Because you know damn well if a game didn't tell you explicitly what to do, you homosexuals would sperg out on Ganker like "OMG THIS GAME IS TROONSHIT IT LITERALLY GIVES YOU NO DIRECTIONS HOW IS ANYONE SUPPOSED FIGURE THIS SHIT OUT THIS GAME IS Black personBAIT IT'S IMPOSSIBLE"
except there is no example of your post ever happening, when OP's picture describes a video game that exists today. In fact just looking at the Void stranger threads proves you wrong.
It literally happened with DaS around both its original release and especially its PC release, "dishonest game design" and "artificial difficulty" is what posters called it at the time. It became such a popular topic that shitposters started using those buzzwords for other games, even fricking youtubers started using it and it kept creeping up in every single fricking Souls thread up to and including Elden Ring, at that point people avoided using the buzzwords but it was glaringly obvious that they were alluding to the same fricking thing in an attempt for (you)s.
Black personbait would be a very stupid game dumb enough that even they could play.
troonyshit is when you have pronoun options in a game where your pronouns are never mentioned because pronouns are used in thirdperson appications when talking about someone else.
Count yourself lucky then. That said, it also depends on types of games you're playing. Most games now a days especially make where you need to go very obvious, be aspects of the environment that are out of place, way point markers, or whatever. That said, the less the game requires you to move in any direction beyond just forward, the less they need those aspects. Games with more vertical elements can be much harder to navigate if not properly shown what you can/cannot interact with or if environments aren't diverse enough.
not really
we see morons complain about how you "have to make your own fun" or "it's impossible without a guide" but everyone knows it's just salty shitpost
You only need to be told once about things like breaking crates and climbing ladders. Usually this is done in the first or second level so you know about the mechanic.
What you don't do is plop a crate to break or a ladder to climb halfway in with none prior and expect players to do so as there was no indication to do so prior
A large part of Breath of the Wild's success is that it was the first open world game that encouraged exploration for A LOT of people. Gamers legitimately don't know it yet but they are begging for challenge and adventure without handholding. Yet because they are so brainwashed by AAA games, they think that stuff is bad game design.
>how were you supposed to know to rotate the claw and read the symbols >how were you supposed to know to use a powerbomb in the glass tunnel >how were you supposed to know you had to dive into colgera >how were you supposed to know what glass him meant >how were you supposed to know you could spare toriel
They hated him because he spoke the truth
What a dumb image, games nowadays are so over the top filled with details that unless every object is intractable there is no way you would be able to identify what is important in an area in the last image, which is incredibly disingenuous because of its absolute lack of detail.
Games SHOULD let you know what is background scenery and what isnt, they should just be not obnoxious about it, which is why 2003 is the best there.
>Games SHOULD solve all their puzzles for you!
Why stop there? They should also kill the bad guys for you, beat the bosses and hand you the best gear with no effort!
There's already Korean games that completely play themselves and they're really, really popular. It's only a matter of time before western developers catch onto this.
>Games SHOULD solve all their puzzles for you!
Finding a crate amidst a thousand of other non-interactable objects isnt a puzzle though, unless you are actually creating a prop hunt game, in that case you should market your game accordingly, as a puzzle game where you try to find the correct object for the situation between 1000 of them.
But the parody here isnt from a prop hunt game now it it?
>Games SHOULD let you know what is background scenery and what isnt
imagine being this moronic. this post was made by someone that cant imagine an apple or someone without an inner voice or someone that isnt aware of objects outside his immediate view.
>unless every object is intractable there is no way you would be able to identify what is important
You realize lilzoomer, that humans are not this moronic. Unless they're like (you) conditioned to be this mentally moronic. That you can't even play a videogame without constantly being told where to go what to do and how to do in bring bright boxes and fonts. You realize till the 360µsoft ruined gaming videogames did not hold your hand and play the game for you. Because playing video games is about playing a game you know a video game doing shit solving puzzles trying stuff out having fun etc etc etc being creative using your head feeling accomplishment for doing something hard. Instead of getting cheevos every 5 steps for doing what the game tells you to do in full details.
Frick me zoomers microsoft mobile(zoomers&insectoids) and youtubes ruined gaming.
>Games SHOULD solve all their puzzles for you!
Why stop there? They should also kill the bad guys for you, beat the bosses and hand you the best gear with no effort!
morons. this has nothing to do with puzzles or difficulty, it's the reality of graphical fidelity. yeah no shit you didn't need anything to find what's breakable in half life because the room had 3 boxes in it that all looked the same.
I want a game to be advertized as "A game made not for gamers, but for people who love video games" where it's basically a Ps1/Ps2 game with modern graphics
>GDC
Frick GDC. That shit is the reason video games suck ass now more than anything else. Turning video games into some sort of educational, "lifelong learning" bullshit ruined the medium. Fricking hate conferences. Nothing good has ever come out of them.
GDC is great. It's moronic devs telling you, completely openly, about how moronic they are. Or suits openly admitting to how scummy they are. Nothing about the games that come out would change without GDC, we'd just have less insight (confirmed insight anyway) into the industry.
So this is what DSP meant when he kept saying thanks for the views you worthless humans. He was talking about the gamedevs studying him on how to make a game not to hard for troglodytes.
How can one man be so based? I don't know much about DSP, but I do know he placed well in a SF2 tournament, jerked off on camera without punishment, and is apparently the peer model for gamer intelligence.
You are in a room. The room has no lamps or candles, but there is a single window letting in some light. Exit to the EAST.
There is a medium-sized wooden CRATE on the ground. It looks breakable.
Games back then didn't litter entire rooms with a shit load of pointless doodads and PhysX objects.
The original RE4 is a good example of proper world design: All the barrels and crates that can be broken stand out because they're basically the only non background object. Everything else is just like piles of rubble or broken machinery or whatever that obviously serves no gameplay purpose beyond fleshing out the environment or forming the outer boundaries of the level.
Nowadays environments are cluttered with so much shit to seem "realistic" and "lived in" game designers feel obligated to put an arrow over an item or a highlight of some sort on it, because otherwise it becomes extremely easy to miss items or interactible objects without it. You get overloaded with pointless decorative shit and your eyes glaze over from the information overload.
They don't need to worry about that anon. Think of it this way >I go into the bathroom to brush my teeth >oh wowzers there's so many objects in here hope my toothbrush is yellow
No lad I just go grab the toothbrush. I knew what my "objective" or "quest" was it doesn't matter how many useless clutter objects are in the room I go into.
This comparison is moronic because you live in this world and you are yourself in this scenario. In a video game you're controlling a separate entity that often has more complex goals than "brush my teeth" and whose goals might require steps more abstract than simply "grab toothbrush," on top of having knowledge of the in-game world that isn't always going to be 1:1 to what you as the player might have.
Honestly there's some features missing from some old games that can add to the experience. Played ultima underworld for the first time a while ago and it was genuinely fun to keep my own journal to write down all the info and objectives and secret spells and shit I'd find. Wouldn't want that from every game, but it'd be fun if there were some focused on that kind of thing.
>this crate is breakable.
it would tell you this in the instruction manual and leave it at that. at worse there would be 1 tutorial at the very start of the game.
you wouldn't have yellow tape or stupid shit like that on every crate.
>the average normie would be dumb enough to not realize you can break the crate for supplies until several hours in when they accidentally discover it >the average game is also so full of clutter you have crates that can be broken, and similar crates that can't be broken (same shit with drawers) because devs can't into proper environmental design
2003 is the best version and anyone who says otherwise is a moron.
Video games should always prioritize being games more than anything else.
2013 and 2023 are both chores where the game demands you break that box, and the future one is unironically the worst because it prioritizes realism on top of breaking a massive rule of game design being ambiguity.
Not everyone is going to assume a crate is breakable or not. Plenty of crates in games are just there for decoration and can’t be broken, so it can be very easy for anyone to ignore them.
Also it’s more than likely that the future example is “selective” interactable crates because making every crate breakable with items inside would be far more work and taxing when you consider that it’d have to be done with every crate.
Visual fidelity is raised to the point that you can't identify what is interactable and what isn't anymore.
A smart developer would lead the player into interacting with an object "naturally" then let them realize that specific item is interactable from that point onwards, but intelligent design is hard so lol yellow.
>Visual fidelity is raised to the point that you can't identify what is interactable and what isn't anymore
Good art direction fixes this
But buying up assets from all over and contracting everything out makes this impossible
you've very clearly never been in a Tomb raider 3 thread if you don't understand why games aren't made in a way that "respects your intelligence". Honestly, some of you morons saying this shit probably think back to Ocarina of Time as the "good old days" of respecting intelligence, rather than Tomb Raider, and would probably get filtered by exactly what you're asking, but would posture that it's good to stroke your ego.
As someone who didn't have an N64 growing up, I played OOT recently. Can't believe how handholdy it is. It's utter shit. How is this shit the greatest game of all time?
>How is this shit the greatest game of all time?
Tendie nostalgia and statistics. See, the N64 sold well but had a modest library. So you get a large number of people who see the same few games - Mario, Zelda, Smash, GoldenEye - as "the best". In contrast, ask people who had a PS1 back then, and the answers will be a lot more varied.
Of course, pic related is the ACTUAL greatest game of all time, but lots of people don't know it because PC gaming used to be much more niche.
The yellow tape/paint shit is purely a Resident Evil design choice, nobody else does and yet everybody acts like every single goddamn game in 2023 does it. It's the least worst option out there and I have to wonder what runs through the minds of people when they see a crate with yellow tape on it in RE4, do you just stand there and gawk at it for ten minutes seething how you identified a breakable box? Do you look at the splash of yellow on the ladders and have a mental breakdown because your immersion is completely ruined?
Explain the autism against the yellow for me because as far as I'm aware it's just people being allergic to sensible game design.
