First, I have to say I’m disappointed that Portal 2 breaks the First and Second Commandment since the opening title screens can’t be skipped and you can’t fully remap the controls.  This is especially disappointing since the original’s controls were fully customizable, and the PC/Steam version has neither offense ( my PS3 copy gave me a free Steam copy. )  On the original I used the right triggers to fire the portals ( R1 for Orange, R2 for Blue, ) but now the two portals have to be kept on opposite sides of the gamepad.  Even after a few hours of playtime, I still revert to old habits and hit R2 for an orange portal.  Sometimes it’s a minor pause, but on more than a few occasions it’s led to my death.

Speaking of the Steam/PS3 crossover, I’ve had a bit of grief there too.  I’ve never used Steam in the past and I’m worried newcomers from the PS3 may well be confused and angered.  Case in point, I created a new Steam account to link to my PSN account, but I messed up when creating the account password ( I accidentally had the caps lock on. )  I poked around the Steam browser interface looking for the “change password” option, but after banging my head for ten minutes, I resorted to a Google search for how to do it.  The answer: you can’t change any account specific settings through a browser ( other than small profile things like nicknames. )  Instead I had to download and install the Steam client, wait for it to update itself, send a password change request, get the authorization code from an email Steam sent back, and then change the password through the Steam client.  Granted, this is a Steam complaint and doesn’t affect the game itself, but I’ve accessed sensitive financial info faster and easier than changing settings on Steam.  I’m not sure if that’s a good or bad thing, but I hope other PS3 users will have an easier time learning Steam than I did.

On the game itself, the first thing you’ll notice is the improvement in the graphics, particularly the lighting effects.  One point in particular has you navigating pitch black catwalks while Wheatley acts as a flashlight.  The cast shadows through the metal beams and pipes look amazing.  As for Wheatley, he’s absolutely hilarious.  His dialog is very witty and the voice acting is great, so too is J. K. Simmons as Cave Johnson.  I suppose they’re intended to make up for GLaDOS.  She’s even more annoying the second time around.  Let’s just say being blown up bit by bit hasn’t improved her personality.  She constantly insults you or harasses you in the test chambers ( like dissolving crates right after picking them up. )  As an atmospheric device, I’ll say it’s effective.  You genuinely despise her after an hour and if I get to blow her up again, I’ll relish it this time.  On the flip side it means you have to endure the snide remarks through the whole game and I can’t say that won’t have some adverse effects on some players’ enjoyment of the game.

The worst thing I can say is the game doesn’t feel as tight as the original.  The maps are far bigger than the original’s and that often means more running, less portaling.  The addition of a sprint feature would let you get around much faster and I’m sad it’s not present ( particularly since a sprint would give the puzzles even more facets. )  The great map size also means you have a lot more area to search for elements to solve whatever puzzle or challenge you’re facing.  In the bigger, darker maps,  acceptable portal surfaces are usually highlighted in some way ( lighter texture color or a flood light makes it bright, ) but sometimes it takes a lot of searching to actually see them.  I think the bigger maps contribute to longer load times unfortunately.  Load times in the first Portal usually amounted to momentary pauses in the elevator after each test chamber.  Portal 2 now has load screens between each section.  It’s not huge, but it does break you out of the game more than the original ever did.

But more than anything, I just can’t say I’ve had that wow moment.  Once you hit the middle of Portal 1, you were doing some seriously cool things with the portal gun, like looping jump momentum through two or even three portal sequences.  So far I haven’t had any “Did I really just do that?” thoughts.  You do encounter some new puzzle elements, like hard-light bridges and propulsion gel, which give you some more toys to play with, but I can’t say they’ve really been utilized fully ( at least not yet for me. )  The game is supposed to be about three times as long as the original, so maybe I just haven’t hit the really cool stuff yet.  But like I say, it just feels a little drawn out, not the tight pacing of the original.

So far, it doesn’t feel like it’s been worth $60.  I loved the first Portal because it was unique.   It was a cerebral challenge with very little twitch factor.  It’s like Valve tried to make the sequel some epic adventure with something that was only meant for a short story.  I would have loved Portal 2 to be just more testing chambers, more puzzles with new mechanics.  Add in the separate co-op campaign and I would have gladly paid $40 for it.  I hope the single player campaign picks up.  If my guess is right and I’m only a third through the game, it has plenty of chances to do so.  And then there’s the whole co-op mode, so here’s to hoping it only gets better from here.

I’ve ( hopefully ) saved the best for last.  This will likely be longer than the previous two sections, but I think every gamer in the world will agree these three Commandments are the most important.  Other elements of a game may be lacking, but if the story is good or if the problems aren’t too bad, most gamers will stick it out to finish the game.  But if you ever make the player feel cheated, don’t expect them to hang onto the game disc for much longer.

#8: Thou Shalt Not Make the Player Feel Helpless

Because “Thou Shalt Not Incite the Player to Say, ‘Oh, Come On!!!!’” is too long a title.  These are the moments of sheer frustration when you’re helpless to do anything but die/fail in the game.  Be warned, this has NOTHING to do with the gamer’s shortcomings.  Caveat #1 states that death and/or failure due to a genuine player screwup is perfectly acceptable, and though we all want to claim otherwise, I think we’ve all been on that side at least a few dozen times.  While the majority of violations to this Commandment are noticed in game combat, it can actually apply to many other game mechanics.  Admittedly it can be a slippery slope where to draw the line between wrist-slap and fatal failure.  Let’s consider four of the most common offenses:

Invisible Barriers

This isn’t a grievous transgression in game design, but it is an annoying one.  The worst part about it is that the player is once again reminded it’s only a game.  Why shouldn’t I be able to scramble over that pile of rocks?  Why can’t I hop down from this ledge?  And I don’t care if that plant is poison oak, I should be able to step over it.

