haha, i love egorapter's works! check him out on Newgrounds.com, he's made many video game parodies. i'd provide a link directly to his user on newgrounds, but my internet is acting up and i cant connect to newgrounds right now :(
Loved the video. That's exactly how I feel about many games. Some of them need endless instructions to play and even after reading/seeing/whatever the instructions you can't play the game.
For SC2 map makers: If your map isn't that simple we have TOOLTIPS!!!! Yes, those little text boxes so you can give the player short, useful instructions. If you don't know how to use them, just check SC2 abilities/upgrades/whatever. Many mappers simply ignore tooltips.
Loved the video. That's exactly how I feel about many games. Some of them need endless instructions to play and even after reading/seeing/whatever the instructions you can't play the game.
For SC2 map makers: If your map isn't that simple we have TOOLTIPS!!!! Yes, those little text boxes so you can give the player short, useful instructions. If you don't know how to use them, just check SC2 abilities/upgrades/whatever. Many mappers simply ignore tooltips.
Unfortunately, the sad truth is that the majority of people won't bother reading a tooltip. You can give people an amazing tutorial system that walks them through the finer points of your map and people will still say "What does X thing that's clearly explained in the tooltip do?". SC2's playerbase just cannot handle reading or critical thinking.
Unfortunately, the sad truth is that the majority of people won't bother reading a tooltip.
I agree, and I confess I'm also one of them. I don't really like to spend 10 minutes just to understand what the map I'm playing is about... I take the time to read when I'm playing against the AI, but let's be honest, maps with complicated gameplay mechanics (ie. complicated enough to require tooltips for explanations) are often 100% made for multiplayer with human players only. In my humble opinion, the main reason why these maps are awful is because they're just a succession of bad decisions in term of design. Making a game with 3 pages of information to read is just a pain, no matter what.
I'd rather put the player directly into the game and let him figure out what he must do rather than popping a tooltip every 10 seconds to tell him "hey look, this unit can do that!". It's true that players are not designers, but they're not dumb enough to be unable to figure how a game has to be played on their own. The worst thing to do is to spam them with confusing tips they don't need, just to let them understand the basics of your gameplay.
It's not the player who's supposed to adapt to the map (if you expect players to choose a confusing map when there are dozens of fun and easy to play maps available everywhere, trust me you'll lose this battle)... It's the role of a designer to think his map ahead and make sure everything is easy to understand without tons of instructions, no matter how complicated the gameplay of the map is in the end. Design (especially Game Design) is not an easy job at all, I've said this many times on SC2Mapster already and I'll keep saying it until people understand that it's not something anybody can do.
Not entirely true. It's not just a matter of fun or not. It's a matter of how frustrating your gameplay is. Some games are not fun at all, and yet you'll keep playing till the end. It's basically a loop including 3 simple things: fun, then challenge, and finally reward. Rinse and repeat. Fun alone is not enough... and that's what a huge majority of mappers don't even know, because they're basically players more than designers.
except the reward part... You dont actually need any reward, Evolves, Bunker wars, DBZ tribute, civ wars and dota, none of which had prizes I think a game can do well just off the first 2. Though rewards dont hurt.
If you want people to play your map, it needs to have a reasonable learning curve. Start out simple and add complexity over time. Every professional game with any amount of complexity does this; look at the SC2 campaign. You start just controlling a squad of units. Then you can build marines and SCVs. Then more infantry, vehicles, and air. The player isn't asked to read 10 pages of descriptions of each unit then be forced to choose between them.
Also, things should be intuitive. Players should be able to guess what something does, without having to read a tooltip. If it looks like a gun, feels like a gun, is called a gun, then you'd damn well expect it to be able to shoot something. Outlandish game concepts can be fun, but they can be very difficult to pick up if they're not based in reality (or well-known science fiction). You can utilize a good learning curve to introduce players to your unintuitive gameplay by starting out with something familiar to everyone.
