Tuesday, July 14, 2009
RPG Design: Encounters as Boundaries
In spite of having a week's vacation, I've still not yet beaten Aveyond: Lord of Twilight. I'm running around the world with a team that includes sunscreen-coated vampires and a main character with a bit of an attitude. And surprisingly, I frequently find my butt getting handed over to me. More than any other Aveyond game to date, this one is letting me get in a little over my head. (At least this one provides an escape mechanicsm from non-boss battles that are clearly going badly).
Granted, Aveyond: World of Twilight is still not a landmark of free-form exploration, but it seems to have at least reduced the size of the training wheels. Since the game is the third of the Aveyond series (or fourth, if you include Ahriman's Prophecy), perhaps it was assumed that the average player is a bit more experienced than in earlier installments.
Now, I don't exactly relish stepping into a cave and having my virtual lungs fed to me by guys who can do over half my total hitpoints in a love-tap. But it is a bit of a change of pace compared to many other games of the jRPG style, including earlier installments in this series. Even some of the more modern western RPGs have made a significant effort to keep the player from encountering anything clearly out of his or her league.
Granted, most RPGs (even the older western RPGs, which seemed to take great glee in beating you to death with your own legs) make some effort to at least geographically separate content beyond your lackluster pay-grade. If nothing else, you had to survive part of level 2 before you could make your way down to the more dangerous level 3. But, typically, they weren't over-zealous in preventing you from going to level 3 until you'd proven yourself on level 2 first. They didn't prevent you from shooting yourself in the foot and making a race for the bottom of the dungeon if you felt so inclined.
In a lecture at the Life, The Universe, and Everything symposium many years ago, author and game designer Tracy Hickman talked about approaching (pen-and-paper) adventure design with "soft limits" and "hard limits" to player actions. The "soft limits" were basic carrot-and-stick incentives to keep the players somewhere in the vicinity of the main storyline and the geography the designer had actually developed. Then, outside of those boundaries, you put harder limits - the impassible cliffs or whatnot (or, in CRPGs, what Shamus Young termed the "Plot-Driven Door") as a last resort.
His philosophy - which I adhere to - is that it is far better for the players to choose to follow the prepared course of the game than to be forced to do so.
More powerful enemies in CRPGs are one example of a (sometimes frustrating) "soft boundary." The player isn't prevented from making a run into the deep end of the pool while still in the early stages of the game, but the difficulty of the encounters may convince her that it's more profitable to go back to an earlier area to pick up some quest threads. But the possibility of heading into more dangerous territory remains open ... maybe to make a mad dash to another town that sells more powerful equipment. Why not? In the past, these kinds of self-initiated quests have proven to be among the highlights of several games I've played.
Ultimately, I think it comes down to the audience. A novice player will probably find himself frustrated if the game allows him to get in over his head, while a more veteran RPG player will probably recognize what is happening and adapt.
Labels: Aveyond, Game Design, Roleplaying Games
- posted by The Rampant Coyote @ 7:40 AM (Permalink)
Comments:
Links to this post:
<< Home
As much as I hate all the handholding that's become a big part of games of late I have to say you're right when it comes to new players getting in over their heads. I loved the fuzzy directions and open exploration necessary for Morrowind's missions-- in fact, one of my best experiences was struggling down Red Mountain with only a few HP after taking a wrong turn. But my 10 year old stepson, completely new to the genre, got lost and hated it.
Regarding powerful enemies as a "soft boundary":
"...A novice player will probably find himself frustrated if the game allows him to get in over his head..."
I don't know that I entirely agree with this (the "probably" part, anyway). If handled poorly, then yes, a novice can end up feeling like he's beating his head against the wall. But handled correctly it becomes an excellent -- and necessary, I think -- design element. It gives the player an immediate and obvious goal: Become strong enough to deal with said enemies, allowing exploration into the new area beyond.
The two things that are key to handling this are, A) Give the player enough information to know what he needs to do to become stronger, and B) Always provide an "out", i.e. a retreat to a safe(r) location on par with the player's current abilities. A player is likely to become frustrated when one (or both!) of these is removed.
It's a pretty standard design in MMORPGs -- enemy-based "soft boundaries" really are an integral part of what makes MMORPGs work...
Areas ("zones" or "dungeons") are generally defined by difficulty, i.e. creatures at one end of an area are generally easier than at the other, and in adjacent areas they are often far more difficult. Players do not venture alone into these areas until they've acquired the requisite skill or level to survive.
