|
[In this in-depth Gamasutra feature, Digital Chocolate (Safari Kingdom, Nanotowns) lead social designer Aki Jarvinen discusses the complexities of attracting social gamers with little patience -- and still teaching them to play your game both effectively and appealingly.]
Introduction: Tutorials and the Freemium business model
As the freemium business model is becoming de facto standard in social games, the key design features factoring into acquiring and retaining players are shifting. Developers can no longer trust that their players will make the effort of learning the ropes of their game through a set of challenges, just because they have spent tens of dollars to get the game at their hands.
Because players of social games do not fork out money to have the chance to try out a game, their time is of precious quantity. Therefore developers need to catch and hold their attention both through viral spread and gameplay itself. The core mechanics and social benefits of the game need to be sold to the players in a matter of minutes. Otherwise, they might never come back.
This of course is not entirely new, as we are familiar with tutorials from a variety of games. Gameplay tutorials have come in various forms, ranging from HUD walkthroughs to quests that showcase the world and mechanics of the game.
Furthermore, free playable demos are marketing material that function not only as teasers, but also as tutorials.
What is then particular to the importance of tutorials in social games? One answer lies in the spontaneous nature of Facebook as a distribution platform: With the constant flow of friend updates, news items, and so on, an online social network is not inherently captivating to the degree that even a Flash game portal is.
Yet it is an environment based around social proof: our tendency to see an action as more appropriate when others are doing it. If someone I regard a friend with whom I share values, opinions, or other social factors is playing this game, maybe I should try it too. A tutorial is the bite-sized dose of play that I can invest my time into, and in the best possible case, it might even turn out to be worthwhile in terms of fun.
The goal of this article is to give an overview of social game tutorials, and identify general structural principles for their design. I will look at tutorial design from the perspectives of user interface (UI) design, play experience, funnel analysis, and service design. The observations are based on analyzing tutorials of social games, research for my forthcoming book on social games, and my work on the design of the tutorials of social games, such as Safari Kingdom.
Tutorials as entry points to the user interface
Introducing a tutorial is a way to facilitate overcoming the familiar cold-start problem of a social game: Often a literally empty grid and possibly empty friends list. The image below shows our game Safari Kingdom. A number of user interface indicators communicate its core mechanics, enticing players into executing them. Some players might get on with this, by pure exploration, but for those regarding themselves as non-gamers, a tutorial is in place.
Kick-starting the empty farming grid in Safari Kingdom
In fact, the image depicts the end state of completing the tutorial, rather than the starting point of launching the application within Facebook. Later we will take a look at a number of popular Facebook games, and how they orchestrate similar core game mechanics into a tutorial sequence.
In their book Designing Social Interfaces, Christian Crumlish and Erin Malone write about "onboarding", i.e. the process which helps people to get started and oriented with a web site. Much of their points are valid in social game development as well: When a Facebook user follows a link to the game, he is essentially taken a leap of faith, and needs to be guided by hand to get on board with the game -- something especially relevant for non-gamers.
The notion of onboarding originates from human resource management. Crumlish and Malone identify three key steps in onboarding: accommodate, assimilate, and accelerate. In terms of games, accommodation is about giving the necessary tools to the player, i.e. the necessary game mechanics and resources to start with.
Assimilation gains a specific meaning from the context of the social network: It accounts for assimilation into the progress of one's friends playing the game, and the benefits from playing parallel to your friends. Acceleration then is about getting the player to engage with the game's full feature set and its possibilities.
|
One interesting thing I've found with some games is that they have the initial tutorial (which in some cases takes multiple sittings), but after you're "done", there still is some features locked. For example, in Farmville, gaining mastery from harvesting specific items isn't unlocked until level 10. That serves as a good way of ensuring the player can learn the mechanics as they play instead of overwhelming everything into the player at the start.
