Game tutorials should be easily skipped. Why is that so hard?(arstechnica.com)
arstechnica.com
Game tutorials should be easily skipped. Why is that so hard?
https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2023/07/game-tutorials-should-be-easily-skipped-why-is-that-so-hard/
106 comments
> Games are generally mass-market products so any feature that only helps a very small percentage of buyers is much less likely to get added.
Your point kind of proves the opposite. Many players will benefit from tutorials, of course. But if making them unskippable helps the bottom 10%, who otherwise can’t correctly judge if they would need them, then we get unskippable tutorials.
The same bullshit applies to dynamic (cheating) difficulty levels, another bane of modern game design where you can’t get ahead by doing well.
Your point kind of proves the opposite. Many players will benefit from tutorials, of course. But if making them unskippable helps the bottom 10%, who otherwise can’t correctly judge if they would need them, then we get unskippable tutorials.
The same bullshit applies to dynamic (cheating) difficulty levels, another bane of modern game design where you can’t get ahead by doing well.
That 10% figure you quote is pulled out of thin air. What if it's actually 80% of players who benefit from the tutorial? At least a little bit, like a refresher on the stealth or crafting system in this particular game?
In any case, even it it were only 10% it's hardly a symmetrical tradeoff. Those bottom 10% cannot play the game at all without the tutorial, while for the rest it's a few minutes of boring content in an otherwise hours-long game. Seems like a worthwhile investment to add the tutorial.
In any case, even it it were only 10% it's hardly a symmetrical tradeoff. Those bottom 10% cannot play the game at all without the tutorial, while for the rest it's a few minutes of boring content in an otherwise hours-long game. Seems like a worthwhile investment to add the tutorial.
We're not really discussing adding the tutorial or not, we're discussing not adding the button to skip the tutorial so that users cannot make their own choice of whether or not to watch it.
The 10% most familiar with the game/genre/developer/controls don't need the tutorial, and know it. I'd argue it's not the bottom 10% least familiar with the game that are harmed by the skip option; they know they need the tutorial, and aren't significantly harmed by the presence of a discrete skip option.
The 10% that cannot play the game because THEY chose to use the skip option, and not to return to the tutorial when they can't figure it out, but instead give up and leave a bad review... they're the only population (against their will!) from the removal of the skip button.
The 10% most familiar with the game/genre/developer/controls don't need the tutorial, and know it. I'd argue it's not the bottom 10% least familiar with the game that are harmed by the skip option; they know they need the tutorial, and aren't significantly harmed by the presence of a discrete skip option.
The 10% that cannot play the game because THEY chose to use the skip option, and not to return to the tutorial when they can't figure it out, but instead give up and leave a bad review... they're the only population (against their will!) from the removal of the skip button.
> while for the rest it's a few minutes of boring content in an otherwise hours-long game
One of the examples in the article was about spending an hour on intro levels before getting to the "meat" of the game.
Plus, "a few minutes of boring content" is no small thing to trudge through.
Before responding, please listen to this musical piece in its entirety[1]. It's only about four and a half minutes long in an otherwise hours-long conversation, so should not be a problem for you.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTEFKFiXSx4
One of the examples in the article was about spending an hour on intro levels before getting to the "meat" of the game.
Plus, "a few minutes of boring content" is no small thing to trudge through.
Before responding, please listen to this musical piece in its entirety[1]. It's only about four and a half minutes long in an otherwise hours-long conversation, so should not be a problem for you.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTEFKFiXSx4
[deleted]
I don't think you give the right weight to BORING,that's the issue here.
I have 2 hours of gaming per day during the week if I don't have anything else to do, which is rare, so it translates more to 2 hours once every 5 days (weekend is ad-hoc).
10 minutes is roughly 8% of that time, so if the game doesn't hook within 30 minutes (that can be with a nice intro, with a FUN tutorial, or throwing me into the gameplay) it gets dropped unless I have a strong referral from a friend.
That being said, most videogames I play have skippable tutorials. Not sure if that's a new problem specific to AAA, i rarely play those (although returnal on pc was very recent)
I have 2 hours of gaming per day during the week if I don't have anything else to do, which is rare, so it translates more to 2 hours once every 5 days (weekend is ad-hoc).
10 minutes is roughly 8% of that time, so if the game doesn't hook within 30 minutes (that can be with a nice intro, with a FUN tutorial, or throwing me into the gameplay) it gets dropped unless I have a strong referral from a friend.
That being said, most videogames I play have skippable tutorials. Not sure if that's a new problem specific to AAA, i rarely play those (although returnal on pc was very recent)
Oh I like dynamic difficulty. I get so bored with Stellaris, Civ 6, or RimWorld when I'm so far ahead I can easily deal with any challenge. Dynamic difficulty lets you progress through a game without outpacing the AI.
RimWorld has so many ways to kick your ass if you're getting too comfy, unless you're playing on peaceful/builder. Some of the late game random events are brutally unfair unless you know specifically how to prepare for them.
To paraphrase SSethT's review -- Randy isn't ashamed to admit he's out for blood and DGAF. He'll make it rain toxic fallout, then drop 600 units of milk on you.
Actually it's the "bottom 10%" that'll keep trying different stuff until they figure it out.
