How to estimate the depth of the game mechanics. Part two
When you have carefully weighed everything and decided that the depth is what your mechanics needs, you need to make sure that you have set clear, understandable goals and created a number of specific game skills. Using the above tips and remembering the difference between thoughtful and primitive skills, you will cope with the problems and easily add depth to the game mechanics.
The first part of the article “How to estimate the depth of game mechanics” is here.
Task formulations
')
So. If it were possible to turn the clock back, how could I make the game mechanics of the attractor beam "Tractor beam" go deeper?
The first thing I would suggest is to add a task statement to each stage of the test.
The formulation is a simple sentence that describes the test objectives and skills that the player needs to apply to achieve these goals.
The task of a simple test with the platform, we can formulate as follows: "The player must jump on the platform." In this case, “jump up” is a game skill, and “on the platform” is the goal of the task.
A more difficult test with a platform can be described as follows: "The player must make two jumps up and then slide down to the platform" or "The player must reach the platform, bypassing flashes of fire."
These formulations include both goals and specific game skills. But what happens if you exclude one of the components? We already understood that tests without a clear goal are not deep, as well as the fact that the seemingly empty game mechanics usually contains many goals, but little thought-out skills.
Here are some examples of what the wording for the game mechanics of the attractor beam “Tractor beam” would look like:
• "The player must move the robot from a given point to a marked place on the floor."
• "The player must move the bomb from a given point to the marked place opposite the door."
• "The player must move the block from this point in such a way as to block the laser beam."
• "The player must move the block with the exploding rocket to the button in the floor."
You may have noticed that there are goals in these formulations, but no game skills. If you take a closer look at them, it becomes obvious that the goal is the same everywhere, and even not very interesting!
All formulations, in fact, boil down to the same thing: “Move the object from point A to point B” - and affect too primitive skill, which does not add depth to our mechanics at all.
With two other tests, things were a little better:
• "The player must move the bomb from this place to the slingshot and use it to undermine the target."
• "The player must arrange the blocks in a certain order, moving them along a groove in the floor."
Both of these formulations represent fairly thought-out game skills.
Given these nuances, I would recommend to myself in the past to do the following:
1. Remove all too simple skills / goals. They all boil down to the same thing - “move the object to the door to blow it up” - and can be realized with the help of a bomb or a block with a rocket. “Mike, simplify the mechanics for the sake of the players,” is what I would say to myself.
2. Analyze the two most profound mechanics and try to create more tests for each of them, starting with the study of the wording of tasks.
3. Create new challenges in the game.
4. Play, test new mechanics in practice, watch them in the game.
5. If the desired depth has not appeared, introduce other thought-out playing skills (skills, not goals - this is important!) And start again from the first point.
The purpose of the Tractor beam mechanics of the attracting beam is quite clear: to place the blocks in the most suitable recesses for each of them. In addition, the game skill of arranging the blocks that move and block each other’s path is the most profound of all the tests proposed in this mechanics.
Note: All my examples dealt with gameplay where a puzzle needs to be solved, but this article is not only about games of this type. Any game mechanics can be improved by relying on these rules.
Suppose you have a mechanic in an armed fight, and it lacks depth. The reason may be that the wording of the task “use a weapon to kill an enemy” does not indicate a specific game skill - it only indicates the purpose of the task. In the game Ratchet & Clank, a similar task was formulated like this: "Choose the right weapon to destroy the group of enemies as efficiently as possible."
Changing the wording of the task at the design stage so that it clearly presents a specific game skill (and modified the mechanics itself) helps to make your design deeper and more efficient.
Avoid vague wording.
The formulation of an assignment is an incredibly useful technique, but it can also cause problems, for example, when using vague wording.
For example, here is a simple task statement, which suits almost every trial in Portal:
"The player must use portal weapons in order to move the block to a given area."
Considering that in this case “using portal weapons” is a well-considered game skill, inaccurate wording can play a cruel joke with you.
The gameplay associated with Clank in Ratchet & Clank is a good example.
Many insomniac designers, including me, have suffered a great deal over creating tests related to Clank. In the process of work, it seemed to us that they had enough depth, but in practice it turned out quite differently.
We could make only a small "redecoration". It took us a long time to reach the desired depth. The players were generally satisfied, but we understood that we could do more.
