Game "Cheating" to help bad players...

[jcottier]

Hello,

I am currently balancing my new game FashionRush:
http://forums.indiegamer.com/showthread.php?t=11623

It is a casual game in the time management genre. Obviously I want my game to be as playable as possible for everyone. I don’t want to create level of difficulties. Too much testing to do , more unneeded front-end and I don't like them in general (witch one do you select??).

So, I wanted the levels to be playable and enjoyable by "Hardcore time management player" 8) but also to any "beginners".

I think I did find a nice way to solve this dilemma: the game is cheating (At least up to the middle of the game).
I keep trace when the player is loosing a level and restart it. After the 3rd try (second restart) I am starting to add more time.

I hope this will be subtle enough so the player doesn’t notice it. This way I can keep the level a little bit challenging for experience people. But also, bad players will not find the task impossible and give up the game.

What do you think of this? Have you try something similar before?

Thanks

JC

[oNyx]

One of the names for that is "adaptive difficulty". It's a somewhat controversial topic, which was also mentioned in the "Most Hated Game Feature(s)" thread.

[Qitsune]

The adaptative difficulty could be a on/off switch in the menu, but then it's a whole different set of testing to do I guess.

[jcottier]

I think it is good solution for the market I am targeting. There is a lot of game out there and people don't spend ages to beat levels anymore.
The game should be rewarding all the time. Not a punishment.

When people play a hard level and they can't succed it, they don't say: "I am bad at this game" but they say "this game is c..p".

JC

[tagged]

I was planning on having a very adaptive difficulty system in my game, but I decided against it in the end.. I do still however have a little system that when you lose the game it will bring up a menu to select a few 'cheats' that can help you the second time around. You can select them all or none of them, up to the user entirely, I just thought it was a good idea for those that really did need the help. Anyone who dislikes it can easily ignore it :)

[oNyx]

>The game should be rewarding all the time. Not a punishment.

How rewarding is it if the game lets you win? How rewarding is a reward if you're fully aware that you don't deserve it?

Ever completed a game with cheats? It's as rewarding as that.

Even "noclip"-ping through a single puzzle in the middle can totally ruin it for me. It's that nasty extra "but". I completed the game, but...

>When people play a hard level and they can't succed it, they don't say: "I am
>bad at this game" but they say "this game is c..p".

Some kids with ADD are like that, but most people can accept their failure if there are no excuses. Such as frame drops at a critical spot, bad/silly collision detection, bugs/glitches, unresponsive controls etc.

From my POV adaptive difficulty removes the most important aspect of games. It's those magical "just one more try" moments, which often sum up nicely. Heh.

[princec]

Adaptive difficulty works nicely in Ultratron. Instead of making the game easier, it only makes it harder though. It provides good players a challenging game much much sooner than crappy players.

Cas :)

[jcottier]

Onyx, I understand what you are saying. But in my case, I am concentrating on casual gamers, like my wife. When she cannot complete something she calls me to beat the boss. She doesn't care if she has done it by herself or not. So, my target audience is very different from princec's one for example. I am just trying to give them the best experience they can have with the game.

Also, the time is increasing just by a little amount each time and people should not realise if a level last 4 minutes or 4 minutes and 15 seconds. So, they are not fully aware that the game is cheating. I haven't balance everything yet but the cheat stop in the middle of the game. At that time most players should be able to compete with the game.

Finally, most portals will allow people to play for an hour. The game is carefully balance with this in mind. I need them to see just enough of the game to want to buy the full version. If it is too difficult for some people, they will probably don't see enough and I will loose potential buyer. This cheat is mostly for these people. I don't want them to be off the train and they should be confident enough that this game is for them.

So, I understand all your point but this doesn't mean that adaptive difficulty is a bad thing. Its main purpose is to make the game accessible to as many people as you can.

I guess, it really depends on your inspiration. My goal is not to do a game for myself and a niche audience. My goal is to be successful in the casual portal audience and reach as many people as I can. In that perspective, adaptive difficulty seems to be the perfect solution.

JC

[voxel]

I think you are heading in the right direction. There was poll done by RealArcade (check the Casual Game Association podcasts) that asked why people played casual games.

The biggest reason - "to relax" - followed by "I like challenges"

How about 3 bypass / cheat tokens that let you skip levels or sections? I hate to play games where I suck and have to repeat the mission over and over again. I paid 60 bucks for this and I can't pass the first mission! (happened with a game recently that was poorly play balanced).

[Nikos Beck]

I love the idea of offering the player which cheats they'd like to enable. The downside is that they might know what they need to help win. In Sudoku I might choose "automatic pencil marks" but really I need "highlight x-wing squares" because it's the part I'm not grasping. It depends on the options given if the player will know what to do.

The player should repeat levels if they can't finish them the first time. There should be challenge. I like the idea of easing up on the player, give them the confidence boost when they've finished a level. In an FPS it might be that the second time through a level the enemy is facing away so the player has an easier time of hitting them before they react. Maybe a pane of glass is in the way so the baddies first shot breaks the glass, alerts the player of the baddie behind them. The baddie might be smoking a cigarette so that they're easier to see in the dark. There are plenty of subtle ways of making a challenge easier without ruining the experience for good players.

[tagged]

I recall Sin Episode 1 had a really good adaptive difficulty, it was a slider in options from very easy to very hard.. I remember having it on hard the first time through and having a very nice challenge, something I don't usually get from FPS games. It had some cool changes as well like adding specific armor if your hitting them in the same place (helmet's after too many head shots). I did die a few times in one spot and remembered it getting easier for me as well, enough to just pass :)

[bvanevery]

>
How rewarding is it if the game lets you win? How rewarding is a reward if you're fully aware that you don't deserve it?

Read a book about that, whose title escapes me at present, because it's in storage somewhere. Evolutionarily speaking, the brain likes problems that it has to struggle with a bit, but that it can overcome. The struggle increases the engagement and interest. But if it's too hard then one gives up. My takeaway is you shouldn't give things away to people "for free," you should make them work for them, because that will actually increase their enjoyment. But the hardcore gamer idea of how hard you're supposed to work for things to feel "worthy" is probably not applicable to the casual market.