Regrettably there really isn’t a proper solution to this oft-used mechanic.  To put reasonable barriers all over the map, like solid rock or steel walls, can make the game world feel restrictive.  And if I’m always standing at the top of a sheer cliff, I have to wonder if the entire kingdom is on an inaccessible plateau.  Strangely enough, the best solution I’ve seen is when a chat bubble or subtitle appears saying there’s no need to go that way.  Understandably, others may hate that method.

I get the idea of story continuity and restricting the player’s path to ensure plot elements are encountered in proper chronological order can be very helpful.  But I beg game designers to use this with discretion.

I’ve Fallen and I Can’t Get Up

Most game combat now allows characters to get knocked down.  Personally, I hate it.  I’m not saying it’s unrealistic to get knocked off your feet, I just don’t like how it’s usually implemented.  If you’re taking enemy fire, you don’t just lie there for a few seconds and then slowly, casually pick yourself up and dust yourself off.  Consider Force Unleashed.  I’ve never seen any Jedi or Sith with slower ground reactions than the Apprentice.  Mass Effect is similar.  Sheppard is supposed to be N7, meaning elite special forces training, but getting off the floor in combat is slower than rolling out of bed in the morning.  I suppose the Smackdown vs RAW titles have some exception to this as it’s what you see on the TV, but can I get some type of meter than gives me an indication of how long my wrestler has to act injured on the canvas?

Again, I get the idea about being knocked down in a game.  But is there some way to recover a bit faster?  Maybe let me roll away to safety?  Maybe let me fight from the ground?  Now if I’m too close to an explosion or get Force thrown across the room, then sure, I’ll be dazed and unable to quickly recover.  Caveat #1 is also in play here.  You saw the Big Boss winding up for their unblockable attack and you didn’t get out of the way?  Your fault.

(Un)Friendly AI

Is it too much to ask for my AI teammates to NOT shoot me in the back?  This alone can make an otherwise great game not just frustrating, but downright unplayable ( I refused to finish Descent: Freespace for just this reason. )  Even with friendly fire disabled, my squadmate is essentially useless if he’s not actually damaging the bad guy ( once again I cite Mass Effect. )  It’s not a whole lot better when they unload guns at the wall the baddie is hiding behind.  I know that good AI is the hardest thing to program, but if the game can tell if an enemy snipes me from across the map, can you at least have the friendly AI check what will get hit before they fire?  And on a side note, can I get party companions that will get out of my way instead of acting the part of the roadblock?

Useless Abilities

Anyone remember the RUB spell from Final Fantasy I?  To those that don’t, it was a spell that was supposed to instantly kill an enemy.  Except it had two problems.  First, even when cast against something that wasn’t immune to instant death, it didn’t always work.   Second, by the time you had the stats and money to get it, most enemies you faced could be handled just as easily in more mundane ways.  And the tough foes that you wanted to use it on were almost always immune.

The other side of this coin are the spells/abilities that always work for the computer but rarely for the player.  Did anyone else feel this way about about the Stasis Force power in KotOR?  Toward the end of the game it was fine for the generic enemy, but I swear I failed every will save against it for the first 15 hours.

Bottom line, if the game has an ability that not only sounds cool but is hard to get or takes time and effort to upgrade, it deserves to be not only effective, but useful more than half the time.

#9: Thou Shalt Not Force the Player to Learn by Dying

This could be a sub-rule of #8, but it’s important enough to merit its own spot.  I remember reading an article in PC Gamer about 10 years ago that addressed this.  In many ways it’s improved in the last ten years, but far too many games still incorporate a few things things that a player has no preparation for and very little chance to get right on their first playthrough.

Blind Choices

I’m not saying every consequence has to be laid out to the player, but decisions with permanent effects throughout the rest of the game need to be handled delicately.  The important part here is to let the player know somehow that the upcoming decision will have drastic effects.  If they play the first few hours with nothing terribly monumental happening, why should they expect a pivotal fork without being somehow prompted or properly informed?  Imagine going through Final Fantasy VII for the first time only to find somewhere around the 60 hour mark that you can’t get the Ultima Weapon because you didn’t buy a flower from Aerith in the first 20 minutes of the game.  Games like Heavy Rain, or even Demon’s Souls to a lesser extant, are exempt because they’re designed to have the player live with every choice without the option to reload the game and try something over.

Instant Death Attacks

Silver bullets can be tricky in games.  If the player has this option, the game may not be challenging.  If only the NPCs can use them, the player might feel unreasonably disadvantaged, that the game is only difficult for the sake of being difficult.  And with all the hi-tech armor, magic, etc. in most current games, how is the mere mortal player supposed to know what actually hurts and what’s “just a flesh wound?”  Perhaps there’s no perfect solution here, but here are a few implementations that can be not only effective, but still challenging and fun.  Of course, if you’re in a big boss battle, the rules usually (understandably ) change.

Everything’s Potentially a Silver Bullet: This was utilized well in Demon’s Souls.  At any point in the game, a monster can kill you from a single attack or combo.  However, you can also kill most of the enemies with a single properly timed riposte.  Basically, the player is taught to take nothing for granted.  A run-and-gun or hack-and-slash method would get you killed in under a minute.  But through patience and proper observation, you could learn how to counter every enemy in the game.  The same can be said about the original Rainbow Six, where a single bullet could kill anyone, terrorist, hostage, or player.  Dead Space took this a bit further since you could die just by losing a limb, not necessarily losing all your health ( and Isaac couldn’t kill any necromorph in a single shot except on the easiest difficulty setting.)

No Silver Bullets: If no single thing is downright lethal, on either the player’s or the computer’s end, then the playing field is even.  That’s not to say there’s no danger or challenge in these games.  Even though a single attack isn’t fatal, what happens when they’re quickly chained together?  Street Fighter and similar games usually follow this and the skilled players are the ones that can juggle a stunned opponent while unloading insane combos.  Ratchet & Clank largely falls in this category since few enemies can kill you in one swipe.  Ratchet’s insane arsenal means he can take out most enemies in a single round, but ammo restrictions and being outnumbered 100 -1 keep it challenging.