While this is a very helpful thing to do its not necessary in all cases, Dota allstars was confusing as hell for beginners in WC3. But i do see your point in how it should get harder over time.
Like in any good Tower Defense the first 10 levels are garbage so you can get used to the interface and the towers.:D
Unfortunately, the sad truth is that the majority of people won't bother reading a tooltip.
I'm one of those people. If you can't present your information in a clear, concise and short manner, then screw it, I'll find out by trial and error instead.
You can give people an amazing tutorial system that walks them through the finer points of your map and people will still say "What does X thing that's clearly explained in the tooltip do?".
Any game that needs a tutorial is unintuitive by definition. That's not the player's fault; that's the developer's fault.
If you really must have a tutorial, implement it as a guide to that information when that information is relevent.
Don't put some huge button labeled "Tutorial" which dumps a metric ton of information onto the player that has little or no relevance to their gameplay experience for the next hour.
Dota is a special case because it's had a very long development history. When it was new, it had fewer features, which kept being added gradually while the playerbase already knew how to play. That was its learning curve.
Dota is a special case because it's had a very long development history. When it was new, it had fewer features, which kept being added gradually while the playerbase already knew how to play. That was its learning curve.
Agree and when something reaches high popularity, most people just try to figure out why it is popular no matter of what...
Btw Dota is a really a good example what can you achieve if you stick to an idea... (however I never liked Dota)
Also the best way to make learning curve for a multiplayer game is the campaign. There is no good way to make a good learning curve in multiplayer game's multiplayer mod.
Yep the "learning curve" is the big thing. Remember when you first time played Command & Conquer or Warcraft2? It required lot of learning to undertand who collects money, who builds farms etc. Nowadays you dont have to think this kind of things so much. Some mechanics on tower defense maps can be really simple but new players just don't have time to read all minor things that are modified on this tower defense version 167.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I think this is pretty funny educational video for map makers:
The other 2 video from this guy are good too.
(yeah my maps lack to from proper introduction too:(
That's a pretty good video. There's a lot of these videos out there that point out very clearly why older games are better than some newer games.
haha, i love egorapter's works! check him out on Newgrounds.com, he's made many video game parodies. i'd provide a link directly to his user on newgrounds, but my internet is acting up and i cant connect to newgrounds right now :(
Loved the video. That's exactly how I feel about many games. Some of them need endless instructions to play and even after reading/seeing/whatever the instructions you can't play the game.
For SC2 map makers: If your map isn't that simple we have TOOLTIPS!!!! Yes, those little text boxes so you can give the player short, useful instructions. If you don't know how to use them, just check SC2 abilities/upgrades/whatever. Many mappers simply ignore tooltips.
I really liked Super Castlevania 4 video, thanks for sharing :D
Unfortunately, the sad truth is that the majority of people won't bother reading a tooltip. You can give people an amazing tutorial system that walks them through the finer points of your map and people will still say "What does X thing that's clearly explained in the tooltip do?". SC2's playerbase just cannot handle reading or critical thinking.
I agree, and I confess I'm also one of them. I don't really like to spend 10 minutes just to understand what the map I'm playing is about... I take the time to read when I'm playing against the AI, but let's be honest, maps with complicated gameplay mechanics (ie. complicated enough to require tooltips for explanations) are often 100% made for multiplayer with human players only. In my humble opinion, the main reason why these maps are awful is because they're just a succession of bad decisions in term of design. Making a game with 3 pages of information to read is just a pain, no matter what.
I'd rather put the player directly into the game and let him figure out what he must do rather than popping a tooltip every 10 seconds to tell him "hey look, this unit can do that!". It's true that players are not designers, but they're not dumb enough to be unable to figure how a game has to be played on their own. The worst thing to do is to spam them with confusing tips they don't need, just to let them understand the basics of your gameplay.