The arrow is just fricking stupid, anyone that has enough braincells to get to that point in the game will obviously be able to tell where to go in a scene like that, most of the visual design in RE4R is just over the top since 90% of it can be figured out by just standing still, looking around and then following the more subtle clues that already exist in the level design, the rest can be solved using the GPS they added into the game, The designers just didn't seem to trust themselves or they were told to add the yellow tape by some higherup
The backlash is because by trying to realistically incorporate the visual cue into the game setting, presenting it as something that physically happened in the world (everything conveniently got messy splashes of paint on it at some point), it's actually doing the opposite and drawing more attention to the contrived gameyness of the setting. Many less dumb solutions are available.
You can do the same shit but make it look less moronic. Give the boxes an Illuminados stamp. Make the ladders into something like pic related where the sides are actually colored. The problem comes that it's super easy to come up with sensible solutions. The paint just looks like fricking shit.
You would know if you played the game you can mantle onto about anything so you would know you could get on top of it, its only covered in paint because players might miss it otherwise.
They don't do this because they assume you're stupid, they do it because the level designers create with no finesse, therefore someone has to go back and paint big yellow stains on everything.
Don't get me wrong, they do assume you're stupid, but this is not a sign of that. This is a sign of a thousands of developers working on a single project with no possibility of coordination.
they should've made a meta npc that yells about how he's been painting surfaces yellow because it's not clear they can be climbed, it would have been in character
iirc Doom 2016 and Eternal also used yellow ledges and bars with green lights to point out what could be climbed up on, and this was constantly used to keep the player on the right path so they wouldn't have to check the map. Not that the levels were all that complex.
Last of Us 1 was one of the first big games to do it. The way forward in every area is lit up by bright yellow stuff like caution tape and yellow ladders and all that shit.
The yellow tape/paint shit is purely a Resident Evil design choice, nobody else does and yet everybody acts like every single goddamn game in 2023 does it. It's the least worst option out there and I have to wonder what runs through the minds of people when they see a crate with yellow tape on it in RE4, do you just stand there and gawk at it for ten minutes seething how you identified a breakable box? Do you look at the splash of yellow on the ladders and have a mental breakdown because your immersion is completely ruined?
Explain the autism against the yellow for me because as far as I'm aware it's just people being allergic to sensible game design.
Assassin's creed mirage has white paint jizz scattered all over walls/rocks because apparently the average player is too fricking moronic even when there's literally only 1 fricking path to climb up from.
It was present in older games too but it was way more subtle to the point of the overwhelming majority of players not even realizing it existed until they read about it on the web.
Don't forget...whatever the game is where you hunt robot animals and they made the protagonist look like that fat muck bang youtuber in the second game.
>It's the least worst option out there
have a nice day
Even TLoU it so desperately tried to copy did better by just slightly altering the shading of intractable props.
even mirrors edge paints climbable shit red, and although they make it look nice and it gels well with the style, the game is so much better with that disabled
If you're going to constantly remind me I'm in a game, you may as well put the stupid yellow outline in, since you've already given up on immersion anyway. If anything, expecting the player to mindlessly follow conventions is just as disrespectful.
Amnesia The Bunker came out this year and basically looks like bottom-right if I'm not mistaken.
I think this is really only a phenomenon with cinematic games for dumbasses.
homosexuals who cry about this are the same people who fail the Sally Ann test.
There need to be clear indicators as to what is and is not interactive in the game world because shit is heavily abstracted - a very small number of objects in the game world are interactive, and the rest is static. Mashing the A button to try and interact with every inch of a room or attacking every wall in case there's some invisible trigger is extremely unintuitive and completely illogical.
It is extremely unintuitive to have a world where 99% of it effectively does not exist while the other 1% is interactive but practically hidden without significant indicators highlighting it. Even those "old PS1 games" like RE use explicit camera angles, little shiny twinkles, 3D models that stand out like a sore thumb to highlight shit you can interact with. New games don't have the luxury of forcing camera angles to make a player look at a bookshelf or painting or desk or pushable box or a big fricking glowing red/green button or a text box telling you every important object on the screen after you type 'look'. The belief that shit was like that in 2003 let alone 1983 is farcical.
Worse, thinking that obtuse design in some obscure past games was intentional let alone did something like "respect your intelligence" is unbelievably moronic.
That "far flung unthinkable future" already exists, and it exists because games are getting to the point where you can interact with absolutely everything in the game. Every wall, every rock, every tree, every trinket can be picked up, taken, destroyed, created, used. There aren't any necessary indicators as to what can be interacted with because everything can be interacted with, and the interaction lends towards actual intuitive experimentation as to what works with what.
I only play good games and good games are designed with interactivity and physics engines.
When games had completely pointless features like flushing a toilet or turning on a sync or picking up a shoe.
Games are interactive experiences.
If the game is not interactive in as many ways as possible it a bad game and only made to make money. Nobody on the dev team cared to make it a living world.
>It is extremely unintuitive to have a world where 99% of it effectively does not exist
exactly.
it seems like you are the one failing to understand other peoples perspectives; we arent complaining about how more idiots play games and need to be pandered to, we are complaining that devs are doing a bad job of designing games.
Baldur's Gate 3 is a game that respects your intelligence. Doesn't explain shit and just assumes you figure casting a fire spell on a patch of oil will set it on fire.
You say that, but didn't a lot of people get stuck on Sonic 2 because they had to press up on the D-pad? Also, didn't valve simplify entire levels because their play tester couldn't figure out very obvious puzzles?
With Valve they were obviously designing the game for morons and with Sonic 2 it was more that vidya hadn't been around for long enough for players to learn how to properly interact with them yet.
Because in any game with a remotely consistent art style, especially more realistic games, it's not immediately obvious what you can and can't interact with any more.
Back in the day, the backgrounds and interactive objects were so blatantly obviously distinct from each other, you didn't need this shit.
You'd have to be fricking moronic to not understand this from a game design perspective where your prospective audience maybe didn't grow up with 30 years of videogames and wouldn't, at a glance, understand "videogamey" things that are obvious to people here.
Based dev guy. I still assert half-life being a big inspiration on why that stuff took off. It makes sense in a place like Black Mesa. Or if you have vampire abilities.
Half-Life didn't do this shit. HL2 maybe, but the original Half-Life had good level design that naturally told you where to go.
7 months ago
Anonymous
HL2 then. The clean ultra sterile look with colored lines leading to departments. A ton of people copied everything about HL series.
7 months ago
Anonymous
HL2 put lambda sprays on everything you could interact with.
It's like Valve saw people playing Sven Co-Op spraying objectives for other players and thought it was a great idea.
7 months ago
Anonymous
oh wow, instead of yellow paint, it's just green glowing poison juice
7 months ago
Anonymous
That's an obstacle you moron, not something to follow.
7 months ago
Anonymous
Green means go though. I should walk towards it.
7 months ago
Anonymous
>Later writes "game is too hard >:(" in the feedback box
I think a lot of the assumptions about players being braindead are really down to a lack of real communication from games early on, not simply on the "you can climb this ladder" level but on the level of "the things around you aren't just cool scenery, you play this game by looking at and interpreting them" fundamentals.
If you put any of those playtesters in an IRL pit with a ladder they needed to use to climb out, they could do it immediately. But the garbage they're playing nowadays teaches them to go into video games with a different set of assumptions regarding what they should even be looking for, what their role is. If you could just teach them that first, as in the moment the game starts, I bet there'd be fewer issues.
2003 needs more HUD elements. People used to complain all the time about HUDs breaking their immersion, and a surprising number of game developers actually listened to that message.
yeah I'm sure games in that far future will have blank flat rooms with only 1 box in them for you to break >errrrm I'll simply be able to tell which box is interactable
no you won't and you'll be b***hing about the breakable box blending in with the room >errrrm just make every asset in the room breakable then
then you'll be b***hing about having to break a dozen boxes to find 1 ammo pickup
graphics shouldn't be realistic to begin with
a cartoony game will still have interactable objects that stand out. will you still be b***hing about it then? >no
so it's only a problem when graphics are realistic because you want them to be even more realistic?
I don't give a shit if my immersion is broken. I want my game to be fun and interesting, not immersive
You solve it with good game design. In The Witness, they explicitly avoided adding circular shapes anywhere in the entire game because they might be mistaken as line startpoints. For example there's a building with minecarts in it, but their wheels are weird polygonal shapes instead of circular wheels.
The way you solve this without moronic yellow paint is by not having interactable objects and non-interactable ones that look the same. A tutorial can introduce you to the differences and even moronic people will understand it.
Or you establish basic theming in the early levels. >Oh no! My guy fell off that platform! Fortunately that stack of RED boxes broke my fall. Oh hey, look, ammo for my weapon, that's neat, I wonder if all boxes have stuff in them. Oh, hey, look, a BROWN box! I'mma smash that! Aw, darn, there's nothing in that one. So maybe only certain boxes have stuff in them. Oooh! Another RED box! Hey! It does have ammo in it! Sweet! Uh, oh! Enemies! Die enemies! BLAM BLAM BLAM! Oh no, they're shooting back! I better hide behind that stack of GREEN boxes! Oh no! The boxes are getting shot up! Die enemies! BLAM BLAM! Whew, that was a close one, and now I'm almost out of health. Oh, wait, there's health boosts in these shot up GREEN boxes! Okay, so certain colored boxes have certain things in them. Oh shit! That's a bigger enemy! Shit! Shit! No more ammo! No more RED boxes! What do I - hey, what's that GOLD box for? If I can just break it maybe-WOAH! A BIGGER GUN! DIE BIGGER ENEMY! BLAKOW! BLAKOW! Wow it makes a different sound and everything! Hey! I did it! My new gun killed the bigger enemy! Good thing I found that GOLD box! I'm gonna have to keep an eye out for those especially!
It's game design, not rocket science.
You’re not wrong but the average gamer would hate this and see it as bad game design because “how was I supposed to know”. You and I both know that the game literally tells them through gameplay but the average gamer doesn’t actually like video games, they just like dopamine.
Gamers are smarter (or at least better at basic pattern recognition) than most designers give them credit for. The problem is that lazy game devs have conditioned gamers to be handheld through everything because it makes game devs' job easier. They don't have to be creative or thoughtful in designing mechanics or levels because they can just draw a big fricking circle around whatever they need the player to do to lurch along to the next big fricking circle.
