What percentage of the average players are "Number peoples"?
by Kyrah Abattoir · in Game Design and Creative Issues · 05/03/2011 (5:07 am) · 44 replies
You don't have to look very far on most video game dedicated forums to find heated debates about this or that piece of equipment or outfit in various games with each participant of the debate presenting his argument with math, probabilities and various spreadsheets.
Now I personally have a little grudge as a gamer, this kind of players tend to spoil the fun of experimentation.
As a game designer, do I risk alienating a significant part of my potential userbase if I design a game in such a way that it not only deny access to the math governing it's inner workings, but purposely introduce random and pseudo random factors into the formulas to prevent players to actually figure out the math?
How far can it go? Are there many players that simply will stop playing a game that is designed to actively defend itself against their attempts at "gaming" the system?
Another thing to think about, what happened to the days where peoples where making choices in games based on past experience and their gut feelings? As a former counter strike player (played from beta 2 to v1.2 i believe) i remember how the feeling of a weapon would influence my gameplay, i used to isntall a lot of skins and model packs that made the game barely recogniseable.
For instance, everytime I installed a "silenced" model and sound pack to the mp5, it had a tendency to become my favourite gun, and I had a better hit ratio with it. The gun was the same, handled the same, but it seems my handling of it was changing.
So frankly are numbers really that important? I personally believe perception is everything.
Now I personally have a little grudge as a gamer, this kind of players tend to spoil the fun of experimentation.
As a game designer, do I risk alienating a significant part of my potential userbase if I design a game in such a way that it not only deny access to the math governing it's inner workings, but purposely introduce random and pseudo random factors into the formulas to prevent players to actually figure out the math?
How far can it go? Are there many players that simply will stop playing a game that is designed to actively defend itself against their attempts at "gaming" the system?
Another thing to think about, what happened to the days where peoples where making choices in games based on past experience and their gut feelings? As a former counter strike player (played from beta 2 to v1.2 i believe) i remember how the feeling of a weapon would influence my gameplay, i used to isntall a lot of skins and model packs that made the game barely recogniseable.
For instance, everytime I installed a "silenced" model and sound pack to the mp5, it had a tendency to become my favourite gun, and I had a better hit ratio with it. The gun was the same, handled the same, but it seems my handling of it was changing.
So frankly are numbers really that important? I personally believe perception is everything.
About the author
3D artist, programmer, game designer, jack of all trades, master of none.
#42
To make it clear, rules are not the same as numbers. Rules should be simple and should be obvious. What a player needs to achieve whatever it is they should achieve in the game should be very clear to the player.
However, how that achievement is measured does not need to be spelled out in incremental steps that encourage grinding or in a way that provides possibilities for min-maxing in the game. A player can achieve by accumulating skills in a natural progression, much like Oblivion does it. You learn as you go, increasing in your skills as you apply your skill knowledge. You know your skills are increasing because you can make better quality items or you can take out that angry bear in less time than before. Of course, variables can cause the unexpected to happen, depending on how you tie your stats to skill success. I don't see this as breaking the rules..but as simply making the game more interesting. When I role the dice in a DnD game, I don't know what that random number might be...but based on my skills, I can make decent choice on how to approach a problem. It doesn't mean I will always succeed though.
Personally a game where I can always succeed at something because at that level everyone always succeeds is boring. Yes, there are those people who want repetitive expected results, but I don't think that is true of everyone. Most people I know hate the mindless grinds of most games.
Keep in mind that I am thinking of a sandbox game, not a game with a set linear story. I think there is a big difference between breaking rules in a game where this only one way to do things as opposed to one where you can explore other options.
09/12/2011 (1:16 pm)
I absolutely think that breaking the rules would be frustrating and not a good way to design a game. To make it clear, rules are not the same as numbers. Rules should be simple and should be obvious. What a player needs to achieve whatever it is they should achieve in the game should be very clear to the player.
However, how that achievement is measured does not need to be spelled out in incremental steps that encourage grinding or in a way that provides possibilities for min-maxing in the game. A player can achieve by accumulating skills in a natural progression, much like Oblivion does it. You learn as you go, increasing in your skills as you apply your skill knowledge. You know your skills are increasing because you can make better quality items or you can take out that angry bear in less time than before. Of course, variables can cause the unexpected to happen, depending on how you tie your stats to skill success. I don't see this as breaking the rules..but as simply making the game more interesting. When I role the dice in a DnD game, I don't know what that random number might be...but based on my skills, I can make decent choice on how to approach a problem. It doesn't mean I will always succeed though.
Personally a game where I can always succeed at something because at that level everyone always succeeds is boring. Yes, there are those people who want repetitive expected results, but I don't think that is true of everyone. Most people I know hate the mindless grinds of most games.
Keep in mind that I am thinking of a sandbox game, not a game with a set linear story. I think there is a big difference between breaking rules in a game where this only one way to do things as opposed to one where you can explore other options.
#43
The MMO I have been playing most, is Perfect World International. It gets frustrating when you try to make decent gear, and it is so random in it's creation, that even what is supposed to be the best possible for that level is crud, cause it only covers 2 of the 5 ellemental defences, but does have the best starting Physical defence, before refining it. Then make another till I make a decent item, ultimatelly going through lots of mats just to make something halfway decent.
