• Announcements

    • khawk

      Download the Game Design and Indie Game Marketing Freebook   07/19/17

      GameDev.net and CRC Press have teamed up to bring a free ebook of content curated from top titles published by CRC Press. The freebook, Practices of Game Design & Indie Game Marketing, includes chapters from The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, and An Architectural Approach to Level Design. The GameDev.net FreeBook is relevant to game designers, developers, and those interested in learning more about the challenges in game development. We know game development can be a tough discipline and business, so we picked several chapters from CRC Press titles that we thought would be of interest to you, the GameDev.net audience, in your journey to design, develop, and market your next game. The free ebook is available through CRC Press by clicking here. The Curated Books The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, Second Edition, by Jesse Schell Presents 100+ sets of questions, or different lenses, for viewing a game’s design, encompassing diverse fields such as psychology, architecture, music, film, software engineering, theme park design, mathematics, anthropology, and more. Written by one of the world's top game designers, this book describes the deepest and most fundamental principles of game design, demonstrating how tactics used in board, card, and athletic games also work in video games. It provides practical instruction on creating world-class games that will be played again and again. View it here. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, by Joel Dreskin Marketing is an essential but too frequently overlooked or minimized component of the release plan for indie games. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing provides you with the tools needed to build visibility and sell your indie games. With special focus on those developers with small budgets and limited staff and resources, this book is packed with tangible recommendations and techniques that you can put to use immediately. As a seasoned professional of the indie game arena, author Joel Dreskin gives you insight into practical, real-world experiences of marketing numerous successful games and also provides stories of the failures. View it here. An Architectural Approach to Level Design This is one of the first books to integrate architectural and spatial design theory with the field of level design. The book presents architectural techniques and theories for level designers to use in their own work. It connects architecture and level design in different ways that address the practical elements of how designers construct space and the experiential elements of how and why humans interact with this space. Throughout the text, readers learn skills for spatial layout, evoking emotion through gamespaces, and creating better levels through architectural theory. View it here. Learn more and download the ebook by clicking here. Did you know? GameDev.net and CRC Press also recently teamed up to bring GDNet+ Members up to a 20% discount on all CRC Press books. Learn more about this and other benefits here.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Koobazaur

Case for Dumbing Down – because others deserve to enjoy games too

10 posts in this topic

I think that a perfect game would be so unique that everyone would be a beginner to boot, and a master at the finish line. What I mean is that when you say "hardcore" gamers know how to play without hints, you are basically admitting that games are unoriginal and strictly follow genre conventions, so if someone who is a fan of a genre is playing a game of that genre, then they will already have mastered skills of previous games in that genre and be better than other players. So a good game designer will build a challenging and unique game that is very accessible, but provides a challenge, be it in reflexes or thinking.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that providing accessibility in game design is admirable and sensible in certain markets, i.e. the particularly competitive ones (mobile). However, if you're creating a small game and you hope to be original, I don't think there's any problem with allowing a greater complexity of design. The reason being, that big developers and publishers are knocking out all the genre stereotypes for us. Adding some of these features can sometimes make games feel a bit like under financed versions of their macro-scale contemporaries. 

 

Sometimes the mainstream dumbed-down features just work with a game, and in that instance they should be used. However, if someone has to opportunity to do something different, a twist on an established convention, it should be seized.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dumbing down is the negative alias of accessibility.

It's the glass is half empty vs the glass is half full.

 

Apparently gamers are selfish. More non selfish proposal would be a good skill adoptive game.

problem is, that no easy task and add to complexity of game production. So often limited to a setting like Easy Normal and Hard etc.

Large funding's and production cost needs large target audiences.

I have no problem with it. Dumbing down is fine with me. Most singleplayer games are some how story driven. So I like a smooth story flow. Instead a QTE that rewind as a A-B loop. replay the same part n times. Or a end boss you try to beat 20 times. That conflicting with story flow.

Also games have a difficulty that is perceived not constant level trough the game levels and gamers differ in how hard or easy a situation is solved.

So a game that dynamical act on player skill and adopt in a smart manner would be great.

