[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / edu / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ wiki / twitter / cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]

/games/ - Games

Password (For file deletion.)

Join our Matrix Chat <=> IRC: #leftypol on Rizon

File: 1702789339656.jpg (235.73 KB, 1284x1917, no it isnt.jpg)

 [Last 50 Posts]

It is better than a marker but the fact that it is so obvious it ruins immersion is an issue. Good game and map design naturally leads you to the ladder.
AAA slop is incredibly simplistic in terms of game design anyway. Both the marker and the yellow paint are there to make the slop assembly process more straightforward, neither of them is for the player's benefit. There's no good answer because the question is wrong.


Literally nothing wrong with the ladder being yellow, it stops the player getting lost. Stop crying about everything.


And they often color code them like that IRL. I have more qualms with ladders often just being splattered with paint rather than fully painted, though given RE4 takes place in a medieval castle it gets a pass.


This is a result of playtesting. Instead of using the feedback to improve the layout of the level or something, they just slap bright colors on things to make sure the worst playtesters won't get stuck.


What game is this?


It wouldn't be too much effort to do this in a more diegetic way that doesn't offend more attentive players.
>have a non-highlighted texture on the Important Thing
>set up a timer for the amount of time you want to allow before you draw attention to the thing
>when time is up, spawn a flock of pigeons that fly in front of the palyer's view and force camera lock-on
>the pigeons fly past the Important Thing and simultaneously shit all over it
>Important Thing is now bright white and the player is looking at it, without artificially breaking immersion


the problem is that games dont make every object interactable as a rule when it would be


<OP says it's better
>Stop crying about everything.


More specifically it's that they don't stay consistent about which objects of the same type are interactive. It's not really that hard to cover a ladder in a cage, make it broken, or otherwise signal that you can't use it.


>it is so obvious it ruins immersion
>AAA slop is incredibly simplistic in terms of game design anyway. Both the marker and the yellow paint are there to make the slop assembly process more straightforward, neither of them is for the player's benefit


and this is wrong because?


Both are true. The former is a consequence of the latter.


The solution is to just paint real ladders yellow. This is good game design because it's good design in general.


i played the entire intro to dead space without realizing you could stomp the crates.


Looks like RE4 remake. Player character looks like Ada, and the body on the ground looks like a Plaga cultist.


this, my intuition (apart from 'it's good design') is that a playtester or two couldn't find how to progress so they added an unmissable hint

lmao @u


all that budget and it still manages to be slop. not like most indie games are much better


How is it bad that people don't get stuck or lost? I mean I have been lost in videogames, it sucks. Having to look up a guide is infinitely more immersion breaking than it would be for there to be yellow ladders or other clear markers to follow.


You're presenting a false dichotomy here.


OP is the one saying any game with yellow ladders is 'slop', how is that not a false dichotomy.

Yes sure there is such a thing as good game design that leads you to the ladder naturally but that doesn't mean it's bad to have some extra reminders for people who missed whatever hints there were.


Highlighting usable objects like this is mandatory when the game is basically roller coaster ride in terms of interactivity. The world is cluttered with things that exist purely as window dressing to make environments nicer, that cant be in any way interacted with, so the only way for player to know which of them are actually usable is to make them obviously stand out.


Can you give me a single example of a game where literally everything in the environment is interactable? Or even the majority of things?


I really like her dress.




what false dichotomy is calling AAA games slop presenting


Let's bully all the AAA publishers.


GTA V, Deus Ex series, Dark Messiah of Might and Magic, Dishonored, Prey, FEAR, just to name a few crowners.


Bad example, most buildings cannot be entered, most objects can't be destroyed or interacted with, a lot of this gets patched by the modding community ofc.
>Deus Ex
Fair enough.
>Dark Messiah of Might and Magic, Dishonored, Prey
No idea why those are included.

I'm surprised nobody mentions Shenmue, Thief, The Elder Scrolls or Half-Life here. Or heck, THE SIMS, The Sims is basically made out of interactible objects. And I'm not even mentioning GMod because it doesn't even have any goals, it's just a sandbox.


Not everything needs to be interacted with if it doesn't serve the narrative or gameplay, tbh.