In a nuttshell, it would be difficult to know where a person stands without some sort of progress indicator. How long will it take to level this up, if I play 8 hours a day?
Also, that MMO is another reason I have gone into trying to design my own game, only content they added was new races, each race has 2 classes, like the race can't have that occational not normal to that race, but still practical. And they added some new quests. Thing about quests, is that in an MMO, everyone does the same things, there is nothing random about them to make it more interesting cause the next person has to do it as if they were the first...
The main reason I am making a game, is cause I like to build things. I play the Sims 2 and 3, cheat for money, then go on a building spree, and set up furnature, to the point that none of the sims in game could buy it LOL. So, every so often I will be adding content, but with the new Torque 3D, I have to wait a bit, but am still using the old constructor to start on the builds, and options for it.
Tho I need to find a DTS Mesh editor for the races, and mobs, I might go as far as making everything super small to make the world seem so much larger...
09/15/2011 (5:31 pm)
I am a major MMORPG player, and have been for the last 10 years.I find, personal stat adjustments essencial in such games, as for the level of the charecters has never been a concern other than to lead me to my next persoal tweak to optperform the average on a personal level vrs others of the same level... Ok, you can heal better than me, and you have a lot more health than I do, but I can solo more... Always prefered a support class that I can be the regular support, OR modify so I can run off and solo, cause in most cases, the support roles get left way behind, cause no one wants to help in return, unless they have other motives like dating... Hiding the weapon stats can both be good and bad, cause the only way to know if you have a better weapon would be to try it on something, and if it's worse, that can get you killed.The MMO I have been playing most, is Perfect World International. It gets frustrating when you try to make decent gear, and it is so random in it's creation, that even what is supposed to be the best possible for that level is crud, cause it only covers 2 of the 5 ellemental defences, but does have the best starting Physical defence, before refining it. Then make another till I make a decent item, ultimatelly going through lots of mats just to make something halfway decent.
In a nuttshell, it would be difficult to know where a person stands without some sort of progress indicator. How long will it take to level this up, if I play 8 hours a day?
Also, that MMO is another reason I have gone into trying to design my own game, only content they added was new races, each race has 2 classes, like the race can't have that occational not normal to that race, but still practical. And they added some new quests. Thing about quests, is that in an MMO, everyone does the same things, there is nothing random about them to make it more interesting cause the next person has to do it as if they were the first...
The main reason I am making a game, is cause I like to build things. I play the Sims 2 and 3, cheat for money, then go on a building spree, and set up furnature, to the point that none of the sims in game could buy it LOL. So, every so often I will be adding content, but with the new Torque 3D, I have to wait a bit, but am still using the old constructor to start on the builds, and options for it.
Tho I need to find a DTS Mesh editor for the races, and mobs, I might go as far as making everything super small to make the world seem so much larger...
#44
@Teila Yes, the whole question of branding and what "fits" inside a brand is a huge discussion, especially for sequels or spin-offs. When we were working on a spinoff of Warlords turn-based to Warlords real-time the idea of exposing the numbers became even more of a hot topic. Even though our primary target market for Warlords was "spreadsheet" type gamers, the playability of real-time gaming trumped the desire to expose any numbers. In other words, the mass market appeal of real-time games like C&C and Starcraft trumped our desire to appeal to the spreadsheet gamer who wants to know everything under the hood. Ultimately, the user experience for the masses won over the vocal minority who want to know everything that is going on. And yes, this needs to re-evaluated every time there is a sequel or spin-off.
09/16/2011 (12:50 pm)
@Teila Yes, the whole question of branding and what "fits" inside a brand is a huge discussion, especially for sequels or spin-offs. When we were working on a spinoff of Warlords turn-based to Warlords real-time the idea of exposing the numbers became even more of a hot topic. Even though our primary target market for Warlords was "spreadsheet" type gamers, the playability of real-time gaming trumped the desire to expose any numbers. In other words, the mass market appeal of real-time games like C&C and Starcraft trumped our desire to appeal to the spreadsheet gamer who wants to know everything under the hood. Ultimately, the user experience for the masses won over the vocal minority who want to know everything that is going on. And yes, this needs to re-evaluated every time there is a sequel or spin-off.
Associate Matt Fairfax
Night Heron Games
I would point out that I didn't espouse any specific rule set (conventional or non-conventional). The closest I got was to say that I think some games are more successful with complex rule sets because those rules line up with their expectations from real life situations (much like the "rules" of Kyrah's thieving system).
I think unconventional, new "rules" are great (and great fun!) but I would expect that the more unconventional they are the more careful you are going to have to be in teaching them to the user (by either keeping them simple or making the progression to the mastery of those rules be a smooth process).
However, if there are "rules" to your game, then there is the possibility that people will record those rules as they discover them and share ways to maximize their xplootscoreetc by pushing the upper limit of those rules. I think the only way you can avoid this is to either build a game where those things don't matter (perhaps making the "game" purely about the story/"experience" than about any particular statistic) or to build a game that continuously and deliberately "breaks" the rules that it previously used. I believe that the second option (something suggested early in this thread) would actually lead to a frustrating and "un-fun" experience and would have a pretty short term following (dependent entirely on the size of your marketing budget).