Game Design Discussion

[Zera]

Have you ever played a game and liked/disliked it and you're not entirely sure why? Oftentimes, you can discover interesting patterns by paying closer attention to a game's design. This topic is for game design analysis and discussion. To start, I would highly recommend you view the following YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/Matthewmatosis This guy has some very good analyses.

Today I'll talk about Sonic Adventure 2: Battle. I've been attempting to get all the Emblems with A-Ranks for all the missions, but as anyone who has done that will tell you, getting all A-Ranks is extremely difficult. Obviously, the requirements for these ranks are strict, and a high degree of skill is necessary. But I've noticed a peculiarity in most levels, which is especially infuriating on the missions where you must collect 100 rings as fast as possible.

Oftentimes, a Gun Hunter will drop in front of you, or a Gun Beetle will swoop through a narrow hallway while shooting, or a Gun Hawk will rise unseen from the edge of a platform. This is what I like to call the "Enemy Ambush". It does serve a purpose - levels are more exciting with an ambush - but instead of existing in one level, it is a consistent theme throughout the game. With the exception of some treasure hunting levels, every level has several ambushes. So many times, I have been hit by enemies that I did not foresee with my psychic powers, and lost my rings (and A-Rank) as a result.

The issue with the Enemy Ambush is that it makes the game harder - but not through skill, strategy, or luck. Rather, it adds an unnecessary level of memorization to levels, because the only way to fight these enemies is to know when, where, and how they spawn, and how they will behave in the half-second you have to react.

The worst part about these enemies is that they often punish players who rush through levels. Recall that this is in a Sonic game, which, via strict A-Rank requirements and the fact that it's a Sonic game, specifically encourages players to rush through levels. In other words, the game punishes players for playing properly, and that is something that a good game must avoid at all costs. The easiest way is to just have the enemies stand there like normal. They can move around and behave uniquely, but the important thing is that the player sees the enemy BEFORE they are about to get hit.

I hope you enjoyed my analysis of Sonic Adventure 2's "Enemy Ambush". If you have any comments or game analyses of your own, please post them here.

Edited December 11, 2014 by Zera

[Garnef]

Well then, if this is going to be a thing, the least I could do is ramble on about Final Fantasy 2's leveling system...later, I'm a little busy right now, but I might make that later, since why not.

[Zera]

Well then, if this is going to be a thing, the least I could do is ramble on about Final Fantasy 2's leveling system...later, I'm a little busy right now, but I might make that later, since why not.

I heard that you have to hurt yourself to level up your health, and it was lame.

[Knight]

I love Metroid Prime's... everything, that's why it's my favourite game. All the lore is written in unlockable, collectible logs and scriptures, combat is a fun mix of shooting, charging and dodging with a very large variety of enemies. The environments are rich with detail, some, especially in Prime 3, are absolute spectacles and it's fun to just explore the areas for hidden details. Tons of collectibles, little details, mixing things up with the grapple beam, morph ball and visors and there is a recipe for a great game. I always wondered why other games don't use a lock-on shooting system, it's fun in Metroid so I don't know why anyone else experimented with it (it would have made Kid Icarus Uprising better on the hands.)

[Lord Raven]

I heard that you have to hurt yourself to level up your health, and it was lame.

You don't *have* to, but it's stuff like;

- Using a spell repeatedly to get that spell stronger and your magic attack get bigger

- If you take more damage then your HP/Def/MDef (depending on the stat) eventually increase

- If you keep using a weapon i think your weapon proficiency (don't quote me) and your strength or whatever increases

Things like that. It's an adaptive level system as opposed to an experience system, but it turns out the most effective way to boost stats is to keep hitting yourself.

[Magical CC]

Ace Attorney games. I really dont get it. Everytime you go out to investigate, you cant leave a place unless you have already collected/investigated/talked to everything that is related to the plot. And then in the court, you only have 1 right option for everything. If you choose them, you win. If you dont choose them, you lose. I havent seen such primitive, limited gameplay like that since the 90s eroge games. I have only played 3 games in the series, but honestly, they bored me. Oh, not to mention the asspulls sudden new situation, new proof, new option or Mia/Maya appear when you are on the verge of losing. This is not a detective/attorney game. You have no option in anything. They force the plot into your throat. It's a poorly done visual novel that has no h-scene.

