Game Design Questions (Poll)

[JulianSull]

1) Do you enjoy bonus objectives that ask you to find a certain amount of hidden items? For example, in Kingdom Hearts 1 you are tasked to find all 101 puppies throughout the game and there is an item you cannot get unless you get them all. Would you enjoy searching for all of them?

2) See above

3) Super Easy: Setting stuff to lowest difficulty and just blowing things up. Really only for fun and not for challenge.

Easy: Mario Kart and the like. Things that you can pick up and play. Probably not going to fail and if you do, you'll probably get it the next time.

Normal: This game on normal difficulty. Also, most Final Fantasy's are this difficult. For the most part, it's a fair challenge and every so often, there are things that slow you down, but you know you can do it.

Challenging: If you have ever played Cathrine, this is what I'm talking about (on Normal). It might start easy, but by the end it'll take some time to figure out how to do it. You might need strategy guides. Metal Gear Solid in some places hits this and some of the optional bosses in Final Fantasy are like this.

Extreme: If you have ever played Person, this is the difficulty I'm talking about. Also, Penance from FFX International, Ozma from FFIX, Cathrine on max difficulty, and

are good examples of this. Anything that when you see or hear about it you wonder "How is that even possible?"

[Lanceor]

I chose the most appropriate choice regarding multiple endings, but if truth be told I prefer open ended games where there's plenty to do after the "ending", such as levelling up, carving out an empire, decorating a house... TES definitely falls into this category, and to a certain extent, Diablo and their clones do too.

[Lady_Nerevar]

1) Yes, but only on the side. I don't usually go out of my way to do them, and prefer when they have some sort of tangible ingame benefit.

2) Yes, I love multiple endings.

3) Anything from Super Easy to Challenging. Sometimes I just want to kill things, other times I like to think. I don't find uber-hard, next to impossible puzzles any fun, though.

[JulianSull]

I chose the most appropriate choice regarding multiple endings, but if truth be told I prefer open ended games where there's plenty to do after the "ending", such as levelling up, carving out an empire, decorating a house... TES definitely falls into this category, and to a certain extent, Diablo and their clones do too.

Technically TES still has an ending to it. Once you beat the game, you can keep playing, but the main storyline is over and all that is left are side quests.

The thing that I find sort of shocking is the number of people that like Challenging. I guess a majority of the people who play TES are hardcore gamers. That in it of itself isn't too shocking as it is a massive game, but the idea of a truly difficult challenge being something people in TES want is. For the most part, I hear a lot of people use cheats after a few deaths, and honestly, if you think Oblivion on normal difficulty at any point is "Challenging" in this respect, you may have voted very wrong =).

I'm glad no one really enjoys the collect them all stuff. I find it a massive pain and I'm glad most people agree.

Very interesting and very helpful.

Julian

[Ed-VO]

This was a little difficult as none of the answers fit my style.

1. No. Never. Nada. pointless as achievements for console weenies.

2. I enjoy multiple endings only if they are engendered by alternate choices within the game that i can replay (even if it means starting completely over.)

3. Very difficult question. I oppose increased difficulty that simply adds hitpoints to enemies. Added enemies, if logically placed and not just dropped in as mobs, are fine. Generally I would prefer increased enemy AI and numbers, along with more difficult puzzles or more stages to quests for added difficulty.

I am totally against respawn points and automatic save points of any kind. Either unrestricted manual saves or I don't play.

[JulianSull]

This was a little difficult as none of the answers fit my style.

1. No. Never. Nada. pointless as achievements for console weenies.

2. I enjoy multiple endings only if they are engendered by alternate choices within the game that i can replay (even if it means starting completely over.)

3. Very difficult question. I oppose increased difficulty that simply adds hitpoints to enemies. Added enemies, if logically placed and not just dropped in as mobs, are fine. Generally I would prefer increased enemy AI and numbers, along with more difficult puzzles or more stages to quests for added difficulty.

I am totally against respawn points and automatic save points of any kind. Either unrestricted manual saves or I don't play.

That last one is of course assuming good game design principles are used =). Health SHOULD (if they know how to design games) are only there to ensure there is enough time so that if a team/person isn't prepared for the boss/enemies, they can't simply just get lucky or kill them before they die. If it's just there to make it longer, that's not using health correctly. Increase in difficulty should be done with changes in enemy AI, slight health increases, new spells/weapons, increased enemy count, better enemy placement and quicker enemy movement/more usage of mean spells/attacks. Insane health increases is just stupid.

As for that last bit, you hate Autosaves? Or you hate games that ONLY have autosaves?

Edited August 31, 2011 by JulianSull