It's the "expert gamers" who skip tutorials and then get stuck and end up all frustrated and angry because the game doesn't work exactly like God Of Thing I Played Last Week.
It's the "expert gamers" who skip tutorials and then get stuck and end up all frustrated and angry because the game doesn't work exactly like God Of Thing I Played Last Week.
I thought it was pretty obvious it's a tutorial section, given there's a fixed text message at the floor telling you that it's the "cave of knowledge". And as long as there's a checkpoint outside there's nothing wrong with checking out scary depths. Just don't get cursed down there.
Don’t get cursed? It’s been a while since I started afresh and did that tutorial so I can’t think what this refers to
Dark Souls 1 had an area called The Depths with enemies that could inflict the curse status. Curse not only instantly killed you but also halved the health bar.
At least they patched out the effect where Curse stacked with each death to the debuff. Imagine playing the game with half health, then a quarter health, then an eighth health...
Damn FromSoftware don't mess around. I'm still yet to finish Elden Ring (just defeated Fire Giant this weekend and I'm now pottering around in the Consecrated Snowfield) and I intend to play through either DS3, Sekiro or Bloodborne after but I need to play something a bit simpler, more mindless and on-rails in between :)
But the curse status also has an interesting positive side effect: with it you don't need the "transient curse" item to temporarily make ghost enemies vulnerable.
> in the Consecrated Snowfield
The merchant outside of Leyndell sells an interesting torch that'll come in handy in Ordina, by the way.
> in the Consecrated Snowfield
The merchant outside of Leyndell sells an interesting torch that'll come in handy in Ordina, by the way.
Curse was a status in previous dark souls titles, but not in Elden ring. The closest thing I can think of is deathblight but it’s not quite as punishing as getting cursed was. Both instantly kill you
[deleted]
Ah right but nothing can inflict deathblight on you in the Cave of Knowledge - there's only a few weaker enemies and, of course, Soldier of Godrick :D
> Skippable tutorials on replay is definitely one of those.
How so? It seems to me that being able to skip tutorials when you're not playing the game for the first time is a thing that would benefit almost all players.
There are several games that I probably will never play again because of unskippable tutorials.
And why is it suddenly OK to force players into doing stuff like this? If a player doesn't want the tutorial -- even when playing for the first time -- they shouldn't be forced to do so. It's their game and their game experience, after all.
How so? It seems to me that being able to skip tutorials when you're not playing the game for the first time is a thing that would benefit almost all players.
There are several games that I probably will never play again because of unskippable tutorials.
And why is it suddenly OK to force players into doing stuff like this? If a player doesn't want the tutorial -- even when playing for the first time -- they shouldn't be forced to do so. It's their game and their game experience, after all.
>And why is it suddenly OK to force players into doing stuff like this?
That's pretty hyperbolic; nobody is forced to play a game. Maybe it sounds like I'm being pedantic, but you don't see anyone using the same language to talk about other parts of a game players are "forced" to go through. Nobody says you're forced to beat a tough boss, for example, even though you usually are if you want to make progress in the game.
You can probably make a good argument for treating tutorials differently from the rest of a game, but I think it's worth acknowledging that it's the norm for games to gate their content by making you complete other content first, with no way to bypass the gate. Tutorials are just a special case of that.
That's pretty hyperbolic; nobody is forced to play a game. Maybe it sounds like I'm being pedantic, but you don't see anyone using the same language to talk about other parts of a game players are "forced" to go through. Nobody says you're forced to beat a tough boss, for example, even though you usually are if you want to make progress in the game.
You can probably make a good argument for treating tutorials differently from the rest of a game, but I think it's worth acknowledging that it's the norm for games to gate their content by making you complete other content first, with no way to bypass the gate. Tutorials are just a special case of that.
> Nobody says you're forced to beat a tough boss, for example, even though you usually are if you want to make progress in the game.
Yes, but that's actually playing the game. A tutorial is not. If I already know how to play the game and have to go through a tutorial anyway in order to get to the actual game, I'm being "forced" in the sense that it's a time-waster I have to go through to get to the game.
This is why there have been games I've never gone back to. Going through the tutorial yet again simply isn't worth it.
Yes, but that's actually playing the game. A tutorial is not. If I already know how to play the game and have to go through a tutorial anyway in order to get to the actual game, I'm being "forced" in the sense that it's a time-waster I have to go through to get to the game.
This is why there have been games I've never gone back to. Going through the tutorial yet again simply isn't worth it.
It’s just lazy design. All Fromsoft games teach you how to play without some tedious time-consuming tutorial. If the mechanics need such a long explanation, they’re probably bad. I recently played the new Harry Potter game for nearly two hours before giving up on the endless tutorial quests.
The extra long exposition that’s basically an extended cut scene with forced interaction is an even worse trend imo. I played the new God of War for about an hour before getting bored of the horrifically bad story telling and uninstalling it. If you want to tell a story with a video game, then do it with the video game. If I want to play a video game, then I want to play a video game, not spend hours wandering between extra long cut scenes. Kojima is the only person I’ve ever forgiven for this sin, but I think that’s just because he crosses over some so bad it becomes good boundary.