What a dumb image, games nowadays are so over the top filled with details that unless every object is intractable there is no way you would be able to identify what is important in an area in the last image, which is incredibly disingenuous because of its absolute lack of detail.
Games SHOULD let you know what is background scenery and what isnt, they should just be not obnoxious about it, which is why 2003 is the best there.
You solve it with good game design. In The Witness, they explicitly avoided adding circular shapes anywhere in the entire game because they might be mistaken as line startpoints. For example there's a building with minecarts in it, but their wheels are weird polygonal shapes instead of circular wheels.
The way you solve this without moronic yellow paint is by not having interactable objects and non-interactable ones that look the same. A tutorial can introduce you to the differences and even moronic people will understand it.
They were dumb enough to take ESG money and actually hired black consultants as character and content designers. We have Kimberly instead of Guy thanks to these gorillas.
All of those cloths and ropes are still by its own nature indicators of what is and isnt interactable, just like the 2003 does so, without words, tell you why a box is interactable (its lighter than the rest of the background).
If this example was like the last panel, there would be no cloths or ropes or lids to indicate anything, just the fact that some obects are moveable and some are not, with no distinction what so ever.
Honestly, if Nintendo wanted to continue with their own established game design from the BOTW / TOTK games, those ropes should have been breakable and allowed access to the building materials inside.
>be industrial worker in a big automated factory >see yellow things standing out >try to interact with them >whole production stops >everyone is screaming at me >boss screams at me >production stops a whole day >they have to call the engineers who designed the machines to come here >I make the company lose millions
just make it lit slightly brighter than the environment. no paint, no shiny effect, no blinking, no prompt. That worked for old games (yes I know it wasn't always intentional due limitations on lighting dynamic objects, but it still worked.)
Games have always, and will always be, the hobby that caters to morons. What do you think pong was about? Catering to intellectuals who wanted to be challenged? No you stupid b***h, think.
>move up or down >more skill than even a walking simulator
This is your brain after suffering severe brain damage with an inability to comprehend 3D space.
Do you hear yourself? Walking simulators literally play themselves. Pong requires actual input and its difficulty is determined entirely by the skill of your opponent.
finally started playing through the Half Life series recently. Valve did a great job with this sort of thing, for the most part. Interactable doors typically have a different look to them. Interactable valves are bright frickin red, which stands out but still makes sense in the environment unlike yellow paint-splattered ladders. It’s not bad.
A lot of games use lighting effects to guide the player, like by highlighting the door you’re supposed to go through with a sunbeam or something. I’ve always liked that.
I UTTERLY HATE when games have characters who will tell you the solution to a puzzle after 6 seconds
Too much visual clutter as a result of pushing for graphical fidelity coupled with a fear of losing the player's attention for even a moment. If the game's "too hard" or "too confusing" the average player will turn to their phone or let their attention wander, which makes it even less likely that they'll continue playing the game because they'll lose focus. If the experience instead is a smooth ride without any rough edges, so the player can turn off their brain, they're actually more likely to stay with the game, even if the game is less fun. Adding these kinds of neon signs will also serve to make it easier for a player to get back into a game after a break or after having been distracted. It's like a laser pointer for a cat
Making a game that's good enough to make the player actively want to engage with it from start to finish, to a point where they remove themselves from distractions (such as phones), is way fricking harder. And when all that matters is ROI, it's not the sensible strategy
As game assets become higher quality, they need to make interactable elements in the game world stand out or else players will get frustrated. You can't just have a box in a corner of a room with one texture, games have dozens of elements in a room at once. I remember playing HL2 and getting pissed that certain doors would open and others were just window dressing. Yellow paints lets players spend less time UNF-ing the walls like we're still playing Doom and find the shit in the environment that's important to the game.
FFXV's highest difficulty, Normal, is a complete fricking joke because the director wanted to pander to casuals
https://novacrystallis.com/2014/09/with-final-fantasy-xv-i-do-want-to-make-it-more-casual-says-tabata/
If a game doesn't sell eleventy billion copies it's deemed a failure due to how overly expensive companies made game development so they need to make sure that actual morons can play and have fun.
The reason they have to do this at all is because MUH GRAFIX. Set pieces are supposed to appear very realistic, but in terms of production and scope, not everything in the environment can be interacted with. Leaving only essential elements in a game now, would make it feel empty.
Gaming isnt a niche corner done as a hobby by a niche group of tech savvy nerds. Its turned into a huge volume market thats aimed at the largest group with largest cash, the average. That means they dont want their customers, like that 50iq roastie friend of yours from college who picked up this game because "I saw it on instagram tee-hee" to be frusturated and shit up the social media. Niche group of nerds dont have the volume to make investors drop big chunks of money into making actual games. Yes, it sucks. It's what it is. No point arguing.
In their defense the average person is a fricking moron >Add short and simple message saying "we need to enter the facility and destroy ALL THE CRATES >Zoomers: "what was I doing again?" "where are they crates? *checks the same place 10 times" "I don't know what crates look like"
Streamers are not the average player, anon. Which is the entire problem, games are being made to appease the streamer crowd because it's free advertising.
The average player is dumber than the average streamer. You have no fricking clue what you’re talking about. The average player simply cannot play a video game without a million markers and a companion to tell you exactly what to do. You seriously haven’t exposed yourself to enough average gamers if you think they’re not window licker tier morons.
Not just a zoomer thing, it's become the norm even since the main audience for AAA games became stoned out guys tapping away on their controllers from their couch
(Western) game devs unironically study people like DSP to decide how to pace games and design environments and objects. I can't find the picture or article for it but there was a presentation done by I assume the God of War devs and they literally showed footage of DSP's GoW Let's Play as they talked about their game design philosophy.
As if that's not bad enough, play testing is never done by people whom actually play a lot of video games (outside of in-house testing done by the devs themselves). It's a random assortment of inner city blacks and middle aged bar hoppers. Since most big budget release titles aren't passion projects, but simply a business venture, they have to be as accessible as possible. They need to be designed so a literal 60+ year old boomer who's never held a controller in their life can figure out what to do.
EVERYONE WHO IS DEFENDING THIS, PLEASE WATCH THIS CLIP
The places that yellow paint are splattered around are fricking indefensible. These are ladders at the end of a very narrow walkway. You CAN NOT miss them.
You would be shocked by how many people would actually miss them and still probably miss them. What you don’t know is that the average STEAM user only plays 5 games a year. Console gamers are likely even lower than that. The average moron has no meaningful experience or frame of reference to draw on, so these studios make sure to make it as brain dead as possible for these people as they make up the majority.
I can think of a few reasons for it, first and most obvious is the ladder is probably reused multiple times and theres no point in retexturing it for the few times its obvious.
The yellow paint though is a bit excessive, the same concept has been handled better in other games through the use of lighting, different textures, or the other various ways. The paint just looks ugly IMO
that's a pretty good summary of modern 2020 game design, every aspect of the cancer is there. To think this is the kind of game that gets praised nowadays, and on Ganker no less
Why even bother with the paint? Everything is contextual in the first place.
You have no freedom to make a mistake in the first place.
Holy frick these games are made for literal morons.
>Nintendo: floating boxes with "?" >Metal Gear: enemies drop spinning ammo boxes when they die >Souls/Elder Ring: comically large treasure chests >Resident Evil:Yellow paint in crates and ladders
because it's what they're taught
it's what they see when they watch GDC game design videos
it's what they experience when they playtest with the lowest common denominator
imo game design is an intuitive process that can't be taught, you're either a person who can understand it by dissecting it in other games you play then replicating it in your own projects or you aren't.
you can't become a quality game designer by going to school and trying to learn about it in an academic setting. you can get good at thinking out the process for gameplay systems there, but not game design.
I agree up to a point but I think getting other developer's perspective on game design can greatly help develop your own. It's just that the kind of people talking at GDC are usually making soulless products so the people they inspire do the same and you end up with passionless design inspiring even more passionless design.
it depends on who you speak to but I agree.
i've collaborated with other developers before and its helped on occasion.
the problem is actually finding people that have any real development insight to offer is difficult.
in my experience within creative fields the incompetent ones tend to be the loudest in the room.
Why shouldn't the crate standout from the environment to signify it is interactive in the 2003 example?
the point of that image is to show off that the 2003 crate is the good one. instead of using a shader to highlight the object or slathering it with garish paint that fricks with the artstyle, it just uses contrast.
nevermind. i took another look at the image and i'm wrong.
2003 is the actual 'best' one there, though. the original resident evil 4 is a good example of using contrast to make things like destructible crates stand out.
if you don't have anything to make them seem different to the environment at all, you're going to end up with 30% of the people buying your game complaining in forums about how they have no resources.
I don't understand why you morons don't get it, if you've played any sort of online game or god forbid watched a normie stream anything in the last decade you'd see just how ridiculously stupid the average person is. You also have to understand that since the early 2000s the gaming industry has been moving more and more towards the mainstream so the average player skill level is only dropping.
While you and I still play video games, video games are not made for us, they are made for people who have fallen off the lowest rung of the skill ladder. It will not get better until gaming becomes "uncool" again.
We understand. We are being snooty arbiters and saying we expect better and deserve better. Ganker culture exists on the precipice that Rome chucked infants off of.
The Half-Life dev commentary track has done untold amounts of damage to game design. There is a reason one of the only new studios to reach the great heights of the "next big studio" is FromSoft which mostly ignores all the design philosophies of mainstream gaming. The people on social media saying 'uh yellow paint is actually good game design' are the same people who were dunking on Elden Ring's UI being too clunky and not modern minimalist enough. >b-but what about the guiding grace
a subtle yellow light that points in a very general direction within a massive open world and appears sparsely throughout the game versus yellow paint that is splattered four times in seconds of gameplay within a narrow hallway in a mostly linear action game
Imagine if people thought this way of literature, movies, or even other interactive media like board games. "The best way to design things is to appeal exclusively to a generalized focus group made up of average non-fans, this is art"
When you look at the grand scheme timeline of gaming the Souls formula is the only evolution in gaming we've had that isn't baseline technology in like 20 years.
