X-Newsreader: Geminisoft Pimmy 3.2 Eng - www.geminisoft.com
From: "John Colagioia" <JColagioia@csi.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.int-fiction
Subject: Re: Game Design Problems: Needed Equipt,Puzzles,Linearity
Date: Thu, 04 Jul 2002 20:32:02 -0400
References: <3D23927F.9C75C4F@qadas.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: ool-182f30fa.dyn.optonline.net
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: ool-182f30fa.dyn.optonline.net
Message-ID: <3d24e918$1@excalibur.gbmtech.net>
X-Trace: excalibur.gbmtech.net 1025829144 ool-182f30fa.dyn.optonline.net (4 Jul 2002 20:32:24 -0400)
Organization: ProNet USA Inc.
Lines: 63
X-Authenticated-User: jnc
Path: news.duke.edu!newsgate.duke.edu!news-hog.berkeley.edu!ucberkeley!news.maxwell.syr.edu!nntp.abs.net!uunet!dca.uu.net!excalibur.gbmtech.net
Xref: news.duke.edu rec.arts.int-fiction:105735

Al <radical@qadas.com> wrote:
[...]
>If the player gets into a situation (or room or whatever) where s/he
>doesn't have the
>needed equipment to solve a puzzle, should the game let him/her stay
>confused, start
>swearing at the game, getting ready to throw a rock thru the monitor or
>should
>there be a notification that the player MUST quit and either start over
>from the beginnging
>(VERY VERY frustrating without ANY saves) or let him or her know that
>there is a way
>out fo the predicatment without the needed equipment to solve the
>puzzle.

Personally, I dislike any game that's going to force my hand
to any great extent.  "You've jumped the rails, and therefore
have lost," is something that will cause me to not restart
the game.  What I prefer (and, therefore, try to keep to
while I slowly work on my first releasable game) is one of
two options:

1)  Hint heavily (going in) that there's no turning back, hint
even heavier that the game has ended, but let the player
explore.  Infocom did this on quite a few occasions, as I
recall, which the clever player could use as an opportunity to
learn more about the game world without being "on the clock."

2)  Don't let the player do anything that stupid.  The guard
("didn't I mention the guard?") doesn't let you in.  You're
"saved" after five turns by the rescue squad.  Whatever it
takes to drag the player (kicking and screaming, in some
cases) back to the main plot.

There's a third option, which I find uninteresting, which is
to kill the player (force a loss) immediately, and have the
player UNDO the blind alley.  It seems rather popular, but I
don't like the idea of assuming UNDO to be a real activity.

[...]
>This brings up the case of  linearity.

True.  They go hand in hand.  "Blind alleys" imply that the
player needs to be "on the tracks" to do well.

>Should there be some "escape" route programmed by the author (with or
>without subtle hints)
>so that the player doesn't have to revert to a saved game or in the
>worse case scenario START OVER ! ! !!

Sure.  And this is done fairly frequently, though probably
not "most of the time."  "Spider and Web" won't let you get
too far off the trail, by its nature, nor will "A Mind
Forever Voyaging," if I remember correctly; the various
"Zork" games have a fairly liberal policy regarding your
demise; I believe I've also seen one or two "one-time"
salvations, like an escape hatch that collapses after you're
through, or a bridge that's damaged by your passing, though
I can't remember the game.

I'll now look around innocently, acting like I'm unaware
that I've never written a releasable (or complete, for that
matter) game...