The extra long exposition that’s basically an extended cut scene with forced interaction is an even worse trend imo. I played the new God of War for about an hour before getting bored of the horrifically bad story telling and uninstalling it. If you want to tell a story with a video game, then do it with the video game. If I want to play a video game, then I want to play a video game, not spend hours wandering between extra long cut scenes. Kojima is the only person I’ve ever forgiven for this sin, but I think that’s just because he crosses over some so bad it becomes good boundary.
> If the mechanics need such a long explanation, they’re probably bad.
Or you're not part of the target audience. For a AAA title, I agree. But I wouldn't blame, say, Crusader Kings for having complex mechanics because that's the entire point of the thing.
Or you're not part of the target audience. For a AAA title, I agree. But I wouldn't blame, say, Crusader Kings for having complex mechanics because that's the entire point of the thing.
I didn't say complex mechanics are bad, just that if you require your players to sit through a training session before they play the game, then you've probably designed your game poorly. Elden Ring has rather complex mechanics, with all of the gear and ability interactions, but the tutorial is mostly just the gameplay, and the skippable tutorial at the beginning is just a short section of gameplay with pop-up tips.
I didn’t even see the tutorial cave. Somehow missed it then got stuck trying to work out how to play the game before refunding it.
I just refund the game.
Which is your right but you’re a minority in that sentiment.
What I really like is when games give you multiple opportunities to "get" what's going on, basically sprinkling tutorialness around (and avoiding the big hit of tutorial at the beginning).
Like with any learning, people might have total knowledge, but they might have partial knowledge and _think they know_, only to end up just missing vital info. You want to have extra chances to get it.
Ultimately games are often about failing a bit, and then succeeding. Hard to balance that with over-tutorialization. Especially in the land of open world immersive sims where you can easily just break a quest chain on accident if there are no handrails.
I don't know what the "right answer" is, except that I've been every persona in this problem and the failure case sucks. Ultimately "tutorial that is more or less instant if you know" is the least worst IMO
Like with any learning, people might have total knowledge, but they might have partial knowledge and _think they know_, only to end up just missing vital info. You want to have extra chances to get it.
Ultimately games are often about failing a bit, and then succeeding. Hard to balance that with over-tutorialization. Especially in the land of open world immersive sims where you can easily just break a quest chain on accident if there are no handrails.
I don't know what the "right answer" is, except that I've been every persona in this problem and the failure case sucks. Ultimately "tutorial that is more or less instant if you know" is the least worst IMO
The hard tutorial/real game divide has another disadvantage, sometimes I forget mechanics straight away and spend the rest of the game (until I get bored/stuck) overusing the one I remember
There has been a few games I couldn't even finish the tutorial because it was so boring. Didn't matter if I learned or retained anything because I never touched the game again.
The worst are multiplayer games that don’t let you join a party with your friends before playing a long single player tutorial. You arrive late, you want to join, your friends will teach you anything you need to know anyway. But a self-absorbed designer decided to spoon-feed you what each individual button does over the next 20 minutes.
Legends of Runeterra does this. When my friend introduced me to it, I had to grind through a long ass tutorial before I could play vs. him. Terrible beginner experience for a card game, which is otherwise a fantastic game
Granblue Fantasy Versus did similar stuff. It's Discord fighter by now... That locks creating room behind completing 5 matches against AI and 2 ranked matches against people.
Even if you just want to play with friends.
I think the larger problem is that there is a lack of attention to things that don't immediately make sales, and a terminal short-termism due to higher levels of external investment.
Consider Redfall, the recent flop developed by Arkane Studios. It is completely obvious to me that the developers of Prey, Dishonored 1/2, and Deathloop know how to make great games that play well. The problem(IMO) is that Microsoft bought Arkane, and then kept Arkane on short leash. The publisher gets to go "hey can you add gear scores, the marketing department says that sells" "Hey can you add co-op multiplayer, we have no idea how the engine works but please do it anyway" and then gets to demand when they launch.
No Mans Sky fell into exactly this trap. They got a big publisher deal, the devs were terrified to deflate the hype because they didn't want to undo the work of their publisher (who is paying their rent/mortgages/food). They couldn't tell the truth about the # of features that were going to be there at launch because that might mean upsetting the publisher and taking massive financial hits.
Skippable tutorials don't make sales, they're not a marketable feature even if it's incredibly important for replay value. Because by the time you're replaying the game, you've already bought it and gone past the refund window.
Now-a-days, I just want a very good first time experience. If I can buy the game on the launch day and not experience gamebreaking bugs while the game more or less fulfills its promises I'll be happy (looking at you, Cyberpunk).
Consider Redfall, the recent flop developed by Arkane Studios. It is completely obvious to me that the developers of Prey, Dishonored 1/2, and Deathloop know how to make great games that play well. The problem(IMO) is that Microsoft bought Arkane, and then kept Arkane on short leash. The publisher gets to go "hey can you add gear scores, the marketing department says that sells" "Hey can you add co-op multiplayer, we have no idea how the engine works but please do it anyway" and then gets to demand when they launch.
No Mans Sky fell into exactly this trap. They got a big publisher deal, the devs were terrified to deflate the hype because they didn't want to undo the work of their publisher (who is paying their rent/mortgages/food). They couldn't tell the truth about the # of features that were going to be there at launch because that might mean upsetting the publisher and taking massive financial hits.
