|
Making a game with a long term experience without having it lose its fun is really difficult to achieve. For this reason there's been several mechanisms used in order to prolong a game's lifetime and still be enjoyable for the players. In here I analyse two methods described in two different satirical games developed by Armor Games.
Upgrades
This is probably the most ancient of mechanisms used to extend the gameplay features of games. It has been used to improve basic game mechanics such as in some action or adventure games (Megaman series, Prototype, Infamous), to add substance to the game experience such as in most RPG games (Fallout, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect) and complement the game story such as in RPGs and Adventure (Fable) and the Sims games.
Upgrade Complete is a game that shows in an exagerated manner the way upgrades work in a game. In a way this game is intended to criticise the abuse of upgrades to enhance the general game concept.
However I've played this game and seen others played it as well; although some people may think that it explains very well the faults of an extensive upgrade system, most of Upgrade Complete's players have found themselves immersed in the game trying to reach the maximum upgrade to everything (and sometimes they have even tried to find more upgrades after the Game Over).
The most interesting thing about this game is that it is basically just a scroll down shooter in which you have the opportunity to upgrade everything. This goes well with the modern trend of having everything customizable and upgradable to meet the player's expectations.
Some may find that having the choice of upgrading the game menu is ridiculous and doesn't fit with a game's purpose, but isn't this customization of the most basic parts of an interface what has made web 2.0 succeed? Isn't this kind of interactivity with everything what is making the users more confortable with their products? Beyond the whole satire idea of Upgrade Complete, I think the concept points more to the future than to an actual mock up.
Achievements
The advent of Steam achievements, XBox Live Achievement Points and PlayStation Network Trophies have made this mechanic more popular every day. And with a good reason it has succeed in extending game experience. However, this is probably the most misunderstood since it has been used to emphasize game events rather than ask the player to strive for greater challenges.
Achievement Unlocked shows in a glimpse all the kinds of achievements that are most frequently used in games. If played completely one will be able to distinguish the type of achievements one would like to find in a game from the ones that doesn't really matter.
The first type of achievement you will find is the one that awards the player for just playing. In Achievement Unlocked this is represented in the most silly way by giving an achievement for "finding the sponsor screen". Although this may seem nonsense it is common to be found in some games.
The perfect example I've found for this is Braid. In this game (at least for the Steam version) the achievements are given everytime a level is finished or a jigsaw puzzle is solved. It's true these events are true accomplishments but they don't add to the game experience, they are in fact necessary to end the game so they are achievements that will show sooner or later is you play the game completely.
Other type of achievement is the one where they award you for learning to play. In Achievement Unlocked this is represented by achievements such as "Learn to move westward". This one made me laugh a lot and I there are a lot of other ones like this in Achievement Unlocked. But the most ironic part is that I've also seen achievements like this in serious games. An example is Defense Grid: The Awakening where they give you achievements for such things like upgrading towers, building more than 5 of a type of tower or even selling towers.
The third type of achievement is the one where they award you for making a mistake. This would be probably the most unwanted kind to find in a game since it completely contradicts the concept of the word "achievement".
And finally you will find the ones that are worth achieving. This are not common achievements and could be better called Challenges. They add to the game experience and gives the player something fun to do besides the regular course of action of the game.
In Achievement Complete they are listed such as "Hit points 3-1-4 in that order" or "touch every touchable block". However, for this example these achievements may be too simple or easy to accomplish but they surely represent a challenge to the general game experience. You may find this type of achievements in games such as Team Fortress 2 and World of Goo.
|
Progress achievements:
"It's true these events are true accomplishments but they don't add to the game experience". Progress achievements are very useful when comparing your game achievements with those of your friends. It makes completing the game a competitve experience, as you can evaluate how well you are doing against them, and helps frame your communication because you know which parts of the game you can discuss. Personally, I think 80% of a game's achievements (at minimum) should fall in this category.
Challenge achievements:
"They add to the game experience and gives the player something fun to do". If a game has too many of these, I generally won't buy it. I rather play the game than play the achievements.
Otherwise, a great article.
"Achievements" are IMO just the ordinary 'cookies' developers give the players since the first games. There's nothing 'semantic' or 'theoretical' about it. You do this - you get that. Old game within games for like forever;-)
Creating 'achievements and making them meaningful is a metagame a developer should not really care about. The lead-designer or producer should just invent funny names the game mechanics and client-server tracking allows for.