In the first two games, Ratchet & Clank, Clank was supposed to give commands to his gadjobot to pass obstacles (Gadgebots - small robots that follow the hero everywhere). Obstacles were divided into several types, but in general were similar to each other. We “patched up” this mechanics with the help of various effects and cute animation, but this did not affect its depth.
The wording of the task "Commanding an army of robots, the player must overcome obstacles" is too blurry. She gives insufficient information.
In the game Ratchet & Clank Future: A Crack in Time, Clank has the ability to record his actions at a certain moment of passing a level, and then scroll back using a hologram.
So there were tests with very complex wording of the task, for example: “The player needs to write down how he moves towards the button that opens the door. Then he needs to scroll back the entry and, if the hologram hit the button and the door opened, enter the door. ” There are clear goals - “reach the button to open the door” and “enter the door”, as well as good, specific playing skills - “record your actions” and “scroll the record back”.
This mechanic is deeper, and its description is more accurate.
How to deepen the game mechanics?
So, you have developed a mechanic, but the formulation of the game task is no good. You have already tried to improve it, but to no avail. What to do in this case?
Start with the following:
1. Define and list the goals.
• Ask yourself: “Does this goal duplicate at least one of the previously encountered on my list?”. If so, think well if you really need it. Is it really necessary to spend time on training players for this? If the answer is no, feel free to cross out such a goal from your list.
2. Identify and list all specific playing skills.
• Ask yourself: “Is this skill well thought out? Is it too primitive? Is he a target? ”
• Ask yourself: “Does this skill duplicate at least one of my list?”. If so, safely remove it. A large number of identical skills does not speak about their quality.
By answering these questions, you realize that you have too many goals, and well-thought-out game skills are not enough? I bet that this is exactly what happened, so you should do the same thing that I advised myself in the past to improve the game mechanics of the Tractor beam attracting beam:
1. Add two or more specific game skills to the list.
but. In the process, ask yourself all the same questions. “Is this skill well thought out? Is it too simple? Is he a target? ”
2. Review all the tests you have created and try to clarify the wording of the tasks.
3. Think over new content.
4. Play and see how this or that mechanic behaves in practice. Problem solved? If yes - great! You did it!
5. If the problem persists, start over from step 1.
For reflection
As I noted at the beginning of this article, the deepening of game mechanics is not always necessary. Before you do a lot of work to give mechanics depth, ask yourself the following questions:
• If you deepen the mechanics, will it still fit your target audience?
- Mechanics in games designed for younger players, simplify intentionally. Games Lego Star Wars - the best proof of this.
- Does your audience really need a deep mechanic? In some games, the number of mechanics works much better, and not their depth (for example, WarioWare).
• "Attractive" game mechanics
- If the main goal of mechanics is to attract and surprise, then the depth and complexity can only confuse players.
- A good example is the gameplay associated with the Clan of Ratchet & Clank Future: A Crack in Time:
but. Mechanics, offering players to record their actions, received mixed reviews.
b. In the future, it took a lot of effort to train players, to create a large number of message prompts. It was quite burdensome for the mechanics, which was just a small part of the game.
at. The players took this mechanic rather as entertainment. The need to develop new gaming skills may have scared off some of the players.
• Narrative game mechanics
- Sometimes the task of the game mechanics is to serve as part of the story, to give the player something to “feel”. In such a case, depth and complexity can help.
- Indigo Prophecy and Heavy Rain are games in which narrative mechanics are used very well.
So, when you have weighed well and decided that depth is what your mechanics needs, you need to make sure that you have set clear, understandable goals and created a number of specific game skills. Using the above tips and remembering the difference between thoughtful and primitive skills, you will cope with the problems and easily add depth to the game mechanics.
Finally
In this article, I described my vision of a game mechanic, noting the importance of well-thought-out game skills compared with goals and primitive skills.
However, I do not believe that this approach is the only correct one. This is just one of many ways that really work.
The French mathematician Henri Poincaré in his book "Science and Method" wrote: "Geometry is not an indisputable truth, it is only one of the convenient theories." In my opinion, the same can be said about game design. None of the approaches can be called the only correct one - all of them can be useful only in certain situations. The approach that I suggested in this article turned out to be convenient in my work and helped me evaluate, anticipate and determine the reasons for which game mechanics were imperfect and not deep enough. Using this approach for these purposes will greatly facilitate the work and improve the quality of your projects.