Only Obvious Silver Bullets: Most games fall in this category, though how “obvious” the insta-kills are varies a lot.  Ideally the silver bullet should be easily recognized ( if you see a flaming weapon in Soul Calibur, you know an unblockable attack is coming. )  Likewise Uncharted is nicely balanced here.  Headshots and explosions are usually fatal on both sides ( flashing red grenades and laser sights trained on your noggin give you adequate warning to seek cover, ) while anything else will take a few rounds.

Raiders of the Lost Ark Chase Scenes

If the only reason I can dodge those pits/spikes/flaming cars is because I’ve died 38 times and now have the whole course memorized, it’s not fun.  It’s nothing but frustrating.  Though short, these sequences in Ninja Gaiden and Uncharted 2 were by far the least enjoyable to me.  Ninja Gaiden and other action games might be excused a bit from this since they’re usually based more on twitch than on wits.  But any game that’s not predicated on the speed of my trigger finger should never use a front camera that only shows me five feet in front of my character ( isn’t the point of a third-person camera to see all around you? )  At the very least, why not a top-down view that lets me plan my escape more than 3 ms at a time?

Undetectable Hazards

Imagine walking through the enemy fortress, carefully sneaking around corners, when suddenly you’re impaled by those perfectly concealed floor spikes.  You’re dead with no warning, no indication, nothing.  Or what about that lava level where the difference between alive and BBQ is half a pixel?  Traps and environmental hazards need to have some type of indicators, even if subtle.  If the fire can kill you from 15 feet away, then my character animation ought to change 20 feet out to show the heat ( shielding their face with their hands, etc. )  If the cave tunnel has a hidden guillotine, how about some bloodstains and severed body parts at that spot?  If there’s a huge ambush around the corner, how about an audio tip like some muffled breathing or metal clinking?  The observant player in these situations will be tipped off that something dangerous is close by even if they don’t know what.  The unobservant player will fall victim to Caveat #1.

Thou Shalt Not Allow the AI to Cheat

I really shouldn’t have to elaborate here, but I still see it show up in current games so I guess someone still thinks it’s a good idea.

Computers need to be handicapped in games.  They can operate infinitely faster than a human, can make thousands of decisions in the time it takes a person to even realize they can make a choice.  It’s actually very easy to program an unbeatable opponent in most games.  It’s also easy to make a moronic one.  That sweet spot in the middle where the AI is good but not too good is the goal and is so very hard to hit.  That means it’s a lot easier and faster to just make adequate AI and them let them cheat to simulate a higher difficulty.  That’s a problem.  It’s not a real, legitimate challenge.  It’s fake difficulty.  So where exactly is the cheating line?  If the player has to rely just as much on luck and chance as on their own skill, the game has usually entered the cheating realm.  An insanity difficulty level is the one and only exception to this rule.  Those game modes are meant for bragging rights alone.  If you want to play Halo on Legendary, then don’t expect it to be fair.  If you want the Brutal awards on StarCraft II, don’t expect it to be a pleasant journey.

The easiest example of AI cheating I can give is that of the Nintendo racer ( though it may well be common in other racing games. )  Basically every iteration of Mario Kart punishes a player for being a skilled driver.  If your lead ever becomes too much, every AI opponent behind is suddenly granted a PhD from the Andretti University of Racing and receives unlimited nitro mushrooms as a graduation present.  But instead of using these gifts to only get back in competitive positions, they’re not satisfied until you’re back in sixth place.  Of course then the others drivers return to their former idiotic selves.  It’s gotten to the point where it’s not only accepted in this title, but also expected.  Why?  If the AI is rewarded for being an idiot, why isn’t the player rewarded for being one?  Try it.  Let yourself fall to the very back of the pack and see if you’ll suddenly get a huge speed boost or if everyone else will slow down.  Koopa Trooper will be lapping you in no time.

The real-time strategy crowd is also notable for letting the computer cheat.  I really respect Blizzard and their commitment to game excellence.  While some complain about the inevitable delays in their game development, every single title they’ve released has been a critical and commercial success because of their commitment to not releasing a game until it’s done.  So why do I feel a little cheated about the hard difficulty on StarCraft II?  Perhaps my idea of “hard” and Blizzard’s aren’t the same.  In general I think a “normal” setting should be for the average player, a default if you will, while “hard” should be for the experienced gamer looking for a challenge, but one that is still fair.  It should mimic how it would be to play the game against a reasonably skilled human opponent.  For the purpose of an RTS, player skill is all about efficiency, how many commands they can issue in a short period of time, how well they manage resources and upgrades, etc.  We’ve already established a computer is faster and more efficient than a human brain, so wouldn’t a “hard” RTS setting just mean a “normal” AI that’s not throttled back so much?  But I can’t help but feel like they’re given extra resources, tougher units, and shorter build times too.

But then there’s my least favorite tactic, letting the computer do something my character can’t but should be able to do.  Case in point, Bionic Commando: Rearmed.  So why can’t Spencer, special forces trained commando, fire on diagonal lines but enemy soldiers, basic conscription mooks, can?  And what about the end of level battles in Force Unleashed?  Did anyone else feel it was unfair that the enemy Jedi were invulnerable to half your arsenal?  Example: you try using Force Push against the boss only to see them absorb it or ignore it completely.  You can unleash a devastating lightsaber barrage against them, but they just effortlessly block it or just ignore it while they meditate and charge up a Force Repulse.  But if they try even a single jumping lightsaber attack in return, you have no chance of guarding against it.  You’re telling me that under 20-odd years of tutelage of Darth Vader, one of the premier swordsman in the galaxy, the Apprentice never once learned some type of guard breaking lightsaber attack?

