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)
CHALLENGE VERSUS FRUSTRATION
Posts
kentona
View playlists
CloseMaybe I am just more mainstream than I realize.
Anywho, to answer your question:
My only plan is to play test my game over and over, while reworking the content until I feel like I managed to get a good challenge level without being unduly frustrating.
The Frustration - Challenge - Boredom scale is hard to quantify and is dependent on the player. Game playing is primarily a learning experience (we are hardwired to find learning fun) and everyone brings their own experiences and intellect to the table. Since we aren't a pro-gaming company, we have to settle on a narrow range for Challenge, and what handier example of the median for that than yourself?
Anywho, to answer your question:
How do you reconcile difficulty with not frustrating the player?
My only plan is to play test my game over and over, while reworking the content until I feel like I managed to get a good challenge level without being unduly frustrating.
The Frustration - Challenge - Boredom scale is hard to quantify and is dependent on the player. Game playing is primarily a learning experience (we are hardwired to find learning fun) and everyone brings their own experiences and intellect to the table. Since we aren't a pro-gaming company, we have to settle on a narrow range for Challenge, and what handier example of the median for that than yourself?
I guess an example would be a part of a Mario level where you have to get across a large gap by bouncing from one flying koopa to the next. Mostly the koopas are set up to not require split-second timing, and the actual task isn't that difficult, but the sense of constant danger that comes from bounding quickly off platforms over a void and the fact that the only options after making the first jump are to succeed or die makes it pretty engaging and satisfying to pull off.
My illusions...are shattered....those parts always made me feel like a badass.
Alternatively, I think some of them DO require split-second timing.
Running, jumping, and praying that the turtle is placed so that this works is what I found usually works
Yoshio
774
post=119952
Anybody played "I wanna be the guy"?
Perfect. Example.
of what? The game creator himself said that game was designed with the intention of frusterating the player and messing with his head.
Darken
3952
Ikaruga is actually a very fair game, if you die, it's pretty much due to your lack of cyborg reflexes.
kayzorkross
25
post=121763post=121646Okay.
There's a simple answer to this question...
If it's going to frustrate the player to the point where they no longer enjoy playing and will turn it off... it should be edited or done away with.
Games are played for fun. =]
Where's the threshold? Who's the arbiter?
The players are. That's what demos and beta versions can help with. Sure you want to show off your project, but make sure there are avenues for interested players to leave feedback so that balancing issues can be fixed as well as bugs and compliments to blow up your e-peens.
Crystalgate
694
My first advice would be to make getting back to the challenging part quick. If a boss is difficult, there should not be a long unskipable cutscene in front of it and the player should be allowed to save first. Also, be careful with bosses with multiple forms, if the third form is the one that causes the game overs, the first two forms will end up being time wasters.
I prefer that if I fail it's because I did something wrong, not because the RNG decided to be a dick. While the RNG will inevitable make some parts harder or easier than expected, buffer it's impact.
Let the player know what happened. If a boss uses a nasty attack called Dark-Flare and you can't see whether it's a fire or dark attack and can't either see if it's a physical of magical attack, it's hard for the player to plan accordingly. It gets even worse if the player has no idea when that attack will come. Sure, the player can experiment, but I don't think it's fun in this case. Unless we're in a logic defying mood, we humans like to be safe when experimenting. When testing whether or not an enemy is susceptible to sleep, we make sure we won't have the party wiped out in case it turns out it's not.
Finally, the more fun the challenge is, the more tolerant a player tends to be towards retrying it. Having the right amount of challenge (where what's right varies from player to player) makes the game more fun, but there's fun that comes from other sources than the challenge. Try to figure out what can make your game fun other than the right amount of challenge and make sure such elements are present in the challenge.
I prefer that if I fail it's because I did something wrong, not because the RNG decided to be a dick. While the RNG will inevitable make some parts harder or easier than expected, buffer it's impact.
Let the player know what happened. If a boss uses a nasty attack called Dark-Flare and you can't see whether it's a fire or dark attack and can't either see if it's a physical of magical attack, it's hard for the player to plan accordingly. It gets even worse if the player has no idea when that attack will come. Sure, the player can experiment, but I don't think it's fun in this case. Unless we're in a logic defying mood, we humans like to be safe when experimenting. When testing whether or not an enemy is susceptible to sleep, we make sure we won't have the party wiped out in case it turns out it's not.
Finally, the more fun the challenge is, the more tolerant a player tends to be towards retrying it. Having the right amount of challenge (where what's right varies from player to player) makes the game more fun, but there's fun that comes from other sources than the challenge. Try to figure out what can make your game fun other than the right amount of challenge and make sure such elements are present in the challenge.
Clest
0
I like a lot of posts here and some of then gave me ideas.
Anyway, I always say dificulty is related to skill, not just some general atribute. What I means is that dificulty tests certain skills from the player such as quick reflexes, patience, strategical planning, dexterity or all of then.
This should be considered when addressing the target audience and checking dificulty levels. Why? because players have different skills and while you think your game is easy because both you and your beta testers excell at strategic planning, a lot of players who actually suck at it but are patient on doing repetitive tasks might feel frustrated.
Of course that if you make a strategy game, planning is a top required skill from the player, either that they have it high or they develope it while playing. But you can always broaden your audience by giving alternate ways to reach the game´s goals.
I for example am good at planning and devising strategies, but am slow as hell and have clumsy hands, this setup makes me suck at most fighting games, however certain fighting games have simple to activate movies with plenty of strategic options, thinking Touhou Fighting games for example, for me it is rather easy to outrun fast players by using strategy.
For RPGs, I think that the best example between hard and fun is Chrono Trigger: If you go straight it presents inteligent challenge for both bosses AND regular battles, yet if you grind a bit you can make things easer on your end, but still not easy enough to troll over bosses without thought.
Anyway, I always say dificulty is related to skill, not just some general atribute. What I means is that dificulty tests certain skills from the player such as quick reflexes, patience, strategical planning, dexterity or all of then.
This should be considered when addressing the target audience and checking dificulty levels. Why? because players have different skills and while you think your game is easy because both you and your beta testers excell at strategic planning, a lot of players who actually suck at it but are patient on doing repetitive tasks might feel frustrated.
Of course that if you make a strategy game, planning is a top required skill from the player, either that they have it high or they develope it while playing. But you can always broaden your audience by giving alternate ways to reach the game´s goals.
I for example am good at planning and devising strategies, but am slow as hell and have clumsy hands, this setup makes me suck at most fighting games, however certain fighting games have simple to activate movies with plenty of strategic options, thinking Touhou Fighting games for example, for me it is rather easy to outrun fast players by using strategy.
For RPGs, I think that the best example between hard and fun is Chrono Trigger: If you go straight it presents inteligent challenge for both bosses AND regular battles, yet if you grind a bit you can make things easer on your end, but still not easy enough to troll over bosses without thought.