The first part of the article “How to estimate the depth of game mechanics” is here.
Task formulations
')
So. If it were possible to turn the clock back, how could I make the game mechanics of the attractor beam "Tractor beam" go deeper?
The first thing I would suggest is to add a task statement to each stage of the test.
The formulation is a simple sentence that describes the test objectives and skills that the player needs to apply to achieve these goals.
The task of a simple test with the platform, we can formulate as follows: "The player must jump on the platform." In this case, “jump up” is a game skill, and “on the platform” is the goal of the task.
A more difficult test with a platform can be described as follows: "The player must make two jumps up and then slide down to the platform" or "The player must reach the platform, bypassing flashes of fire."
These formulations include both goals and specific game skills. But what happens if you exclude one of the components? We already understood that tests without a clear goal are not deep, as well as the fact that the seemingly empty game mechanics usually contains many goals, but little thought-out skills.
Here are some examples of what the wording for the game mechanics of the attractor beam “Tractor beam” would look like:
• "The player must move the robot from a given point to a marked place on the floor."
• "The player must move the bomb from a given point to the marked place opposite the door."
• "The player must move the block from this point in such a way as to block the laser beam."
• "The player must move the block with the exploding rocket to the button in the floor."
You may have noticed that there are goals in these formulations, but no game skills. If you take a closer look at them, it becomes obvious that the goal is the same everywhere, and even not very interesting!
All formulations, in fact, boil down to the same thing: “Move the object from point A to point B” - and affect too primitive skill, which does not add depth to our mechanics at all.
With two other tests, things were a little better:
• "The player must move the bomb from this place to the slingshot and use it to undermine the target."
• "The player must arrange the blocks in a certain order, moving them along a groove in the floor."
Both of these formulations represent fairly thought-out game skills.
Given these nuances, I would recommend to myself in the past to do the following:
1. Remove all too simple skills / goals. They all boil down to the same thing - “move the object to the door to blow it up” - and can be realized with the help of a bomb or a block with a rocket. “Mike, simplify the mechanics for the sake of the players,” is what I would say to myself.
2. Analyze the two most profound mechanics and try to create more tests for each of them, starting with the study of the wording of tasks.
3. Create new challenges in the game.
4. Play, test new mechanics in practice, watch them in the game.
5. If the desired depth has not appeared, introduce other thought-out playing skills (skills, not goals - this is important!) And start again from the first point.
The purpose of the Tractor beam mechanics of the attracting beam is quite clear: to place the blocks in the most suitable recesses for each of them. In addition, the game skill of arranging the blocks that move and block each other’s path is the most profound of all the tests proposed in this mechanics.
Note: All my examples dealt with gameplay where a puzzle needs to be solved, but this article is not only about games of this type. Any game mechanics can be improved by relying on these rules.
Suppose you have a mechanic in an armed fight, and it lacks depth. The reason may be that the wording of the task “use a weapon to kill an enemy” does not indicate a specific game skill - it only indicates the purpose of the task. In the game Ratchet & Clank, a similar task was formulated like this: "Choose the right weapon to destroy the group of enemies as efficiently as possible."
Changing the wording of the task at the design stage so that it clearly presents a specific game skill (and modified the mechanics itself) helps to make your design deeper and more efficient.
Avoid vague wording.
The formulation of an assignment is an incredibly useful technique, but it can also cause problems, for example, when using vague wording.
For example, here is a simple task statement, which suits almost every trial in Portal:
"The player must use portal weapons in order to move the block to a given area."
Considering that in this case “using portal weapons” is a well-considered game skill, inaccurate wording can play a cruel joke with you.
The gameplay associated with Clank in Ratchet & Clank is a good example.
Many insomniac designers, including me, have suffered a great deal over creating tests related to Clank. In the process of work, it seemed to us that they had enough depth, but in practice it turned out quite differently.
We could make only a small "redecoration". It took us a long time to reach the desired depth. The players were generally satisfied, but we understood that we could do more.
In the first two games, Ratchet & Clank, Clank was supposed to give commands to his gadjobot to pass obstacles (Gadgebots - small robots that follow the hero everywhere). Obstacles were divided into several types, but in general were similar to each other. We “patched up” this mechanics with the help of various effects and cute animation, but this did not affect its depth.