Or sometimes the computer is allowed to do something no one should be able to do, namely seeing through walls.  I have to bring up Mass Effect again.  Start a new game and head for the Eden Prime spaceport.  Right after the fight just prior to the spaceport, your teammates will continually fire at the geth hiding by the train.  Even though you can’t see any trace of geth, apparently Ashley and Kaiden can.  The same thing happens in any number of the warehouse maps with crates and boxes stacked all over.  Either the AI can see through walls or they saw that one moving pixel between all the boxes.

I have to bring up Dead Space, Demon’s Souls, and Rainbow Six again because these three games didn’t simulate fake difficulty by letting the computer cheat. They were difficult due to fair and fully explained challenges that gave an actual sense of accomplishment.  The player wasn’t left to ask, “Why can’t I do that?”

Either I want to be lazy right now or I just can’t think of an inventive intro ( probably both, ) so let’s jump right into it.  Here are the Commandments of Game Design, numbers 4 – 7.

#4: Thou Shalt QA Thy Text

I’m a writer so I know how easy it is for a minor typo to fall through the cracks ( chances are you may find one or two in these pages. )  But really, I’m only one man that servers as writer, QA, and editor.  Don’t studios have a small army of game testers?  How is it then that 100 people with three months to test the game didn’t catch the misspelled word that I saw on my first playthrough?  And this isn’t just dialog subtitles either.  Item descriptions, quest chat bubbles, quest journal entries, menu descriptions, all written text in the game needs thorough review by many sets of eyes.  And that means checking for more than just misspelled words ( and my sympathies to those who have to spell check all the crazy names sci-fi and fantasy games make up. )  Character strings can have all sorts of “invisible” special characters like new lines, tabs, carriage returns, and extra spaces that can screw up the way text is displayed on screen.  A single typo may not completely ruin the game atmosphere, but it always makes me think, “Really, they didn’t catch that?”  And then I start to wonder what else they missed…

#5: Thou Shalt Not Allow Bad Voice Acting

Many blockbuster games now have budgets that rival those of small Hollywood movies.  And with many games claiming a “cinematic feel,” I’m happy to see professional voice actors used in many of them and hope the trend continues.  So when I come across a game that has poor voice acting, I just have to ask, “Why?”  Audio is half the experience of a game, and surely voice dialog is half the audio, so why shouldn’t the budget be allocated accordingly?  If you can, get skilled actors and a good voice director.  I’m not saying every title needs to spend top dollar on people like Nolan North, Jennifer Hale, or James Arnold Taylor, but don’t just throw Larry from the marketing department in a sound booth and call it good.  Then again, soap operas are technically staffed with “professionals” and that doesn’t always translate into authentic sounding dialog either.  Bottom line, if a stranger off the street can’t listen to the voice without thinking it’s extremely flat or over-the-top, you might be better off dropping the voice-overs and going with text only.  And remember that no amount of good voice acting can compensate for poor writing and dialog.

#6: Thou Shalt Honor Thy Players’ Saves

Most gamers know the mantra: save early, save often.  Adventure and role-playing games especially need this.  You never know when you might get ambushed or make a hasty decision you want to undo.  If you want to try a different tack in a recent conversation or a different tactic in the last battle, you likely don’t want to play an extra hour just to get back to that point.  So why do so many games still have those restrictive save points? ( why is this one of the few things that carries over from every Final Fantasy? )  I realize old hardware limitations may have had restrictions on when a game could be viably saved.  But in this age of computer hardware and programming, why can’t I save at any point I want?  I understand if I can’t save in the middle of a fight, because saving the exact location of every bullet and spell countdown timers may be more complicated than necessary.  But say you have to make it down a long hallway through four particularly nasty encounters with no saves between each one.  Isn’t that just asking for unnecessary frustration?

Final Fantasy XIII gives you an invisible checkpoint that rewinds the game to just before the encounter where you died, but it also loads all the monsters back on the board, even those you defeated before you died.  That’s not too bad, but what happens if you can’t get past fight three of four and you just want to save it and turn it off for the night?  So sorry, you’ll have to load it from the very beginning tomorrow.  Or there’s the Ratchet & Clank method that will save your weapon and character progression, but every time you load you have to start at the beginning of the stage.  I don’t claim to know all the intricacies of managing save game files, but I’d honestly be interested in hearing the limitations.  Otherwise, why not let the player save whenever, wherever?  At the very least, make checkpoints plentiful.  Like the other Commandments here, players will notice it and will thank the developers for it.

But saving the game is only part of it.  Few things are more disappointing than not being able to load the game.  In this I’m talking about updates and patches that make old saves incompatible.  I understand making changes to a game might require a save file to now hold different and/or additional info.  But is there a reason you can’t also make a save game conversion tool?  At the very least, please give gamers fair warning that an upcoming patch will invalidate older save games.  This gives us time to try to finish the current playthrough or at least warns us not to apply an update until we’ve beaten the game.

#7: Thou Shalt Disclose ALL the Rules Clearly

I can’t believe that I’m the only gamer out there that likes to know everything that happens under the hood.  Perhaps it’s from my tabletop and D&D experience in the past.  When it’s just paper and pencil, you have to know all the rules and stats or you can’t even play the game.  The downside is that rolling dice and doing mathematical computations by hand can really slow down the game.  In this wise, having the computer handle the background math is great so the player so they can enjoy the game ( kudos Baldur’s Gate, Neverwinter Nights, and Knights of the Old Republic. )   KotOR even let you go back through the combat log to see exactly how everything was calculated.  So when such transparency has been used for a while, I get frustrated when games still hide their rules tighter than the Coca-Cola recipe.  And this isn’t limited just to item stats and combat rules.

