For me, to some extent it depends on the type of story it is.
If it's more of a pot-boiler or the plot relies on a sense of urgency, I feel like a lot of the momentum is lost if you spend most of your gaming time stumped about puzzles rather than experiencing the flow of the plot.
On the other hand, if a story is more of an unfolding mystery that doesn't rely on rapid story movement as a plot device, slowly making discoveries through challenging puzzles is a really satisfying way to make progress.
I think it's less that there's one perfect ratio, and more that developers need to figure out what kind of story they want to tell or what they want the overall game experience to be, and make sure the puzzle structure works with rather than against that goal.
That said, if a developer is going to err one way or the other, personally I'd rather have them err on the side of story. If a plot is interesting enough to me, it makes up for a lack of puzzles, but if the plot is too thin it doesn't hold my attention enough to make me want to put in the effort to solve lots of hard puzzles.
I think that's a matter of individual taste, though, not absolute gaming goodness - and I really think a balanced and thoughtful approach is better than either extreme.
|