 

Some games have more then 4 difficulty levels.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some book authors write "Children's Books," not because they are good at it, but because they cannot imagine content that would entertain an adult.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question might be  can you change factors to  make the game easier for some players (via a difficulty setting slider) while retaining much harder modes for other players?  To do it in a balanced way - evenly across the games interactive features?

 

 

Its not really 'dumbing down', but tailoring the player experience.  Just about anyone can make a game for which ALL humans dont have the reflexes or thinking power before the game vaporizes them into total obvious defeat.   On the other hand a game the player just 'waves his hand at' and wins might not go over well (unless winning ISNT the goal --- like a tourist game, where seeing the wonderous/spectacular soul-bending scenery/objects/plot and special effects is the real point).

 

You want players to be able to play, to have whatever challenge level you are targeting (hopefully with sufficient difficulty settings to hit most of the bell curve of player abilities).

 

You might have some few 'difficult' achievements which require higher skill  - some percentage (?)  low enough that the majority of players who will be denied success and whatever result that success brings them.

 

If  reaching entire areas of the game is blocked by difficulty, how much work will you want to expend on such things which a minority will 'get' -- which will detract from the amount of effort of making the common part of the  game which the majority can play/reach  sufficiently well (and thus a majority who will bother to buy this game)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are more non-hardcore players than there exist hardcore players. Also, both in real life situations and in games, the vast majority of people regularly encounter situations which... do not exactly testify their superior intelligence.

I'm trying hard to avoid saying something like "90% of all people are stupid", but you get the idea. People get to struggle in important situations (some struggle more, and more often, and some struggle less), and adding extra burden "just because" does not make this better.

 

Including designs that cater a mere 5% of your prospective customers and that frustrates a large share of your customers because it is needlessly complicated when they're already struggling is not an intelligent design decision. Unless of course you do not care about being successful.

 

Also, most of these features are not "dumbing down" (well, arrows are, somehow), but a mix of ergonomy and accessibility. That isn't the same thing.

 

Dumbing down is a "click here to win" style of gameplay, but for example item highlights are a valuable visual hint both to novice and experienced players that they're pointing at the right spot, and not a pixel or two too far left or right. There may be people who simply don't see all that well, too.

 

Contextual menus make your "workflow" less cumbersome -- why would one want to annoy the player with a purposely hard to navigate menu. It's similar to contextual popups in most desktop environments. When hovering over a red icon shows a popup "Pressing the Red Button will close the program without saving data" you might yell at the developer for how stupid he is for stating the obvious. What else would the Red Button do.

 

On the other hand, if you don't know because maybe it isn't quite so obvious to you, he just made your day, and at a neglegible cost. You could of course have read the 200-page manual, too. You do read manuals, don't you. Of course, everyone does.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Difficulty levels. I could never understood why they so rarely make diffuclty levels (and by this I mean more than the standard 3 easy/normal/hard, because it's a bit not enough). There are some games (genres) I beat at hard and some I can't beat on easy... Especially, since such difficulty levels are frequently quite easy to implement (reduce damage from enemies for example).

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thinking dumbing down is pejorative and used incorrectly in the industry. Not everyone has the same capability for hand eye coordination and reflexes and that doesn't make them any worse. The fact that there are different markets to serve should be applauded. Our jobs as game makers is to entertain people - you choose who you entertain.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Difficulty levels. I could never understood why they so rarely make diffuclty levels (and by this I mean more than the standard 3 easy/normal/hard, because it's a bit not enough). There are some games (genres) I beat at hard and some I can't beat on easy... Especially, since such difficulty levels are frequently quite easy to implement (reduce damage from enemies for example).

 

Depending on the game mechanics and what options they have to make things easier/harder   they dont want to have to test/debug/tune too many difficulty levels (or possibly worse a continuous slider difficult controls effects)

 

 

Some games it might only ge adjusting enemy hitpoints, hit probabilities, target AABB or damage-to-opponents/damage-to-players multipliers.  But not all games have factors that linear and modal changes can cause pendulum swings (or open up loopholes) which need to have many other things adjusted to keep the game playable (or to achieve the desired REAL difficulty)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0