🎉 Celebrating 25 Years of GameDev.net! 🎉
Not many can claim 25 years on the Internet! Join us in celebrating this milestone. Learn more about our history, and thank you for being a part of our community!
Whats wrong with Walk-Throughs
Author
Whats with the idea that walk throughs are bad. Don''t they allow the player to get the most out of a game?
They wouldn''t exists if games did not need them so who''s fault are they that they exist. Would you be will to take the ego dent becuase your game needed one. Really its your fault isn''t it :-).
Well thats my thought anyhow.
We are their,
"Children of the Free"
I was going to say what you just implied a bit later along your post. The need for a walkthrough is more often than not a sign of bad problem/puzzle design. At some point while playing The Dig, which for the most part I quite enjoyed, I became quite frustrated as I ran out of ideas. While I do like these sorts of games such experiences are far from uncommon. Someone more brave than I would state that games to which walkthroughs may be applied have some kind of fundamental deficiency, but I''d rather not say anything definitive about this point.
Walkthroughs are sometimes a signal of bad game design, this implies mostly to adventure games. Sometimes you get stuck on a real hard problem, you spend hours trying to solve it, then read the walkthrough and go DOH! that''s so stupid.
A friend of mine was playing Discworld2 and got abit tired of it. I encouraged him to use a walkthrough to just run through the game for an hour, because the dialogue and story is still worth it. If you stopped playing a good adventure game, I say use a walkthrough and get through it!
A friend of mine was playing Discworld2 and got abit tired of it. I encouraged him to use a walkthrough to just run through the game for an hour, because the dialogue and story is still worth it. If you stopped playing a good adventure game, I say use a walkthrough and get through it!
I view walkthroughs as results of two things (aside from bad design):
1 Games are designed for hardcoregamers/reviewers but the actual customers are from all walks of life. Working as a gamedeveloper as well as raising two kids give me limited time to play. A walktrough is a nice way to see the story unfold despite getting stuck.
2 Users are creative. they want to do things with their games, hack it, edit maps, write walk´throughs etc. Even if a walkthrough isn''t really needed the users will make one anyhow just to out of creativity/thirst for fame.
1 Games are designed for hardcoregamers/reviewers but the actual customers are from all walks of life. Working as a gamedeveloper as well as raising two kids give me limited time to play. A walktrough is a nice way to see the story unfold despite getting stuck.
2 Users are creative. they want to do things with their games, hack it, edit maps, write walk´throughs etc. Even if a walkthrough isn''t really needed the users will make one anyhow just to out of creativity/thirst for fame.
Author
So its not unreasonable to say that a walk-though ruins a game because really it comes down to the author of the walk-through to make it add to a game. In fact, would be unreasonable for the makers of a game to make an offical walk-through for their games?
There''s one thing that is absolute though, and that is that if a player wants a walk-through then they should (and will probably) will get one.
Could a walk-throughs be designed to add to the game? I mean things like the "fun factor" and the like.
We are their,
"Children of the Free"
There''s one thing that is absolute though, and that is that if a player wants a walk-through then they should (and will probably) will get one.
Could a walk-throughs be designed to add to the game? I mean things like the "fun factor" and the like.
We are their,
"Children of the Free"
OK,
a walkthrough is usefull when you play games like Monkey Island or Indiana Jones which use really wicked puzzles(but very smart) - especially Monkey Island.
Now i hate walkthroughs about games like Tomb Raider.
I mean the game is based on your skill.There aren''t any hard puzzles.
And about using walkthroughs:
1)If the game is good
If you get stuck in a hard puzzle of a really good game,just read the solution of only this puzzle.Then try again yourself to find the rest of the puzzles.And don''t give up easily!
I''ve spended 2 months in Monkey Island 3(it''s not called "3" actually
) trying to solve a puzzle and finally i did it(i saw it in a dream actually - you believe it or not!)
If you just take the walkthrough and finish the game in two days then it doesn''t worth it.You will just ruin the game!
2)If the game is bad
Don''t play it!
Voodoo4
a walkthrough is usefull when you play games like Monkey Island or Indiana Jones which use really wicked puzzles(but very smart) - especially Monkey Island.
Now i hate walkthroughs about games like Tomb Raider.
I mean the game is based on your skill.There aren''t any hard puzzles.
And about using walkthroughs:
1)If the game is good
If you get stuck in a hard puzzle of a really good game,just read the solution of only this puzzle.Then try again yourself to find the rest of the puzzles.And don''t give up easily!
I''ve spended 2 months in Monkey Island 3(it''s not called "3" actually
) trying to solve a puzzle and finally i did it(i saw it in a dream actually - you believe it or not!)If you just take the walkthrough and finish the game in two days then it doesn''t worth it.You will just ruin the game!
2)If the game is bad
Don''t play it!
Voodoo4
Author
Personally i wish that if a game is designed with puzzels in it then it should warn the consumer prior. To me its like putting sultanas in bran without tell the buyer. Sometimes its ok but sometimes i will just throw the game in the bin regardless of how much i bought it for.
