[scout]

I remember Discworld's chimney puzzle well. Even the game's developers admitted later that they had made the game purposively too hard. Discsworld 2 on the other hand was really well balanced. Lots of hints in just the right places. Those 2 games together pretty much stand as a case study in how-to and how-to-not design adventure game puzzles.

[AGA]

Yes, Erwin, I think he is.

As for your hatred of Pratchett, I really don't understand how you can be a Rankin fan but dislike Pratchett, they could very easily be the same person... Or is it something about the man personally you hate?

[Yahtzee]

I'm not really a fan of Rankin anymore, but they are very different writers. Pratchett's books have been becoming very samey lately, and his writing style has an air of smugness about it. Also, I've heard some personal anecdotes that paint the guy as a dick.

[RLacey]

Have you ever seen this hat look anything other than pitch black? Have you ever been able to make out the contours? The hat scares me (though I don't mind the writing)...

[stepurhan]

Originally Posted by RLacey

Have you ever seen this hat look anything other than pitch black? Have you ever been able to make out the contours? The hat scares me (though I don't mind the writing)...

Seen the hat in real-life and it's not nearly as scary as in the picture.

Loved the article and I heartily agree with the criticism of the game. "That doesn't work" is said in so dismissive a tone as well. Almost as if you're being told you're an imbecile for even trying whatever you did.

As for the criticism of Pratchett himself, I think my signature might make my opinion on that one clear.

(or maybe not, dammit, which forum is it I have a Pratchett quote as my signature? )

[Esseb]

Originally Posted by Yahtzee

I'm not really a fan of Rankin anymore, but they are very different writers. Pratchett's books have been becoming very samey lately, and his writing style has an air of smugness about it. Also, I've heard some personal anecdotes that paint the guy as a dick.

Do you remember vaguely what they said so I can look for the anecdotes myself, or remember where you read them? I'm curious now.

As for the air of smugness bit, www.fullyramblomatic.com. I suppose that's intentional and all though.

[Bastich]

One thing people always seem to gloss over is that when playing a 3rd person character-based game, it isn't you that is in the game world. Whether or not you would do something differently is irrelevant to figuring out what way works for the character you are guiding. If it isn't part of their personality, they should not, under any circumstances, do it, plausible or not. Real people are often very stubborn about what methods they use to do things. Why should adventure characters be any different?

In these types of games, you aren't an actual participant, but an empathetic observer; a guardian angel if you will. You may nudge them along, but it isn't your story. Confusing yourself with the character on the screen goes completely against the whole concept in my opinion. You are supposed to get into THEIR minds, not subvert them to yours. That is why they are given names and personalities; to emphasize that they aren't you.

If you aren't playing a pre-developed character, it is definitely understandable to feel stifled when you are the one who is supposed to be exploring the world. A 1st person game or a game that allows you to create your own avatar (like RPGs) for 3rd person would be a good example of such.

OTOH, Manny Calavera, Joshua Reev, April Ryan, or any other character not being willing to do things your way, is the way it absolutely should be. The fact that they have their own ways of interpreting their surroundings and doing things is the very thing that makes them unique and interesting. The question isn't how YOU solve a puzzle, but how the character would in these cases.

I guess my above interpretation is the reason why I personally am never bothered by the "That doesn't work" problem. It would of course be better to have a more varied number of responses or less negative ones, but I don't really think multiple solutions or hints are a helpful solution as they can make the game too easy.

It is too bad that adventure developers usually aren't willing or are unable to dedicate time and budget to a difficulty slider so people can make the game as challenging as they want. Every other genre has difficulty levels that I can think of at the moment but adventure games. Beggars can't be choosers though...

[fov]

Originally Posted by Bastich

One thing people always seem to gloss over is that when playing a 3rd person character-based game, it isn't you that is in the game world. Whether or not you would do something differently is irrelevant to figuring out what way works for the character you are guiding. If it isn't part of their personality, they should not, under any circumstances, do it, plausible or not. Real people are often very stubborn about what methods they use to do things. Why should adventure characters be any different?

I agree with you. But if the character is not doing something because it's not in character for them to do it, they better give me a good explanation. There's a difference between a character not doing something because *they* don't want to, and not being able to do something because the programmers were lazy.

Legacy: Dark Shadows was full of this kind of thing. One of the "That doesn't work" responses in that game is "That's illogical." It started driving me nuts. One room you walk into has a running faucet. I tried using an empty bottle with it and the character told me "That's illogical." No, actually, it's not, YOU (the game) just don't want me to do it. So give me a reason why.

