Sign in to follow this  
i_grad

How to exit the game gracefully?

Recommended Posts

I was reading this article for boredom's sake and contemplating some resolutions to these design flaws. One issue that caught my attention was the two entries about quitting the game back to the desktop/dashboard/whatever, especially the "are you sure you want to quit?" dialog entry.

 

One answer I thought of is to have a countdown timer (3, maybe 5 seconds) after the player presses the quit button before the game actually quits. During this time the player can cancel the operation with a button press. This isn't as fast as Start->up->X->up->X, but it could be less annoying than a pop-up dialog box if implemented with a similar style to the rest of the game.

 

Thoughts? Other solutions to this design flaw?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the problem differs from game to game. If you're playing a game that loses progress if not saved properly, or cannot be saved, then thats where the quitting option becomes a problem.

 

Their are quite a few games that implement a time feature GameCreator, however most of them are mmorpg's, which is reasonable as the online feature can cause problems if disconnection is immediate. There have been quite a few times where my internet has turned off, but it took a few seconds for my character itself to be removed from in-game, causing me to die. Some mmorpg's implement both the time and are you sure features together, so once you click quit you are given a 10s window in which you can click quit again to close the game immediately. It's a mostly irrelevant feature, save for the off chance you need to leave in the space of the 2s required to click the quit button, but its nice nonetheless.

 

The problem with this, well, problem, is that their is no entirely correct solution. its a Comfortability vs Security problem, where adding to one will always minus from the other. It really just depend on what game you are playing, as I stated originally. A game that does not have a dynamic or auto save feature,or no save feature at all, would lean more heavily on the security side. Where as a game that does will focus more heavily on the comfortability side.

 

If I was leaning onto the Security side, I'd only have a quit to the main menu option on my menu bar. most games allow you to continue where you left off from the main menu, so in most cases this stops potential problems. however if that is not the case, I would make sure that accessing the quit option takes at least more then one click once you access the menu (basically a sub-menu, probably accessed through options). Finally I'd implement an are you sure to feature. An additional thing you could do is make sure that each click has to happen on a different part of the screen, so that rapid clicks in the same area don't cause a quit. This would remove 99% of the accidental quits, that 1% being the extremely unlucky person.

 

However if I was leaning onto the comfortability side, I'd have the quit to menu and quit to desktop on a sub-menu within the quit button. Well, less of a sub-menu, and more of a replacement for are you sure. It removes the need for are you sure and makes quitting feel nice, at least in my opinion. I would also make sure that clicking on them happens at a different part of the screen to avoid rapid clicks, however I'd do this at a lesser degree to make it less movement for your mouse. This makes it a lot less effective, as rapid clicking usually occurs in an area and not just one spot, but we are not going for Security here. There's not much else you can do for this, though I may be wrong, so its the easier of the two.

 

But to be honest, these kind of features are the 'that'd be nice' kind of features. I'd only worry about it after you've created your game, but by then a lot of developers have already moved onto their next project. moving off-topic, I never really liked the concept of starting a new project so soon after finishing your first one. Give at least half a month of extra time for a refresher, and another half to come back to the game you made and see if their are any design flaws, or areas you can improve in. Not to mention most of them will have already been pointed out by the community. But I digress, that's all I have to say on the topic.

 

EDIT: in light of the next two posts, I want to rephrase that I was talking about what things worked towards the goal of security, and what worked for the goal of comfort-ability. A combination of the two are generally good for most games. if you're playing a game like CoD Zombies, then you can spend up to entire days (theoretically infinite) playing it. You can't save your progress, and any disconnection results in the loss of your game. During this time you'll be taking plenty of breaks and, more often then not, won't be paying attention to the small things. In a case like that, i'd like as much security as possible. However on the contrary, you can play this game for one minute and then quit.

 

So on rethinking, I'd prefer to have this 'extreme' version of security as an optional feature. That way when im going for that score break or just want to play as long as possible, I can select it to ensure I don't accidentally disconnect.

Edited by ShiftyCake

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I'm in the middle of gameplay, and ask to quit to the desktop, I think it's reasonable to ask me if I'm sure.