Puzzels can ruin a game.
We are their,
"Children of the Free"
Puzzels can ruin a game.
We are their,
"Children of the Free"
Hmm, this is a broader topic than it first looks.
I too, chronos, got stuck on The Dig and got the official game guide. Ironically it didn't help at all. My problem was I couldn't get the lightbridges up, but didn't realize you had to hold down the buttons, not just click {a bit of a menatl jump for someone who had only played Sierra's adventures.}
Anyways, since it was writen by someone on the development team, it had lots more in it than the typical game guide. Preliminary artwoek, team-member's profiles, lots of cool stuff. It was more than a plucky walk through {especially since it didn't give everything away, instead leaving some steps out until the end of a section.}
Also, some walkthoughs help players get around glitches in the game {one's that never get patched.} I had this problem in Twinsen's Adventure {LBA} where I talked to two characters out of sequence. I couldn't get a key to continue the game. Without refering to a walk-through, I would have never realized what I had done wrong.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Back on topic:
Some guides are just spoilers for games. These are meant for the same type of players that use every cheat code and easter egg constantly and never play a game that doesn't have them. I find them quite deemening, to both serious players and the developers. The game looks like just a pile of code, graphics, sound, and text any 1337 h4x0r n3w813 could patch together in an evening.
Others are testaments to how poorly developed a game actually is. These games feel like they never went through a true beta-test cycle. Its as if only bug reports were taken, not any player comments, ideas, or suggestions. Perhaps they are that bad, but the walk-through doesn't help, often written as "Place item A in hole B. Door C will open now. Type ctrl-{I-A-M-M-A-G-O-D} to prevent being killed by the mosquito."
To paraphrase, "don't judge a game by its book."
Edited by - SonicSilcion on July 9, 2000 3:29:02 PM
I too, chronos, got stuck on The Dig and got the official game guide. Ironically it didn't help at all. My problem was I couldn't get the lightbridges up, but didn't realize you had to hold down the buttons, not just click {a bit of a menatl jump for someone who had only played Sierra's adventures.}
Anyways, since it was writen by someone on the development team, it had lots more in it than the typical game guide. Preliminary artwoek, team-member's profiles, lots of cool stuff. It was more than a plucky walk through {especially since it didn't give everything away, instead leaving some steps out until the end of a section.}
Also, some walkthoughs help players get around glitches in the game {one's that never get patched.} I had this problem in Twinsen's Adventure {LBA} where I talked to two characters out of sequence. I couldn't get a key to continue the game. Without refering to a walk-through, I would have never realized what I had done wrong.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Back on topic:
Some guides are just spoilers for games. These are meant for the same type of players that use every cheat code and easter egg constantly and never play a game that doesn't have them. I find them quite deemening, to both serious players and the developers. The game looks like just a pile of code, graphics, sound, and text any 1337 h4x0r n3w813 could patch together in an evening.
Others are testaments to how poorly developed a game actually is. These games feel like they never went through a true beta-test cycle. Its as if only bug reports were taken, not any player comments, ideas, or suggestions. Perhaps they are that bad, but the walk-through doesn't help, often written as "Place item A in hole B. Door C will open now. Type ctrl-{I-A-M-M-A-G-O-D} to prevent being killed by the mosquito."
To paraphrase, "don't judge a game by its book."
Edited by - SonicSilcion on July 9, 2000 3:29:02 PM
i don''t mind spoilers too much as long as I''ve completed or at least gotten all that I want out of the game. Once I''ve experienced the game thouroughly I don''t mind using cheats to find all the little details, but if the game''s easter eggs are not redicuously obscure then I''d rather not use the cheats.
Author
There reasons why i hate puzzles are:
1. They are placed in a game to artifically extend the length of a game (this is done way to often).
2. The puzzle does not fit it with the game. The player should never think that the game designer chucked the puzzle in, instead they should think that the wizard made it to protect his belongings... and the like.
3. They cause unnecessary halts in the game progression. The game designer should have a reason for putting the puzzle in, it shouldn't be a case of "well i think i'd be cool to chuck one in here".
4. The player should never actually realise they are solving a puzzle. This some what relates to Point 1.
I love Game Design and it loves me back.
Edited by - Paul Cunningham on July 3, 2000 12:14:38 PM
1. They are placed in a game to artifically extend the length of a game (this is done way to often).
2. The puzzle does not fit it with the game. The player should never think that the game designer chucked the puzzle in, instead they should think that the wizard made it to protect his belongings... and the like.
3. They cause unnecessary halts in the game progression. The game designer should have a reason for putting the puzzle in, it shouldn't be a case of "well i think i'd be cool to chuck one in here".
4. The player should never actually realise they are solving a puzzle. This some what relates to Point 1.
I love Game Design and it loves me back.
Edited by - Paul Cunningham on July 3, 2000 12:14:38 PM
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