I really like it when a character tells you, in their own words, why they don't want to do what you're trying to make them do. Like when you try to make April Ryan walk off a cliff.

-emily

[Ninth]

Originally Posted by Bastich

One thing people always seem to gloss over is that when playing a 3rd person character-based game, it isn't you that is in the game world. Whether or not you would do something differently is irrelevant to figuring out what way works for the character you are guiding. If it isn't part of their personality, they should not, under any circumstances, do it, plausible or not. Real people are often very stubborn about what methods they use to do things. Why should adventure characters be any different?

In these types of games, you aren't an actual participant, but an empathetic observer; a guardian angel if you will. You may nudge them along, but it isn't your story. Confusing yourself with the character on the screen goes completely against the whole concept in my opinion. You are supposed to get into THEIR minds, not subvert them to yours. That is why they are given names and personalities; to emphasize that they aren't you.

If you aren't playing a pre-developed character, it is definitely understandable to feel stifled when you are the one who is supposed to be exploring the world. A 1st person game or a game that allows you to create your own avatar (like RPGs) for 3rd person would be a good example of such.

OTOH, Manny Calavera, Joshua Reev, April Ryan, or any other character not being willing to do things your way, is the way it absolutely should be. The fact that they have their own ways of interpreting their surroundings and doing things is the very thing that makes them unique and interesting. The question isn't how YOU solve a puzzle, but how the character would in these cases.

I guess my above interpretation is the reason why I personally am never bothered by the "That doesn't work" problem. It would of course be better to have a more varied number of responses or less negative ones, but I don't really think multiple solutions or hints are a helpful solution as they can make the game too easy.

It is too bad that adventure developers usually aren't willing or are unable to dedicate time and budget to a difficulty slider so people can make the game as challenging as they want. Every other genre has difficulty levels that I can think of at the moment but adventure games. Beggars can't be choosers though...

I absolutely agree with everything you said here, except perhaps with the difficulty slider thingy. If I play with difficult setting, I'll feel like I'm cheated because others are playing this game and getting further without making any effort, and if I play with easy settings, I'll feel like I'm cheating. Of course, this way of thinking is very much inherent to my personnality, so I can't really expect other to agree, but still, I'm not fond if this kind of things.

And as fov said, the problem with that doesn't work is not so much that it prevents the player from doing something logical, rather that it's frustrating and uninventive.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Originally Posted by Bastich

I guess my above interpretation is the reason why I personally am never bothered by the "That doesn't work" problem. It would of course be better to have a more varied number of responses or less negative ones, but I don't really think multiple solutions or hints are a helpful solution as they can make the game too easy.

Multiple solutions would constitute an entirely other kind of adventure game. Once you offer more than one solution to puzzles and situations it can easily set up the experience in ways typical and conventional adventure games never can. So you go into it with a new mindset (and hopefully the game's designers did too).

Originally Posted by Ninth

If I play with difficult setting, I'll feel like I'm cheated because others are playing this game and getting further without making any effort, and if I play with easy settings, I'll feel like I'm cheating. Of course, this way of thinking is very much inherent to my personnality, so I can't really expect other to agree, but still, I'm not fond if this kind of things.

Why should you care how other players on the same game progress? Are you that self-conscious? Besides, some of them could very well be experiencing the game not for the puzzles but purely for the story, or the beautiful graphics, or something else. That's what I did playing Silent Hill 2, cranking down the combat difficulty so I can pay more attention to the gorgeous art of the game and the story.

[fov]

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

Why should you care how other players on the same game progress? Are you that self-conscious? Besides, some of them could very well be experiencing the game not for the puzzles but purely for the story, or the beautiful graphics, or something else. That's what I did playing Silent Hill 2, cranking down the combat difficulty so I can pay more attention to the gorgeous art of the game and the story.

This might not be exactly what Ninth meant, but I find if there's a difficulty ranking to a game I always pick the most difficult setting. I scoff at those who pick the easy setting; I like to think of myself as a "seasoned adventurer". Then I get stuck and feel guilty if I go for a hint. Just can't win...

[Ninth]

Originally Posted by fov

This might not be exactly what Ninth meant, but I find if there's a difficulty ranking to a game I always pick the most difficult setting. I scoff at those who pick the easy setting; I like to think of myself as a "seasoned adventurer". Then I get stuck and feel guilty if I go for a hint. Just can't win...