Also, a small correction: Cafe World does use a specific NPC as part of the tutorial and in other aspects of the game (such as getting gifts from players). IIRC the game never explicitly names her during the tutorial, but her name is Amelia (which you can find out if you browse some of the decorations you can buy; there's a couple items of her you can get, which have her name in the item name). I don't think she's present for every step of the tutorial though, but I can't fully remember.
@Sean Yes, you are correct about Cafe World - Amelia is there for part of the time. The biggest difference is that she does not figure in the game in other ways, unlike Harold in Happy Aquarium where the player can visit his aquarium at any point.
1. "With the constant flow of friend updates, news items, and so on, an online social network is not inherently captivating to the degree that even a Flash game portal is." I think you need to back this assumption up, because much of your follow-on reasoning flows from this idea that social gamers are poor-attention and flit quickly between things, like kids.
One of the huge differences between social games and most Flash games is the retention of user data (i.e. save games) which makes the games mostly long term rather than short term. The successful game are undeniably successful because of their retention. Therefore it must follow that social game players actually have a *high* capacity for attention, not a low one. This is further borne out by such studies as that by Popcap indicating that the average social gamer plays for 30-60 minute stints, not the 2-5 minutes typical of casual Flash games.
My point: It's a different landscape.
2. What about the negative cases?
It's fine to study the tutorials in successful games, but I think you are not convincing me that successful games all must have tutorials. What's not said is whether these games are successful because of tutorials, or whether they would be so anyway. You'd need to back up with concrete data, games which significantly improved or dis-improved their performance.
3. Are tutorials a crutch?
I often think that game tutorials represent a design failure. What I mean is that if a user interface needs to formally teach users how to use it, then usually the fault is with the design. That's not a judgement on the designer or the game, because often the goal for a game user interface can get pretty complicated and involved. And yet at the same time, it does represent a game design essentially saying "We don't know how to make this intuitive for you".
Added to that is the tendency of game developers to copy each other, and conventions to arise. So when one developer coins a Sims-esque interface for a game, they all do. When one creates a social bar of friends at the bottom of the game, they all follow along. This leads to the institutionalisation of certain ideas (things aggregated, but usually untested, through conventional wisdom), which subsequently lead to coda of interaction with the user that can start to depart from how users actually think and into how the game development community thinks they think.
Though they may be unavoidable, we should always strive to have no crutches and no conventional "Well that's what Zynga does and they're successful" wisdom guiding us. Because it's usually wrong and the real reason for someone's successes are often entirely surprising.
1. Actually I think everyone has poor attention spam. In the freemium context, I don't believe any designer should assume that any user is prepared to give any attention to anything...
2. True, but then the sample would be quite arbitrary, right - justifying a random sample of failed games is quite difficult; and most of the failures go under everyone's radar, which is indicative of the nature of the field and Facebook as a platform.
3. A good point - yet I do think many Facebook games also recycle UI patterns already established in casual downloadable games, so if there is a set of false assumptions, it goes further back. I do find many of, e.g. FarmVille's design solutions less than optimal, but players get along with those, as the other aspects of the game trump the annoying ones. Then again, as I suggest in the piece, a tutorial can be more than a UI tutorial, i.e. a designed sequence with which the designer eases the player to the feel and meaning of the game's mechanics, even if they would be as intuitive and brilliant so as to be self-explanatory (which is very rare).
One interesting thing I noticed was early on in the article one study showed that 90% of users who make it past the second step in the flow completed the tutorial, yet later Mark Skaggs GDC talk is mentioned on how randomly removing one step increased conversion (completion of the tutorial) by 25%. Not sure what to make of that, other than the fact that covering the core mechanics should be done as quickly as possible, and the user should be rewarded the most while in the tutorial (going back to Sid Meier's talk on the importance of the first 15 minutes.).
Oh, and for any social media game devs reading this, *please* ensure you can turn sound off while in the tutorial flow. Nothing bounces like hearing unmutable upbeat country music from your game against the blasting metal I listen to on my PC.