Because no one went to game design school
And the ones who did just learned Reagan wanted to use arcade games to make boys of all races into super soldiers (which was a bad thing).
Thats fricking stupid. Have you ever had to "break a crate" in real life? Why would that occur to you?
Game logic is not the same as real world logic. Unless the game explicitly breaks the chain by not only respecting your intelligence, but also providing an environment were using your brain is rewarding, highlighting the dumb shit you're supposed to do is reasonable. Then you don't waste your time.
I used to do the truck shipments when I worked in a pharmacy and it came on pallets so we had break the crate missions weekly.
The pallets never needed to glow yellow, we knew what our objective was that night so we could navigate to the box cutters and the pallets without much confusion. Rarely did I see someone have to noclip to our position.
>Game logic is not the same as real world logic
building up game logic through playing games is a fun part of engaging with video games. We all know what this means. It's cool that it is just a collective part of our gaming knowledge and we don't need it explained beyond a barrel just being red (or at this point, any cylinder that is glowing like the purple stuff at the beginning of Baldur's Gate 3)
>Baldur's Gate 3
people have kind of just glossed over how BG3 doesn't hold your hand AT ALL. It tells you a couple of things you can do at the beginning of the game and then never again. You can miss like 80% of the game's interactions if you just beelined through the main story quest. Imagine if they railroaded you because playtesters didn't know to go to the goblin camp in act 1 and how fricking lame that would be.
They didn't have to teach much, core mechanics are all the player has to be directly taught if they're not a mobile market tard tester. They can pick up the environmental cues and patterns beyond that.
Like in doom the developers don't have to explain in detail what every monster is (even if the manual does). Instead you fight a monster and get a general idea of what to expect from them going forward.
That is because hovering your mouse over anything puts 1000 words on screen like having a game manual open at all times.
It is CONSTANTLY feeding you information but in a good way. The autism of slowing down to read everything gives you time to arrange it nicely in your head and it does set up situations nicely.
If you've ever done playtesting you'll learn real fast most people have the mindset of babies when it comes to leaning new gameplay. They have to be directed around like sheep or they get angry and say the game is confusing/boring without a beepy beepy sparkle GOOD JOB badge
it's the same problem there is with wide audience movies these days. Either you have a vision because you like games / movies and you go through with it, or you don't so you have to rely on feedback for every decision, and the problem with that is that number one your audience simply isn't as aware of what it wants as it thinks it is, and number two, what the way they give feedback from small portion of a game doesn't account for the overall experience you get through playing a game properly or enjoying a movie in its entirety.
They just design games for their audience.
Zoomers can barely understand how computers work. They grew up playing casual mobile shit and would get filtered if every game didn't hold their hand.
I know you Black folk might be too young to remember but I was here on the day Skyrim released. The amount of people that couldn't figure out the Golden Claw door near the start of the game was hilarious.
>start new game >immediately try to bunnyhop and when i get a melee weapon i hit everything and try to break it
it's a shame you can't do that i a lot of games now, you'd think with all the new tech everything should be breakable and you'd be able to at least put a dent in a wall with a melee weapon
>you'd think with all the new tech everything should be breakable
Anon, it's not a technical issue. Every game could have every wall and object to be destructible, the question is, why? What is the purpose of destroying objects in the game beyond wasting development time in QA
because it's fun and makes the world feel alive, there doesn't really have to be any other reason
same as going fast or crouch-jumping or nade jumping, it's a game after all
>because it's fun
Games have destructible objects for a reason, not because "it's fun".
Your fun happens because someone put actual thought over what the game you play is about, it's not some random thing.
See? It's not hard to think of a reason to destroy objects in a game, what I'm trying to tell you is there's no point of making every single object in the game destructible unless it's the whole point of the game (aka minecraft or teardown)
7 months ago
Anonymous
That's a very arcadey view of game design. Not every choice you make has to feed into the gameplay, you can add shit just for flavor.
7 months ago
Anonymous
the reason is my monkey brain wants to smash with club in hand
Secret passages
Secret weapon cache
Alt. level
Part of a puzzle (if it's action-adventure)
Design-wise it's not that hard to have some level geometry be destructible and other level geometry be static when you need it that way.
>play old game >if I can find a way to jump over the wall I can >play new game >if I can find a way to jump over the wall there's actually an invisible wall extending it
That's something I'll give cyberpunk credit for, there aren't many invisible walls in the game and the climbing works on almost any surface.
This just reminded me of the GoW guy (forgot his name) who claimed to love Metroid only to be filtered by fricking breakable blocks in Metroid Dread which the game taught you about at the very start of the game.
>no yellow markers telling you where to go and where to put key items
AAAAAAAAAAAAAA WHERE DO I GOOOOOOOOOOOO?????? HOW CAN PEOPLE PLAY THIS GAME?????? THIS IS GARBAGE AM I SUPPOSED TO JUST RUN AROUND THE MANSION?????? IM LITERALLY ON THE VERGE OF QUITTING THIS GAME
An actual explanation:
The first major Game Design degree offered in the US was by Worcester Polytechnic Institute in 2004.
Before that, getting a job at a game studio required a Computer Science, Programming, or Engineering degree.
A game design degree is two years of downloading Unity and Blender, then watching youtube tutorials.
Since big projects have so many people working on them they have to work in a company like environmente, less creativity, a lot of charts and making sure the product is undestandable and tasteless as possible
They're not, visual noise has been the true enemy all along and we can thanks graphics prostitutes for that. You can't just fill a room with props, dynamic lighting and shadows, 4k textures and fancy shaders without absolutely killing the ability to spot things you can interact with. It's like we applied pixel hunting of old adventure games to fricking everything.
There's just very little care, passion or talent in the game industry these days.
Because you know damn well if a game didn't tell you explicitly what to do, you homosexuals would sperg out on Ganker like "OMG THIS GAME IS TROONSHIT IT LITERALLY GIVES YOU NO DIRECTIONS HOW IS ANYONE SUPPOSED FIGURE THIS SHIT OUT THIS GAME IS Black personBAIT IT'S IMPOSSIBLE"
except there is no example of your post ever happening, when OP's picture describes a video game that exists today. In fact just looking at the Void stranger threads proves you wrong.
It literally happened with DaS around both its original release and especially its PC release, "dishonest game design" and "artificial difficulty" is what posters called it at the time. It became such a popular topic that shitposters started using those buzzwords for other games, even fricking youtubers started using it and it kept creeping up in every single fricking Souls thread up to and including Elden Ring, at that point people avoided using the buzzwords but it was glaringly obvious that they were alluding to the same fricking thing in an attempt for (you)s.
You're probably too young to remember, but that was a common critique of older games.
Black personbait would be a very stupid game dumb enough that even they could play.
troonyshit is when you have pronoun options in a game where your pronouns are never mentioned because pronouns are used in thirdperson appications when talking about someone else.
Falseflag harder.
I rant when it's the opposite.
I've never seen this happen, ever. And any homosexual that tries gets rightfully called out for being the moron they are. You are a homosexual.
Count yourself lucky then. That said, it also depends on types of games you're playing. Most games now a days especially make where you need to go very obvious, be aspects of the environment that are out of place, way point markers, or whatever. That said, the less the game requires you to move in any direction beyond just forward, the less they need those aspects. Games with more vertical elements can be much harder to navigate if not properly shown what you can/cannot interact with or if environments aren't diverse enough.
not really
we see morons complain about how you "have to make your own fun" or "it's impossible without a guide" but everyone knows it's just salty shitpost
You only need to be told once about things like breaking crates and climbing ladders. Usually this is done in the first or second level so you know about the mechanic.
What you don't do is plop a crate to break or a ladder to climb halfway in with none prior and expect players to do so as there was no indication to do so prior
nah
And that's why things shouldn't be obvious. It filters those morons and drives them away from video games.
Gatekeeping is a necessary evil.
bg3 is very creative for mainstream standard and it received incredible reception as a breath of fresh air
A large part of Breath of the Wild's success is that it was the first open world game that encouraged exploration for A LOT of people. Gamers legitimately don't know it yet but they are begging for challenge and adventure without handholding. Yet because they are so brainwashed by AAA games, they think that stuff is bad game design.
He was talking about baldurs gate 3, dumbass.
are you an idiot
No.
You've struck a nerve because you are correct
>how were you supposed to know to rotate the claw and read the symbols
>how were you supposed to know to use a powerbomb in the glass tunnel
>how were you supposed to know you had to dive into colgera
>how were you supposed to know what glass him meant
>how were you supposed to know you could spare toriel
They hated him because he spoke the truth
Yw
N
baw
What a dumb image, games nowadays are so over the top filled with details that unless every object is intractable there is no way you would be able to identify what is important in an area in the last image, which is incredibly disingenuous because of its absolute lack of detail.
Games SHOULD let you know what is background scenery and what isnt, they should just be not obnoxious about it, which is why 2003 is the best there.
>Games SHOULD solve all their puzzles for you!
Why stop there? They should also kill the bad guys for you, beat the bosses and hand you the best gear with no effort!
There's already Korean games that completely play themselves and they're really, really popular. It's only a matter of time before western developers catch onto this.
Vampire survivors is the start of this in the west
I fricking love idle games so i can't complain though
>Games SHOULD solve all their puzzles for you!
Finding a crate amidst a thousand of other non-interactable objects isnt a puzzle though, unless you are actually creating a prop hunt game, in that case you should market your game accordingly, as a puzzle game where you try to find the correct object for the situation between 1000 of them.
But the parody here isnt from a prop hunt game now it it?
jesus christ you homosexuals are so goddamn melodramatic about everything, absolute woman behavior
Holy shit, 1st grade reading comprehension right here
>figuring out which containers to bother opening is a “puzzle”
Are you some kind of troglodyte that actually enjoyed mashing A on every prerendered background in PS1 RPGs to find secrets?
>Games SHOULD let you know what is background scenery and what isnt
imagine being this moronic. this post was made by someone that cant imagine an apple or someone without an inner voice or someone that isnt aware of objects outside his immediate view.
the breakfast thing doesnt really fit imo. thats an autism test. the next meme after inner monologue and apple was object permanence.