This. I would even say that too much interaction would ruin the immersion, like killing your own friends for literally no reason. That's why Gordon lowers his gun while looking at his allies in HL2. It still shoots somehow.


Yeah but this is an issue if there's a standard interactivity with something like ladders that doesn't work with all the ladders in the game.


Fair but not comparable to linear story driven games.

Haven't played some of these but as the other anons said, the environments are littered with locked doors, buildings that have no interior, cars you can't interact with (other than GTA), street furniture you can't sit on or whatever, and so on.


True but I don't know if that's the case in RE4 remake, in the original game the only non-interactivity that annoyed me was this kind of stuff


The anon that asked wanted examples with majority of things. I deliberately tried to not include obvious answers like Minecraft, Fallout or TES, so went with the other answers.


Even in Fallout a majority of buildings (in the cities) you can't go into. Skyrim yes you can interact in the sense of go into most buildings or places but I don't think that's comparable to a linear story based game. Almost all of Skyrim or Fallout are made up of premade templates which you see a bunch in other areas of the game whereas that's not the case with RE4 or similar. So yes I admit there is games where almost everything can be interacted with but I don't think open world games are inherently less 'slop' than linear ones.


File: 1702980136136.png (784.77 KB, 1920x1080, n99f5iqs3ah31.png)

Yeah I was always confused as to why Bethesda Fallouts have so much boarded up doors. It just does not make any sense and is frankly just plain lazy.
>I don't think open world games are inherently less 'slop' than linear ones.
Open world is just a level design format. The quality of game experience still lies in variety and meaningfulness of interaction, and given that open world games tend to have the player return to locations there should be always some kind lf difference every time you do, like new NPCs, enemy types, new level elements, sidequests and so on. Make it more worth the player's time than just completing yet another errand to retrieve some peasant's jumbo potatoes from an ogre.


I was going to say this too


Was going to say The Sims isn't open world but then I remember that The Sims 3 exists and that The Sims 4 is a major downgrade from it while also ditching the open world (while still loading like shit). Maybe it is an open world thing.


>>32610 (me)
Wait, but what about Thief 1-2? What about Hitman? Those aren't open world. Although their levels are hooge.


File: 1703022234866.png (884.79 KB, 780x624, ClipboardImage.png)

>Yeah I was always confused as to why Bethesda Fallouts have so much boarded up doors. It just does not make any sense and is frankly just plain lazy.
It is but it's not even the most egregious thing in that arena for those games. The problem with a lot of this stuff is that they are simultaneously doing "hand crafted" design and making the world too big. This is still an issue with linear games like RE4 where they are just cramming more "content" (detail) into the game so it "looks better." When you have to manually set up everything instead of having the level design be more organic and procedural, you create more work for less consistency.

On the one hand you could design a handful of ladders that always work like ladders and plop them down in a level wherever you need them. On the other hand, you can hand-design every individual ladder, either functional or useless scenery. The former is more efficient for development and more intuitive to the player. The latter is more "immersive" in the sense that the assets feel more unique and "real" but it doesn't function as well as a game. When you start sacrificing the playability of the game for this kind of "realism," you not only make the game less predictable, but you also spread your resources thinner and make it more likely to cause confusing design or outright errors. The trend of painting up the interactable parts of the level is essentially a coping mechanism for this approach becoming more typical.

In the name of "realism" we are getting shittier games that have to then actively go out of their way to sabotage that "realism" to recover some of functionality as a game. There's a whole lot of art theory about conveyance, and it's especially relevant to video games. Unlike looking at paintings in a gallery, your engagement with a game is usually time-dependent. You need to be able to register what's happening in the game pretty quickly. The best case scenario is clever and unintrusive design that effectively highlights the meaningful parts of the game world. Unfortunately, that type of design requires good coordination and planning so that for example the special colors or textures look correct regardless of the environment (lighting, etc varying a lot). Gamedev is also a very iterative process, so you'd have to keep redesigning these elements to keep them fitting the game as its visuals change. It's much much easier to do something glaring and obvious (and also will ensure fewer players miss it).


very good post explaining what op was getting at


Maybe they are the same person?