Skippable tutorials don't make sales, they're not a marketable feature even if it's incredibly important for replay value. Because by the time you're replaying the game, you've already bought it and gone past the refund window.
Now-a-days, I just want a very good first time experience. If I can buy the game on the launch day and not experience gamebreaking bugs while the game more or less fulfills its promises I'll be happy (looking at you, Cyberpunk).
I don't think that's an accurate characterization of the No Man's Sky situation. Sean Murray has been quite public about his own role in building up the hype they couldn't live up to, initially at least. They did eventually ship basically all the promised features in the end though.
In hindsight I guess No Man's Sky panned out like a super protracted crowdfunded game with a large scale prolonged beta-phase.
Which I guess is true for a lot of other games too.
Props to Final Fantasy XVI for shipping a finished product. I think they got enough flak for trying it on with XV that they realised they couldn't afford to burn anymore bad will.
Which I guess is true for a lot of other games too.
Props to Final Fantasy XVI for shipping a finished product. I think they got enough flak for trying it on with XV that they realised they couldn't afford to burn anymore bad will.
That's not accurate, there were reports of Microsoft actually not being hands on enough with Arkane, of devs even hoping MS cancels Redfall, but MS being so afraid of doing what they did with 343 and others companies they just let them do whatever basically.
My bad, you're absolutely right on that.
I do want to defend that I'm right in spirit however - Arkane was receiving pressure from Zenimax (it's parent company) from even before the buyout. Microsoft didn't reverse that decision, and I think it was likely Arkane was still pressured to make/release a game they never would have made otherwise. I think the same idea of external pressure and short-termism still apply, and that's indicative of where the industry as a whole is.
I do want to defend that I'm right in spirit however - Arkane was receiving pressure from Zenimax (it's parent company) from even before the buyout. Microsoft didn't reverse that decision, and I think it was likely Arkane was still pressured to make/release a game they never would have made otherwise. I think the same idea of external pressure and short-termism still apply, and that's indicative of where the industry as a whole is.
I think you're being too charitable about No Man's Sky, some of the stuff they said was just absurd. Multiplayer was the most notorious after it was released but then there was stuff like this [0]:
> The team programmed some of the physics for aesthetic reasons. For instance, Duncan insisted on permitting moons to orbit closer to their planets than Newtonian physics would allow. When he desired the possibility of green skies, the team had to redesign the periodic table to create atmospheric particles that would diffract light at just the right wavelength.
I don't see how this could be chalked up to publisher pressure, a lot of the hype before it came out was just absurd bullshit that Sean Murray fed into.
[0] - https://archive.md/8KJIL
> The team programmed some of the physics for aesthetic reasons. For instance, Duncan insisted on permitting moons to orbit closer to their planets than Newtonian physics would allow. When he desired the possibility of green skies, the team had to redesign the periodic table to create atmospheric particles that would diffract light at just the right wavelength.
I don't see how this could be chalked up to publisher pressure, a lot of the hype before it came out was just absurd bullshit that Sean Murray fed into.
[0] - https://archive.md/8KJIL
I don’t get why they do this. You are allowed to release an alpha or beta build and call it so. One of the best selling games of all time is Minecraft and it worked just like this, dripping out features over a decade now from what started as such a basic game from where it ended up.
"Early access" games are a huge trend right now. Release the game when it's in a playable state, and iterate based on feedback from the community moving forward. Some games seem to handle this very well with frequent updates and some games kind of fizzle out and disappear. This has also led to a lot of games with about 6 hours of content and then you've done basically everything in the game.
Early access minecraft might have worked so well then because it was just 3d computer legos basically in the first releases. Infinite content in other words just like a box of legos.
The time it takes to launch a new game and get into the actual gameplay is off-putting for me. I am not really into 'AAA' games but when I try one every once in a while I makes me very impatient. Trying to rush trough everything until I am let free.
Ironically the modern GTA games were the worst for me. I kept thinking, when is this tutorial ever going to end, not knowing I was already playing the actual game for a long time.
I like games that immediately give you agency and never take it away. When playing a game I don't want to watch a movie.
The game studios may focus on teaching a person the first time they play a game, but it is no excuse to make tutorials unskippable.
The problem is worse the longer the tutorial is.
I'll cut an indie developer some slack, and even the big game studios on making this mistake on the first release of a game. But I won't cut them slack if they get feedback on this point and then ignore it.
The problem is worse the longer the tutorial is.
I'll cut an indie developer some slack, and even the big game studios on making this mistake on the first release of a game. But I won't cut them slack if they get feedback on this point and then ignore it.
Another very annoying thing are long unskippable intros and “live cutscenes” in highly replayable games. E.g. fallouts, borderlands. It’s easy to drop a save after it, but only after a few times you stumble upon that.
I think the real issue is that if your game loop is so complicated that the average gamer cannot discover its mechanics by way of whatever play through you've designed, then you may have fundamentally failed to design a good game. It's possible your game is some real-time 4X Dune universe simulator and your audience is expected (and happy) to read 1k+ pages of tome and pass a written exam before they are even allowed to purchase it. But, I suspect probably not.
I feel like OW1 nailed the approach. Instead of forcing the player through a hand-holding experience with every character in the game (because god forbid someone play off-meta), they simply put the essential information regarding each under a common hotkey which you can view at your leisure.