>thats an autism test.
Autistics have an inner monologue. You're thinking of people with BPD.
>thats an autism test
No, it's a moron test.
but i ate breakfast tho
Internal dialogue is a midwit meme
>how would you feel if i depicted you as a basedjack
>but i wasn't depicted as a basedjack
>unless every object is intractable there is no way you would be able to identify what is important
You realize lilzoomer, that humans are not this moronic. Unless they're like (you) conditioned to be this mentally moronic. That you can't even play a videogame without constantly being told where to go what to do and how to do in bring bright boxes and fonts. You realize till the 360µsoft ruined gaming videogames did not hold your hand and play the game for you. Because playing video games is about playing a game you know a video game doing shit solving puzzles trying stuff out having fun etc etc etc being creative using your head feeling accomplishment for doing something hard. Instead of getting cheevos every 5 steps for doing what the game tells you to do in full details.
Frick me zoomers microsoft mobile(zoomers&insectoids) and youtubes ruined gaming.
morons. this has nothing to do with puzzles or difficulty, it's the reality of graphical fidelity. yeah no shit you didn't need anything to find what's breakable in half life because the room had 3 boxes in it that all looked the same.
I should probably make a video game.
Why are you unable to understand that your average normie gamer is not the most aware?
I want a game to be advertized as "A game made not for gamers, but for people who love video games" where it's basically a Ps1/Ps2 game with modern graphics
Play Nomura games
FF Origin
KH
NEO TWEWY
Even FF7R to an extent
all are essentially that
Yakuza as well I'd say
I'm a big fan of Nomura and his work
I still have to play FF Origin, though
But I've already played all the rest of your list
somebody post that clip where the GOW devs use DSP as a measure of intelligence
not a clip but
>GDC
Frick GDC. That shit is the reason video games suck ass now more than anything else. Turning video games into some sort of educational, "lifelong learning" bullshit ruined the medium. Fricking hate conferences. Nothing good has ever come out of them.
GDC is great. It's moronic devs telling you, completely openly, about how moronic they are. Or suits openly admitting to how scummy they are. Nothing about the games that come out would change without GDC, we'd just have less insight (confirmed insight anyway) into the industry.
maybe you should get a job instead of whining online so you can realize conferences are just boring, there's nothing to hate
GDC sucks dick nowadays.
modern games are made with DSP in mind. that means if Gankertards are ever complaining about being stuck in a video game then they are worse than DSP.
So this is what DSP meant when he kept saying thanks for the views you worthless humans. He was talking about the gamedevs studying him on how to make a game not to hard for troglodytes.
How can one man be so based? I don't know much about DSP, but I do know he placed well in a SF2 tournament, jerked off on camera without punishment, and is apparently the peer model for gamer intelligence.
This. Got to go back to 1993 in order to get games that respect your intelligence.
You are in a room. The room has no lamps or candles, but there is a single window letting in some light. Exit to the EAST.
There is a medium-sized wooden CRATE on the ground. It looks breakable.
>
EAT CRATE
Don't know how to "EAT" something.
>
frick crate
>You don't have to use the word "frick" in this game
Don't know how to 'FRICK' something.
>GET YE FLASK
You cannot get ye flask
>GET YE FLASK
Kill jester
With one well placed blow you cleave her skull.
Sam waits.
Games back then didn't litter entire rooms with a shit load of pointless doodads and PhysX objects.
The original RE4 is a good example of proper world design: All the barrels and crates that can be broken stand out because they're basically the only non background object. Everything else is just like piles of rubble or broken machinery or whatever that obviously serves no gameplay purpose beyond fleshing out the environment or forming the outer boundaries of the level.
Nowadays environments are cluttered with so much shit to seem "realistic" and "lived in" game designers feel obligated to put an arrow over an item or a highlight of some sort on it, because otherwise it becomes extremely easy to miss items or interactible objects without it. You get overloaded with pointless decorative shit and your eyes glaze over from the information overload.
They don't need to worry about that anon. Think of it this way
>I go into the bathroom to brush my teeth
>oh wowzers there's so many objects in here hope my toothbrush is yellow
No lad I just go grab the toothbrush. I knew what my "objective" or "quest" was it doesn't matter how many useless clutter objects are in the room I go into.
This comparison is moronic because you live in this world and you are yourself in this scenario. In a video game you're controlling a separate entity that often has more complex goals than "brush my teeth" and whose goals might require steps more abstract than simply "grab toothbrush," on top of having knowledge of the in-game world that isn't always going to be 1:1 to what you as the player might have.
Honestly there's some features missing from some old games that can add to the experience. Played ultima underworld for the first time a while ago and it was genuinely fun to keep my own journal to write down all the info and objectives and secret spells and shit I'd find. Wouldn't want that from every game, but it'd be fun if there were some focused on that kind of thing.
>this crate is breakable.
it would tell you this in the instruction manual and leave it at that. at worse there would be 1 tutorial at the very start of the game.
you wouldn't have yellow tape or stupid shit like that on every crate.
Worst bait
nah, '03 needs to be spinning or bouncing.
>the average normie would be dumb enough to not realize you can break the crate for supplies until several hours in when they accidentally discover it
>the average game is also so full of clutter you have crates that can be broken, and similar crates that can't be broken (same shit with drawers) because devs can't into proper environmental design
2003 is the best version and anyone who says otherwise is a moron.
Video games should always prioritize being games more than anything else.
2013 and 2023 are both chores where the game demands you break that box, and the future one is unironically the worst because it prioritizes realism on top of breaking a massive rule of game design being ambiguity.
Not everyone is going to assume a crate is breakable or not. Plenty of crates in games are just there for decoration and can’t be broken, so it can be very easy for anyone to ignore them.
Also it’s more than likely that the future example is “selective” interactable crates because making every crate breakable with items inside would be far more work and taxing when you consider that it’d have to be done with every crate.
Visual fidelity is raised to the point that you can't identify what is interactable and what isn't anymore.
A smart developer would lead the player into interacting with an object "naturally" then let them realize that specific item is interactable from that point onwards, but intelligent design is hard so lol yellow.
>Visual fidelity is raised to the point that you can't identify what is interactable and what isn't anymore
Good art direction fixes this
But buying up assets from all over and contracting everything out makes this impossible
The Evil Within had not so obvious breakable boxes. Dont know if most people knew that with how niche the game is.
>that guy who ran around in circles for thirty minutes during a Half Life 2 Part One playtest singlehandedly ruined gaming
you've very clearly never been in a Tomb raider 3 thread if you don't understand why games aren't made in a way that "respects your intelligence". Honestly, some of you morons saying this shit probably think back to Ocarina of Time as the "good old days" of respecting intelligence, rather than Tomb Raider, and would probably get filtered by exactly what you're asking, but would posture that it's good to stroke your ego.
As someone who didn't have an N64 growing up, I played OOT recently. Can't believe how handholdy it is. It's utter shit. How is this shit the greatest game of all time?
>No
Yes
Tendie game, that's all it takes. Remember tendiegays are a cult.
>How is this shit the greatest game of all time?
Tendie nostalgia and statistics. See, the N64 sold well but had a modest library. So you get a large number of people who see the same few games - Mario, Zelda, Smash, GoldenEye - as "the best". In contrast, ask people who had a PS1 back then, and the answers will be a lot more varied.
Of course, pic related is the ACTUAL greatest game of all time, but lots of people don't know it because PC gaming used to be much more niche.
>The subtle aliasing
>Logo 20x as crisp as the rest of the picture
>background is blurry and stretched to frick
aw yeah.... peak SOVL
Baby's first 3D game. It's Halo for Nintendogays.
The yellow tape/paint shit is purely a Resident Evil design choice, nobody else does and yet everybody acts like every single goddamn game in 2023 does it. It's the least worst option out there and I have to wonder what runs through the minds of people when they see a crate with yellow tape on it in RE4, do you just stand there and gawk at it for ten minutes seething how you identified a breakable box? Do you look at the splash of yellow on the ladders and have a mental breakdown because your immersion is completely ruined?
Explain the autism against the yellow for me because as far as I'm aware it's just people being allergic to sensible game design.
Babying the player. The game/environment design should naturally lead you to the end goal.
The arrow is just fricking stupid, anyone that has enough braincells to get to that point in the game will obviously be able to tell where to go in a scene like that, most of the visual design in RE4R is just over the top since 90% of it can be figured out by just standing still, looking around and then following the more subtle clues that already exist in the level design, the rest can be solved using the GPS they added into the game, The designers just didn't seem to trust themselves or they were told to add the yellow tape by some higherup
The backlash is because by trying to realistically incorporate the visual cue into the game setting, presenting it as something that physically happened in the world (everything conveniently got messy splashes of paint on it at some point), it's actually doing the opposite and drawing more attention to the contrived gameyness of the setting. Many less dumb solutions are available.
You can do the same shit but make it look less moronic. Give the boxes an Illuminados stamp. Make the ladders into something like pic related where the sides are actually colored. The problem comes that it's super easy to come up with sensible solutions. The paint just looks like fricking shit.
The ganados using fiber glass ladders would fricking dumb
Its not boxes but Borderlands 3 does yellow paint for climbable surfaces.
Here is an example of what I'm talking about.
Good because it's not clear you could interact with this
Shit because it's so clear that it's interactive.
You would know if you played the game you can mantle onto about anything so you would know you could get on top of it, its only covered in paint because players might miss it otherwise.
To be fair the game has pretty poor level design
They don't do this because they assume you're stupid, they do it because the level designers create with no finesse, therefore someone has to go back and paint big yellow stains on everything.