File: 1703078050789.jpg (22.31 KB, 555x361, amci.jpg)

If something looks like it has utility like you would expect but does not really provide it without explanation it is bad game design, especially in a realistic setting. Disappointing like someone giving you an apple, only for you to discover it is just a well-crafted fake just as you bite into it.


File: 1703082176415.png (264.34 KB, 441x603, ride.png)

>If something looks like it has utility like you would expect but does not really provide it without explanation it is bad game design, especially in a realistic setting.
I agree, that's kind of what my point was. It's also unrealistic, because duh obviously IRL a thing is a thing and can function as that thing. It's both bad game design and unrealistic. They keep doing it because it looks realistic and makes things look better which is what they're really after. Video games are often treated much more like a haunted house or theme park ride than some kind of simulated space you can mess around in. It's largely reduced to a series of spectacles with some basic interactivity to get you from one point to the next.


>why is water always colored blue?
>fucking unnecessary bullshit
this how retarded this guy sounds



I just encountered the absolutely worst version of this. I decided to give Dragon Age Inquisition a try (only to be reminded why I dropped it when it came out), and there, interactive objects are completely indistinguishable from background, or so small you cant really see them in 3th person camera, so you get dedicated "highlight all usable things in 5m radius" button. Meaning instead of actually looking around and engaging with the world, the game encourages you to spend most of the time just staring at the minimap while non-stop spamming the search key. Like how the fuck does this even happen, that is such a blatantly awful design it must have been obvious to everyone who tested that game during development.


File: 1703118399992.jpg (92.13 KB, 800x450, digital_gopnik.jpg)

I hate this kind of poorly thought-out visual """realism""" so much. Especially in fantasy games where you can in fact deviate from the medieval basis of the setting just fine provided you have a bit of background writing to back it up.


File: 1703118832467.png (1.89 MB, 1920x1080, ClipboardImage.png)

Assassin's Creed really normalized this bullshit with the "eagle eye" mechanic.


Ah yes, Asscreed. The series where everything looks so fucking drab and shit and uniform, you often have to turn your hereditary arab ninja glowie seeing powers to know what to do next. If first two games at least tried to keep some semblance of proper visual design, then practcally every Asscreed since 3 stsrted using the magic IR sight as a crutch while also spreading this trend on other action-adventure franchises like Witcher. A good cautionary tale for this kind of stuff if there is one.


File: 1703119877186.png (1.46 MB, 1280x720, ClipboardImage.png)

It's made worse by other games doing a better version of the idea.


Average classic rpg


True, but those had more sensible graphic design and clearly highlighted everything on screen. I mean previous Dragon Age games were like that, so with Inquisition someone had looked at that and went "Hey guys, can we make it worse?", which is running theme with that game.


This reminded me of how much I dislike the areas of MHW compared to the older games and the scoutfly/track system as a whole.

For all the praise Monster Hunter World gets for its environments/visuals, I despise how it bleed into the other aspects of the game. We want to move away from the "archaic" gameplay of the older games where you ran around zones separated by loading screens until you found the monster, threw a paintball at it, and it magically appeared on the map until he hidden timer ran out and you had to throw one again. The environments themselves can be reduced to flat circles with a visual theme (and ledges plastered around in the 4th gen games).

Then you move to World and the environments are heavily detailed and layered than previous games. The hunting needs to be more "immersive" so instead of the run around and paintball a monster of the past titles you now walk around and find monster tracks, but the environments have so much going on they need to glow bright when you're nearby otherwise people would spend forever finding the monster. However, even then people still get lost trying to navigate a labyrinth like the Ancient Forest so on top of that you need a visual to pathfind you to the next track/monster otherwise you'd spend half the hunt running lost. That's not getting into how a lot of areas in it are cramped, have environment details obscuring your view, etc. It feels like Capcom designed the Ancient Forest first to show it off because the other areas don't share its problems. There's a nice balance between visual detail and playability but one thing the Ancient Forest does well is that most of the sub areas in it are used whereas with the other areas (mainly coral highlands) it feels like the other areas are there for the sake of the environments being big more than anything. There's also a level of environmental interactivity the Ancient Forest has that the other areas don't beyond Rotten Vale and Hoarfrost Reach.