I think if you can't fit all of the relevant information regarding what I need to know regarding the current context of gameplay on a 1080p viewport, then the game might not really be a game anymore. At a certain point, these turn into jobs with regard to complexity.
The Design of Everyday Things is just as applicable to game design as it is the design of doors and cars and light switches. I don't need to go through a 30 minute tutorial every time I buy a new car because they all follow similar human-oriented patterns. The cars themselves can be wildly different in many aspects, but I can still quickly ramp myself to a point of understanding without having it shoved down my throat each time.
I feel like OW1 nailed the approach. Instead of forcing the player through a hand-holding experience with every character in the game (because god forbid someone play off-meta), they simply put the essential information regarding each under a common hotkey which you can view at your leisure.
I think if you can't fit all of the relevant information regarding what I need to know regarding the current context of gameplay on a 1080p viewport, then the game might not really be a game anymore. At a certain point, these turn into jobs with regard to complexity.
The Design of Everyday Things is just as applicable to game design as it is the design of doors and cars and light switches. I don't need to go through a 30 minute tutorial every time I buy a new car because they all follow similar human-oriented patterns. The cars themselves can be wildly different in many aspects, but I can still quickly ramp myself to a point of understanding without having it shoved down my throat each time.
I experienced an even more extreme version of this with Watchdogs 2. I enjoyed the first game, but the second one had this protracted tutorial. After an hour, I was still having to follow its instructions rather than playing in the open world, so I just stopped for the day, and never had the enthusiasm to pick it up again. In the 5 or 6 years since then, I've never even considered booting up the game again.
Sleeping Dogs almost lost me when I encountered the "you went the wrong way!" failure meme during the tutorial. I played it again sober and am glad I stuck with it because it ended up being one of the best games I've ever played.
It also forever ruined Robert Palmer's "Bad Case of Loving You," since that was the song I chose for the karaoke date you're supposed to ruin by singing it poorly.
It also forever ruined Robert Palmer's "Bad Case of Loving You," since that was the song I chose for the karaoke date you're supposed to ruin by singing it poorly.
You either have either a separate easily skippable tutorial that has nothing to do with the story and is thus usually boring or an integrated tutorial that acts as a narrative prologue and is thus usually at least somewhat interesting.
Another trend that is popular is unobtrusively displaying control hints regularly during gameplay. That’s especially nice for context sensitive or infrequently used inputs.
Another trend that is popular is unobtrusively displaying control hints regularly during gameplay. That’s especially nice for context sensitive or infrequently used inputs.
All user experiences should be great. Why is that so hard?
I went to piano teacher and they told me to stop being bad and be good. It seems so obvious now!
The worst one was the Nier Automata tutorial. You had to play this non stop for about an hour with no saves.
I'd suggest the worst tutorial was for Driver (PS1).
Not only is it an unskippable tutorial, it's a goddamn driving test, and was impassible altogether unless you pulled off some poorly-detected stunt move you'll never need to use.
I've only ever managed to get past it once, despite repeat attempts.
Not only is it an unskippable tutorial, it's a goddamn driving test, and was impassible altogether unless you pulled off some poorly-detected stunt move you'll never need to use.
I've only ever managed to get past it once, despite repeat attempts.
Hope you won't die in the process.
Like c'mon, I get there was a lore explanation behind saves but c'monnnnnn
Like c'mon, I get there was a lore explanation behind saves but c'monnnnnn
On a game console (starting with PS4/xbone) a game ships on a slow optical media and needs to be installed on the hard drive to be played. The install happens without user interaction in background. This can be done in two steps - install a small level quickly and let the user play it while installing the rest of the game. Usually the first small part is some kind of tutorial and skipping it makes no sense as the user will be stuck waiting for the rest of the game to install. This two-part install is kind of mandated - the game license requires it by default though if you make a case why it is not possible with Sony/Microsoft, it can be waived.
The worst are long unskippable video cutscenes right before a boss fight.
I hope there is a special circle of Hell for game designers who do this.
I hope there is a special circle of Hell for game designers who do this.
Agreed, I once gave up on a game because it had an unskippable long cutscene before every attempt on a difficult RNG-heavy bossfight.
Yeah. And this is especially annoying in games where your progress even after death to boss is still preserved. Why not add an additional flag for CUTSCENE_SEEN ?
Years ago when I have PS1, I bought a disc of Driver, thinking that it's another racing game (I also played Gran Turismo, R4 and Chocobo Racing). Turns out I cannot play the game as I failed the first mission, which is supposed to be a tutorial on how to drive. I never played it again.
Not only I then barely understand the instructions (slalom, for example; fortunately, Gran Turismo 2 has the license test to explain how it works), the time limit of 60 seconds is very tight, and not all stunts performed are correctly marked as having performed, meaning that the particular stunt must be done again (if there's any time left, that is).
Not only I then barely understand the instructions (slalom, for example; fortunately, Gran Turismo 2 has the license test to explain how it works), the time limit of 60 seconds is very tight, and not all stunts performed are correctly marked as having performed, meaning that the particular stunt must be done again (if there's any time left, that is).