If I can sneak around in the game, I want to know exactly what it takes for me to remain hidden and what will expose me.  If I take penalties for carrying too much inventory, what are those penalties exactly?  If I can persuade people in conversations, I want to know my chances of success ( this particular example might be a permissible exception since persuasive arguments aren’t an exact science. )  Let me go back to my favorite scape goat, Mass Effect ( actually, I really liked the game, perhaps it’s a testament to how good the story is even with the numerous, yet small, gaffs. )  The game says that heavier armors impair movement and weapon accuracy, but never explain exactly what those penalties are or how much they affect you ( and I didn’t really notice much difference either. )  Then there’s the hidden armor bonuses, with some giving you health regeneration or environmental protection, but the game only mentions it in passing at best.  These side-effects may not be huge, but as so many games use combat as a primary game mechanic, those combat rules should always be fully disclosed.

Sadly so many combat games still leave weapon and armor stats to arbitrary bars and graphs.  But it’s not always evident what scale they’re measured in so comparing like items can be very difficult.  Are they on a scale of 1 – 10, 1 – 100, or something else entirely?  I love MAG, but understanding weapons and armor in that game is a nightmare.  Gauging one weapon against another involves stat bars that don’t tell you much.  All I can see is that rifle A’s accuracy bar is four pixels higher than rifle B, but rifle C’s rate of fire is five pixels more than either A or B.  How much of an improvement is one pixel, seriously?  Ten percent?  One percent?  Half a percent?  How important are those attributes and how heavily weighted are they in the game engine?  Granted MAG makes it even worse since you can’t see weapon stats until after you’ve purchased them from the supply depot so it’s not uncommon to end up with something that’s effectively worse than what you were already using.  And then there’s the armor.  It says the heavier armors provide more protection, but it never says exactly how much.  Can I take one more bullet before dropping?  Three more?  How much explosive damage will this soak up?  It’s left to the player’s own experimentation to find out, which in the realm of server lag and network congestion is never empirical.  Now compare that to the excellent way Mass Effect presents weapon and armor stats ( I told you it had good things about it. )  Not only does it present the actual numbers for the item, but it also provides a graph bar that ranks the item against all others in that category.  The graphs give a quick view to see with item is better/worse in each aspect while the numbers let you know exactly how much better/worse it is.  Sadly, some systems are even worse than bar graphs.

Does anyone else hate those S, A, B, C, D, and E ranks?  What do they really show?  How much improvement does it take to get from one letter to the next?  Is one rank ten points better than the last?  Ten times better?  And how am I supposed to compare multiple items in the same rank?  Demon’s Souls uses a hybrid system that lists both hard numbers ( wonderful ) with attribute bonuses in letter ranks ( awful. )  The attribute bonus multiplies a corresponding stat ( strength, agility, etc, ) by an unknown value and adds it the the weapon damage.  When upgrading a weapon, changes in the the number stats are displayed, but if the attribute bonus stays the same rank, you’re only given a blue or red highlight to show if it’s going up or down.  That goes right back to my first question: how much is it actually changing?  Admittedly the weapon’s resulting calculated attack power is always listed numerically so you usually have a pretty good idea of overall weapon power.  But still, I’d like to see concrete numbers so I can better plan weapon and character upgrades.  Altogether Demon’s Souls use of letter ranks lists more details than Metal Gear Solid 4, but really, why use the letters at all?  Just give me actual numbers.  Please?

Bottom line, somewhere in the programming a variable is holding actual numerical data so why not just show the player what it is?  Why not disclose the attack/damage/persuasion calculator?  Sure, some players will take those rules, plug them into an Excel sheet, and go to munchkin town to find exactly how to play the meta game and min-max to their heart’s content, but why is this a bad thing?  If gamers are discussing pros and cons about different builds or load-outs, that means there’s a healthy community for a game which is essential for long-term success.  And personally I see that much more productive than people using opinions and best guesses.  Like many things here, it’s one of those things to add under the “Why Not?” category.

You know, I really love games.  I mean really.  A good game to me is something like an interactive book or movie.  As gamers, we don’t just follow the story, we get to influence it and really experience it.  And nothing pulls us out of that experience faster than a design flaw.  In that moment, we completely forget about storming the castle and remember that we’re just watching a bunch of pretty dots on a screen. Sometimes they’re unimportant enough that we quickly ignore them.  But sometimes it’s something so critical, even if small, that it makes the game almost more trouble than it’s worth.  Now, I’ve done my fair share of writing and programming, so I’m more than a little understanding when a minor error slips through.  But some problems are far too egregious to ever be included in a game.  The next few posts will deal with my list of design elements that can make or break take a Game of the Year contender.

#1: Thou Shalt Not Make the Player Wait

I think it’s safe to say much of the gaming crowd suffers at least a little from ADHD.  Not that we can’t be patient when necessary, but a game ideally should never have long stretches where the player has no option but sit and wait.  And this begins with the opening titles.  Why are games still released where the player can’t skip the titles and go straight to the main menu?  If it’s a good game, I know know exactly who made it.  I don’t need five splash screens, each up to ten seconds long, constantly reminding me.  If the titles are mandatory the first time the game is launched, fine, I’m willing to watch your snazzy title screens and logo animations and I may be amused the first few times.  But on the tenth launch, I’ve pretty much got them memorized.  ( I’m looking at you, Dragon Age and Demon’s Souls! )  What’s worse is when the “skip feature” only shaves two seconds off a ten second intro.  Then I know you put extra time in allowing the title to be skipped, but didn’t make much use of that time.  ( Still looking at you, Dragon Age! ) I’m sure some studios likely have legal requirements to display every license used on the game, all physics and graphics engines, and every team and publisher that worked on the title.  Yes, they deserve recognition for their work.  But please, dump the long animations and turn them into quick splash screens to fade in and out.  Better yet, just stick all the logos on a single splash screen while a loading progress bar scrolls across the bottom.  At least then I know the game’s doing something.  Otherwise I’m left to assume I have to watch logos just because someone wanted pointless image exposure.