MHR, for being an even more streamlined and diluting the identity of the series even more than World, I can say at least the environments are enjoyable to fight monsters in and there's no wasted area that only exists for you to run in during a scripted story sequence.

tl;dr mhw strived to create realistic and open environments that necessitated shallow mechanics to help you find the monster that ends up being less engaging than the older system while the environments themselves prioritize fighting most monsters in the same 2-3 areas despite being larger than the past games


File: 1703186208231.jpeg (574.63 KB, 1569x2001, FzU8bgnWIAUSgdN.jpeg)

There's nothing wrong with scrubs getting lost in a video game. Games are supposed to be challenging. If you have the internet to complain about it, you can go look up a guide if you are really that stuck. It's no different than struggling to beat a difficult enemy.


Eh, I agree outright handholding is cancer, but so is poor level design that does not give any subtle clues on where to go next. Having a game's levels diegetically point you where to go with architectural elements, encounters and rewards is probably the best way to go about it like older games like Doom did.


I like getting lost in games. It's my favourite part of them.


this is true only when the intention is being challenging and it isnt an excuse for bad game design ("its a feature not a bug i swear")


Remember having a lot of great moment in Morrowind getting lost and for example ending up in Vivec instead of Balmora as a newbie. Barely can get that experience in newer games because everything just has to have markers now.


So I decided to reinstall the game again, because I am really craving that Bioware experience, I mapped the search key out of the keyboard and the game became significantly more enjoyable. Fuck looting, I dont care, if I happen to stumble upon item, fine, but Im not gonna run around searching for them anymore.


>Good game and map design naturally leads you to the ladder.
What's an example of this?

Because the design you're annoyed at seems like something that is perfect for those who don't play games alot.


That's cool.
I'd agree, but there's a limitation for me.

Like I've played and got lost in both fall out new vegas and 4, and I just got burnt from playing those games.
(I know there's a marker, but I still explore and aim to power up my character).


I have yet to see anyone use this word that wasn't a fuckwit.


Basically this, but I would be cheaper about it and pocket the money :P So I would put a few clever events into the game to advertise and hype the game as having TIME-TRIGGERED ENVIRONMENTAL HINTING AI TECH, but 95 % of these hints would just be characters mumbling and thinking aloud.


I think its a very convenient word for describing low-quality mass produced products.


IHot take: I would not really call most games slops, because even they are underwhelming there is still obviously a lot of time and effort sank into making them. The word "slop" calls to my mind more the countless shit zero-effort game apps featuring trendy characters that plague Google Play, or asset flip Unity games like Air Control.


Like I posted on another board there's a lot of games that are slightly above average but still have very interesting ideas and mechanics.


It's a term that was useful to describe a certain quick to create low effort thing for ten minutes until it became "things I don't like"


They defo addressed that on guiding lands, looking forward to how they design maps for the new monster hunter game.


Agree, I remember walking in a circle while playing the long dark, was a major “wow moment” as i was struggling not to freeze to death in a blizzard. Amazing feeling when i somehow discovered a place to take shelter in and so survived by the skin on my teeth. Not many games offer experiences like that.


The infected have workplace safety standards too. Stop being anti-worker.


Those are open world games where getting lost is part of the core gameplay loop. Getting lost in a linear game on the other hand is a sign of bad level design.


This debate started up over the demo for the sequel to the FF7 remake having climbing sections marked with yellow paint and I'm going to lose it if I see another uygha go "Devs did focus testing and found that yellow paint is objectively the best way to sign post and you're a capital G gamer if you criticize this in anyway" in response to "Is there not a more natural or subtle looking way to convey this within the game?"


File: 1707590389582.jpg (138.94 KB, 769x428, GF_avZkXUAEa2Ut.jpg)

stealing from some rando

> The problem with really obvious signposting, backseating NPCs, hand-holding etc… is that it robs the experience of a sense of discovery, surprise and mystery. It's disengaging when you never have to look or think or guess.