"...A novice player will probably find himself frustrated if the game allows him to get in over his head..."
I don't know that I entirely agree with this (the "probably" part, anyway). If handled poorly, then yes, a novice can end up feeling like he's beating his head against the wall. But handled correctly it becomes an excellent -- and necessary, I think -- design element. It gives the player an immediate and obvious goal: Become strong enough to deal with said enemies, allowing exploration into the new area beyond.
The two things that are key to handling this are, A) Give the player enough information to know what he needs to do to become stronger, and B) Always provide an "out", i.e. a retreat to a safe(r) location on par with the player's current abilities. A player is likely to become frustrated when one (or both!) of these is removed.
It's a pretty standard design in MMORPGs -- enemy-based "soft boundaries" really are an integral part of what makes MMORPGs work...
Areas ("zones" or "dungeons") are generally defined by difficulty, i.e. creatures at one end of an area are generally easier than at the other, and in adjacent areas they are often far more difficult. Players do not venture alone into these areas until they've acquired the requisite skill or level to survive.
The thing that annoys me the most is when there's no up-front information about the difficulty of an area (short of actually going there and getting soundly thumped). So I'm never entirely sure if heading towards a particular side-quest location is going to get me in over my head or not (sometimes until it's too late and I have a savegame in a place that's difficult to back out of).
Perhaps it's a bit immersion breaking, but I'd really love to see maps that say "expected level: 5-10" with a particular area highlighted. (You sometimes see these in MMORPGs, but very few SPRPGs.)
Perhaps it's a bit immersion breaking, but I'd really love to see maps that say "expected level: 5-10" with a particular area highlighted. (You sometimes see these in MMORPGs, but very few SPRPGs.)
I'm a soft-boundaries kind of fan.
With my mobile RPG I'm making what I'm doing is making the world open in that the player is NEVER restricted. Even for the vendors they can buy the high-end gear but the main thing will be getting enough gold same with end-game bosses... like:
(spoiler for anyone following my game... not like any1 is but thought I would warn you)
Right now I plan to have an end game dragon as the end-all boss (not set in stone) but if a player doesnt kill the lesser dragons the mages guarding the end-game dragon will still be protecting him making it even harder to kill him.
No my ideas arn't revolutionary but I feel like this will bring a more open feel to my game which with todays rpgs seems be lacking a lot.
With my mobile RPG I'm making what I'm doing is making the world open in that the player is NEVER restricted. Even for the vendors they can buy the high-end gear but the main thing will be getting enough gold same with end-game bosses... like:
(spoiler for anyone following my game... not like any1 is but thought I would warn you)
Right now I plan to have an end game dragon as the end-all boss (not set in stone) but if a player doesnt kill the lesser dragons the mages guarding the end-game dragon will still be protecting him making it even harder to kill him.
No my ideas arn't revolutionary but I feel like this will bring a more open feel to my game which with todays rpgs seems be lacking a lot.
While I usually have no problems with soft boundaries, I think a lot of the issues have to do with how a couple levels often represent a *significant* difference in power. For instance, in D&D, a first level character isn't even in the same league as one who's, say, third or fourth - 3-4x the hit points, better equipment, better and more spells, higher skill levels, etc. In some game systems this rate slows down a bit as you gain more levels, but there's other times where it doesn't feel as though any thought went into dealing with it at all. If this power band were narrowed so that characters didn't increase in power by leaps and bounds, an open world is much more viable.
But, unfortunately, there's too many players who feel their characters need to have thousands of hitpoints, and deal tens of thousands of points of damage. Personally, that's not my thing.
But, unfortunately, there's too many players who feel their characters need to have thousands of hitpoints, and deal tens of thousands of points of damage. Personally, that's not my thing.
# posted by 
: July 14, 2009 7:35 PM
: July 14, 2009 7:35 PM
Great topic. My first thought on the subject drifts to Fallout/Fallout 2. Both games gave you plenty of information about how to proceed with the main quest once you left the first town. World map opens and you can see green dot marking the next destination. The seductive part is a black unexplored map all around. If you choose you can try to find San Fran from the git go and unless you cheat your likely going to die trying many times in the Wasteland. However Mutants with laser rifles wont ruin your day just yet if you follow the bread crumbs provided.