It's not the player who's supposed to adapt to the map (if you expect players to choose a confusing map when there are dozens of fun and easy to play maps available everywhere, trust me you'll lose this battle)... It's the role of a designer to think his map ahead and make sure everything is easy to understand without tons of instructions, no matter how complicated the gameplay of the map is in the end. Design (especially Game Design) is not an easy job at all, I've said this many times on SC2Mapster already and I'll keep saying it until people understand that it's not something anybody can do.
Most maps lack the most important element, and thats why they fail.
Its called the fun factor... I don care how "cool" a map or "innovative" it is, if its not fun its garbage.
@Taintedwisp: Go
Not entirely true. It's not just a matter of fun or not. It's a matter of how frustrating your gameplay is. Some games are not fun at all, and yet you'll keep playing till the end. It's basically a loop including 3 simple things: fun, then challenge, and finally reward. Rinse and repeat. Fun alone is not enough... and that's what a huge majority of mappers don't even know, because they're basically players more than designers.
@ZealNaga: Go
Yeah I can see that.
except the reward part... You dont actually need any reward, Evolves, Bunker wars, DBZ tribute, civ wars and dota, none of which had prizes I think a game can do well just off the first 2. Though rewards dont hurt.
If you want people to play your map, it needs to have a reasonable learning curve. Start out simple and add complexity over time. Every professional game with any amount of complexity does this; look at the SC2 campaign. You start just controlling a squad of units. Then you can build marines and SCVs. Then more infantry, vehicles, and air. The player isn't asked to read 10 pages of descriptions of each unit then be forced to choose between them.
Also, things should be intuitive. Players should be able to guess what something does, without having to read a tooltip. If it looks like a gun, feels like a gun, is called a gun, then you'd damn well expect it to be able to shoot something. Outlandish game concepts can be fun, but they can be very difficult to pick up if they're not based in reality (or well-known science fiction). You can utilize a good learning curve to introduce players to your unintuitive gameplay by starting out with something familiar to everyone.
@LosTacos: Go
While this is a very helpful thing to do its not necessary in all cases, Dota allstars was confusing as hell for beginners in WC3. But i do see your point in how it should get harder over time. Like in any good Tower Defense the first 10 levels are garbage so you can get used to the interface and the towers.:D
I'm one of those people. If you can't present your information in a clear, concise and short manner, then screw it, I'll find out by trial and error instead.
Any game that needs a tutorial is unintuitive by definition. That's not the player's fault; that's the developer's fault.
If you really must have a tutorial, implement it as a guide to that information when that information is relevent.
Don't put some huge button labeled "Tutorial" which dumps a metric ton of information onto the player that has little or no relevance to their gameplay experience for the next hour.
Don't mix "critical thinking" with "deciphering bullshit".
I hate to agree with you because I think you're hilariously stupid, but I endorse this statement fully.
There's a damn good reason Smashcraft never got past page 5.
Smashcraft was fun if you got past it's horrible learning curve and had decent enough skills. It was too competitive for the average sc2 player.
I think you'd struggle to find a more competitive community than sc2.
@Taintedwisp: Go
Dota is a special case because it's had a very long development history. When it was new, it had fewer features, which kept being added gradually while the playerbase already knew how to play. That was its learning curve.
Agree and when something reaches high popularity, most people just try to figure out why it is popular no matter of what...
Btw Dota is a really a good example what can you achieve if you stick to an idea... (however I never liked Dota)
Also the best way to make learning curve for a multiplayer game is the campaign. There is no good way to make a good learning curve in multiplayer game's multiplayer mod.
Maybe best part of video at 3:00-5:00 :D
Sometimes when I'm designing map and I'm not sure should I add tip or not because I don't want to cause "Megaman, Megaman!" reaction on people. :D
Yep the "learning curve" is the big thing. Remember when you first time played Command & Conquer or Warcraft2? It required lot of learning to undertand who collects money, who builds farms etc. Nowadays you dont have to think this kind of things so much. Some mechanics on tower defense maps can be really simple but new players just don't have time to read all minor things that are modified on this tower defense version 167.