> I know people are probably sick of hearing about dark souls but I think the reason it resonated was that it's "old school" design elements created that sense of discovery - it was a game you learned through experience, surprise, rumour, conversations with friends, research
> And this, just as much as it's art design, level design and elliptical storytelling, keep it intriguing and surprising - it's a game where you don't feel like you already know everything and have seen everything after a half hour of playing
> The moment where you realize, after ten minutes of thinking and exploring, you need to look up - or the moment you talk to a friend - of even break down and hit a walkthrough and go "oh, duhhh" - is more powerful, memorable and engaging than a big sign saying "look up, dummy"


File: 1707601152816.png (1.96 MB, 1024x947, ClipboardImage.png)

jesus christ how horrifying


>>Good game and map design naturally leads you to the ladder.
>What's an example of this?
Ladders in real life are constructed and placed by humans for a purpose. In real life, you can increase your ladder-finding odds by asking where you would put the ladder if you lived there. This should also work in a game.

Likewise with other stuff. Consider a plant that works as health-restoring item in the game. Plants also have their preferences (sun light, water, not too much wind, right soil), and these should limit where the item can appear. Hollow structures with secret rooms inside should not have heavy stuff on top of them.

I don't know whether people are supposed to live in that area. If I were designing that game I wouldn't mark every stone you can climb, but it's normal that people modify their environment, so… (Would be more cool if you could take hints from animals moving around though.)


Why do we let autistic people have access to the internet?
The fact that low iq fucks get annoyed at paint covered surfaces that quickly and visually tell you where to go while masking it as "criticism" is just pathetic


OK Ben Garrison.


>low iq fucks get annoyed at paint covered surfaces
The irony in saying this when it's because playtesters not being able to figure out where to go and whining is the reason it's even there.


yeah and what's wrong with that? maybe you've played 1000 videogames but it's someone else's first or 10th, why does it annoy you that there's guardrails for them


> why does it annoy you that there's guardrails for them
It doesn't.


Ever since Valve started rigorously playtesting with the Half Life episodes, content has been getting simplified or removed to placate playtesters who get instantly frustrated and give up the moment the game stops holding your hand.


yeah everyone fucking points to those valve commentary tracks


>maybe you've played 1000 videogames but it's someone else's first or 10th
weird argument when old games werent like this. you know, when there were barely any games out there and you couldnt get them easily either


well old games were usually a lot simpler in terms of where to go, you come from the left of the screen and go to the right to finish the level. sometimes you go up and right.


File: 1707626256602.jpg (136.17 KB, 600x655, 1664270328931.jpg)

>most old games were easy because (describes a platformer)
lmao rpgs and the sort were hard as shit back then, stop being disingenuous


I didn't say 'easy' I said 'simpler'. And yes you can probably pick out some example of a super complicated and obscure game but you get the point I'm making.


not really, youre saying most games were simpler and then focus entirely on the single most simple genre


Well yes that's what most games were 'back then'. Not only platformers but beatemups and shooters and shootemups too.

I'm not gonna say there's absolutely been no 'casualisation' but I don't get why people would be mad at something totally innocuous like marked ledges and not the million other worse things like bad generic plots characters and dialog, lack of gameplay variety, and so on


>beatemups and shooters
Don't be silly, all the posts complaining about location markers are clearly meant to be specific to games that promise to players an element of exploration. And what players want is environmental hints or hints by NPCs that make sense within the game world, nudges instead of being lead by the nose. Even the word nudge might be too strong here for some.

As for myself, I'm not that nostalgic about getting lost in old games and knocking on walls for hours, I just want something a bit less crude than some of the "modern solutions" shown ITT.


>and not the million other worse things like bad generic plots characters and dialog, lack of gameplay variety, and so on
But people do complain about these too.


File: 1707701937275.jpg (264.36 KB, 2048x1308, GGEJkKzXcAAAQaP.jpg)


The levels in Left 4 Dead are 90% purely linear though. And they don't have any climbing up stuff.


>Don't be silly, all the posts complaining about location markers are clearly meant to be specific to games that promise to players an element of exploration. And what players want is environmental hints or hints by NPCs that make sense within the game world, nudges instead of being lead by the nose. Even the word nudge might be too strong here for some.