Don't get me wrong, they do assume you're stupid, but this is not a sign of that. This is a sign of a thousands of developers working on a single project with no possibility of coordination.
they should've made a meta npc that yells about how he's been painting surfaces yellow because it's not clear they can be climbed, it would have been in character
Horizon games do it too, also yellow.
iirc Doom 2016 and Eternal also used yellow ledges and bars with green lights to point out what could be climbed up on, and this was constantly used to keep the player on the right path so they wouldn't have to check the map. Not that the levels were all that complex.
mad max did it
Mad max gets a pass because the enviroment is all the same
Hard to make anything stand out when its all rusted or dusty
Last of Us 1 was one of the first big games to do it. The way forward in every area is lit up by bright yellow stuff like caution tape and yellow ladders and all that shit.
all naughty dog games starting from uncharted
that's way better than how crapcom does it
Yes, but
claims "only" Capcom does it
Assassin's creed mirage has white paint jizz scattered all over walls/rocks because apparently the average player is too fricking moronic even when there's literally only 1 fricking path to climb up from.
It was present in older games too but it was way more subtle to the point of the overwhelming majority of players not even realizing it existed until they read about it on the web.
Don't forget...whatever the game is where you hunt robot animals and they made the protagonist look like that fat muck bang youtuber in the second game.
Elden Ring did it PERFECTLY using depth to determine player direction, down means deeper/farther into the dungeon.
Dead By Daylight also has yellow tarp on certain vault locations. Funnily enough the Resident Evil map has them everywhere.
>It's the least worst option out there
have a nice day
Even TLoU it so desperately tried to copy did better by just slightly altering the shading of intractable props.
even mirrors edge paints climbable shit red, and although they make it look nice and it gels well with the style, the game is so much better with that disabled
Everyone does it, but white paint for the "correct path" is more common than yellow for objects.
Already done better
Why would I break a crate for no reason
Why wouldn't you break a crate for no reason
>Why would I break a crate for no reason
Because previous games have established the convention that crates that look breakable are, and have something useful inside.
If you're going to constantly remind me I'm in a game, you may as well put the stupid yellow outline in, since you've already given up on immersion anyway. If anything, expecting the player to mindlessly follow conventions is just as disrespectful.
or are modern players stupider?
Its californian QA testers who have never played video games who get stuck in a circle for 30 minutes
Remember, it’s always about money.
The more moron mouthbreathers without self awareness buying your product the better.
They want the dumbest hood monkey to buy your game instead of new air jordans and make it go viral on worldstar tiktok like soulja boy did with Braid.
Amnesia The Bunker came out this year and basically looks like bottom-right if I'm not mistaken.
I think this is really only a phenomenon with cinematic games for dumbasses.
homosexuals who cry about this are the same people who fail the Sally Ann test.
There need to be clear indicators as to what is and is not interactive in the game world because shit is heavily abstracted - a very small number of objects in the game world are interactive, and the rest is static. Mashing the A button to try and interact with every inch of a room or attacking every wall in case there's some invisible trigger is extremely unintuitive and completely illogical.
It is extremely unintuitive to have a world where 99% of it effectively does not exist while the other 1% is interactive but practically hidden without significant indicators highlighting it. Even those "old PS1 games" like RE use explicit camera angles, little shiny twinkles, 3D models that stand out like a sore thumb to highlight shit you can interact with. New games don't have the luxury of forcing camera angles to make a player look at a bookshelf or painting or desk or pushable box or a big fricking glowing red/green button or a text box telling you every important object on the screen after you type 'look'. The belief that shit was like that in 2003 let alone 1983 is farcical.
Worse, thinking that obtuse design in some obscure past games was intentional let alone did something like "respect your intelligence" is unbelievably moronic.
That "far flung unthinkable future" already exists, and it exists because games are getting to the point where you can interact with absolutely everything in the game. Every wall, every rock, every tree, every trinket can be picked up, taken, destroyed, created, used. There aren't any necessary indicators as to what can be interacted with because everything can be interacted with, and the interaction lends towards actual intuitive experimentation as to what works with what.
I only play good games and good games are designed with interactivity and physics engines.
When games had completely pointless features like flushing a toilet or turning on a sync or picking up a shoe.
Games are interactive experiences.
If the game is not interactive in as many ways as possible it a bad game and only made to make money. Nobody on the dev team cared to make it a living world.
>It is extremely unintuitive to have a world where 99% of it effectively does not exist
exactly.
it seems like you are the one failing to understand other peoples perspectives; we arent complaining about how more idiots play games and need to be pandered to, we are complaining that devs are doing a bad job of designing games.
Baldur's Gate 3 is a game that respects your intelligence. Doesn't explain shit and just assumes you figure casting a fire spell on a patch of oil will set it on fire.
yeah but wokeBlack persontroonyslop so that game is bad anyway.
I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic.
You say that, but didn't a lot of people get stuck on Sonic 2 because they had to press up on the D-pad? Also, didn't valve simplify entire levels because their play tester couldn't figure out very obvious puzzles?
With Valve they were obviously designing the game for morons and with Sonic 2 it was more that vidya hadn't been around for long enough for players to learn how to properly interact with them yet.
Stop playing AAA slop.
Because in any game with a remotely consistent art style, especially more realistic games, it's not immediately obvious what you can and can't interact with any more.
Back in the day, the backgrounds and interactive objects were so blatantly obviously distinct from each other, you didn't need this shit.
You'd have to be fricking moronic to not understand this from a game design perspective where your prospective audience maybe didn't grow up with 30 years of videogames and wouldn't, at a glance, understand "videogamey" things that are obvious to people here.
People really think the yellow paint thing is new? The Stanley Parable parodied them back in 2013.
I'm an idiot for not getting that until now.
Aren't markings like that a standard way to mark a path in some professional environments?
No it isn't standard and it isn't normal.
BUT, autists that grew up on Half-life specifically would think it is normal and the parody is of half-life.
Actually I based it on VTMB
Based dev guy. I still assert half-life being a big inspiration on why that stuff took off. It makes sense in a place like Black Mesa. Or if you have vampire abilities.
Not a dev, I'm talking about what I based my near baseless assumption about floor markings on
Oh, then yeah my claim is equally as baseless.
Half-Life didn't do this shit. HL2 maybe, but the original Half-Life had good level design that naturally told you where to go.
HL2 then. The clean ultra sterile look with colored lines leading to departments. A ton of people copied everything about HL series.
HL2 put lambda sprays on everything you could interact with.
It's like Valve saw people playing Sven Co-Op spraying objectives for other players and thought it was a great idea.
oh wow, instead of yellow paint, it's just green glowing poison juice
That's an obstacle you moron, not something to follow.
Green means go though. I should walk towards it.
>Later writes "game is too hard >:(" in the feedback box
Same difference frickwad
They used to do it in hospitals to find different departments faster.
That was the joke though
Yes, we know. That's why the poster you replied to mentioned Stanley Parable PARODIED the idea. You know what a parody is, right?
Why are modern games so slow?
Compare ANY game you have played to this
I think a lot of the assumptions about players being braindead are really down to a lack of real communication from games early on, not simply on the "you can climb this ladder" level but on the level of "the things around you aren't just cool scenery, you play this game by looking at and interpreting them" fundamentals.
If you put any of those playtesters in an IRL pit with a ladder they needed to use to climb out, they could do it immediately. But the garbage they're playing nowadays teaches them to go into video games with a different set of assumptions regarding what they should even be looking for, what their role is. If you could just teach them that first, as in the moment the game starts, I bet there'd be fewer issues.
2003 needs more HUD elements. People used to complain all the time about HUDs breaking their immersion, and a surprising number of game developers actually listened to that message.
yeah I'm sure games in that far future will have blank flat rooms with only 1 box in them for you to break
>errrrm I'll simply be able to tell which box is interactable
no you won't and you'll be b***hing about the breakable box blending in with the room
>errrrm just make every asset in the room breakable then
then you'll be b***hing about having to break a dozen boxes to find 1 ammo pickup
graphics shouldn't be realistic to begin with
a cartoony game will still have interactable objects that stand out. will you still be b***hing about it then?
>no
so it's only a problem when graphics are realistic because you want them to be even more realistic?
I don't give a shit if my immersion is broken. I want my game to be fun and interesting, not immersive
You solve it with good game design. In The Witness, they explicitly avoided adding circular shapes anywhere in the entire game because they might be mistaken as line startpoints. For example there's a building with minecarts in it, but their wheels are weird polygonal shapes instead of circular wheels.
The way you solve this without moronic yellow paint is by not having interactable objects and non-interactable ones that look the same. A tutorial can introduce you to the differences and even moronic people will understand it.
Or you establish basic theming in the early levels.
>Oh no! My guy fell off that platform! Fortunately that stack of RED boxes broke my fall. Oh hey, look, ammo for my weapon, that's neat, I wonder if all boxes have stuff in them. Oh, hey, look, a BROWN box! I'mma smash that! Aw, darn, there's nothing in that one. So maybe only certain boxes have stuff in them. Oooh! Another RED box! Hey! It does have ammo in it! Sweet! Uh, oh! Enemies! Die enemies! BLAM BLAM BLAM! Oh no, they're shooting back! I better hide behind that stack of GREEN boxes! Oh no! The boxes are getting shot up! Die enemies! BLAM BLAM! Whew, that was a close one, and now I'm almost out of health. Oh, wait, there's health boosts in these shot up GREEN boxes! Okay, so certain colored boxes have certain things in them. Oh shit! That's a bigger enemy! Shit! Shit! No more ammo! No more RED boxes! What do I - hey, what's that GOLD box for? If I can just break it maybe-WOAH! A BIGGER GUN! DIE BIGGER ENEMY! BLAKOW! BLAKOW! Wow it makes a different sound and everything! Hey! I did it! My new gun killed the bigger enemy! Good thing I found that GOLD box! I'm gonna have to keep an eye out for those especially!
It's game design, not rocket science.
You’re not wrong but the average gamer would hate this and see it as bad game design because “how was I supposed to know”. You and I both know that the game literally tells them through gameplay but the average gamer doesn’t actually like video games, they just like dopamine.
Gamers are smarter (or at least better at basic pattern recognition) than most designers give them credit for. The problem is that lazy game devs have conditioned gamers to be handheld through everything because it makes game devs' job easier. They don't have to be creative or thoughtful in designing mechanics or levels because they can just draw a big fricking circle around whatever they need the player to do to lurch along to the next big fricking circle.
I'm sure they are but they'll still make you user play testers who have minimal gaming experience and demand you cater to that
NINTENDO ALWAYS WINS BAYBAY!!!!!