Driver was a fantastic game. The beginning was both a tutorial and in game test. I remember it was difficult as well, having to park perfectly in the designated spot.
Games don't come with paper manuals anymore (nor demos on game magazine CDs), so tutorials are the only way to expose them to the mechanics. Gamers nitpick every fine detail, so why run the risk of having angry 14yos review-bomb you on Steam because they think your game should work exactly like some other game they've played?
I don't agree with the premise. You didn't want to skip the train ride in Half-Life, or Wheatley's witty instruction in Portal 2.
When a tutorial is done well it's seamlessly integrated with the narrative, such that you don't even realize you're playing through a tutorial.
When a tutorial is done well it's seamlessly integrated with the narrative, such that you don't even realize you're playing through a tutorial.
On the other hand, both of those examples are more about story than teaching you how to play the game. Half-Life has an actual tutorial mode which is optional. Portal 2 is able to hit the ground running since it more or less assumes the player has already played Portal 1, but Portal 1 does start with essentially an extended tutorial. It's perfect for a first play but can be a bit much on successive plays. (You don't get the full portal gun until test chamber 11 out of 19! Though the later test chambers are longer, and the test chambers are only half of the game.)
Same for cut scenes. If I wanted to watch a badly written movie, I would watch badly written movie.
GT7 includes an 8 minute(!) unskippable movie[1] on the history of racing that plays when you start the game. You got a new game, you're excited to start playing it, but you have to sit through an 8 minute movie before you even get to the game's main menu.
You can disable the startup movie from the settings after you sat through it once, but if you don't do that you'll get the same 8 minute movie again the next time you start the game.
1) The movie in question: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULfjoCqEo6I
You can disable the startup movie from the settings after you sat through it once, but if you don't do that you'll get the same 8 minute movie again the next time you start the game.
1) The movie in question: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULfjoCqEo6I
The last half of that movie is equivalent to the filler movies they play in previous episodes of GT. The first half is interesting but it should not be inflicted to players without an option to skip it. Sooner or later everybody will watch it at least once.
Anyway, my main grudge with GT is that you buy a new episode and start from scratch. Maybe they got smarter but I remember that when I bought GT4 I had to go through all the licenses again. That could be OK because even if the controller is the same there are changes in the physics model etc. What I don't forgive them is that I must unlock again everything. Cars, tracks, money, they take a massive amount of time. I had that time with GT3, I didn't have it anymore with GT4. Give me at least all the tracks and the cars and the money I had on the GT3 memory card. The result is that I unlocked some new tracks, I played only a tiny amount of the game, kept doing laps on the tracks that I unlocked and never bought a newer Playstation. That cost them some missed sales with me. I would pay an extra to buy a totally or partially unlocked game.
By the way, I play only racing games and I'm not interested to play against other people with a network connection. There are apparently too many jerks and lapping alone or against the AI is entertaining enough.
Anyway, my main grudge with GT is that you buy a new episode and start from scratch. Maybe they got smarter but I remember that when I bought GT4 I had to go through all the licenses again. That could be OK because even if the controller is the same there are changes in the physics model etc. What I don't forgive them is that I must unlock again everything. Cars, tracks, money, they take a massive amount of time. I had that time with GT3, I didn't have it anymore with GT4. Give me at least all the tracks and the cars and the money I had on the GT3 memory card. The result is that I unlocked some new tracks, I played only a tiny amount of the game, kept doing laps on the tracks that I unlocked and never bought a newer Playstation. That cost them some missed sales with me. I would pay an extra to buy a totally or partially unlocked game.
By the way, I play only racing games and I'm not interested to play against other people with a network connection. There are apparently too many jerks and lapping alone or against the AI is entertaining enough.
> There are apparently too many jerks
I don’t play online so I don’t know how well it works, but GT7 has a sportsmanship rating system that is supposed to combat this.
I don’t play online so I don’t know how well it works, but GT7 has a sportsmanship rating system that is supposed to combat this.
I'll check that, thanks. But then in a different game I see the current Formula 1 champion doing this https://twitter.com/vcoesports/status/1680276931109871617
Also the non-story cutscenes and other minutiae. Like in BotW (the game I'm currently playing), these things drive me nuts:
- Entering/exiting shrines (infuriatingly, you can skip about half the time, but not all of it). I've seen it a hundred times already (literally). I only needed to see it once, if even that. There's not even any variation.
- Unlocking a tower. You're making this a bigger deal than it really is.
- Interfacing with Great Fairies and Hestu. Again, some of it is skippable, but not everything. Why half-ass it?
- Pause and modal popup whenever you pick up certain items, even if you pick up some amber for the 1000th time. Why.
- Dialog and popups not immediately reacting to input, but every such thing has an artificial 1000-1500 ms delay. Can someone explain why this was added? For players to not accidentally choose an option without reading it? OK, maybe stop doing it after the first, I don't know, 100 times?
- Opening (and closing) chests.
- Praying in front of goddess statues and the things that ensue.
It's like they've done extra "fuck you" work to ruin your experience. Just let me skip. The whole thing. And don't fade in/out from/to white/black over 3 seconds, just cut it. Cut it. Begone.
- Entering/exiting shrines (infuriatingly, you can skip about half the time, but not all of it). I've seen it a hundred times already (literally). I only needed to see it once, if even that. There's not even any variation.