I don't want any of my games to be Morrowind. People talk about how cool that game was but have you ever really tried to play it? I play games for fun not to be constantly just lost and having to look things up anyway.

I will say though that I enjoyed Star Control II where I had to physically make notes about stuff. Maybe if games tried to reintroduce those kind of skills it wouldn't be so bad. But nowadays the game would have to literally tell the player at the start 'hey you need a notepad and pen to play this game'.


File: 1707722473171.png (78.79 KB, 810x800, 1b4_png.png)


Yikes can't you number the panels


Any trick that works for a linear path would also work for multiple linear paths in the same environment (which is generally what non-linear actually means).


File: 1707724136390.mp4 (5.76 MB, 684x512, animation.mp4)

You are not a true gamer if you first sexual experience was not humping the walls in Doom, looking for the secret passage.


I played Morrowind for years and never had too much of an issue with its directions. The rest of the series on the other hand treats the player as an ADD child with early onset dementia to the point that they do not even give you proper directions.


I only play games made for drooling troglodytes where every object I need to interact with glows and flashes bright yellow. This is literally good game design btw


not even similar


File: 1707766193031.jpg (30.5 KB, 599x567, 1581977095849.jpg)

>capitalism has dumbed down books, shows, films, music… to appeal to the lowest common denominator
<so true!
>capitalism has dumbed down video games to appeal to the lowest common denominator
<ableist chinlet!
I'm all for more people playing games but it also does not mean I want every player to play every game just like every movie doesn't have to appeal to every viewer.


I just think we should be worried about dumbed down plots, gameplay, etc, not yellow ledges


It is dumbed down gameplay though. It removes the aspect of the game where you have to pay attention to figure out the cues.


"yellow paint" in games isn't really about yellow paint, it's a metonym for decades of frustration from people who feel less engaged with many mainstream games because they tend to treat the player like a baby - the actual paint is a proxy and sorta beside the point


Stop talking about the fucking yellow paint then.

In my opinion, just being lost and wondering around areas you've already been trying to find where to go isn't 'gameplay' in a meaningful sense.


im sorry your feeble mind is incapable of abstraction


>post talks about exactly what you want people to talk about
<um why are you hyperfocusing on le paint
>handholding is part of gameplay too
<um it isnt because i dont like it
Love the discourse, bay-bee.


This topic has an OP of the yellow paint and people are continuing to talk about the yellow paint.


>In my opinion, just being lost and wondering around areas you've already been trying to find where to go isn't 'gameplay' in a meaningful sense.
In fact, this is one of the most unpopular opinions you could possibly have considering the overwhelming popularity of open world games where 90% of the time is spent wandering around finding the way.


File: 1707789856807.png (28.28 KB, 918x515, 8f4a906f41b39429.png)

Even kenny's getting in on it


>just being lost and wondering around areas you've already been trying to find where to go isn't 'gameplay' in a meaningful sense.
Slander misrepresenting the APF (anti-paint faction). We don't ask for totally hidden things to be found only by headbutting all the walls, we ask for subtle cues in environment and storytelling.

The cues can even be painting, it just should not be something ruining the vibes of the game world. Some gang in the game's world might use invisible ink and UV light to signal things to each other. You just can't put me into a jungle where I'm the only human and then there is paint bukkake everywhere (did the snakes do that?) and expect me to not roll my eyes.


So they just want yellow paint, but not yellow?


Yellow paint is just an example.
Of course this is about some broader pattern.
Universal design principles are not so universal…

After all, industrial UI design is for speed and simplicity on the job.
Real world matters.
Environments in games are supposed to offer challenge.

Design that simplifies takes away challenge.
Ultimate simplification would be turning the game into a movie.
Make it possible to fail or you don't have a game.
But of course we want hints, they have to be subtle though (more subtle than this post).


What I personally want from games are:
>no untraversible waist-high fences or boxes
>no pointers
>no paint

If you need me to feel confined, I want to feel REALLY confined. Not just feel confined because my character is on a wheelchair apparently. Invisible walls are also sus but you can just make it so every time you want to exit an open location the character will be like "Where tbe fuck am I going?"