Let gamers get caught up in the linguistics and sophisms of 'achievements and their meaning in life'.
You can do something more useful in the meantime;-)
I totally agree! Achievements and throphy's can be used to extend the game experience, but too bad most achievements are made up two seconds before a game is released, which leads to 'out of the vault'-like achievements (in fallout 3, this achievement is given for completing the tutorial).
A good example of ways to use achievements well are some of the thophies of the PSN game Super Stardust HD. I suggest reading the next page:
http://playstation.joystiq.com/2008/07/02/trophy-guide-super-stardust-hd/
The 'Late Boomer' trophy for example gives the gamemode 'Bomber' a huge twist, totally changing the way you play this mode and that way changing the entire concept of the game!
"It makes completing the game a competitve experience, as you can evaluate how well you are doing against them (your friends)". In other words, acomplishment achievements are your imediate boss standing right behind you pressuring you hurry to finish your work in a way or quality you don't desire to, as long as you finish it quick. I think acomplishments should award gamers by enjoying the best of the game, and finding nice experiences and ways of playing. Of course I also rather play the game than play the achievements, but the presence of them, that are beggining being obrigatory (sadly, when I becoma a professional game designer and make you earn cross-title acomplishements and unlocks, upgrades, diferent classes for each media in cross-plataform multiplayers [AVP?] and players trading resources between servers, all of this, and everyhing else will be "trends"... patience...)
@ Alex Covic
Actually, in Game Design (or Production), everything matters.
Also, using mechanics such as upgrades and achievements doesn't mean that the general gameplay scheme can be mediocre. As I say in this entry, upgrades and achievements are an extension to the game itself and not what the whole concept should be about (such as in Upgrade Complete or Achievement Unlocked).
As for the progress achievements, it's true they can keep track of the player's progress in the game in order to maintain competition between different users but I wouldn't call that "achievements" but rather something else like "Game Record". Also, if you are competing with someone else it wouldn't matter that much the fact that you have finished one level but maybe more detailed information about the completeness of the level, such as time spent finishing it, "coins" gathered, points achieved, etc. But achieving good records on this type of information wouldn't fit into the Progress Achievement type... it would again fall into the Challenge Achievement category.
In general, I find that Valve's approach to achievements is very effective. Most of them will and should be gained simply by playing correctly... Left 4 Dead, for instance, rewards you for using a health pack on a teammate. Seems utterly unnecessary, but what it's actually doing is rienforcing proper play to the players and rewarding them for playing the game correctly. For instance, scouts, snipers, and spies in TF2 have achievements for killing priority targets like medics with full ubercharges, which is what those classes are designed around. By rewarding and enticing players to go after those targets which are the best use of their class's talents, the achievements are actually improving the quality of play!
I think correct playing is something that should be motivated by the gameplay mechanics themselves rather than by achievements. A game shouldn't rely on achievements in order to maintain immersitivity or to show the goodies of the game system because achievements are meant to be an extension of the game and optional. Therefore these goodies could do better if they are intuitive to players instead of having people check the achievement list in order to see what is possible in a game and what not.
The bottom line is that achievements can be used to alter player behaviour to some degree, and therefore can be an excellent teaching tool that will augument your existing teaching tools.
Personally I never got into the Achievement collection craze. When I have played through all the content I can I usually drop my subscription and move on to something different. There were times I would return to a game because of a new content, but in the end I coast through that in a month or so and it's all back to the grind.
This is made especially clear in Upgrade Complete. Because the graphics upgrade, for example, doesn't help you beat the levels, it makes sense to get that last. The game makes us aware how willing we are to sacrifice the richness of experience for quantitative, arbitrary awards. (Granted, I don't care much what a game looks like, but I think the point is still there.)
In the end (literally) they make the argument that any achievement system is silly.
Insofar as the achievements in TF2, I see how they reward good play ("Be effecient"= 3 headshots in a row as sniper, I think) but they don't seem to be an affective learning tool. There isn't, for example, an achievement for "Don't zoom until your cursor is already over the target and then zoom for fine tuning" or "Leave zoom and asses your surroundings periodically."...
The reward (your score) is already enforcing good play. Of course, that too is quantified, but that's a different subject altogether...