And speaking of loading screens, I know optimizing and speeding up the game initialization process is low on the priority list since it only happens once per session, ( and again, Dragon Age! ) but the faster it is, the more we gamers are grateful to you!  Trust me, we take special notice of how long or short it takes a game to get up and running, and this includes the time to load a saved game.  I realize that some games require a lot of information to be in a save file, and thus a lot of information to load.  And after that, you’ve got to load the game map, objects, textures, etc.  But just like that first initialization screen, I guarantee you shortening the load process is always noticed and always appreciated.  I remember Ninja Gaiden on the original Xbox.  The first load could take a while, but after that it held the game in a cache or something because all subsequent loads were near instant.  Given the number of deaths and loads in that game, it was very appreciated.  If a game load takes more than 20 seconds, it’s nice to see some kind of screen to give the player something to do, like Final Fantasy XIII giving a story synopsis of where you are, just in case you forgot.  If nothing else, you can take the Insomniac approach and show some type of transition, a la Ratchet & Clank flying the ship to the new planet.

Next on the wait list is the menu animation.  I know it’s tempting to make it seem cool and flashy, but again I shouldn’t have to wait a second or two between every sub menu. ( I’m talking to you, Prince of Persia! )  Simple, fast animations are more than welcome, but let’s not get carried away, please?  If nothing else, how about an option to enable/disable menu animations, eh?

Third, you should never make the gamer wait on dialog, cutscenes, or movies.  I can usually read subtitles faster than a character speaks.  And I really hate going through a conversation a second time, either from loading a previous save or playing through the game again.  On the flip side, it’s rather nice to be able to pause a movie or cutscene at any time since I can’t foresee when the phone or doorbell will ring.  But please, if you implement this, it’s much better to be able to pause and continue instead of skipping the whole thing at the first button press ( Final Fantasy XIII did this very well as the cutscene “pause menu” gave you the choice to skip or resume. )

Finally, lose the death scene.  Anyone who played Mass Effect ( at least on the PC, ) knows what I’m talking about.  You open the door and get in a massive firefight.  Then some Krogan rushes you, sends you flying, and follows up with a nasty shotgun blast.  The screen tints red, the sorrowful music plays, and the camera goes into a long slow-mo pan around your corpse as it not so gracefully slumps to the floor.  You’re then presented with the option to load the most recent save, pick from a save game, or return to the main menu.  Right?  Wrong.  Game developers, I bought your game, I keep you in business.  Why do you feel the need to kick me when I’m down after dying?  I’m already frustrated enough at losing, you don’t need to rub my nose in it.  If you want to go for the “dramatic” death, fine, but the instant I hit a button or click my mouse, I better see the load screen.  It’s even worse on more challenging games, or higher difficulty settings, where you’re to likely die a lot.  And if the game load time is long too, the developer is just compounding transgressions of this, the First Commandment of Game Design.

#2: Thou Shalt Not Restrict Button Mapping

Can someone please explain to me why a professional game studio with access to some of the most advanced programming tools and software can’t find a way to let the player remap every control in the game?  The worst offenders are the games that offer one, and only one, button layout.  And really, offering four layout options isn’t much better ( though usually this equates to only two since options C and D are usually mirrored A and B for the lefties. )  If you’re expecting your game to be commercially successful ( and why wouldn’t you? ) how can you think that two or even four control options will fit 100,000+ players?  I don’t know what’s more frustrating, being forced to learn a completely new button layout, or having a layout that matches 90% of my existing preference except for that one damn button I keep hitting by mistake due to old habits.  And what’s with those games released on both console and PC where the console version has a locked control scheme but the PC is completely customizable?  Do consoles have some sort of restriction against this?

Please, please, please, give players the option to completely reorganize the button layout to their own preferences.  I don’t mean you have to give them insane options like assigning “walk forward” to the trigger or “reload” to the left thumbstick.  But I damn well better be able to map common actions to whichever buttons I want and invert both axes of the camera ( what is with this idea of pressing right on the thumbstick to look left?  I’m not rotating a camera pan handle. )  And speaking of camera inverting, please separate it for player one and player two during the split-screen co-op mode.  Is it really that dificult to let me use the buttons as I wish?  In the end, if a player can’t remap the controls to their own liking, they have to stop and think about how to do any action in the game and that means they’re constantly reminded it’s just a game and it kills the immersion factor.

#3: Thou Shalt Tame Thy Camera

If I can’t see the game correctly, I can’t play it.  Just like remapping buttons, if the player has to fight the camera through the whole game, they’re always reminded it’s just a game.  The best thing that can be said of a camera is if you don’t notice it’s there.  If the game review doesn’t mention anything about the camera, a developer should take that as the greatest compliment.  Believe me, you’ll hear plenty from critics and gamers if the camera is bad  Here are some of the most common camera problems that should be thoroughly tested and corrected before a game ever ships:

Full Axis Control

Yes, I’m repeating this from above because I find it that critical.  If the thumbsticks are meant to control the camera, let the player decide exactly how to use them.  If they want to use the X-axis on one stick and the Y-axis on the other, why not let them?  And why not give them the option to invert one or both camera axes?  Again, I don’t like the idea of treating a third-person camera like a panning lever ( looking left by tilting the thumbstick right, ) but apparently some players and/or studios do because either the option is there or the studio decided to make it the default and only setting ( why, oh why, Kingdom Hearts II? )

Wall Collision & Camera Obstruction

This is a big questions in third-person games since the camera is essentially an invisible lens floating ten feet behind the character.  If you want to rotate the camera around the character but you’re only five feet from a wall, the camera will want to cut through said wall.  The most common “solution” is to write some code that won’t let a camera clip through any wall ( otherwise it’d be easy to see through walls, understandably. )  Early versions of this method had the camera restricted to the same height and distance from the character so seeing all around your character was impossible when even remotely close to a wall ( a very unfortunate flaw in Crisis Core. )

