This is my first post on this blog, but rather than give you some silly shpeel about it, I'm just going to jump in and talk about a game design conundrum that I feel has been on the minds of many a gamer and designer lately; the complexity of modern games - or the lack there of. (And if you actually want all that shpeel, you can find most of it in my profile on the right.)
Most hardcore gamers will complain that they feel that the last console generation has seen a disappointing drop in the complexity of games. This is usually seen as a ploy by the industry to pull in new players with simple gameplay and user-friendly interfaces. But any good game designer knows that game designs should be as simple as possible, so long as the gameplay is still intact. So then, where do we draw the line between engaging and oversimplified? When is a game fun and when is it too hard – or too easy - to follow?
In general, the best way to draw this proverbial line is to make sure that the player has a mental link from each part of your game to the next. For example, if you want the player to understand unblockable attacks, they need to already understand normal attacks and blocking. This way, the player has a frame of reference to use when assimilating the new information. So long as you follow this principle for everything throughout your game, from new items to level difficulty, your game progression should make sense to the player. If you've ever been told of a new piece of gameplay in a game and said, "Where the heck did THAT come from?!" this is likely because whoever designed the game didn't keep this "trail of bread crumbs" structure in mind.
But how much hand holding do we really need? Our players have been around for long enough that we can skip most of this stuff and just jump right into the core gameplay, right? Yes and no. There is some validity in the idea. It's never good to bog down a game with useless tutorials and the like. Most hardcore gamers feel babied if you try to re-teach them the basics of gaming. But at the same time, you can never know what exactly a player's frame of reference is. You might think that they already have experience with this type of game, but what if they don't? This is why even sequels to largely popular games like Halo and GTA still have tutorials. You never know if the player has played the previous games, and even then, you don't know how much they remember.
And then of course there's the question of drawing in new players that so many hardcore gamers groan at. As much as they might balk at the latest set of Wii mini-game titles, these releases and others like them are needed for the industry to grow. Just like the Super Marios and Sonics of our childhood years, the new crop of gamers needs that starting point for their journey into the legendary land of gaming. Games like these are simple enough for gamers to learn without prior gaming know-how, but complex enough to lead them further. A game as complex as say Starcraft 2 just can't do that, no matter how many tutorials you throw in.
So, while you may scoff at the simplicity or complexity of that game that you hate, just keep in mind that both types of games have an important role in the industry. The game may not be at the right skill level for you, but it's at the right one for someone.