The wording of the task "Commanding an army of robots, the player must overcome obstacles" is too blurry. She gives insufficient information.
In the game Ratchet & Clank Future: A Crack in Time, Clank has the ability to record his actions at a certain moment of passing a level, and then scroll back using a hologram.
So there were tests with very complex wording of the task, for example: “The player needs to write down how he moves towards the button that opens the door. Then he needs to scroll back the entry and, if the hologram hit the button and the door opened, enter the door. ” There are clear goals - “reach the button to open the door” and “enter the door”, as well as good, specific playing skills - “record your actions” and “scroll the record back”.
This mechanic is deeper, and its description is more accurate.
How to deepen the game mechanics?
So, you have developed a mechanic, but the formulation of the game task is no good. You have already tried to improve it, but to no avail. What to do in this case?
Start with the following:
1. Define and list the goals.
• Ask yourself: “Does this goal duplicate at least one of the previously encountered on my list?”. If so, think well if you really need it. Is it really necessary to spend time on training players for this? If the answer is no, feel free to cross out such a goal from your list.
2. Identify and list all specific playing skills.
• Ask yourself: “Is this skill well thought out? Is it too primitive? Is he a target? ”
• Ask yourself: “Does this skill duplicate at least one of my list?”. If so, safely remove it. A large number of identical skills does not speak about their quality.
By answering these questions, you realize that you have too many goals, and well-thought-out game skills are not enough? I bet that this is exactly what happened, so you should do the same thing that I advised myself in the past to improve the game mechanics of the Tractor beam attracting beam:
1. Add two or more specific game skills to the list.
but. In the process, ask yourself all the same questions. “Is this skill well thought out? Is it too simple? Is he a target? ”
2. Review all the tests you have created and try to clarify the wording of the tasks.
3. Think over new content.
4. Play and see how this or that mechanic behaves in practice. Problem solved? If yes - great! You did it!
5. If the problem persists, start over from step 1.
For reflection
As I noted at the beginning of this article, the deepening of game mechanics is not always necessary. Before you do a lot of work to give mechanics depth, ask yourself the following questions:
• If you deepen the mechanics, will it still fit your target audience?
- Mechanics in games designed for younger players, simplify intentionally. Games Lego Star Wars - the best proof of this.
- Does your audience really need a deep mechanic? In some games, the number of mechanics works much better, and not their depth (for example, WarioWare).
• "Attractive" game mechanics
- If the main goal of mechanics is to attract and surprise, then the depth and complexity can only confuse players.
- A good example is the gameplay associated with the Clan of Ratchet & Clank Future: A Crack in Time:
but. Mechanics, offering players to record their actions, received mixed reviews.
b. In the future, it took a lot of effort to train players, to create a large number of message prompts. It was quite burdensome for the mechanics, which was just a small part of the game.
at. The players took this mechanic rather as entertainment. The need to develop new gaming skills may have scared off some of the players.
• Narrative game mechanics
- Sometimes the task of the game mechanics is to serve as part of the story, to give the player something to “feel”. In such a case, depth and complexity can help.
- Indigo Prophecy and Heavy Rain are games in which narrative mechanics are used very well.
So, when you have weighed well and decided that depth is what your mechanics needs, you need to make sure that you have set clear, understandable goals and created a number of specific game skills. Using the above tips and remembering the difference between thoughtful and primitive skills, you will cope with the problems and easily add depth to the game mechanics.
Finally
In this article, I described my vision of a game mechanic, noting the importance of well-thought-out game skills compared with goals and primitive skills.
However, I do not believe that this approach is the only correct one. This is just one of many ways that really work.
The French mathematician Henri Poincaré in his book "Science and Method" wrote: "Geometry is not an indisputable truth, it is only one of the convenient theories." In my opinion, the same can be said about game design. None of the approaches can be called the only correct one - all of them can be useful only in certain situations. The approach that I suggested in this article turned out to be convenient in my work and helped me evaluate, anticipate and determine the reasons for which game mechanics were imperfect and not deep enough. Using this approach for these purposes will greatly facilitate the work and improve the quality of your projects.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/266599/
All Articles