To remedy this, some games had the camera slide along the wall so it came closer to the character.  Sometimes this would work well, but it sometimes meant the entire screen was filled with just the character’s shoulder ( unless the character became transparent which was very helpful. )  Other methods keep the camera at the set distance from the character but have it slide up the wall, giving you a top-down view.  But if I wanted a top view, I would’ve panned the camera up, not left.  Overall, this method can work well with smooth walls, but the instant you get irregular environmental objects like trees, street signs, or rubble, panning around the scene usually results in a jerky camera as it slides between and around objects ( or worse, gets stuck between two objects. )

On the other side, if the camera can clip through objects, you run into the problem of having the camera inside an object.  Even if the camera isn’t completely obstructed, it’s common to see a partially displayed object on the screen ( like seeing the outline textures, but otherwise looking right through it. )  The other problem with no camera collision is having a large object, like a tree or wall, directly between the camera and character.  Just try shooting a bad guy when all you can see is an extreme closeup of tree bark.

Personally, I’m a big fan of the camera without collision detection.  It feels smoother when the camera isn’t constantly jumping between objects and jerking around.  Camera obstructions with objects between the camera and character are easily resolved with transparency or wireframes.  To keep the player from seeing what’s on the other side of walls,  only show the polygons on the side closest to the player and nothing on the other side.  Again, I’m no ace programmer so I don’t know how difficult it would be to implement a camera like this, but I’d sure like to see it attempted more often than it is, even to become the standard in all third-person games.

Auto-Follow / Auto-Centering

For the love of my sanity, give me an option to turn these off!  I’ll admit most auto-follow cameras are done pretty well, but every now and then I have to fight the camera to keep it pointed in one direction while I’m moving in another.  Fighting the camera is always bad!

Fixed Camera Positions/Transitions

I never played the original Resident Evil games on the PlayStation.  But after a co-op Resident Evil 5 gaming session, I decided I’d give them a try.  So I bought RE1 off the PlayStation Store and fired it up.  In less than an hour, my TV had a few close calls with a thrown controller.  Now I welcome the challenge of a difficult game.  But this game just made me mad by the poor camera positions.  I understand part of that scare factor in that game was the surprise in turning a corner and finding yourself nose to nose with a zombie when the camera finally switched.  All the same, I didn’t find it challenging, I found it frustrating and unreasonable.

Sadly, some games still fail in this right.  Many puzzle and platform games can benefit from a wide angle view in some places.  Just remember the camera’s first job is to show the player their route options, not to showcase your graphics engines with Utopian vistas.  If multiple fixed positions are used, make sure those views have ample overlap; don’t make the player walk right to a blind corner or to the edge of the screen before switching to the next view.  A surprise now and then is nice for atmosphere.  But a surprise that can easily end in death is a good way to really upset the player.  Particularly if they have to endure a long slow-mo death scene and a long game load time.  And unless the developer wants death by camera complaints, the camera view should never, NEVER switch in the middle of platform jumping or complex puzzle actions. ( Fair warning, opening the previous link will likely suck away hours of your time. )

Logarithmic Sensitivity

I’ll be the first to admit I’m not great at first-person action games.  I might get slightly better than average, but I’ll never be anywhere near the top of the leaderboards.  Frankly, my thumbs just aren’t twitchy enough to pull off that 200m headshot while jumping on the run.  So I have to dial down the look sensitivity a bit if I want to properly aim at all.  However, on many games, this means that not only is my fine-tune aiming just a little slow ( which helps me a bit, ) but actually turning around is slow too ( which gets me killed more often than usual. )  Wouldn’t it be great if action games like this would let the center of the thumbstick be a little less sensitive while the outer edges were always at the max?

Actually some games have had this and it was called “logarithmic sensitivity” ( though it could be called “exponential sensitivity” too. )  Ever see a mouse setting on your PC labeled “mouse acceleration?”  That’s a similar idea.  For those that don’t know, mouse acceleration means the faster you move your mouse the farther it would track the cursor on your screen ( meaning if you move your mouse slowly one inch, it might move the cursor one inch, but if you zipped the mouse that same inch three times faster, the cursor might move three inches instead of one. )  The idea is not to make a huge dead zone in the middle of the thumbstick.  Instead the thumbstick is tracked slower while in the middle while it gets progressively more sensitive as you move it toward the edges.  I admit most gamers have probably never even heard of or considered this option so maybe this is only a personal rant no one cares about.  But I’m willing to bet a fair amount of players would find it quite helpful if more games offered it.

So now you’ve got your gear and a few games under your belt.  “What’s next?” you ask.  Now comes the fun part of actually playing.  There’s no perfect way to do it, everyone picks up and develops their own style and methods.  But that doesn’t mean there aren’t things every player should incorporate into their game.

SAFETY FIRST!

That sticker on your paintball gun that says “THIS IS NOT A TOY” isn’t lying.  Paintball is a contact sport and you need to know some basic rules to keep it safe.  It may seem silly to you reading this, but it amazes me how many people ignore basic safety rules.  First, treat your marker like a firearm.  Don’t point it at anything you don’t intend to shoot and keep your finger off the trigger when you dont intend to fire.  When you’re not playing, keep your barrel pointed down and engage your safety if your gun has one.  Treat every gun as though loaded until the hopper is empty, the breech is clear, the gas source is removed, and any stored up pressure is released.  Even then don’t take it for granted.  Always use a proper barrel blocking device, or BBD, whenever you’re not in a game. A swab stuffed down your barrel or a glove over the muzzle is not good enough.  They can fall out and one or two accidental shots will send them flying

Always use a chronograph before playing to make sure your marker is shooting at a safe velocity.  Different fields have different requirements but 280 feet per second ( fps ) is commonly considered the maximum safe velocity.  Many indoor fields have a lower limit due to the closer firing ranges, usually around 240 fps or less.  It’s good practice to re-chrono your marker throughout the day, particularly if you use CO2 in warm weather.  Remember that CO2 will increase in pressure as it heats up and this means your muzzle velocity will also go up.

