could be saved for all episodes of game (which was done in Sam and Max Season 2, if I remember correctly, but not in later games I played).
As for difficulty... I am not really sure what could be done to improve it. I think the earlier games were ok (easily completale, but you still had to think), but everything since (and including) The Devil's Playhouse felt too easy to me. It has been some time since I last played those games so this may not actually be true, but in many cases it seemed like there was only one or two things to do at a time, and therefore you can not do anything but solve the puzzle.
I think, as others have already pointed out, it may be a good Idea, to have more options for interaction than the left mouse button. Why not use the left mouse button for interaction (pick up, use, push, pull, eat, talk to, go to) and the right mouse button for examination (look at)? Inventory combination should also come back, but this would probably also require larger inventories.
And another thing: If it is possible to die in the game, please minimize the (re)loading time and do an autosave before that.
I though Devils Playhouse was too easy. The episode in the museum pretty much played by itself I thought.
As for dual-difficulty modes. Why not do it like they did in Monkey Island 2? That worked pretty well, and the lure of new areas and dialogue could make unsuspecting newcomers seasoned adventure vets without realising.
Couple that with the existing hint system and you've got a good forumla if you ask me.
I agree with a lot of what's already been said. The one-click interface really hurts the genre in my opinion. A lot of other games these days, Skyrim being the obvious example, make a big deal about letting you do a lot of different things even if they aren't necessary, and meanwhile adventure games feel more limited in what you can do than ever. The old Sierra games really gave you the illusion that you could do almost anything, like the first time I randomly decided to type "pick nose" while playing as a thief in Quest for Glory. I know the old text parser will never make a comeback as much as I'd like it to
I would also like to see situations where failure is actually an option. Sierra would kill you, but generally offer a hint in the death description as to what you can do to avoid it the next time. Another good example is LA Noire, where it's possible to arrest the wrong guy and get reamed out by your chief, but still be allowed to continue the game. To me that's a thousand times more interesting than having the whole world remain completely static until I figure out the right idea or give up.
Well this is it right here, we want to know what we are supposed to do but not be told how we are supposed to do it. Going back to my earlier example from Jurassic Park,
The first thing I do before I start an episode is turn all the hints off. I like to think of myself as Hardcore XD
(lol, if future games you could put a Hardcore button in the settings menu that automatically turns off all hints and disables the obvious puzzle spoilery dialogue. I'd like to think that wouldn't cause that much more work for you guys.)
Yeah but sometimes the game decides I want hints anyway, so I'm just like
Always. I think in the Devil's Playhouse there was one instance where I wasn't sure what to do, so I put the hint level up 1, then Max said enough for me to figure it out, and I put it back down to 0 after that.
I agree that Hector has a pretty good hint interface, though I didn't need to use it much.
A game is mostly too hard when I can't figure out what I'm supposed to do next, where I can wander between rooms but am not sure what to solve. That might be a case where Max says, "Gee, Sam, we've been here five times already! Maybe we should do something destructive with that file cabinet!" Only if hints aren't turned off, of course.
I still think making other characters more or less cooperative for a given difficulty level works, too.
And for that one reason it's because I get too frustrated too easy.
I need to be able to handle a game without ripping my hair out and smacking my face into a wall. I can get hissy fits easy over a game (not something I am proud of).
Sam & Max was a perfect difficulty, you had to think but not so hard your brain was melting.
And call me thick, but I think Back to the Future the game is also the perfect difficulty I mean there are plenty of times I missed the obvious and had to use the hints to get through the puzzles.
But for hard games I have quit is Jak & Daxter 2 as an example, that game is just ridiculously hard. Never played it again.
Other games where there are difficulty settings I always choose the easiest, I hate not winning.
So year I like my games easy.
Absolutely off.
I think we need a pool* here. :P
Yes, it is getting rather hot.
I am the agreeman.
Crazy Idea #652: Do essentially that, but in the opposite order - release the difficult version day one, and then update the game every day for a month to make it a little bit easier to finish each time. That way everybody's caught up by the time the next episode releases. There are all sorts of reasons why I don't think we could actually do that, but I like anything that makes interesting use of the episodic format.
I appreciate the thought people are putting into this.
I think someone else alreday pointed out that Double Fine's Stacking is a very interesting solution to the problem. You don't actually choose a difficulty level before playing, you tailor the game on yourself in realtime.
Genius.
I think the hint system of Tales and Sam&Max is good - they randomly suggest what to do - and it's more transparent than the one of BTTF.
I haven't used that so much, but I think that in those games the only difference between levels of hints is the frequency of them.
Why don't you differentiate the actual hint depending on the selected difficulty?
Example: if I have to open a lock with a pin:
- if I selected hard: no hints
- if I selected normal: the character says "Mmhh...maybe I should open the lock" after a while the player's stuck
- if I selected easy: the character says "Mmhh... now I should open the lock - maybe I already have something to do it" right after completing the preceding puzzle
- if I selected very easy (or "just tell me the story" mode): the character says "now I've to open the lock with the pin" right after completing the preceding puzzle
If someone doesn't want to be distracted from the story will choose the most straightforward mode that always tells you what to do.
Deus Ex: Human Revolution.
Give me a story.
Give me a challenge.
Give me Deus Ex.
End of conversation.
-What is a game?
The funny thing is, is that the answer to this changes all the time.
At one point many people believed that a game would be to solve a challenge, achieve an objective (like getting the best score a la Pacman or Tetris), or bring resolution to a situation (finish the story a la Final Fantasy), in a world with pre-determined rules, but games like Minecraft break that rule.
Minecraft has no point, yet people play it, and its called a game. Its has pre-determined rules, like a world, but has no objective. People literally, make of it of what they will.
I won't go into detail analysing this game, as there is so much that could be said about it, (and this post will stretch for miles), so I'll move on to another "game", Heavy Rain.
Now Heavy Rain, has a story, it has a goal, and it has pre-determined set of rules, but its nothing like conventional videogames.
Or its like a videogame, but very streamlined.
You have minimal control over the events, compared to say Grand Theft Auto, and there is no scope for independant action either.
Maybe then its an more interactive version of a choose-your-own adventure book.
But thats the point. Maybe we shouldn't even care about what Games mean or what books are, since in the end of the day the media is irrelevant, and that its the interaction and/or communication thats what is important.
(This is especially the case in D'n'D since it is purely communication and interaction via people and sometimes books. They make the rules (or the book does), and the situation or goal, and then the "players" interact with it)
You could have a movie that has a different ending each time.
You could have a game in which you do nothing.
You could have a book you could write in, and it reflects what you do.
(Games like Zork are already like this when you think about it)
Re-applying all this to the question at hand, maybe you need to create products in a way which appeals to what particular aspect each person wants.
Some people prioritise the interaction, the ability to influence the game world.
Some people prioritise the challenge. The rules to play to, the goal to achieve, the obstacles in the way.
Some people prioritise the story. The situation, the characters, the events, and the resolution
Some people prioritise the world. The lore, the graphical design, the characters within.
To avoid disappointment, if you can't make something dynamic enough to tailor to everyone, then just make it clear what the game contains in relation to those four areas, and avoid the disappointment of someone buying this, and then getting something a mix they didn't want, (like a lot of people did with Back to the Future, since it lacked challenge).