Yeah I wish more games would just be like 'I don't need to go that way' instead of contriving blockages.


>instead of contriving blockages
It's not just blockages. It's """blockages."""

At least doors in Stanley Parable are unopenable because they're locked. At least there's a logical explanation.


What's more unimmersive: the character not being able to go that way or all environments being completely blocked except for the route(s) that are there for the player character. With the latter, the fiction surrounding the NPCs makes no sense. Why are these people distributed evenly along a winding corridor with no way in or out except the end points?




File: 1708777534479.png (942.05 KB, 975x1037, 5478346946953.png)

The thing with that example (FF7) is that you also have a non-world marker already telling you you can climb the cliff.

In fact, I'm going to say it, the best markers and so on are, indeed, those that just sign you that there's a thing there in a non-world way. As in, a literal translucent arrow pointing towards a place, to put an example, there's: >>32633 . That's a non world sign, it's clearly obvious that that sign isn't there on the world of the game, but put there by the devs in order to communicate with the player, if you have problems with such non-world communication, the HUD in of itself is also a non-world communicator, like the minimap is as well; text-boxes are also non-world communicators, in reality there shouldn't be any text-boxes (or subtitles) and you would only listen and attend whatever the NPC is telling you verbally in their own language (english, japanese, spanish…); your HP and MP are also non-world communicators, people don't say "I'm low on health points, -5 points and I'm dead", they might say "I'm feeling weak right now" but that isn't a direct reference to the HP, how many HP points do YOU have right now?
You don't know, and the character you're playing doesn't know either. Do objects that matter to you/MC shine brightly like a lightbulb? No, and in that world they do not as well, but the devs let that object shine in order for you to get it. It isn't part of the world.

Non-world communicators are communicators that display only for the player and not for the characters of the game, and thus are probably the best non-world communicators, easy to understand, and completely realistic because the player inherently knows that that sign isn't in the world itself, but a non-world communicator left by the devs to make the players life easier.

This is, in part, the problem I have with the games that apply the yellow (or any colour) treatment to important objects. In games like Mirror's Edge they're important because the game is, exactly, about going fast as fuck. The game's plot doesn't matter, gameplay does, and it benefits a lot thanks to the treatment of the red paint which also contributes to the art department of the game, in games like Uncharted, which try to go for maximum realism, I can somewhat understand it, and the devs also try to hide the fact they're using yellow, but in FF7 you have the yellow paint in a cliff, which also has a non-world marker, in a game which is really fucking blunt about where you have to go, and this cliff looks like it's on a habitated place, on the moment they're going to the lab and shit during the flashback. Are you telling me that the goverment has set up a lab in order to make weird mutants and shit in secrecy, and the scientist, in order to get there, have to go through a cliff everyday, so much that they have actually painted yellow the cliff? Or better yet, the scientist live in the lab, and thus they have actually gave away their location by unsubtlelly painting the parts of the cliff necessary to reach it? Wouldn't have it been better to just get some string ladder there that you can withdraw so people don't go climbing the cliff towards your secret lab (wasn't the lab also the energy plant of the town?)

Once you implement a "subtle" in-world communicator, such as the yellow paint, in an absolutely lazy and brute way, people start to ask questions about why is that in the world. If the answer isn't found in the game, then it takes the person out of the experience. Meanwhile, non-world communicators don't take the player out of the world because it's honest, it's just a help from the dev.

That's about it. In-world communicators depend on lying to the player meanwhile non-world communicators do not, and of course, if in-world communicators actually work if it is actually able to convince the player that it's part of the scenery and not put there by the developers. When it doesn't work because there's no actual reason for that to be painted yellow, the player will feel either cheated because the devs think they can deceive him and thus the devs think he's a fucking imbecile, or amused because the devs ridiculed themselves in their puny attempt at trickery.

It's all about the devs being honest or not, really.


