Which of these two methods DO YOU choose to entertain your player ? Increasing difficulty. ======================== The game has a standard challenge and a standard method of overcoming this challenge. [Shooting the aliens in Space Invaders, bursting the bubbles in Puzzle Bobble, destroying bases in Command and Conquer]. Through the course of the game this challenge increases in difficulty until the final showdown. There are slight changes in the challenge to keep the player interested, and occasionally new player/enemy controlled units [items, tanks etc] are added in to necessitate a slight change in strategy... the final level is usually very hard. Ie. Doing what we know how to do best = providing a fairly limited way of solving the challenge. There seems to be a concept that the harder the challenge, the better they will feel when they overcome it. Diversity =========== Where the player is faced with a variety of tasks. There are often multiple solutions. Does not rely as much on increasing the difficulty of the game, and instead tries to provide more interesting & entertaining situations for the player to face. Maybe starting with the player being asked to help sober up the drunken lord of the manor, and ending up with stealing diamonds by dangling from a wire above a room full of sleeping security guards. This approach [in my opinion] either requires that there be a series of unconnected sub-games, or the more expensive and difficult approach of making a game which provides diverse gameplay and problem solving opportunities all within one gameplay system. [Sorry if I didn''t explain Diversity very well].

I certainly am more interested in diversity.


Need help? Well, go FAQ yourself.
What a plight we who try to make a story-based game have...writers of conventional media have words, we have but binary numbers

Pondering the same thing, isn''t that funny...

Of course, the de facto standard is increased difficulty possibly because it''s the easiest to do and maybe understand.

I want to see more of the second, but just as you mentioned, it''s difficult. How do you get diversity without it winding up being a bunch of different games? For instance, I''ve (*insanely*) decided that I want the player to be able to: fly a ship, get into a car chase, repair a reactor, fight a boarding party, and invade a planet, (among other things ).

This is not possible if you follow the standard approach. It would be multiple games, and be too complicated to play together. Even the idea of seperate games that can link together is unsatisfying.

You can go the route of subgames, and I''m planning to do a little bit of that myself. But consider another another, probably more powerful concept: reuse. CRPGs like the Fallout series (sorry, it''s just what I happen to be studying right now ) make excellent use of applying a single action to multiple contexts. In this way, a single action *means* different things depending on how or when it''s used.

To do this, you need to look for where game elements are similar, and then change the context. For example: The "Take" action can pick up something on the ground, or can be used to steal from someone. Another example: Driving, flying, and walking can be made remarkably similar, and for a 3D isometric game can simply be a change in art, handling characteristics, and function. Reuse.

I think this, combined with subgames, is the ultimate way to go. It requires you to give up some detail, but it seems to me that you gain a world of diversity.


--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...

I think you left one out.

Everybody, Ketchaval meant for the title of his topic to be:
Difficulty or Diversity or Diversion

Diversion
=========

Where the player is immersed in an entertaining world that provides an hour or three of diversion as she participates in an ever unfolding tapestry of convoluted plots and situations that are at times dangerous and deadly, and at other times merely fascinating and mind expanding.

Gone are levels, silly quests and puzzles. Increasingly more present are an evolving set of circumstances that have carried her character to this junction thus far. Is the Hooded Mystique still tracking her across the Universe? Was it wise coming to Sorbias Port to contact Dasquin-Dam-Demoor?

Wavinator''s point about reusing elements in different ways is an important aspect of this. Whether it be a flexible interface, for example the Steal function of Fallout 2 which brings up a two way item exchange menu.. so you can steal things, or plant objects on them [drugs, explosives].

Or repeated gameplay elements like being able to sneak around guards if they aren''t looking at you. [See the Gamasutra - production article Postmortem on System Shock 2 for some interesting info on this].

I never designed any real big game, but I played a few, and I have plans for a few games too. I think that since the first thing you have to do is creating the game engine, including gameplay, difficulty and diversion have to be tweaked afterwards to match the gameplay. There is no choice betwen diversity and diversion / difficulty.


After you make the best gameplay (allowing the player the most freedom (Diversity)) you can/afford:

1) Difficulty :

The game can''t be too easy, or the player will just ignore your great gameplay system, and solve everything using simple strategies (like me banging every single guard''s head in thief, on expert difficulty...).

The game can''t be too hard, or the number of strategies that would work at any time will be quite small, and the feel of freedom goes away, and the player is forced again to reverse engineer the game design for clues. Some very hard points every once in a while are good practice though.

2) Diversion :

If I understand it, in-game movies, and predefined plots and intrigues with a finite number of paths all make up Diversion. If so, Diversion also depends heavily on gameplay. The plots have to change the gameplay in some ways, or the player won''t pay any attention to them. You can''t put intricate intrigues in a low Diversity gameplay like PacMan or Doom. They fit very well in Thief, because together with the story, the player gets bits of mission usefull information.

[Edited, see Forum guidelines, no one-liners, and certainly no one-worders.]


Edited by - MadKeithV on March 26, 2001 4:13:23 AM

quote: Original post by Diodor
The plots have to change the gameplay in some ways, or the player won't pay any attention to them. You can't put intricate intrigues in a low Diversity gameplay like PacMan or Doom.

Indeed, plots in Pacman wouldn't work that well if the gameplay didn't change. Although a simple, fun plot might add some entertainment value of Pacman.

But the diversity of Pacman's gameplay could be increased fairly simply. Pacman is a good example of Difficulty / Endurance gameplay, you keep playing until you run out of lives.You could create greater diversity by adding simple new gameplay elements like mines or moving obstacles.. etc.

[For proof of how simple gameplay elements can add lots to games, see Bubble Bobble & Zelda].


Edited by - Ketchaval on March 26, 2001 12:50:06 PM

Personally, I''d rank diversity over difficulty. The game as a whole, should be diverse, but, in my opinion, difficulty should be modular.

By this, I mean that you have your playzone/map, and your objectives, detonate the nuke inside the castle, rescue the princess, sleep with the princess''s mother, all of the above...

These objectives form part of the diversity - not just multiple endings, but multiple paths to get there, all weaving through the same world. I know that''s not the meaning of diversity being discussed here, but it IS another form of diversity, and central to my point about difficulty.

Now, in order to achieve the desired objective, there would be several ways, each with varying levels of difficulty.

For example, rescuing the princess:

1. Wait till she goes to the market, shopping, with her escort "bodyguards", then charge through, sword in each hand, take them down, and escape. Moderate difficulty.

2. Again, the market. Set up a stall in her favourite market, selling perfumes and herbs (The perfect way to disguise poisons). Wait until she comes upto the stall, with her guards, blow a fast-acting nerve toxin in their faces, and escape. Time-consuming, but easy.

3. Attempt a direct assult on the castle. You against all its defenders and defenses. Extremely hard.

Utillising this sort of system, the difficulty level would be determined by the player''s approach to the problem - provided by the diversity of tasks.

quote: Original post by DM

Personally, I''d rank diversity over difficulty. The game as a whole, should be diverse, but, in my opinion, difficulty should be modular.

DM, I''m right with you. This is why a 3 year old game like Starcraft is STILL being played and sold when the shelf-life of most games is no more than 6 months!!!!

quote:
These objectives form part of the diversity - not just multiple endings, but multiple paths to get there, all weaving through the same world. I know that''s not the meaning of diversity being discussed here, but it IS another form of diversity, and central to my point about difficulty.

Exactly. While this is more difficult to design and to balance, it''s also much more replayable and in my book fun!



--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...