Generally, I hate hand holding and quest markers in games which allow players to coast through without thought but they have a place especially for novices and busy people to find the main quest again. In my book, its always good the let the player know what is expected but not strictly enforce the rules just for player safety.
Generally, I hate hand holding and quest markers in games which allow players to coast through without thought but they have a place especially for novices and busy people to find the main quest again. In my book, its always good the let the player know what is expected but not strictly enforce the rules just for player safety.
# posted by : July 14, 2009 9:15 PM
: July 14, 2009 9:15 PM
MMOs have a few interesting twists on this issue. In general, MMOs try to restrict players to certain locations based on their level. In many cases you simply cannot affect a higher level enemy because levels are used in a lot of the combat calculations.
This brings up a few interesting issues.
1) Sometimes you want to go to a higher level area. I'm playing The Lord of the Rings Online (LotRO) and for advanced crafting I need resources from a higher level area. I've sent my level 26 character into an area about 10 levels higher than he is in order to find materials needed. It's very dangerous because I can't survive a combat with a monster, I just have to run and hope it gives up before I'm dead.
2) Lower level soft boundaries. In most MMO games, you gain very little from fighting lower level monsters. You get no experience points, and the loot you get is worth so much less than the things you can fight of equal level. So, there's no reason to fight lower level things. However, sometimes this means that you out-level content that you're interested in. In LotRO there were quite a few quests I eventually gave up on because I grew too powerful for the area. Even now, my highest level character hasn't gone into the big Moria expansion yet because I'm enjoying playing a lot in the original world. Eventually I'll out-level some of those other areas, though, and they'll be less interesting to me.
A few other things to consider on the topic.
This brings up a few interesting issues.
1) Sometimes you want to go to a higher level area. I'm playing The Lord of the Rings Online (LotRO) and for advanced crafting I need resources from a higher level area. I've sent my level 26 character into an area about 10 levels higher than he is in order to find materials needed. It's very dangerous because I can't survive a combat with a monster, I just have to run and hope it gives up before I'm dead.
2) Lower level soft boundaries. In most MMO games, you gain very little from fighting lower level monsters. You get no experience points, and the loot you get is worth so much less than the things you can fight of equal level. So, there's no reason to fight lower level things. However, sometimes this means that you out-level content that you're interested in. In LotRO there were quite a few quests I eventually gave up on because I grew too powerful for the area. Even now, my highest level character hasn't gone into the big Moria expansion yet because I'm enjoying playing a lot in the original world. Eventually I'll out-level some of those other areas, though, and they'll be less interesting to me.
A few other things to consider on the topic.
Almost any solution works for me, depending on the game. In the Elder Scrolls games, I like exploring, taking the time to do a quest now and then. It's great that I can go anywhere (especially since I rarely finish a game, so I wouldn't get to the upper levels anyway).
But if the game is more linear than that, I don't mind. I'd prefer that the overly-dangerous areas be obvious (I never forget that it's a game, after all), since I don't like to waste time going somewhere I just can't handle. Soft boundaries are fine, but hard boundaries work, too.
In general, though, I love exploring. So I want some freedom to look around. Finding a neat area or an interesting story that's not part of the main quest - that's completely optional, in fact - is great fun. But only if it's somehow correlated to my level.
But if the game is more linear than that, I don't mind. I'd prefer that the overly-dangerous areas be obvious (I never forget that it's a game, after all), since I don't like to waste time going somewhere I just can't handle. Soft boundaries are fine, but hard boundaries work, too.
In general, though, I love exploring. So I want some freedom to look around. Finding a neat area or an interesting story that's not part of the main quest - that's completely optional, in fact - is great fun. But only if it's somehow correlated to my level.
Maybe I'm old-school, but the explorer in me loves to be thrust into a foreign world which states, "Here, sink or swim on your own".
I don't want to be told that an area of the world is "for levels xx-xx". I'd much rather find out on my own whether I can take it or not.
Which is why I am also against "leveled monsters and loot" like in Oblivion. I don't want to always encounter things which are within my ability to kill. I want to encounter things that are both more powerful than me and less powerful.
Post a Comment
I don't want to be told that an area of the world is "for levels xx-xx". I'd much rather find out on my own whether I can take it or not.
Which is why I am also against "leveled monsters and loot" like in Oblivion. I don't want to always encounter things which are within my ability to kill. I want to encounter things that are both more powerful than me and less powerful.
Links to this post:
<< Home
