Out Of Order retrospective

[admin]

Tell us what you think! You can read and leave comments about Out Of Order retrospective below...

[ad7venture]

Wow, a new feature!  I was thinking of suggesting the little place in the upper corner that never changes be replaced with something that might actually change like a crossword puzzle or something.   

But, yeah, have to agree with the gist of the article.  It's easy for authors to force the player into repetitive mode as a time filler.  We know where we are supposed to go so we don't make so many trips when we do our own testing.

[Erwin_Br]

I think I'd be very bored as well if I see a player spending a lot of time walking around. Especially if I'm the one who designed the game and know exactly where to go. But as a player? No, I don't mind if I have to do some walking, visiting places more than once.*

I never used the "double-click to jump to the next screen" feature in Curse of Monkey Island myself. I felt it kind of spoiled the atmosphere for me. I didn't want to rush through the game, but enjoy every moment of it. Some people like to click through the dialogue as well, without letting the audio finish. That's something I don't understand at all, except if the voice acting is really bad. The only game I would want to rush through is a bad game, and then having the option to take short cuts will be very welcome.

_{*Okay, one exception: Syberia. That game crossed the line for me.}

[fogfighter]

I totally agree. Discovering is fun but spending time and efforts to get back to some previously visited location is not always a thrill. Perhaps most doors once opened should automatically be equipped with automatic door openers. Teleportation to known locations may not be bad either.

Thanks for a good and inspiring reading :-)

[Kickaha]

Articles like this I find very readable and worthwhile, so great it's appeared!

I'm playing an indie RPG at the moment, one of the Aveyond games.  The storyline is good, but getting around the game is like wandering around a maze.  One spends hours trying to get from place to place.  So this time wasting isn't peculiar to Adventure games.

For me I prefer that solutions to puzzles be localised - you don't have to wander to the other side of the gameworld to get that watering can to water the magic beans.  And I prefer a map you can click to to teleport to magically making rooms vanish - that feels counter-immersive to me.

[Trumgottist]

Good points well worth keeping in mind for any game developer.

I'd also like to add that now that I've replayed Out of Order a bit (for SLUDGE-testing purposes), I've once again been impressed by the lighting and scene composition in the game. Good lessons can be had by studying those things in that game.

(I also note that the article is described as "the introduction to a series". Cool.)

[ad7venture]

For me I prefer that solutions to puzzles be localised - you don't have to wander to the other side of the gameworld to get that watering can to water the magic beans.  And I prefer a map you can click to to teleport to magically making rooms vanish - that feels counter-immersive to me.

I agree.  I think the best way to solve these problems is through game design and realizing the limitations of the game genre.  A lot of people, myself included, tend to try to make large open world games like rpg's.  Unfortunately, because adventure game play is mainly puzzles, that doesn't work out very well.  You can have larger worlds, but they need more clearly defined subdivisions where things are more or less taken care of before you move on.  That way, you don't carry an overly large inventory and the back and forth motion is eliminated with out the double click type solutions of not having the vaguest idea what needs to be done.  It also provides a short term reward system much like an rpg leveling up or whatever.  My own feeling from trial and error is that 3 to 5 rooms/screens/ whatever, is about right for a subdivision.  Too many more and the player gets overwhelmed, less and it feels too linear.  Connecting subdivisions with a map is nice if it's a larger game and then it becomes somewhat all right to carry from one side of the game world to the other, but I think it mostly should be avoided.

[Erwin_Br]

I believe in compact locations as well. I'm trying to avoid having to spend time walking through empty, useless scenes. Every scene should have a purpose. In the scenes I also try to add interesting hotspots that trigger actions unrelated to advancing the game, so the player has things to do even if he doesn't need to. That way I think you can make the game bigger in an aternative way, without relying on walking time.

[ad7venture]

In the scenes I also try to add interesting hotspots that trigger actions unrelated to advancing the game, so the player has things to do even if he doesn't need to.

Yes, there needs to be a balance with them, because they can act as red herrings.  We're not really sure that they aren't part of some puzzle so we can overly examine them, but games need some frivolous hot spots.  That reminds me of that inflatable clown in Day of The Tentacle.