Edited December 12, 2014 by Magical Amber

[Zera]

@Knight: That's not so much an analysis of Metroid Prime's design so much as a list of things you like about it. I'd prefer something more like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfS0254dRRw

@Magical Amber: I agree. I've only played Ace Attorney Investigations: Miles Edgeworth and I thought it was just okay. Once you beat it, all that's left is a visual novel. Because the story is completely linear, there is absolutely no replay value. I'd rather watch an Ace Attorney game on YouTube than buy another one.

Edited December 12, 2014 by Zera

[Wen Yang]

Ace Attorney games. I really dont get it. Everytime you go out to investigate, you cant leave a place unless you have already collected/investigated/talked to everything that is related to the plot. And then in the court, you only have 1 right option for everything. If you choose them, you win. If you dont choose them, you lose. I havent seen such primitive, limited gameplay like that since the 90s eroge games. I have only played 3 games in the series, but honestly, they bored me. Oh, not to mention the asspulls sudden new situation, new proof, new option or Mia/Maya appear when you are on the verge of losing. This is not a detective/attorney game. You have no option in anything. They force the plot into your throat. It's a poorly done visual novel that has no h-scene.

When an H-game has way more replay value than you do... you know you're a meh-ish at best game.

[Psych]

That's because Ace Attorney games aren't games, they're visual novels. VN's just aren't that common in the US so while playing through it you don't really realize it.

Dangan Ronpa is also in the same boat.

[Wen Yang]

Psych: and as an avid VN reader, I'm saying AA fails because they utterly fail to give any reason to play them more than once.

[Nightmare]

Good thing the point of Ace Attorney is not to have infinite replay value or freedom, and the developers never made any such claims. They're just games with superb storylines and very well-written characters. It's also misleading to call them purely visual novels, because they're more like point-and-click adventure games. I understand they're linear, but I don't understand why them being linear is necessarily bad.

you cant leave a place unless you have already collected/investigated/talked to everything that is related to the plot.

False. You can't make progress in the game without having done all that, but you usually can leave an area. Heck, movement is open to you most all the time, and that's why it can actually get confusing because you don't know where to investigate.

It is, in fact, choices like that that make the games what they are. They are weighted choices, whether it be investigating or presenting evidence/arguments in the court. They really matter.

It's kind of very obnoxious of you two to compare them to h-games.

EDIT: Actually, visual novels shouldn't need to have replay value or freedom either. They're pretty much what they're called: visual novels. At their most basic, they're just books with pictures. It's true that there have been innovations in the genre, but I don't think that's reason to demean the less innovative kinds.

Edited December 12, 2014 by Nightmare

[Raven]

It was a hassle getting all A-ranks in SA2:B, indeed. But I was also a mid-teen who spent almost all his free time playing games, so there's that. Looking back, the levels with regard to the ambushes was pretty shitty. However it was the hard-mode final Robotnik stage that delayed my completion of it for reasons I don't remember. Fuck knows how many times I had to restart that one.

[Magical CC]

Good thing the point of Ace Attorney is not to have infinite replay value or freedom, and the developers never made any such claims. They're just games with superb storylines and very well-written characters. It's also misleading to call them purely visual novels, because they're more like point-and-click adventure games. I understand they're linear, but I don't understand why them being linear is necessarily bad.

False. You can't make progress in the game without having done all that, but you usually can leave an area. Heck, movement is open to you most all the time, and that's why it can actually get confusing because you don't know where to investigate.

It is, in fact, choices like that that make the games what they are. They are weighted choices, whether it be investigating or presenting evidence/arguments in the court. They really matter.

It's kind of very obnoxious of you two to compare them to h-games.

EDIT: Actually, visual novels shouldn't need to have replay value or freedom either. They're pretty much what they're called: visual novels. At their most basic, they're just books with pictures. It's true that there have been innovations in the genre, but I don't think that's reason to demean the less innovative kinds.

