45
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 28 Sep 2023
45 points (95.9% liked)
Patient Gamers
20173 readers
31 users here now
A gaming community free from the hype and oversaturation of current releases, catering to gamers who wait at least 12 months after release to play a game. Whether it's price, waiting for bugs/issues to be patched, DLC to be released, don't meet the system requirements, or just haven't had the time to keep up with the latest releases.
Relavent communities: !games@lemmy.world !games@sh.itjust.works !retrogaming@lemmy.world !videogamesuggestions@lemmy.zip !linux_gaming@lemmy.world
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
I think that we mostly agree. My contention is that pretty much the entire game should still be engaging to play; having a long total play time shouldn't excuse that, and a shorter play time simply doesn't allow for it. Plenty of games have shown that it's possible to gradually layer mechanics one or two at a time, creating experiences around those smaller subsets of abilities that are still entertaining. I work in education and this idea is vital to what I do. Asking students to sit down and listen quietly as I feed them a mountain of boring details while promising, "Soon you'll know enough to do something interesting, just a little longer," is a sure-fire recipe for losing my audience.
And as I think you may have intimated, creating environments that require the use of only one ability at a time reduces those abilities to a boring list. When you've finally taught the player each ability in isolation, and suddenly start mixing everything up once they get to the "good part" of the game, they'll virtually have to "relearn" everything anyway.
We don't need to give the player everything at once to make our games interesting, but we do need to make sure that what we're giving them piecemeal is interesting in the moment.