[MUD-Dev2] Specialization

[cruise]

Thus spake Fred Pseudonym...
>> "cruise" <cruise at casual-tempest.net> wrote:
>>
>> I don't consider it breaking my game - I consider that /the/ game. A 
>> game is about overcoming obstacles. An obstacle that can be overcome by 
>> anyone, easily, isn't an obstacle.
>>
>> It's not success if everyone has it all.
>  
> Thus you have identified the art of the game designer.   
> A game that is too easy then people will get bored and/or
 > finish it too quickly as no obstacles results in no fun;
 > basically you have a very elaborate novel in a medium that
 > simply isn't very good at telling complex stories.  A game
 > that is too hard will frustrate most players who will then get
 > bored and quit, leaving only the truly hardcore to blunder to the
 > finish.  The great game designers will use pacing, story and rewards
 > to draw the players through difficult challenges, motivating them to
 > work through the obstacles to obtain the feeling of accomplishment
> that  comes with doing something difficult.
>  
> But do not kid yourself; they want everybody to make it through those
> challenges so that everybody can "finish" the game.  Why spend the
> time to lovingly create content that you won't let a portion of your
> playerbase ever use?  Why do you want to frustrate some players just
> to try to make others feel a greater accomplishment?

Obviously people must be capable of defeating the challenge - the 
potential should always be there.

However, some people may not be willing to invest the effort required 
for themselves to do so. At which point, "this challenge is impossible" 
is an accurate, if subjective, description.

The unsolvability is centered on the player and not the challenge at 
that point, however.

For me the true artistry of game design is enthralling people so well 
that they are willing to put the effort required into overcoming the 
obstacles you give them.

A couple of specific examples:

I enjoy tekken-style beat 'em ups - in single player. Against a good 
opponent (I have a friend who is a very good opponent), I simply get 
frustrated because I do not have the necessary knowledge to perform, and 
more importantly, block, the lengthier combos. While innate ability 
helps, it is insufficient without extensive time and domain-specific 
knowledge.

I get similarly irritated by r-type-esque style shoot 'em ups that 
require memorising attack waves to survive, for similar reasons.


A game should be winnable, theoretically, on the first play through, 
without any prior information, and without requiring guesswork. You 
might have to be very quick and accurate, or very observant, or 
whatever, but those are generalised skills that apply for more things 
than just the one specific game.

In this regard, I agree that a game (and success) should be available to 
all. That doesn't mean it has to be without effort, however. An effort 
some might not wish to put in.

> The problem, of course, is that different players have different
> levels of ability and motivation which the designer has to somehow
> accommodate.   Non-persistent worlds can adapt to this either
> adjusting, either manually or automatically, the difficulty of
> those challenges.   Persistent worlds can't really do this because
> it would be odd (and likely difficult given the computational power
> available) for challenges to alter their difficulty based on the
> abilities of the people involved.   So they either keep difficulty
> of the challenges very low and hope the players will find some way
> to increase the challenge on themselves or they, much more often,
> simply remove skill from the equation completely.

Again, the game designer is allowed to choose his market. Some people, 
obviously, enjoy the hardcore end of gaming, and a game designer is 
within his rights to target them.
Some people want "casual" games, and likewise these games are no less 
worthy.
Difficulty settings let a game hit several of these groupings, thus 
expanding their potential customer base.
Automated difficulty adjustments are a nice idea, but the algorithm will 
all-too-quickly become the game for many players, as they learn to 
manipulate it at will.