I once played a 90s eroge game. You can go to every places you want in the big map. The problem is that the plot will not kick in unless you visit the right place. Then, after the plot kicked in. To get the next event, you have to walk through the map again to find who you will have to talk to. When the game didnt let me go out of the park in the first AA game, I realized that this is just a faked game. They give you a ton of choices, but none of them matter.

For a visual novel, it's fine to be linear because characters, plots are usually well done in these cases. For example, Muv-Luv Alternative. No matter which choice you choose, it will be the same. There's almost no h-scene either. But I love it. I cried manly tears reading it. In fact, I think it's the best visual novel I have ever read. What about AA? The point of a linear plot, limited choice game play is that you can create a well done story. AA's plot, character, story can only be described with 1 word "meh". Please take note that I have only played 3 first games so I have no ideal about the others. Most of the side characters, victims and antagonists are 1 week monsters with 1 side personality. At least, in Danganronpa, you get to know the other classmates by talking to them and they are not what they look like so at least when they are murdered or being executed by the teddy bear, you do care about them. The murderers in Danganronpa are also less obvious. Honestly, I can tell who is the killer in AA just by looking at their face.

For short, AA has neither story or gameplay. It's a book that pretends to be a game. And the sad fact is it's not even a good book.

Edited December 12, 2014 by Magical Amber

[Knight]

OBJECTION! sorry

I don't think the point of Ace Attorney is to be an open non-linear adventure game and your opinion that Ace Attorney's plot is uninteresting is very subjective as another member who posted and myself will testify the opposite. The point of the gameplay is to find the logical contradictions in the courtroom scenes, sure it's linear but it requires quite a bit of thinking sometimes to progress and the satisfaction comes when finding the write evidence. I'll admit that the Investigation parts are oftentimes boring and that the game isn't perfect, but your statement is mostly opinion-based.

[Zera]

Ace Attorney and other "visual novels" are like the Fig Newton of videogames. It's a book that wants to be a game. Interactive like a Choose Your Own Adventure book, except there's only one story path. I think it's a niche genre because most people play games since they prefer games over books. It must be disappointing to buy a game and find out it was a good book in disguise. Would an Ace Attorney game cost less if it were a book instead of a game?

Edited December 12, 2014 by Zera

[Samias]

I'm not sure "doesn't have h-scenes" is a negative for Ace Attorney for most people... Some of us actually want to be able to play a visual novel out in public considering they're on a mobile platform. While Ace Attorney isn't the BEST design, it works. It's a linear story with point-and-click exploration and is easy to pick up and play. It's wacky, unbelievable court drama with its own insane adventure game logic. Finding out what works out of your inventory is more like a puzzle with some strange in-world logic mixed in. The actual interface functions pretty well so honestly it boils down to personal preference over whether or not you like the story and how much you can stomach logical inconsistencies rather than bad design.

As for a game with actual poor design choices, I have to nominate the early SMT games, notably Persona 1, and both parts of 2. What would otherwise be a stellar set of RPGs is hampered by nearly impenetrable menu structure that is difficult to navigate and the demon negotiations can be a total crapshoot. The steps you need to go through to get anything done are puzzling at best and insanely granular and missable at worst. Tales of the Abyss is another offender, making many skills unavailable unless you visit a certain NPC at an exact point in time otherwise you miss it forever. There's no hints, which basically forces you to find a guide. It wouldn't be so bad if these things stuck around forever to be completed but they don't. Golden Sun: Dark Dawn is yet another offender with its djinn, including tons of points-of-no-return. AND to make things worse, iirc you can't access the final bonus boss without every djinn, locking you out of endgame content.

[Magical CC]

The point of the gameplay is to find the logical contradictions in the courtroom scenes, sure it's linear but it requires quite a bit of thinking sometimes to progress and the satisfaction comes when finding the write evidence

It's wacky, unbelievable court drama with its own insane adventure game logic.

Yeah, unbelievable court drama, insane adventure game logic and logical contradictions in the courtroom sure go well with each other, arent they? I have seen more courtroom drama in Dangan, have more insane adventures in Syberia and Mist games, and more interesting and more real logical contradictions in other point&click games. It's not me that is bias, it's you guys who have bias. You guys let your lack of experience cloud your judgement.

