|
 Features
Game
Design: Theory & Practice, Chapter Seven
The Elements of Gameplay
Implementation
My first
game, Odyssey: The Legend of Nemesis, is without doubt the most
relentlessly non-linear game design I have ever done, and includes examples
of all the types of non-linearity described above. Odyssey is an
RPG and takes place on an archipelago that includes seven primary islands
for the player to explore. Though the player is required to complete at
least one quest on the first island before moving on to the rest of the
game, there are two quests, each with multiple solutions from which the
player may choose. Indeed, clever players can skip the quests entirely
if they figure out how to rob a particular townsperson. From there, the
player is able to move freely about the next five islands, picking which
ones he wants to explore and which he prefers to just pass through. Indeed,
all that is required for the player to reach the seventh island and the
end-game is for the player to successfully navigate each island, killing
the monsters that get in his way. Of course, killing those creatures is
made significantly easier if the player receives the rewards for completing
the quests. But if the player so chooses, he can skip the entire middle
of the game. Of course, few players have done this, preferring instead
to explore the different quests and situations they encounter there. Nearly
every single one of these quests has multiple ways for the player to solve
it, with his actions having a direct impact on how each of the island's
mini-stories resolves. Finally, the game itself has multiple endings for
the player to explore, endings which suit the different overall goals
the player may have: survival, revenge, or a sort of justice and harmony.
Though the game had a very definite story, I am happy to say that I doubt
very much that any two players ever experienced it in exactly the same
way.
Non-linearity is an extremely powerful tool to use in designing a game,
and the descriptions above of the types of non-linearity a designer can
employ may seem obvious to the reader. What is astonishing, then, is how
many games fail to provide any substantial non-linearity for the player,
instead insisting that the player play through the game on a single line
from point A to point B. One reason for this is that creating all of these
non-linear elements can be quite time consuming. Consider that between
point A and B, we have the aforementioned challenges X, Y, and Z, but
the player only has to overcome one of these challenges in order to progress,
say challenge X. The player can then continue playing through to the end
of the game having never interacted with challenge Y or Z. As a non-linear
game, that is the player's prerogative. The problem arises when a cost
accountant looks at the game and tries to figure out where the game's
budget can be trimmed. Well, obviously, if Y and Z are not strictly necessary,
why bother having them at all? Why spend a lot of money on the programming,
art, and design necessary to get Y and Z working when there's a chance
the player will never see them? Unfortunately, accountants are often not
in touch with the finer points of game design, and when you say, "But
non-linearity is what makes this game great!" they are likely to
dismiss you as "difficult."
Non-linearity is also often hard to pull off from a design perspective,
certainly harder than simple linearity. This may be another reason why
so many designers shy away from it at the first opportunity. Designing
numerous obstacles that are different enough to provide variety for players
while all applying roughly the same challenge is not an easy task. In
the X, Y, and Z challenges example, if Z is significantly easier than
X or Y, it is quite likely no one will ever bother with X or Y. In a way,
a game with poorly designed choices for the player is nearly as linear
as a game without any choices at all. The non-linearity your game provides
must be meaningful and useful to the player or it is a waste. Designers
who think too highly of their own design skills may also avoid non-linearity
in their designs because they want the player to experience every single
element of the game they decide to include. "Why spend a lot of time
on portions of the game that not everyone will see?" say these egotistical
designers, starting to sound a lot like the accountants.
The Purpose
of Non-Linearity
It is important to always remember that non-linearity is included in the
game to provide the player some meaningful authorship in the way she plays
the game. If forced to stay on a specific line to get from the beginning
of the game to the end, the player will tend to feel trapped and constrained.
The challenges along that line may be brilliantly conceived, but if the
player has no choice but to take them on in order, one by one, the fun
they provide will be greatly decreased.
Non-linearity is great for providing players with a reason to replay the
game. Replaying a game where the player has already overcome all of the
challenges is not that much fun. In replaying a more non-linear game,
however, players will be able to steer away from the challenges they succeeded
at the last time they played and instead take on the games other branches.
However, it is important to note that replayability is not the main motivation
for including non-linearity in your game designs. I have heard some game
designers complain that replayability is unnecessary since so many players
never manage to finish the games they start playing anyway. So if they
never finish, why add replayability? These designers do not realize that
the true point of non-linearity is to grant the player a sense of freedom
in the game-world, to let each player have a playing experience unique
to himself, to tell his own story. If the player wants to replay the game
again, that is fine, but the primary goal of non-linearity is to surrender
some degree of authorship to the player.
Furthermore, the contention that players seldom finish games and hence
the games do not need to be non-linear is a self-fulfilling prophecy.
The reason players fail to finish games is often because they become stuck
at one particular juncture in the game. This may be a boss-monster who
is too difficult, a puzzle that is too confounding, or merely failing
to find the exit from a given area. If the game were more non-linear,
however, players would have much less chance of getting stuck at any point
in the game, since the variety of paths available would increase the likelihood
that the player's unique talents would be sufficient for him to make it
successfully past one of them.
At a Game Developers Conference talk entitled "A Grand Unified Game
Theory," Noah Falstein suggested that when non-linearity allows the
players to tackle a series of required challenges in whatever order they
desire, completing one challenge should make the others easier for the
player to accomplish. In the case of a collection of puzzles, this can
be done by providing the player with a hint about the other puzzles once
he completes one of them. In the case of a collection of battles of some
sort, this can be done by providing the player with additional weaponry
with which to survive the other battles. Whatever the case may be, using
this technique increases the chance that the player will be able to overcome
the challenges at hand and get on with the game.
A note of caution: all designers should understand that non-linearity
is not about having the player wander around the game-world aimlessly.
If the game is non-linear to the point where the player has no idea what
she is supposed to try to accomplish or how she might go about it, the
non-linearity may have gone too far. Often game designers talk up their
in-development games by making statements like "In our game-world,
the player can do anything they want; there are no restrictions. The game
is completely non-linear!" Such a game would likely be completely
annoying as well. Of course, by the time these completely non-linear games
have shipped most of the non-linearity has been stripped out and the player
is left solving puzzles on a rail. Somewhere between on a rail games and
total freedom lies an ideal middle ground, where the player is left with
a sense of freedom accompanied by a sense of guidance.
Discuss
this article in Gamasutra's discussion
forum. ______________________________________________________
|
|
|
|
|
