"Implicit" game design

[Lambonius]

Here's a neat video discussing what we might call the counter-trend to the current trend of "casualized game design."  This video references Dark Souls (the last mainstream game to really REALLY suck me in and not let go, and one of my favorites of this entire console generation) along with a few others, but I think that the ideas he brings up can be applied to adventure game design as well.  The idea of dropping a player into the game world and letting them simply explore and uncover things as they go is one of my favorite parts of traditional adventure games (I f***ing hate that I have to use the qualifier "traditional" now--THANKS, TELLTALE.)  I know that it's something we at IQ have had in the back of our minds with Quest For Infamy, too--rewarding players for exploring and trying new things, etc.  Anyway, I thought it was a cool video with some good ideas.  Thoughts?

[stika]

I feel there's a room for both and I understand that there aren't enough games that offer you more liberty or at least, mystery on how to play.

I guess that's why we have indies

[Lambonius]

Well, I think we're talking about something different than just the idea of non-linear gameplay.  What he's talking about is more the idea of allowing the player to discover the beauty and depth of a game's world and mechanics without an excessive amount of hand-holding.  Dark Souls, for example, has a very deep story and world rich in lore, but you've got to dig for it.  The beauty of the game is really in that sense of discovery, and that despite the level of "challenge," the game makes you WANT to press on, just to see what's around the next corner.  It's very rogue-like in that respect, actually.

[stika]

I think part of the problem is that most don't have the time for that sort of gameplay style anymore.

It's not an easy thing to admit, but I hardly have the time I'd like to have to play games

[Lambonius]

I think part of the problem is that most don't have the time for that sort of gameplay style anymore.

It's not an easy thing to admit, but I hardly have the time I'd like to have to play games

Maybe adults with full time jobs and kids might have a hard time finding time, but honestly, how many gamers are kids, teens, or college students with nothing BUT time?  I'd say that's MOST gamers--or at least, the target audience for most game companies.

[stika]

Indeed, but then we enter the old 'bro-gamer' argument.

Which to be honest, I have nothing against 'bro-games' I'll be the first to admit I love Halo and Gears of War.

But I do love deeper games of course, it's just that alas, bro games are the main force behind sales

[snabbott]

I like what he said about having a superficial story that is easier to get through but a much deeper story  for those willing to look for it.

[stika]

Sort of like the original Deus Ex

there was a lot of lore in that game, if you were willing to read through people's emails that is

[Rosella]

I just want to say that I'm a college student and I have no time.

[stika]

How dare you spend your time studying and being productive? 

[Bludshot]

I didn't like Dark Souls, I mostly found it irritating.  I see the appeal though, it is strange situation where I don't think it is a bad game, it just isn't something I am interested in.

Reading this thread is makes me wonder if I would've felt different 5 to 10 years ago, if what I look for in a game has changed that dramatically.

[Lambonius]

I just want to say that I'm a college student and I have no time.

I used to think that, when I was in college.  Now, in hindsight, I look back and realize just how much time I wasted on things like socializing, sleeping in, etc., that I could have used much more productively playing video games. 

[Lambonius]

I didn't like Dark Souls, I mostly found it irritating.  I see the appeal though, it is strange situation where I don't think it is a bad game, it just isn't something I am interested in.

Reading this thread is makes me wonder if I would've felt different 5 to 10 years ago, if what I look for in a game has changed that dramatically.

Dark Souls is a tough one--it's VERY inaccessible to newcomers, but once you get the hang of its combat and leveling mechanics, its difficulty is majorly tempered.  A number of things could be done to make Dark Souls more accessible and still maintain the kind of depth and implicit game design the guy in the video is talking about.  He's really referring to the open-ended nature of the gameworld and its story.

[Blackthorne]

Yeah, it's funny... when I was in college I thought I had no time either, but it turns out that's when you have all the time.


Bt

[snabbott]

I don't know that it's a lack of time (though I do have a lot less time than I used to). It seems like as a society, our attention span has decreased. I know there are a bunch of things I want to do (testing Cognition, programming Infiltrator, learning C++ and/or C#, learning HTML5/CSS, playing games...), and I have trouble focusing on one thing long enough to get anywhere with it.

[Bludshot]

I didn't like Dark Souls, I mostly found it irritating.  I see the appeal though, it is strange situation where I don't think it is a bad game, it just isn't something I am interested in.

Reading this thread is makes me wonder if I would've felt different 5 to 10 years ago, if what I look for in a game has changed that dramatically.

Dark Souls is a tough one--it's VERY inaccessible to newcomers, but once you get the hang of its combat and leveling mechanics, its difficulty is majorly tempered.  A number of things could be done to make Dark Souls more accessible and still maintain the kind of depth and implicit game design the guy in the video is talking about.  He's really referring to the open-ended nature of the gameworld and its story.

Well it wasn't just the difficulty, I understood that dying a lot was to be expected, and I could appreciate the atmosphere of the whole thing.  I just couldn't bring myself to care enough to invest the time.

Maybe this goes in tandem with the posts about the lack of time, in an age where our lists of "must play" games are incredibly long, if a game can't hook me in the first hour I don't want to potentially waste time for an experience that may or may not improve.

Older games could get away with that because there were simply less games around, it was easier to focus on one game at a time.

[Lambonius]

Oh yeah, I definitely agree that Dark Souls' story could do a better job of "hooking" the player, as you put it.  It's very bare-bones at the beginning, and only really reveals itself if you take the time to read item descriptions, talk to every character multiple times and at different points throughout the game, and really explore to find the various secrets.  One improvement that they could definitely make is in the sprinkling of a few (not too many) more story focused cutscenes or playable story sections (not QTEs though) throughout the game.  Dark Souls at times feels like there literally ISN'T a story, because it's pretty much ENTIRELY told through subtext.  They could definitely bring parts of it to the surface more, but leave the subtext there for people who want to explore the lore more deeply.  With Dark Souls, the lack of any surface story absolutely kills the sense of any urgency in the game, and really leaves it up to the player to decide to go forward and check out another area.  In some ways, that can be considered a strength, but in my opinion, there's a better balance that could be reached in the next game.  From what the developers have said, that's something they are looking into addressing in the upcoming sequel.