Japs, on average, are smarter than Americans. Japs make real games while Americans like to make stories pretending to be games.
But Capcom is a Japanese dev team.
Capcom is a JINO - Japanese In Name Only
They're the most Westernized of all the big Japanese devs by far.
They were dumb enough to take ESG money and actually hired black consultants as character and content designers. We have Kimberly instead of Guy thanks to these gorillas.
>ESG
I knew the israelites made crates glow. The west has fallen.Based Japs will save us
All of those cloths and ropes are still by its own nature indicators of what is and isnt interactable, just like the 2003 does so, without words, tell you why a box is interactable (its lighter than the rest of the background).
If this example was like the last panel, there would be no cloths or ropes or lids to indicate anything, just the fact that some obects are moveable and some are not, with no distinction what so ever.
Honestly, if Nintendo wanted to continue with their own established game design from the BOTW / TOTK games, those ropes should have been breakable and allowed access to the building materials inside.
>understands game design
>game still isn’t fun
many such cases
>no you won't
yes I will because I believe in myself 🙂
>anon imagines games "in the far future" still have us breaking boxes to get ammo pickups
grim
>be industrial worker in a big automated factory
>see yellow things standing out
>try to interact with them
>whole production stops
>everyone is screaming at me
>boss screams at me
>production stops a whole day
>they have to call the engineers who designed the machines to come here
>I make the company lose millions
wooooooow
Your emergency stop buttons are yellow?
Because picrel is the people designing your game
It's a domino effect we never expected
just make it lit slightly brighter than the environment. no paint, no shiny effect, no blinking, no prompt. That worked for old games (yes I know it wasn't always intentional due limitations on lighting dynamic objects, but it still worked.)
>brown and bloom in 2013
a few years off, but nice touch
You have no idea how fricking moronic people are.
Games should not cater to morons.
morons have money, you don't. Devs don't work for free.
Games have always, and will always be, the hobby that caters to morons. What do you think pong was about? Catering to intellectuals who wanted to be challenged? No you stupid b***h, think.
Pong requires 100x more skill than any AAA game made in the past 10 years.
>move up or down
>more skill than even a walking simulator
This is your brain after suffering severe brain damage with an inability to comprehend 3D space.
Do you hear yourself? Walking simulators literally play themselves. Pong requires actual input and its difficulty is determined entirely by the skill of your opponent.
>Pong
wrong
I think you mean tetris dumbass not fricking pong.
For back then it was
>"Games should respect my intelligence."
Respect is earned. You have to prove you deserve it first.
finally started playing through the Half Life series recently. Valve did a great job with this sort of thing, for the most part. Interactable doors typically have a different look to them. Interactable valves are bright frickin red, which stands out but still makes sense in the environment unlike yellow paint-splattered ladders. It’s not bad.
A lot of games use lighting effects to guide the player, like by highlighting the door you’re supposed to go through with a sunbeam or something. I’ve always liked that.
I UTTERLY HATE when games have characters who will tell you the solution to a puzzle after 6 seconds
Your seem to be making an assumption on what their job is. Their job is to make a product for the widest audience with the lowest commond denominator.
inteligent people don't play video games
>that 1 non-red explosive crate at the end of a bunker hallway in The Darkness when you're in ww2 hell
It was a different time back then.
ENTER
Too much visual clutter as a result of pushing for graphical fidelity coupled with a fear of losing the player's attention for even a moment. If the game's "too hard" or "too confusing" the average player will turn to their phone or let their attention wander, which makes it even less likely that they'll continue playing the game because they'll lose focus. If the experience instead is a smooth ride without any rough edges, so the player can turn off their brain, they're actually more likely to stay with the game, even if the game is less fun. Adding these kinds of neon signs will also serve to make it easier for a player to get back into a game after a break or after having been distracted. It's like a laser pointer for a cat
Making a game that's good enough to make the player actively want to engage with it from start to finish, to a point where they remove themselves from distractions (such as phones), is way fricking harder. And when all that matters is ROI, it's not the sensible strategy
>parasiteeve.png
As game assets become higher quality, they need to make interactable elements in the game world stand out or else players will get frustrated. You can't just have a box in a corner of a room with one texture, games have dozens of elements in a room at once. I remember playing HL2 and getting pissed that certain doors would open and others were just window dressing. Yellow paints lets players spend less time UNF-ing the walls like we're still playing Doom and find the shit in the environment that's important to the game.
casuals are ruining gaming
FFXV's highest difficulty, Normal, is a complete fricking joke because the director wanted to pander to casuals
https://novacrystallis.com/2014/09/with-final-fantasy-xv-i-do-want-to-make-it-more-casual-says-tabata/
If a game doesn't sell eleventy billion copies it's deemed a failure due to how overly expensive companies made game development so they need to make sure that actual morons can play and have fun.
The reason they have to do this at all is because MUH GRAFIX. Set pieces are supposed to appear very realistic, but in terms of production and scope, not everything in the environment can be interacted with. Leaving only essential elements in a game now, would make it feel empty.
All in all theres no right or wrong in this.
Gaming isnt a niche corner done as a hobby by a niche group of tech savvy nerds. Its turned into a huge volume market thats aimed at the largest group with largest cash, the average. That means they dont want their customers, like that 50iq roastie friend of yours from college who picked up this game because "I saw it on instagram tee-hee" to be frusturated and shit up the social media. Niche group of nerds dont have the volume to make investors drop big chunks of money into making actual games. Yes, it sucks. It's what it is. No point arguing.
In their defense the average person is a fricking moron
>Add short and simple message saying "we need to enter the facility and destroy ALL THE CRATES
>Zoomers: "what was I doing again?" "where are they crates? *checks the same place 10 times" "I don't know what crates look like"
Streamers are not the average player, anon. Which is the entire problem, games are being made to appease the streamer crowd because it's free advertising.
The average player is dumber than the average streamer. You have no fricking clue what you’re talking about. The average player simply cannot play a video game without a million markers and a companion to tell you exactly what to do. You seriously haven’t exposed yourself to enough average gamers if you think they’re not window licker tier morons.
Not just a zoomer thing, it's become the norm even since the main audience for AAA games became stoned out guys tapping away on their controllers from their couch
(Western) game devs unironically study people like DSP to decide how to pace games and design environments and objects. I can't find the picture or article for it but there was a presentation done by I assume the God of War devs and they literally showed footage of DSP's GoW Let's Play as they talked about their game design philosophy.
As if that's not bad enough, play testing is never done by people whom actually play a lot of video games (outside of in-house testing done by the devs themselves). It's a random assortment of inner city blacks and middle aged bar hoppers. Since most big budget release titles aren't passion projects, but simply a business venture, they have to be as accessible as possible. They need to be designed so a literal 60+ year old boomer who's never held a controller in their life can figure out what to do.
It's been posted homie
EVERYONE WHO IS DEFENDING THIS, PLEASE WATCH THIS CLIP
The places that yellow paint are splattered around are fricking indefensible. These are ladders at the end of a very narrow walkway. You CAN NOT miss them.
CRAPCOM IS BACK BAYBAY!
didn't give a shit before, don't give a shit now
good games can't be criticized anymore? what board am I on
RE4 is a 10/10
REmake 4 took it to an 11/10.
fricking amazing game nothing else can cum close
Holy shit you are delusional
not him, but I actually prefer the remake.
Society has fallen and cities will burn.
Who gives a frick? Still the best game made in the past 5 years.
you don't play many games huh
It may not be the best game but it’s definitely a great game and a great remake.
You would be shocked by how many people would actually miss them and still probably miss them. What you don’t know is that the average STEAM user only plays 5 games a year. Console gamers are likely even lower than that. The average moron has no meaningful experience or frame of reference to draw on, so these studios make sure to make it as brain dead as possible for these people as they make up the majority.
>didn't mark the ledge where you drop down with yellow paint
They're showing unimaginable levels of restraint and subtlety
I can think of a few reasons for it, first and most obvious is the ladder is probably reused multiple times and theres no point in retexturing it for the few times its obvious.
The yellow paint though is a bit excessive, the same concept has been handled better in other games through the use of lighting, different textures, or the other various ways. The paint just looks ugly IMO
that's a pretty good summary of modern 2020 game design, every aspect of the cancer is there. To think this is the kind of game that gets praised nowadays, and on Ganker no less
Why even bother with the paint? Everything is contextual in the first place.
You have no freedom to make a mistake in the first place.
Holy frick these games are made for literal morons.
Most intelligent mobile game playtester
>we need to make the holes bigger so any shape can fit inside
Watching this movie makes me sick, and not in a metaphorical way, like I literally feel ill watching this movie and I have no clue why.
>Nintendo: floating boxes with "?"
>Metal Gear: enemies drop spinning ammo boxes when they die
>Souls/Elder Ring: comically large treasure chests
>Resident Evil:Yellow paint in crates and ladders
Guess which one of these is an object you literally have to interact with. I'll wait.
focus testing
imagine if Grunty Industries had gotten focus tested before release. the game would have never come out
because it's what they're taught
it's what they see when they watch GDC game design videos
it's what they experience when they playtest with the lowest common denominator
imo game design is an intuitive process that can't be taught, you're either a person who can understand it by dissecting it in other games you play then replicating it in your own projects or you aren't.
you can't become a quality game designer by going to school and trying to learn about it in an academic setting. you can get good at thinking out the process for gameplay systems there, but not game design.
I agree up to a point but I think getting other developer's perspective on game design can greatly help develop your own. It's just that the kind of people talking at GDC are usually making soulless products so the people they inspire do the same and you end up with passionless design inspiring even more passionless design.
it depends on who you speak to but I agree.
i've collaborated with other developers before and its helped on occasion.
the problem is actually finding people that have any real development insight to offer is difficult.
in my experience within creative fields the incompetent ones tend to be the loudest in the room.
the point of that image is to show off that the 2003 crate is the good one. instead of using a shader to highlight the object or slathering it with garish paint that fricks with the artstyle, it just uses contrast.
nevermind. i took another look at the image and i'm wrong.