May be if dead people just stay dead instead of jumping in and out again and again to save you from losing because the plot forced you to lose, denying your logical conclusion because....fuck it, it's plot! I may rate AA a little higher. Because you are right, it's easy to pick up and everything is so simple. It's everyone's game unlike annoying point&click games I have played (and quit).

[Psych]

Dark Dawn has issues, but the rest of the GS series is very good.

[Ein]

why does wen yang's group always bring eroge into everything like it's the golden standard or some shit

Demon's Souls and Dark Souls have some neat things going for them. Namely you, the player, having to experiment with all of your known options and exploring more options to find what suits you into to overcome the level design, puzzles, enemies, and bosses. The tutorial kinda shows you how to play the game but even then you would have to get used to it plays over time through experimentation and mistakes. Sometimes you just make due with what you have with whatever stands in your way.

Probably at these points you'll try to get help from others players by co-oping and junk. Or they invade your playthrough and start wrecking your face.

It's something that is rarely seen in games today and I'd like to see more games actually letting the player figure out what to do rather than just showing them what to do at every little moment rather and reminding them how to perform certain actions they've been doing since the very beginning of the game.

[Magical CC]

Ah, about Monster Hunter. It's like Monster Fighter instead. I mean, trap, bomb, foods and other things are just the topping. You have to deal with ridiculously tough monsters for nearly half an hour of dodging, timing and slashing. Stealth means nothing, there's little to no tactic or planning. The highest level of planning is choosing the right weapon and skills then bash your weapon on monster's head. I have no problem with gameplay but the naming sure is misleading.

[Jedi]

Ace Attorney and other "visual novels" are like the Fig Newton of videogames. It's a book that wants to be a game. Interactive like a Choose Your Own Adventure book, except there's only one story path. I think it's a niche genre because most people play games since they prefer games over books. It must be disappointing to buy a game and find out it was a good book in disguise. Would an Ace Attorney game cost less if it were a book instead of a game?

You have obviously not played many visual novels if you think they all have one route. That's a blind generalization.

Phoenix Wright has wacky and fun characters with a sense of drama, you feel for the characters. Especially when Phoenix does screw up or gets screwed over. Its not for everyone obviously but its by no means bad, and what's wrong with visual novels? You seem to think niche genres are bad, then again you are someone who says IGN and Metacritic are gods in opinion and that anyone who goes against them are wrong. I.E your rants on how F-Zero should continue not because its a good series (it is don't get me wrong) but how it did better then Mario Kart in reviews (which means absolutely nothing).

[Zera]

I apologize; when I said "one story path" I was referring specifically to the Ace Attorney series. I don't recall giving massive praise to IGN and Metacritic though. IGN has some good reviews and Metacritic is a great place to find reviews. I couldn't care less about the Metascore of F-Zero GX; I was merely using it as evidence of the game's high quality. You KNOW a game's good when it has a Metascore around 90, even if it's not your genre or you haven't played it. After all, those scores are made by people.

Back on topic...

In Sonic Adventure 2, there are rails that you can grind on, which is fast and fun. Sometimes there are parallel rails that you can switch between by pressing A (the jump button) while leaning left or right. Often though, there will be a single rail, and you will try to jump with the A button, instead switching to a rail that doesn't exist, instantly falling to your death. The issue presented here is "inconsistent controls". Having consistent controls is crucial to all games, but especially action games. Having the jump button make you fall, the exact opposite of jumping, is a massive inconsistency. This could have easily been fixed by mapping the "switch rail" action to the B, X, Y, or Z buttons, none of which are used on rails. Having context sensitive buttons can simply a control scheme, but if it kills the player a dozen times, it's time to consider using one more button.

ADDENDUM: I got all the A Ranks for Rouge's stage Mad Space, and it is one of the worst level in the game. The Spherical Planet has some of the worst controls I've ever experienced. As I move down the planet, I must tilt the control stick down to go down, then right to go down, then up to go down! These controls are seemingly random! The Capsule Planet also has anti-gravity, but only on the top half. Meanwhile, the Holy Planet has no anti-gravity at all. So not only are the controls inconsistent, the gravity is too. What were the level designers thinking? It's a shame, because Mad Space's anti-gravity reminds me of Super Mario Galaxy.

Edited August 29, 2015 by Zera