Yep.
To me, AGs are not only pleasure, entertainment, and sometimes something more deep, they are also a challenge I have to overcome. It's like climbing a (small) mountain. It's worth it for the view, for the physical well-being that follows, but also for the feeling of something accomplished.
But there's something else. Somewhere in the back of my mind is a small voice saying : "What good is reaching a goal that's accessible to just anyone?" If it's easy to finish a game without cheating, using the easy mode, then it kind of lowers the worth of completing it in any mode in my eyes. Not that this way of reasoning is exactly wise, but that's why I'm not so fond of easy modes.

[stepurhan]

Originally Posted by Bastich

One thing people always seem to gloss over is that when playing a 3rd person character-based game, it isn't you that is in the game world. Whether or not you would do something differently is irrelevant to figuring out what way works for the character you are guiding. If it isn't part of their personality, they should not, under any circumstances, do it, plausible or not. Real people are often very stubborn about what methods they use to do things. Why should adventure characters be any different?

In these types of games, you aren't an actual participant, but an empathetic observer; a guardian angel if you will. You may nudge them along, but it isn't your story. Confusing yourself with the character on the screen goes completely against the whole concept in my opinion. You are supposed to get into THEIR minds, not subvert them to yours. That is why they are given names and personalities; to emphasize that they aren't you.

True enough, and a well-designed personality for your in-game character can only be a good thing for enjoyment. But there are a couple of things to consider in the context of this thread.

Firstly "That doesn't work" isn't the same as "I don't want to do that." If I have a sticker in my inventory and | try to stick it on a load of different things they'd better all be coated in Teflon if I'm going to get the response "That doesn't work" But if I get a response like "I don't think that would look good there" then that's the character saying that, while an action may be possible, they don't want to do it for their own reasons.

Secondly, what counts as illogical for a character? Let me expand on an example alluded to by Yahtzee in his article. Dealing with the monster in 7 Days a Skeptic.

Spoiler:

As Yahtzee says you have to use a very specific item to blat the monster off the bridge. However, there is an ideal item for defending yourself that’s been lying around for days. The machete (sitting on the table in the conference room) Every time you try to pick it up your character refuses to touch it because “it could be evidence”. You’re fighting for your life and you’ve already obliterated any fingerprints by handling it but you can’t move it again because it’s evidence? That stretched my credulity a bit.

I should point out that, despite this, I thoroughly enjoyed both this game and it's predecessor (which you should play first) 5 Days a Stranger. These problems were exceptions and so maybe stand out more.

Similarly this by Soccerdude28 in another thread.

Lately Runaway peaked the most ridiculous puzzles in my opinion. The wrench (or was it a screw driver?) that you desperately need falls in a trough full of mud. So can you go down to the trough and just pick it up? OH HELL NO. Your hands would get dirty. So instead you go to the top of the balcony, throw a pot into the trough and then the splash throws the wrench out of the trough. All that while you are running out of time trying to save the day. Now that is ridiculous. Just pick up the goddamn wrench and wash your hands.

Is the Runaway character obsessive-compulsive? (Could be an interesting character to play, handled sensitively. How would the average AGer cope with a character that refused to pick up every available item for fear of dirt?)

If a character's refusal is for reasons that round out their character I'm all for it. As long as that IS the raason.

[pleto4_ryan]

Now, there's an article that you can't say "That Doesn't Work".

[EasilyConfused]

Yeah, just want to say I really liked the article. More, more, please.

[Brushguy]

Ben inspired me to put more effort and more hints into my amateur adventure games. From now on, I'm going to drop hints early and often, and try to think of everything the player would try, with different responses for each. Maybe if more real adventure developers did this, adventure games would be less demoralizing, less in a niche market, and more popular.

Great first article! Looking forward to further ones!

[ConcreteRancor]

Originally Posted by fov

I really like it when a character tells you, in their own words, why they don't want to do what you're trying to make them do. Like when you try to make April Ryan walk off a cliff.

My personal favorite is: "Licking the barbecue would NOT be my idea of a good time."

As for the personal jab at Pratchett, my opinion is bad show, and not necessary, no matter how difficult the game was. Hell, my OTHER favorite author created a game that is INFAMOUS for its unforgiving difficulty, but I don't begrudge him PERSONALLY for that.

But you can tell that that WOULD be my opinion. Every single post that I make contains three separate Pratchett references.

Other than that, though, I love the article, and completely agree!