I love stories of how games improve through playtesting. This look at Moving Out features a few interesting lessons, including dialog changes to make sure players go in with the right expectations (the line about insurance), a mechanic that was added because players expected it to be there (the co-op throw), art changes to improve readability and player communication (color-coding rooms), and the introduction of an Assist Mode to increase accessibility and “help more people enjoy the game”.
When developers don’t add enough accessibility options to their games, modders can come to the rescue.
This provides an object lesson in one of many reasons why “git gud” is a terrible response to people who want easy modes or other accommodations - as seen in this writeup, the presence of such accommodations is exactly what allows many players to git gud when they otherwise couldn’t.
It’s also worth pointing out that this is only possible when modding is possible - and thus, things that take control away from gamers (such as cloud-based games) are a genuine threat to accessibility.
Did you know that Minecraft started as a self-described clone of a game called Infiniminer made by Zach Barth of Zachtronics? I sure didn’t.
This video presents an interesting angle on the history of Minecraft and also a case study in the value that can be unlocked by allowing player freedom away from the game designer’s authorial intent - and how strange it is to have a game you created get changed into the most successful game of all time.
It’d be easy to dismiss the success of Animal Crossing: New Horizons as an accident of timing, simply the result of releasing just as the COVID-19 pandemic was kicking into gear - certainly it doesn’t hurt that the world needs that kind of gentle escapism now (even if Animal Crossing was never designed to be binge-played). Here, Rob Fahey argues that this is a clearly incorrect reading that dismisses the obvious value of and appetite for variety in gaming experiences beyond what the AAA industry typically offers up.
Tangentially, for what such a misreading looks like in hindsight, see the narratives around Myst. As I wrote before, “[G]aming has always had more subcultures than the social narrative has accounted for and when we refer to gaming as a monolith we distort reality by ignoring the experience and perspective of many, many people.”
Continuing his series in which he watches his non-gamer wife play various games, YouTuber Razbuten now takes a look at how several popular online competitive multiplayer games are experienced by an inexperienced gamer.
Key takeaways include that good tutorials are if anything even more important in these kinds of games, as understanding how to play affects not just one player’s experience but all of them, and a fear of making the game worse for other players can easily drive away exactly the sort of people you’d prefer to interact with online. Yet many games lack tutorials entirely, fail to point new players to them, or just convey the game’s basic mechanics without teaching the player how to actually use their toolkit and be a good teammate.
Additionally, it’s often very difficult to find matches against other players of similar skill levels, which can result in being frustratingly steamrolled while just trying to learn the game. One of the best solutions to both problems is to let players team up against bots - though even this often fails to convey the necessary skills to then play effectively against other humans.
Localization presents interesting challenges, but cultural differences run much deeper than language. It’s easy to think of any changes as censorship, but market realities are far more complex than that. Here, Kate Edwards provides a fascinating look at how to handle the trade-offs and pitfalls that can needlessly render games unsaleable in particular countries.
Letting the player have an effect on the environment is a great way to make a game’s world feel alive. Here, Damon Reece examines how Metroid Prime’s world can seem much more real than that of Dragon Age: Inquisition due to the former allowing the player’s actions to change that world.
Internalizing that there’s a “right” way to play games can ruin your ability to enjoy them.
In this op-ed, Nick Calandra writes about how adhering to others' ideas of how several prominent games should be played was ruining the games for him. Once he let himself “set [his] own parameters for how [he] wanted to experience [them]” he was able to play in the ways that made the games fun for him.
