Here's another video making the rounds I thought warranted discussion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXLRd5Kah-I

It's an hour-long GC talk by a CDProjekt RED level designer on the
benefits of making maps where it is possible for players to "miss out"
on content. One of the complaints about "Cyberpunk 2077" was how
similar all the missions felt to one another, and CPR's take-away was
that complaint was a result of their making their missions accessible
to every player, regardless of skill set. There was always an 'easy'
path that didn't require any special abilities, and the alternate
paths that did require those abilities rarely offered any real benefit
to the player. So, of course, the players always took the obvious path
and their experience suffered because it was the most generic route.

He then goes on to describe how to fix this problem, by moving
entrances, preventing people on one path from seeing what the other
path is like (preserving mystery), and gatekeeping some content so
that you only see it if you pick a specific path. It's an interesting
look into how games create the illusion of choice and craft unique
experiences for us, so if you've any interest in level design (it even
applies to table-top gamers!) it's worth a watch.


But that's not what I'm here to talk about. ;-)


Or perhaps it is, but only indirectly. Because Mr. Tost - the dev in
question - makes an assumption about gamestyle choices which, while it
may be accurate for many players, is not accurate when /I/ play. And
that's the idea that I /only/ choose the one path.

Because that's never been how I roll. Give me a choice on how to get
through a level, and I pick them ALL.

So, take your generic sandbox game level: you usually have two or
three ways to get through. There's the sneaky way, there's the
skill-based way (which is often sneak-based too), there's the
conversational way, and then there's brute-forcing it with guns.
Usually each of these choices have their own circuitous routes, gated
by skill checks, which all meet at a common destination. Often, a map
will have multiple hubs, so you can decide to talk past the first
obstacle, sneak past the second, and shoot past the third.

But I /hate/ the idea of missing out on content, so I always try to do
all three.

Usually this consists of me talking my way past the first guard, who
happily turns off the autoturrets and cameras and lets me pass
through. But I don't walk through the doors like he expects, oh no. I
then turn around and look for the inevitable air-vent so I can SNEAK
my way through to the next hub (it's usually a doddle, since the
cameras are all off now ;-). Then, having made my way through that
way, I then turn around and go back through the level a third time,
taking my time to off the guards as I wander back to my starting point
(again, made much easier now that the security is disabled... and
because I'm coming at them from behind). Finally, I make my way
through the level the final time, hoovering up all the goodies and collectibles, and taking my time with the skill-checks that might have
blocked off any remaining routes.

It takes a little longer, but miss out on stuff? Nope, not me. And
while I doubt my method is used by the majority of players, I KNOW I'm
not unique in this style.

So, how you gonna deal with people like me, Mr. Lead Design Acting
Lead Miles Tost of CD Projekt RED, huh? ;-)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 7/10/2023 6:55 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

Here's another video making the rounds I thought warranted discussion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXLRd5Kah-I

It's an hour-long GC talk by a CDProjekt RED level designer on the
benefits of making maps where it is possible for players to "miss out"
on content. One of the complaints about "Cyberpunk 2077" was how
similar all the missions felt to one another, and CPR's take-away was
that complaint was a result of their making their missions accessible
to every player, regardless of skill set. There was always an 'easy'
path that didn't require any special abilities, and the alternate
paths that did require those abilities rarely offered any real benefit
to the player. So, of course, the players always took the obvious path
and their experience suffered because it was the most generic route.

He then goes on to describe how to fix this problem, by moving
entrances, preventing people on one path from seeing what the other
path is like (preserving mystery), and gatekeeping some content so
that you only see it if you pick a specific path. It's an interesting
look into how games create the illusion of choice and craft unique experiences for us, so if you've any interest in level design (it even applies to table-top gamers!) it's worth a watch.

But that's not what I'm here to talk about. ;-)

Or perhaps it is, but only indirectly. Because Mr. Tost - the dev in
question - makes an assumption about gamestyle choices which, while it
may be accurate for many players, is not accurate when /I/ play. And
that's the idea that I /only/ choose the one path.

Because that's never been how I roll. Give me a choice on how to get
through a level, and I pick them ALL.

So, take your generic sandbox game level: you usually have two or
three ways to get through. There's the sneaky way, there's the
skill-based way (which is often sneak-based too), there's the
conversational way, and then there's brute-forcing it with guns.
Usually each of these choices have their own circuitous routes, gated
by skill checks, which all meet at a common destination. Often, a map
will have multiple hubs, so you can decide to talk past the first
obstacle, sneak past the second, and shoot past the third.

But I /hate/ the idea of missing out on content, so I always try to do
all three.

Usually this consists of me talking my way past the first guard, who
happily turns off the autoturrets and cameras and lets me pass
through. But I don't walk through the doors like he expects, oh no. I
then turn around and look for the inevitable air-vent so I can SNEAK
my way through to the next hub (it's usually a doddle, since the
cameras are all off now ;-). Then, having made my way through that
way, I then turn around and go back through the level a third time,
taking my time to off the guards as I wander back to my starting point (again, made much easier now that the security is disabled... and
because I'm coming at them from behind). Finally, I make my way
through the level the final time, hoovering up all the goodies and collectibles, and taking my time with the skill-checks that might have blocked off any remaining routes.

It takes a little longer, but miss out on stuff? Nope, not me. And
while I doubt my method is used by the majority of players, I KNOW I'm
not unique in this style.

So, how you gonna deal with people like me, Mr. Lead Design Acting
Lead Miles Tost of CD Projekt RED, huh? ;-)

Make sections one transit only, impossible to re-enter or backtrack in. :P

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Mon, 10 Jul 2023 08:20:25 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
<dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:

On 7/10/2023 6:55 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

So, how you gonna deal with people like me, Mr. Lead Design Acting
Lead Miles Tost of CD Projekt RED, huh? ;-)

Make sections one transit only, impossible to re-enter or backtrack in. :P

Some games do that (and we hates 'em, my precious, we does!). Most
games however, do not. Usually the alternate paths are gated at the
front entrance, not the rear. This is likely because there are
numerous times when players want/need to go back (for perfectly
reasonable purposes, and not because they're insane completionists
like myself ;-) and being blocked off like that is extremely
frustrating. For instance, many players may cache gear elsewhere, and
being cut off from their supply depot due to circumstances outside
their control is considered bad form.

Thus, the tactic is most often used sparingly, often right before
climatic encounters, and usually with adequate warning that there's no
"door to before". Most designers instead rely on the fact that few
gamers are actually crazy enough to traverse the same level multiple
times.

The most common method to prevent backtracking is having to drop down
to a lower platform that's too high to scramble back up. It's one of
those level design tricks - like those narrow caves you have to slowly
slide through sideways to give the game time to load the next part of
the level - that once you notice, you can never unnotice. ;-)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)