2003 is the actual 'best' one there, though. the original resident evil 4 is a good example of using contrast to make things like destructible crates stand out.
if you don't have anything to make them seem different to the environment at all, you're going to end up with 30% of the people buying your game complaining in forums about how they have no resources.
This is the truth. Good design is something you learn from playing an excessive amount of games. Most devs don’t even play games anymore.
I don't understand why you morons don't get it, if you've played any sort of online game or god forbid watched a normie stream anything in the last decade you'd see just how ridiculously stupid the average person is. You also have to understand that since the early 2000s the gaming industry has been moving more and more towards the mainstream so the average player skill level is only dropping.
While you and I still play video games, video games are not made for us, they are made for people who have fallen off the lowest rung of the skill ladder. It will not get better until gaming becomes "uncool" again.
We understand. We are being snooty arbiters and saying we expect better and deserve better. Ganker culture exists on the precipice that Rome chucked infants off of.
The Half-Life dev commentary track has done untold amounts of damage to game design. There is a reason one of the only new studios to reach the great heights of the "next big studio" is FromSoft which mostly ignores all the design philosophies of mainstream gaming. The people on social media saying 'uh yellow paint is actually good game design' are the same people who were dunking on Elden Ring's UI being too clunky and not modern minimalist enough.
>b-but what about the guiding grace
a subtle yellow light that points in a very general direction within a massive open world and appears sparsely throughout the game versus yellow paint that is splattered four times in seconds of gameplay within a narrow hallway in a mostly linear action game
Imagine if people thought this way of literature, movies, or even other interactive media like board games. "The best way to design things is to appeal exclusively to a generalized focus group made up of average non-fans, this is art"
When you look at the grand scheme timeline of gaming the Souls formula is the only evolution in gaming we've had that isn't baseline technology in like 20 years.
>Greg Coomer
Because no one went to game design school
And the ones who did just learned Reagan wanted to use arcade games to make boys of all races into super soldiers (which was a bad thing).
Thats fricking stupid. Have you ever had to "break a crate" in real life? Why would that occur to you?
Game logic is not the same as real world logic. Unless the game explicitly breaks the chain by not only respecting your intelligence, but also providing an environment were using your brain is rewarding, highlighting the dumb shit you're supposed to do is reasonable. Then you don't waste your time.
>Have you ever had to "break a crate" in real life?
Yeah when I fricked your mom on top of one
Rude!
I used to do the truck shipments when I worked in a pharmacy and it came on pallets so we had break the crate missions weekly.
The pallets never needed to glow yellow, we knew what our objective was that night so we could navigate to the box cutters and the pallets without much confusion. Rarely did I see someone have to noclip to our position.
>Game logic is not the same as real world logic
building up game logic through playing games is a fun part of engaging with video games. We all know what this means. It's cool that it is just a collective part of our gaming knowledge and we don't need it explained beyond a barrel just being red (or at this point, any cylinder that is glowing like the purple stuff at the beginning of Baldur's Gate 3)
>Baldur's Gate 3
people have kind of just glossed over how BG3 doesn't hold your hand AT ALL. It tells you a couple of things you can do at the beginning of the game and then never again. You can miss like 80% of the game's interactions if you just beelined through the main story quest. Imagine if they railroaded you because playtesters didn't know to go to the goblin camp in act 1 and how fricking lame that would be.
They didn't have to teach much, core mechanics are all the player has to be directly taught if they're not a mobile market tard tester. They can pick up the environmental cues and patterns beyond that.
Like in doom the developers don't have to explain in detail what every monster is (even if the manual does). Instead you fight a monster and get a general idea of what to expect from them going forward.
That is because hovering your mouse over anything puts 1000 words on screen like having a game manual open at all times.
It is CONSTANTLY feeding you information but in a good way. The autism of slowing down to read everything gives you time to arrange it nicely in your head and it does set up situations nicely.
BG3 and fromsoft games kinda show that the excessive handholding is not a requirement of a modern AAA game.
Why shouldn't the crate standout from the environment to signify it is interactive in the 2003 example?
If you've ever done playtesting you'll learn real fast most people have the mindset of babies when it comes to leaning new gameplay. They have to be directed around like sheep or they get angry and say the game is confusing/boring without a beepy beepy sparkle GOOD JOB badge
it's the same problem there is with wide audience movies these days. Either you have a vision because you like games / movies and you go through with it, or you don't so you have to rely on feedback for every decision, and the problem with that is that number one your audience simply isn't as aware of what it wants as it thinks it is, and number two, what the way they give feedback from small portion of a game doesn't account for the overall experience you get through playing a game properly or enjoying a movie in its entirety.
The mobile game aesthetic is made for the moronic and the bobble head outsourced 3D stock models make me wish I was never born
They just design games for their audience.
Zoomers can barely understand how computers work. They grew up playing casual mobile shit and would get filtered if every game didn't hold their hand.
playtesters when no yellow paint:
Playing Skyrim with survival mode and no HUD is seriously one of the best experiences in gaming.
where the FRICK am I supposed to go guys?
Try walking backwards
>2013 was 10 years ago
>2017 was 9 years ago
Feel old yet?
>Mario Galaxy released 25 years ago
>we're now closer to 2024 than we are 1984
not even going to look it up but there is no way this is true, I would've been 4
>2013
ah, i miss that era
Why can I not flirt with the cube
you could if you weren't a coward
I know you Black folk might be too young to remember but I was here on the day Skyrim released. The amount of people that couldn't figure out the Golden Claw door near the start of the game was hilarious.
Im giving them some slack because after that they NEVER use that method of puzzle solving again
Because, like all pop-media, its designed to appeal to the broadest demos of moron possible. That means (You) 🙂
because the regular human have zero intelligence. Watch any Valve's developer commentary in youtube
I walked into a Walmart the other day and I saw various colored duct tapes on the shelves and I started fuming with rage.
>start new game
>immediately try to bunnyhop and when i get a melee weapon i hit everything and try to break it
it's a shame you can't do that i a lot of games now, you'd think with all the new tech everything should be breakable and you'd be able to at least put a dent in a wall with a melee weapon
>you'd think with all the new tech everything should be breakable
Anon, it's not a technical issue. Every game could have every wall and object to be destructible, the question is, why? What is the purpose of destroying objects in the game beyond wasting development time in QA
because it's fun and makes the world feel alive, there doesn't really have to be any other reason
same as going fast or crouch-jumping or nade jumping, it's a game after all
>because it's fun
Games have destructible objects for a reason, not because "it's fun".
Your fun happens because someone put actual thought over what the game you play is about, it's not some random thing.
what reason? hiding medpacks? smashing things is fun
See? It's not hard to think of a reason to destroy objects in a game, what I'm trying to tell you is there's no point of making every single object in the game destructible unless it's the whole point of the game (aka minecraft or teardown)
That's a very arcadey view of game design. Not every choice you make has to feed into the gameplay, you can add shit just for flavor.
the reason is my monkey brain wants to smash with club in hand
Secret passages
Secret weapon cache
Alt. level
Part of a puzzle (if it's action-adventure)
Design-wise it's not that hard to have some level geometry be destructible and other level geometry be static when you need it that way.
yeah and that's why kids prefer empty boxes to the toys inside the box
>Play 30 years old game with neat features
>Man the futur is going to be awesome when every games do that
>They never did
A couple did
>play old game
>if I can find a way to jump over the wall I can
>play new game
>if I can find a way to jump over the wall there's actually an invisible wall extending it
That's something I'll give cyberpunk credit for, there aren't many invisible walls in the game and the climbing works on almost any surface.
it's no longer art, it's israelite-capitalist propaganda, obviously. pay attention.
because you have to design games for 60IQ troglodytes to catch the most fish
This is a problem because graphical detail has wildly outpaced mechanical detail. These are 90s mechanics dressed up and it's embarrassing.
don't put anything in your games play spaces unless it is intractable. problem solved. All ledges should be climbable, all boxes breakable.
>intractable
shit
This just reminded me of the GoW guy (forgot his name) who claimed to love Metroid only to be filtered by fricking breakable blocks in Metroid Dread which the game taught you about at the very start of the game.
playtesters and dumbfrick suits who want to ensure the most customers possible
>no yellow markers telling you where to go and where to put key items
AAAAAAAAAAAAAA WHERE DO I GOOOOOOOOOOOO?????? HOW CAN PEOPLE PLAY THIS GAME?????? THIS IS GARBAGE AM I SUPPOSED TO JUST RUN AROUND THE MANSION?????? IM LITERALLY ON THE VERGE OF QUITTING THIS GAME
An actual explanation:
The first major Game Design degree offered in the US was by Worcester Polytechnic Institute in 2004.
Before that, getting a job at a game studio required a Computer Science, Programming, or Engineering degree.
A game design degree is two years of downloading Unity and Blender, then watching youtube tutorials.
For those who remember how things used to be.
the 1997 one often came with a physical book that said you should try breaking crates because they contain ammo and health
Pre-00s gaming just assumed you would bother to experiment. Now you're railroaded so tightly that starting a new game feels agonizing
How about this? The very first loot box is impossible to miss, but afterwards you're expected to remember that boxes can be looted.
Good, but morons will still complain which is the problem.
Ganker would just b***h about unskippable tutorials or something
Ganker will b***h about everything. "Don't pander to morons" doesn't just mean normalgays and casuals.
I liked it more when you discovered features of the game by itself and played it at your own peace. Those times are over
Since big projects have so many people working on them they have to work in a company like environmente, less creativity, a lot of charts and making sure the product is undestandable and tasteless as possible
>bottom right
yeah fill the whole game with breakable objects and have like 1% of them have the item you need in there, that's a good idea.
Is detective vision in 2013 too
They're not, visual noise has been the true enemy all along and we can thanks graphics prostitutes for that. You can't just fill a room with props, dynamic lighting and shadows, 4k textures and fancy shaders without absolutely killing the ability to spot things you can interact with. It's like we applied pixel hunting of old adventure games to fricking everything.
Quite funny how game design quality went down as degrees in that field became more common
Almost like its a complete joke