- Unlocking a tower. You're making this a bigger deal than it really is.
- Interfacing with Great Fairies and Hestu. Again, some of it is skippable, but not everything. Why half-ass it?
- Pause and modal popup whenever you pick up certain items, even if you pick up some amber for the 1000th time. Why.
- Dialog and popups not immediately reacting to input, but every such thing has an artificial 1000-1500 ms delay. Can someone explain why this was added? For players to not accidentally choose an option without reading it? OK, maybe stop doing it after the first, I don't know, 100 times?
- Opening (and closing) chests.
- Praying in front of goddess statues and the things that ensue.
It's like they've done extra "fuck you" work to ruin your experience. Just let me skip. The whole thing. And don't fade in/out from/to white/black over 3 seconds, just cut it. Cut it. Begone.
I totally get where you're coming from, but being "forced to appreciate" the event yourself is part of the diegetic experience.
You just climbed a tower-- behold this sweeping view while you catch your breath.
You can't feel the weight of this heavy chest lid, but you do feel it in how long it takes to open.
I hated the cooking animations (fuck those dancing vegetables), but they make you feel the effort involved in the process.
Letting you skip that stuff ruins the immersiveness. Nothing you can fast-forward through is ever going to feel epic. (It's not a fuck-you unless Hideo Kojima was involved.)
Red Dead Redemption did this too. By the end I had seen so many animals skinned it broke something inside me, which gave fourth-wall consequence to what I was doing in-game.
You just climbed a tower-- behold this sweeping view while you catch your breath.
You can't feel the weight of this heavy chest lid, but you do feel it in how long it takes to open.
I hated the cooking animations (fuck those dancing vegetables), but they make you feel the effort involved in the process.
Letting you skip that stuff ruins the immersiveness. Nothing you can fast-forward through is ever going to feel epic. (It's not a fuck-you unless Hideo Kojima was involved.)
Red Dead Redemption did this too. By the end I had seen so many animals skinned it broke something inside me, which gave fourth-wall consequence to what I was doing in-game.
Oh, this gives me flashbacks from Call of Duty: ?Advanced? Warfare (the one with Kevin Spacey as the plot antagonist).
There was this one level, which begins with a cutscene and then a car chase on a highway, eventually (after many game crashes, restarts, rewatches of the unskippable cutscene) lands you on ... I'd like to say an aircraft carrier?
Perhaps it was my hardware which was shit, but the game worked well enough on every other level, but that one. damn. level... it just kept crashing. Which lead to a restart and that unskippable. fricking. cutscene...
ugh. just ugh.
There was this one level, which begins with a cutscene and then a car chase on a highway, eventually (after many game crashes, restarts, rewatches of the unskippable cutscene) lands you on ... I'd like to say an aircraft carrier?
Perhaps it was my hardware which was shit, but the game worked well enough on every other level, but that one. damn. level... it just kept crashing. Which lead to a restart and that unskippable. fricking. cutscene...
ugh. just ugh.
On whose authority?
ON MY AUTHARAATY.
[deleted]
Also, the feature that you read about in the manual and try out, but it doesn't work. Eventually you realize that the game has disabled that feature until you learn about it twenty minutes later in the forced tutorial. (Consoles have bad manuals, but thy usually have something. Or it can happen with an in-game manual.)
Also, games that have a twenty minute forced tutorial and don't let you save before it's done.
Also, games that have a twenty minute forced tutorial and don't let you save before it's done.
What about campaign levels, should they be easily skipped? What if the campaign levels are your tutorial and the player never even knew?
Once upon a time way back in the yesteryears of yore, you could enter a simple text code or special sequence of inputs to skip entire maps and levels. Usually these were hidden deep in the manual somewhere.
That's cheating! ;)
Tutorials? I miss the era of games providing player the with satisfaction of figuring things out on their own.
Nowadays, a lot of games ARE tutorials.
Nowadays, a lot of games ARE tutorials.
The reason for that is the same reason why TFA advocates for skippable tutorials: the average gamer today has less time on their hands than 20 or 30 years ago. When I was a child, I would only be able to get a new game every 4-6 months, and I would have hundreds of hours to pour into each game over the course of those months, so I didn't mind having to spend quite a while to get into it. Nowadays, my play sessions are more like 2-3 hours twice a week or so, because adult life includes a lot more obligations than my teenage life back then. Given that I have less time to devote to this hobby, I have a higher desire to make every minute and every hour count.
That's not to say that I don't like a game that rewards me for figuring stuff out. But it should be actually significant stuff like a puzzle solution or how a certain place relates to a certain event in the world's history, not stuff like "I just died 10 times because I was pressing A when instead I should have been pressing RL+B which the game never told me was a thing I could do".
That's not to say that I don't like a game that rewards me for figuring stuff out. But it should be actually significant stuff like a puzzle solution or how a certain place relates to a certain event in the world's history, not stuff like "I just died 10 times because I was pressing A when instead I should have been pressing RL+B which the game never told me was a thing I could do".
The other extreme of this would be something like NetHack, where it's very difficult to figure things out on your own even if you read the guidebook through and through. There is no tutorial.
(You might discover the one mention of Elbereth in the guide, but I think it would be very difficult to make progress without consulting the larger NetHack wiki.)