File: 1708838987323.jpg (679.49 KB, 1442x1442, 1708826022229304.jpg)

>screen goes black and white except for the color yellow
>camera pans over to a flight of stairs with yellow markings
>time slows down
>Inner monologue: "Hmm.. I should try using those stairs to get up"
>game pauses
>pop up appears on screen
>"Yellow marks may indicate areas of interest"
>"Press any key to continue"


File: 1708841698857.png (228.64 KB, 640x360, ClipboardImage.png)

Yeah using UI is less annoying than trying to convey the game mechanics diegetically if they can't do better than yellow paint. I mean, not everything has to be diegetic. I think this comes from the attempt to be "cinematic" in AAA games, which they think means diegetic. But one of the hallmarks of cinema is the orchestral score, which is non-diegetic. The camera and lighting aren't usually diegetic either. Cinema frequently uses special lights on an actor's face to get the desired effect for a scene, and obviously the camera and everything associated with it isn't meant to actually be there in the world (unless it's a stylistic choice).

Tbh I feel like this is just growing pains for the medium figuring out what's too much or too little of something to work best.


Growing pains in a medium that is over 50 years old and that didn't have this 20 years ago?


File: 1708843875996.png (384.95 KB, 1024x450, ClipboardImage.png)

Yeah, just like how cinema had growing pains when CGI was introduced despite being like 100 years old as a medium. Sometimes things change and it takes a while to adapt.


jfc you're so close. 99% of commeercial games are this to a greater or lesser degree. They're designed to
>be as sticky as possible
>give a sense of achievement
>waste your most productive and energetic years
>maintain studio or designer credibility to encourage future purchases
You sound like you're expecting porky to include training, education or a challenge in the slop.


I think having an arrow is justified if your character knows the road very well, it wouldn't make sense for the character to just fumble around in search of a specific house.


The thing is that the arrow isn't a manifestation of the character knowing where to go (although I can see that being a cool idea tbh) in of itself, but the devs telling you where to go.
The arrow in of itself is not in-game, it's not "real". It is a tool used by the developer to talk to the player.

What I can see, tho, is these arrows and non-world communicator (or non-diegetic) being taken out in a harder difficulty, meanwhile an easier difficulty featuring more signs and so on.


Honestly, I hate the non-immersive UI design and gameplay mechanics like all those insta-kills in Splinter Cell Conviction and Splinter Cell Blacklist (in the case of Red Dead Redemption this is justified ON CONSOLES since the camera controls on a gamepad are dogshit). I even hate the minimap (except for GTA where it is somewhat justified). The things I do not object to are the inventory (because implementing bag exteriors is a waste of time), HP and MP (because we can't really "feel" heavy injuries or tiredness) and other simplifications of regular things such as the map (duh), the objectives (notepad) and spells (memory/reading). The reason all of them are a part of the UI is that they're either a part of your character's mind or are simply too hard to implement with 3D objects.

Same with a third-person camera: it's not that it's third-person to make the game easier (in beat 'em ups/slashers and action-RPGs at least). It's to prevent your from having a vertigo due to all the camera spinning. Plus close-quarter fighters and battle mages turn their body and head seperately, they aren't cars. Plus the animations look cool.

Misunderstanding this is missing the point. Which the AAA game designers constantly do nowadays.


>>33859 (me)
Also, the insta-kills can be forgiven to Conviction since it's more of a third-person shooter like RDR than a stealth game. You can't feel like a pro marksman if you can't kill anyone with one bullet.


>>33860 (me)
Then again, not on PC. Not on PC.


Wow, the state of modern gaming. I feel like I'm blessed to have a shitty pc and can't play anything made after 2013.


>the state of modern gaming
What a cringe overdone stock phrase with zero validity other than AAA publishers producing slop and bad PC ports because they don't give a crap.


> AAA publishers producing slop and bad PC ports because they don't give a crap
Its what I'm referring to. I can't wrap my head around the idea of paying 70 dollars to play chore simulators.


That's not "modern gaming" though. "Modern gaming" is too broad of a term to use here, it's misleading. AAA gaming becoming white is merely the natural consequence of gaming becoming mainstream, it happens to all media in capitalism. It happened to electronic music too, just look at the fucking Tomorrowland, European minimal "techno" producers, Skrillex and Angerfist, I hate this crap. I. Hate. This. Tasteless. "Music."

Unique IPs: 34

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / edu / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ wiki / twitter / cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]