Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Images
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Post History
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
[POLL] OPTIONAL CONTENT: HOW MUCH IS BEST?
Poll
How much of a game's content should be optional, i.e. side quests and hidden areas that can be missed or skipped by a player completing the core game? Keep in mind this question is focused towards an indie/amateur developer frame of reference. - Results
|
No side content. 100% of players should see 100% of the game.
|
|
1
|
4%
|
|
Some of the game's content, but less than 10%, should be "optional".
|
|
1
|
4%
|
|
Around 10% of the game's content should be "optional".
|
|
4
|
18%
|
|
Around 25% of the game's content should be "optional".
|
|
11
|
50%
|
|
Up to 50% of the game's content can be missed by a non-completionist player.
|
|
3
|
13%
|
|
More than half of the game should be optional content! A la some open world games, the 'main story' isn't the main point.
|
|
2
|
9%
|
Posts
Pages:
1
Max McGee
View playlists
CloseI'm positive we've done this thread before but I don't remember what the consensus was so aw heck I'm doing it again.
RPGs are a tricky beast. One of their characteristic features is optional side content that can be missed or skipped. Side quests, hidden dungeons, secret bosses, you name it. Most RPG series are famous for including these. As a one-man development team, it seems horribly inefficient to work on content that not every player will see. Especially since, as an indie, you are already looking at a very limited audience seeing ANY part of your game. On the other hand, optional side content is the kind of thing die hard fans expect to give them a special sense of achievement.
So what do you think is the "right" amount of optional content, the right balance of potentially wasted effort and optional extras for die-hard "super-users", keeping in mind it's obviously a somewhat subjective issue.
Bonus Question: However much optional content you are using, when do you put in the work to build it? Do you weave it into the development of the core game, or set it all aside for after the core game is done, or something else?
RPGs are a tricky beast. One of their characteristic features is optional side content that can be missed or skipped. Side quests, hidden dungeons, secret bosses, you name it. Most RPG series are famous for including these. As a one-man development team, it seems horribly inefficient to work on content that not every player will see. Especially since, as an indie, you are already looking at a very limited audience seeing ANY part of your game. On the other hand, optional side content is the kind of thing die hard fans expect to give them a special sense of achievement.
So what do you think is the "right" amount of optional content, the right balance of potentially wasted effort and optional extras for die-hard "super-users", keeping in mind it's obviously a somewhat subjective issue.
Bonus Question: However much optional content you are using, when do you put in the work to build it? Do you weave it into the development of the core game, or set it all aside for after the core game is done, or something else?
author=Max McGee
somewhat subjective issue
It's extremely subjective. Even if you put all of your content on a linear path from New Game to the ending credits, you're still losing players every minute of your game. People quit because of boredom, or taste, or genuine distraction, and then don't pick the game back up.
The only thing 100% of your players will see is the title screen. After that, the different forms of game ("linear" and "nonlinear") only mean one thing: In a linear game, the developer decides what the player's priorities are; and in a nonlinear game, the player decides.
So, I guess the answer to your poll depends entirely on how much control you're willing to permit your player to have. Are you willing to let them violate your beautiful special snowflake story in order to let the player enjoy the game more?
Corfaisus
"It's frustrating because - as much as Corf is otherwise an irredeemable person - his 2k/3 mapping is on point." ~ psy_wombats
7874
I love optional content (side-quests) in RPGs, but I think it goes without saying that a solid narrative is absolutely mandatory in order for the optional content to even see the light of day.
flapbat
1053
Basically what others have said, but I think it depends on how strong of a narrative you're shooting for. Optional content can sometimes detract from the narrative, flow, pacing, etc. But at the same time, optional content can be pretty dang fun! There are ways to weave the narrative into it, like in CT or BoF:DQ. But the main focus for an indie developer should probably be developing beginning to end and producing a finished product.
-flap
-flap
Shinan
4314
I think that there actually is a somewhat correct answer to this (yeah right). And that is in the extremes. You should either have lots of optional content or very little. Doing something in the middle can essentially just be a waste of time.
My thinking is that the audiences seldom overlap. The people who want a linear experience aren't drawn in by some optional content and the non-linear fans aren't going to play a linear game just because there's some optional content.
In fact "halfassing" it by trying to appease both is often a recipe for disaster.
My thinking is that the audiences seldom overlap. The people who want a linear experience aren't drawn in by some optional content and the non-linear fans aren't going to play a linear game just because there's some optional content.