(You might discover the one mention of Elbereth in the guide, but I think it would be very difficult to make progress without consulting the larger NetHack wiki.)
I am no game designer. Also, i never really played video games. But to me, the first super mario game was so well designed. Of course, simple gameplay. But no tutorial needed. Just start the game. The game design is so good, the first run is the tutorial.
Obviously this works because it‘s so simple. What other games exist, where it‘s similar?
Obviously this works because it‘s so simple. What other games exist, where it‘s similar?
Divekick ;)
Because it's unfathomably hard to do anything when making a game. I tried making a simple 2D rougelike a few times and was overwhelmed by the effort required for simple things.
Multiply that ten thousand times with the added scale of 'real' games and things are just going to get cut if they're not essential to the experience.
Multiply that ten thousand times with the added scale of 'real' games and things are just going to get cut if they're not essential to the experience.
> I tried making a simple 2D rougelike a few times and was overwhelmed by the effort required for simple things.
I made an actual terminal Rogue-clone in University. It was a short game parodying the University experience and, though I haven't touched it since, was probably terrible. Even so, I was able to do all that + most of the mechanics (AoT procedural generation, leveling, various characters/enemies, a full event-based architecture, a terminal rendering system using ANSI codes, etc) in about a week of in-between class time. I am by no means an amazing gamedev, I just think you might be exaggerating a bit.
I made an actual terminal Rogue-clone in University. It was a short game parodying the University experience and, though I haven't touched it since, was probably terrible. Even so, I was able to do all that + most of the mechanics (AoT procedural generation, leveling, various characters/enemies, a full event-based architecture, a terminal rendering system using ANSI codes, etc) in about a week of in-between class time. I am by no means an amazing gamedev, I just think you might be exaggerating a bit.
I concur. It depends on what engine you're using and how many corners you are willing to cut, but the fundamental act of just creating a game is actually not that challenging.
The challenge for most art forms isn’t practicing it but having the taste and experience to make something other people actually want to experience.
Oh it's absolutely true that game design is difficult and underappreciated.
But the development side of it really isn't harder than any other software project of a similar scale. If you know how to build complex software, you can build complex games.
But the development side of it really isn't harder than any other software project of a similar scale. If you know how to build complex software, you can build complex games.
As someone who does both bits I definitely agree but my point is more subtle that merely being able to do it misses the point.
This is kind of my theory too; making a tutorial is difficult and not the most exciting part of the game (for the developer).
It's difficult because players refuse to read, and showing stuff to them rather than writing requires a stupid amount of work. Moreover, players can get distracted during the tutorial, misunderstand something, get lost, etc. So you have to build a lot of redundancies and safeties.
So maybe the developers unintentionally try to make it worth it by "forgetting" to offer a way to skip it.
It's difficult because players refuse to read, and showing stuff to them rather than writing requires a stupid amount of work. Moreover, players can get distracted during the tutorial, misunderstand something, get lost, etc. So you have to build a lot of redundancies and safeties.
So maybe the developers unintentionally try to make it worth it by "forgetting" to offer a way to skip it.
And please, also let me skip camera & map animations explaining what's happening. One of my favorite games does that even in New Game+ mode and it's just annoying.
Or be as well done as Breath of the Wild and Tears of the Kingdom
I agree they're well done, but I have met a number of people who have a lot of experience in various genres of game who have bounced off of BotW because they couldn't figure out the tutorial area, much to my astonishment.
Not as a bit, either - they genuinely spent a few hours not finding the first tower that it has 5 or 6 different prompts to tell you how to find and where, and gave up.
This isn't to denigrate the games, just to remark that for any level of well-done, there is still a sliding scale tradeoff between how obnoxiously prescriptive the tutorial is and how many people will get filtered out by not getting it.
Not as a bit, either - they genuinely spent a few hours not finding the first tower that it has 5 or 6 different prompts to tell you how to find and where, and gave up.
This isn't to denigrate the games, just to remark that for any level of well-done, there is still a sliding scale tradeoff between how obnoxiously prescriptive the tutorial is and how many people will get filtered out by not getting it.
I got frustrated with the start of BotW and took a bit to get my bearings. It’s incredibly fun once you get into it but that first bit took longer than I’d like to admit
Recently bounced of Hearthstone because of this. To play the game mode I want, and use the cards I want, I have to grind 50+ wins with decks I have no interest in playing.
Try Legends of Runeterra for a less hostile card game experience.
Even worse issue: tutorial hints on loading screens are impossible to read due to fast loading times from SSD drives.
The prime complaint here seems to be a campaign game where you might need to restart the campaign forcing you to do the tutorial multiple times. A bit niche imo.
Honestly I think most tutorials are fine. The boring stuff is usually very quick. The game specific mechanics are worth learning.
Honestly I think most tutorials are fine. The boring stuff is usually very quick. The game specific mechanics are worth learning.
Some games offer turning off all help in game settings.
They can’t be skipped because the players who will skip them are the ones who need them and will then complain about the game as a result bringing down the average score and hurting the games financials.
Why are there so many video game articles lately?
Elden Ring was hilarious though I looked at the tutorial cave and nooped out of going that way immediately as it looked way more scary than doing anything else.