Never remove your mask during a game, ever.  If something happens and your mask comes off, immediately drop down, cover your head, and try to signal a ref.  Likewise if you notice this happen to someone else, call out the situation so all players around you know to stop shooting.  Masks should only come off in designated safe zones where everyone else has put their guns on safe and BBD’s are in use.

Try to avoid shooting people at point-blank range.  Many fields have minimum shooting distances, usually around 10 to 15 feet.  If you happen to sneak up on a player within that range, give the person a chance to surrender first.  If they try to make a move on you then you’re allowed to open fire, but try to hit them someplace it won’t hurt too much, like on a boot or in the pack.  If you’re ever caught in that situation, don’t make sudden moves since it might be interpreted it as an aggressive action.  Just calmly put your gun and hands up.

Remember that every field may have their own particular rules so always check with refs and staff for any rules you should be aware of.

If you play “outlaw” ball on land that isn’t part of any designated paintball field, it never hurts to check with your local law enforcement agency first.  Politely ask where you can and can’t play and don’t try to push the issue.  Be respectful and even if you can’t play on your first area of choice, they may direct you to another area where it is allowed.

Finally, a paintball marker is for paintball only.  It’s not for shooting the neighbor’s cat, plinking birds in your trees, or otherwise shooting anything outside a paintball game.  It’s very easy for paintballers in general to get a bad rap because a few people decided to be stupid.

Check Your Ego

By the time you read this, hopefully you’ve already played a game or two.  Even if you have a general feel for the game, you’ll still have more to learn.  Be patient with yourself since you’re in for a long, but enjoyable, learning curve.  The truly good players know that everyone started somewhere.  They’ll let you know if you’re doing something wrong or unsafe, but they will never insult anyone for playing poorly.  Instead they usually take new players under their wing to help them learn the game.  If this happens to you, leave your pride at the door.  You can learn something from anyone regardless of age or playing experience.

If you’ve yet to play your first game, it’s perfectly normal to be nervous or even a little scared.  It hurts to get shot with a paintball, I’ll admit it.  It can be more than a little nerve-wracking not knowing if you’re about to get pegged on the other side of that tree.  But the thrill of scoring that first elimination or capturing that first flag quickly erases all anxiety from your mind.  When starting a new match, try to be a team player and ask what you can do to help.  If you’re asked to do something during a match, don’t blow it off.  Give it your best effort even if you don’t understand why it needs be done.  If it doesn’t work there’s always the next match.

Learn the Rules

Every game format can be different so make sure you fully understand the rules before the game is underway.  Too many game variants exist for me to list them all here.  The two most common variations are deathmatch and capture the flag, both of which will be familiar to you if you play online action games.

Like your average action video game, a deathmatch is a straight shoot ‘em up.  The only objective is to shoot out every opposing player.  This can be played every man for himself, but is more often between two teams.

Capturing a flag usually means grabbing a dirty rag hanging in a tree instead of an actual flag.  CTF is usually played with one or two flags and always with teams.  With one flag, it’s placed somewhere in the middle of the field.  Both teams then try to get the flag and return it to their side of the field.  This version of CTF is usually called “center flag.”

You can also play CTF with two flags.  Each team has a flag and keeps it in an area designated as their base.  The object of the game is to bring both flags into your base, so you not only have to attack the opposing team, you have to guard your own flag too.

Play With Honor

Sportsmanship is a dying value unfortunately.  Don’t add to its demise.  This is just a game after all and the point is to have fun.  If you’re hit, you’re out.  You don’t make a judgment call about whether it should count.  You never wipe it off, ( and yes I’ve been tempted a few times too. )  If you get hit from behind or where you can’t see, call a ref over and they’ll check if you got hit or if the shot bounced off.  Congratulate the other player when they shoot you out.  You’ll be surprised what that does for your mood while playing.

Getting shot multiple times isn’t fun so don’t try to plaster your opponent.  Likewise if you get lit up don’t get in a huff.  For all you know it was accidental.  When you get shot at, chances are about 10 balls are in the air heading towards you.  Even if the other player stops shooting the instant the first ball hits, that ball still has a few friends trailing right behind it.  It can be hard to hear much of anything over the noise of a firefight so don’t expect all fire to cease the instant you’re hit.  If you’re hit and under heavy fire, don’t stand up and try to walk off the field just yet.  If it’s not immediately obvious you’re hit, run to the nearest cover and duck down.  Try to raise your hand and/or gun from behind cover and yell that you’re out.  A ref should come running to escort you off the field if you’re still taking fire.  Again, don’t blame people for overshooting you.  Everyone who plays this game will be on both ends of this type of exchange and any respectable player feels awful when they accidentally bonus-ball someone.  Cursing them out doesn’t help the situation in the slightest.  If you feel it was blatant, respectfully ask the ref and/or player about it.  Yes, emotions run high in this game and I’ve lost my temper a time or two.  But still try to keep it civil.

Never argue with the refs.  They’re likely not getting paid much, if at all, and they’re doing the best they can.  They don’t see everything and they will miss a call every now and then.  When two players exchange fire, it’s sometimes impossible to tell who shot who first.  Just accept the fact that you traded out shots and you’re both out.  If you think you hit an opponent, politely ask the player to check themself before asking a ref to do it.  It may sound trite but are you worried more about having fun or winning?  And no, they’re not the same thing.

Have Fun!

And so my young padawan, you’re on a long and enjoyable road through the world of paintball.  And so I say to you, “Welcome to the addiction, say goodbye to your money.”