In fact "halfassing" it by trying to appease both is often a recipe for disaster.
nurvuss
958
I love it, as long as it's fleshed out and not 'kill 10 rats'.
It's ok if not every player sees it. It's neat stumbling upon unique hidden situations that not everybody will.
but obviously the appropriateness of this depends on the project!
It's ok if not every player sees it. It's neat stumbling upon unique hidden situations that not everybody will.
but obviously the appropriateness of this depends on the project!
Over 50%! Your players may not see it. But it will be a draw point for players to keep with your game. Also, you can conceivably add an extra storyline, after the main story (that gets unlocked if you finish a special way).
By doing so, you can theoretically appeal to both the quest players and the 100% complete types.
I don't think there is a "too much" point on sidequests, so long as the main plot is visible.
By doing so, you can theoretically appeal to both the quest players and the 100% complete types.
I don't think there is a "too much" point on sidequests, so long as the main plot is visible.
Roots
14
It depends on the game. But all of my favorite RPGs have around 10-25% optional content. I want the optional content to enhance and expand the story and character development, not just reward the player with rare/unique items and equipment. For myself, the story is everything and most of my motivation with any game I play comes from a desire of wanting to find out what happens next in the story, or learn more about a character.
Well if you have optional content that's essential to the story, that brings up another issue. Non-completionist players might finish the game without fully understanding every nuance of the story if they just stay on the main track.
And I have a suspicion that a lot of players playing just for the story are also the type to stay on the main track.
And I have a suspicion that a lot of players playing just for the story are also the type to stay on the main track.
For your bonus; you should definitely work on it concurrently with the main game. You're going to have to factor the rewards you dole out into the difficulty curve, after all!
flapbat
1053
Ooh, bonuses... I say work it into the core! Your creative juices are flowing anyway while you work on the core stuff, so why not? You can always add even more at the end if you feel so compelled!
And you don't make optional story pieces essential to the plot. You just make them expand on the plot in order to make it richer and more satisfying.
Bonus Rant: What you don't want to do is put in Easter Eggs while working on the core game. They can totally sidetrack you! I once had a perfectly good game turn into a story about sacrificing yourself to a Lion that stole your Work Boots and then sent you to hell where you got cussed out by Irvine and had to fight the Demon King x2 only to end up burning in a different victorious hell with Irvine, some butler guy, and... get this, yo! A freakin' dolphin!!
All that because of an Easter Egg.
-flap
And you don't make optional story pieces essential to the plot. You just make them expand on the plot in order to make it richer and more satisfying.
Bonus Rant: What you don't want to do is put in Easter Eggs while working on the core game. They can totally sidetrack you! I once had a perfectly good game turn into a story about sacrificing yourself to a Lion that stole your Work Boots and then sent you to hell where you got cussed out by Irvine and had to fight the Demon King x2 only to end up burning in a different victorious hell with Irvine, some butler guy, and... get this, yo! A freakin' dolphin!!
All that because of an Easter Egg.
-flap
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
author=Max McGee
Well if you have optional content that's essential to the story, that brings up another issue. Non-completionist players might finish the game without fully understanding every nuance of the story if they just stay on the main track.
And I have a suspicion that a lot of players playing just for the story are also the type to stay on the main track.
I think this is just a matter of good conveyance. Diablo 3 handles this extremely well, for example. There are hundreds of optional dungeons and sidequests in the game, most of them generated randomly, which contain no plot. There might be an NPC with a couple lines about how he got there, but no more. But there are also exactly three sidequests in Act 5 that are extremely plot relevant, are not random at all, and involve your party members.
The game handles this by conveying very clearly that these sidequests will teach you about the story. By this point in the game you've undoubtedly done at least a dozen story-free sidequests, and possibly hundreds of them. Without exception, every single one of those is found by exploring randomly out in the wild. You are never prompted to seek any of them out, and you don't know about them until after you find them. The three story-driven sidequests, on the other hand instead start in a town area, with exclamation points over your party members' heads. When you talk to your party members, which you are absolutely going to do because of how unusual that exclamation point is, they start talking about important plot stuff with you, explain their reason for wanting to go somewhere, and then ask you if you will go with them. Upon saying yes you are teleported there and the plot continues. It's an extremely different experience and its effectively unmissable.
Now, there are trivial bits of info about the game's world you can learn from other optional parts of the game. But that's not the same. That's really not much different from giving dialogue to random townspeople that the player isn't forced to talk to. It's fine! There's no need to force every single player to learn every single tiny piece of information about the game's world, events and characters. Some of them care more than others.
Pages:
1
