Game design to make you feel "Pro"

[AmishSamurai]

That's insinuating that the Quickbeams were fun and not a nightmare-inducing hell that still makes me cry myself to sleep at night.

I could never get past the quickbeams when I was younger. I found them frustrating and just gave up pretty easily and tried to beat other levels (I was pretty bad at Mega Man back then). I went back and played Mega Man 2 last year, and got through them on my second try.

It usually takes about an 45 minutes to an hour to finally cross it, then I can blaze through the rest.

[J T]

It depends on the type of game for me as to whether I like this kind of thing or not. In a competitive setting, I usually prefer an increase in the amount of precision required to properly execute a complicated maneuver. If the game auto aims for the head and rewards me for headshots, well that just feels kind of hollow.

On the other hand though, some of my favorite games use techniques to make you feel awesome and that is precisely what I love about them. In the Zone of the Enders series, you push a few simple buttons and your orbital frame (robot) does these amazing ninja-like moves. What you do is simple, what your character does is complex, and it works because it makes you feel awesome and the game is still challenging enough even with the built in targeting and combo systems.

Another example is the Sly Cooper series. With the simple push of a button, Sly self corrects his jumps and can easily land on ledges, wires, and other thin and tiny platforms. This makes it easier to jump and bound all over the place like you are a platformer expert, and I like that. There are still enough other challenges in timing and stealth that you shouldn't have to worry about landing precision jumps like those.

[Ivo]

Those beams in Megaman 2 suck, that is not fun for me. I like the difficulty in e.g. the GBA Zero games but not those frustrating beams.

I was going to point out - but someone already did - that tiny hitboxes in shmups are (for me) the quintessential example of this kind design.

To be honest I think this isn't bad design. It is a different school of design and depending on the mood I might enjoy that kind of game. Often there are even design elements like that in hard games (e.g. shmups once again). I can think of stuff like Cannon Fodder or Diablo where you are often taking out entire hordes of enemies that grossly outnumber you, but the game isn't necessarily easy.

If you don't like this kind of stuff, you can always play something else.

I don't think anyone paying attention has doubts that gaming has transitioned to be mostly an experience rather than a challenge... Compare the arcade-inspired design of e.g. arcade games (of course) and NES games to what you mostly have nowadays.
There are still arcade-inspired experiences around which I enjoy occasionally, and often the same game can provide both an enjoyable experience for the majority and, if you crank up the difficulty level, an enjoyable challenge that may be more suitably for your tastes.

Ivo.

[Hatta]

I thought Mirror's Edge did that really well. It made tumbling across the rooftops of the city feel effortless.

[J T]

I think that higher difficulty settings should take off the training wheels so-to-speak. I think these game development tactics are really good at making the average person feel skilled at a game, and that's cool. However, if someone wants to really excel at a game, then the option should be there to take away auto-aiming or to have a more realistic hit detection box, rather than just simply making it so enemies require twice the amount of firepower to destroy (which always ruins the flow of the game imo).

[Erik_Twice]

I was going to point out - but someone already did - that tiny hitboxes in shmups are (for me) the quintessential example of this kind design.

The reason why the hitboxes are small compared to the size of the craft is so that you can recognize your position on the screen easily without needing a huge screen.



I never had any problems with those beams, you can also get the time stopper if they give you problems and I got them the third time. I actually like that stage very much. Anyways good or bad, they wouldn't be fun if they were slooooooooooooooooooooow and you could dodge them far more easily.


@JT

The kind of "making you feel like a pro" we are talking in this thread prevent different difficulty levels because you "won't be a real pro" and "l33t" if you don't play on hard.

The point is that the game tries to make you feel very good when you aren't. Killing lots of enemies or being able to jump really high affect the character, not the player, so as to speak.

[Bradtemple87]

I thought Mirror's Edge did that really well. It made tumbling across the rooftops of the city feel effortless.

remarkable game

[TopherMan]

Surprised, nobody brought up achievement points yet.

I never could understand what it is about them that make people go after them. If they were actually a challenge to get then I would understand, but most of them you get just from doing something lame.... like beating a level. Beating a level for a gamer should be a standard... not a reward.

But for some reason people crave them, maybe it is because it makes them feel like a better gamer.... or a.... "pro".

PS: Whoever said fighting games are one of the (if not) the hardest genre to MASTER, is right.

[Bradtemple87]

PS: Whoever said fighting games are one of the (if not) the hardest genre to MASTER, is right.

That would be me , I still get my ass kicked at times

[TopherMan]

PS: Whoever said fighting games are one of the (if not) the hardest genre to MASTER, is right.

That would be me , I still get my ass kicked at times

Yeah man I hear ya....

Most genres I can figure out incredibly fast and have no problems understanding how they're supposed to be played...

Fighters on the other hand took me YEARS to fully understand. You really need to know everything with them before you know anything.