 

If I just quit to the main menu, and then ask to quit to the desktop, then I think it's reasonable to assume I meant to do exactly that.  (Unless both of these are mapped to "Esc", in which case make sure, because I may have accidentally hit it twice.)

 

What I don't like is where I quit, and it takes me to a menu, and I quit, and it takes me to a dialogue box, and I have to say "OK" to quit.  I don't want to do *three* things to quit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TLDR;

 

chance for player to have unsaved progress he could lose -> prompt quit

casual game / without saving -> instant quit

never -> player has to wait for timers or watch advertising/credits screens

Edited by ShadowFlar3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a number of approaches. The best approach is one that suits the context. The biggest complexity is how to handle saving data. If players will not wish to manage their own saved games, or are otherwise restricted from doing so, then it's reasonable to auto-save the game when exiting in most circumstances. If automatically saving the game is not a reasonable option, then a prompt might be a solid choice.

 

After reading this, one approach I considered to avoid cases of accidentally exiting the game would be to impose a time on the interaction of instructing the game to exit itself. Rather than allowing the player to tap/click the exit button, and then implementing something like a timer, make the exit button a 'hold button.' The player would be required to depress the button for a minimum length of time, such as 1.5 seconds. The interface device would then provide visual (and possibly auditory) feedback to indicate the progress toward exiting the game. This minimises the risk of accidentally hitting the wrong button, and diminishes the likelihood of exiting without thinking. Simultaneously it provides feedback to the player and does not require the player to wait, inactive, while a timer expires. Implemented well, it should be a satisfying interaction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 One issue that caught my attention was the two entries about quitting the game back to the desktop/dashboard/whatever, especially the "are you sure you want to quit?" dialog entry.

Hi,

 

- if I'm doing some shareware game, I put this dialogue with a few seconds delay and product promotion in it until the game is not registered. Registered game comes out without any holdback and fully advertising-free.

 

Good luck in your work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Coincidentally: Sometimes it might be good to disable ALT+F4. I was playing Divinity: Original Sin last night, was holding down ALT to view items on the ground, then hit F4 to select my fourth character to pick up a heavy item. Instantaneous exit without saving. Whoops!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I would say that overriding standard OS level commands is a bad thing. Ideally your control scheme should be designed and laid out such that a user is very unlikely to accidentally select a command like alt+F4 (I'm really not a fan of F-keys being used for game commands due to just how common keyboards that lack distinct F-keys are. Forcing a user to then add the Fn key into the mix is not a good design in my mind. And given the number of people who now own ONLY a laptop, this issue should be considered by developers.)

 

OSX CMD+Q however is a little more tricky. 

 

 

A program should play nice in the environment it runs in. Along with exiting nicely it should also multitask nicely, not screw with system audio or video, and work well in various multi-monitor setups.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most gamers I know now have a shortcut on their keyboard to do Alt-F4 (ya, because two keys is too long).

When a player wants to quit, he wants to quit now.

Trying to alleviate the anxiety caused by a misclick from the player by delaying everyone's dedicated action would cause more harm than good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I would say that overriding standard OS level commands is a bad thing.

Hi,

- generally, the all current object-oriented programming language, has an independent "on close" event, where we can choose the outcome.
Good luck.

Edited by jbadams
Removed signature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Personally I would say that overriding standard OS level commands is a bad thing.

Hi,

- generally, the all current object-oriented programming language, has an independent "on close" event, where we can choose the outcome.
Good luck.

 

That's so barely relevant that I can only assume you're only responding in order to share the link in your signature -- and I've noticed that a lot of your other posts are pretty similar -- so I've removed it from this particular post.  Please try to ensure you're only replying if you have something relevant, meaningful and on-topic to say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Personally I would say that overriding standard OS level commands is a bad thing.

Hi,

- generally, the all current object-oriented programming language, has an independent "on close" event, where we can choose the outcome.
Good luck.

 

That's so barely relevant that I can only assume you're only responding in order to share the link in your signature

Thank you for your opinion.
This message is to the intended meaning, that even trying to get away with Alt-F4, in modern language, we bid the walking "on close" or "on exit" event, where we have the opportunity to choose a return or exit. Without processing this event, just exit.
Thank you again.

Edited by jbadams
Removed signature.

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