What Game Design means and why it matters

[ZombieDupe]

Some may have seen some of my takes on what I think this game should do differently, and I try my best to explain that. This probably belongs more in off-topic than anywhere else, but DS/DST have been by far the biggest examples of failed game design that I have seen from the games I have played and seen others play, so I'm sticking it here. This relates a lot particularly to The Combat Gap topic I posted a while back, which I recommend reading through after this if you're inclined. It's just that many people who have played the game don't seem to get to the point of understanding what the game doesn't do well to actually give a proper critique on things like its gameplay loop and progression, Steam reviews are Overwhelmingly Positive for both games but they often don't express any understanding of the game. If they did, I'm sure these games would not get the level of appraisal that they have all these years.

But I urge everyone reading this, and the developers at Klei to really take a look at this video and evaluate the content that is in this game already and how and why many people fail to progress in the game entirely. This is why I think we need more updates like the Reap What You Sow, particularly for existing items and progression because there is a lot of potential for things that just end up not working or ever being used even when you get good at the game, bar decoration. For example, items with a functionality ending up as just decoration at best means the practical use for an item has failed. First thing that comes to mind is the Nap Sack, you are better off just deconstructing it for shroom skins if you need, you would never actually throw it to put things to sleep when panflute is overall much cheaper and more effective.

 

 

[ADM]

I've read a lot of wild, good and bad criticisms around video games on their gameplay, aesthetic and so many other aspects but you just decide to drop by and claim the whole game design is a monumental failure without elaborating further than linking a 20 min long video, some old topic and random niche features any game has.
Not to mention I haven't watch the vid but that kind of content certainly isn't the most relevant analysis to give if you wish to address issues to game developers that already have quite a large background or just people who already played games who aren't just there for the funnies. All games will be different, some has generic introductions and some prefer to let you get used to it and the latest is more favourable for such an unique sandbox survival as Don't Starve that will rather let you explore its options than guiding you through any element of the HUD as some platform games and others would do, but this very select game types doesn't rely on a short play duration and as a result you get used to as you desire to progress. This is a successful process of introduction that contributes to the global game design and will apply from the very start to the on-going of your experience.

So you either have no idea what game design is and so I encourage you to get more used to this industry vocabulary or reevaluate how and why this game is designed as it is in combat and other key elements. But in both case you should just avoid jumping to the conclusion nobody review is correct but yourself regardless they are casual players or pay attention to the game they paid for :
"My opinion : good and strong, your opinion : bad and weak.

[BezKa]

"if only people understood game design, they wouldn't enjoy games that much"

Sounds like a really bad thought design. 

People play the games they are enjoying. That means they like them. That means they are good enough to make a lot of people like them. You seem to have some really weird standards, or ideas on how a game should look and play, and if that prevents you from enjoying anything different than your imagined perfect game, then my condolences. 

I've been suggested this video by YouTube like 60 times already, and it still sounds like a meme compilation. And I never watched it because, well, I'm a gamer. I don't care how non-gamers see the games I play or not play. And as a person that plays video games, I know what I enjoy and what I don't. 

"Bad game design" gets thrown around on these forums really often. And I can see it's slowly becoming the term for "thing I don't like". Tough luck. 

6 hours ago, ZombieDupe said:

Steam reviews are Overwhelmingly Positive for both games but they often don't express any understanding of the game.

What does this even mean. The reviews should be short and to the point. Not everyone can write an essay on the game. 

Understanding of the game? "Ah yes, this does look like a Sandbox survival with a hint of creepiness, how delightful" 

Also also, you named the topic as if you planned to explain what Game Design means, yet I see no definition or anything. What is game design and why it matters? You have given no answer to these questions.

[minespatch]

37 minutes ago, BezKa said:

"Bad game design" gets thrown around on this forums really often. And I can see it's slowly becoming the term for "thing I don't like".

Quote

Hollow knight needs a easy mode. One two slash and continue the story.

[HowlVoid]

Did it ever occur to you that perhaps the reason why this game is fundamentally different from what you consider a "good game" is because it doesn't appeal to you?

What you're doing is shoving your opinion down people's throats and that isn't going to sway anyone. 

I suggest you try again but this time without looking down on us like we're idiots that don't know why we enjoy the game. 

[GenomeSquirrel]

I recommend you give more examples and more common place ones than an optional boss, and explain how you to make them better.

 

Also keep in mind that while you might not like decorative items, some people enjoy that the most.

[Mike23Ua]

I’m pretty sure there are 4 yr olds out there that know game design better than I EVER did, but as someone who has been on this planet 34 years and has played pretty much anything you can name (including games on my grandparents ancient Atari) What I DO recognize clearly is PATTERNS- Every single game on the planet falls into a Pattern of some sort, a strict “thing” it is intended to do, for example- if you go right now and play state of decay: The pattern would be collect resources, keep your community alive, kill zombies, rinse repeat for eternity. If you go play Batman you may mash a few punch and block buttons, use a few segments of stealth rinse repeat to create the entire game.. GTA- Go here, do this, complete X task for Y purpose- Rinse Repeat..

In fact the movie PIXELS explains game PATTERNS better than my description here probably does..

But what makes people play games (well at least what makes me play them) is finding something I like and enjoy about them that keeps me entertained- And because of that very purpose: I know what I would LIKE to see in Klei’s game but at the exact same time- Any one persons opinion shouldn’t be enough to sway the way the game is developed.

For example- Klei’s been listening to people when it comes to things like being able to change game settings to add more or less of this particular mob or resource to your world- So you can literally play the game the way YOU feel like playing it at the time.

The game can LITERALLY be as Easy or as HARD as you personally want it to be.. You think killing butterflies for easy hunger and food restoration or souls as Wortox is too easy?? Turn butterflies OFF are you crazy like me and want to see Wendy’s biggest weakness intensified? Set Nightmare Monsters to TONS..

I really don’t think you have any idea what your talking about here- you don’t have to be a professional game designer to have played games your entire life and know what you like and don’t like about a game.

AND in that same light- you shouldn’t have to go quote “Make your own game or use Mods” to get features and QOL changes that will make your game more enjoyable for you.

there are MANY people who dislike wildfires, Yet there’s a game option to toggle them to happen MORE OFTEN. There’s also a game option to TURN THEM OFF COMPLETELY.

Dont Starve Together is a game that continues to change the rules- it still has a pattern mind you (keep all those fancy bars managed or Die) But it’s also a game unlike many others- you don’t like Hound attacks? Toggle LESS or NONE, You want more Saladmander to spawn on your Lunar Biomes? Set them to MORE

I honestly don’t see why anyone is complaining about this game when all the options to modify it to your personal play preferences are.. and more importantly CONTINUE to be added with each update/QoL patch.

[Guille6785]

honestly this game just might not be for you

[MondayNight]

Letting aside the fact DS/T is a Survival Sandbox where you pretty much make your own adventure, discovering at your own pace a pretty unforgiving world and its.. rather simple basic mechanics (combat for example - very basic, but effective). What you point out with your video is the fundamental difference between "gamers" and "normies" more than anything. "Gamers" usually started playing games regularly at a young age, when one learns very quickly, has a lot of energy and free time, can experiment a lot (hence why they play a lot of genres and are proficient at it). "Normies" or "casuals" often dwell into games later in life and do so sparsely. They learn them harder, more-so since the interests' pyramid has other stuff on its lower levels. That's why they more-often-than-not need assistance, tutorials and "Easy Modes". And, while nowadays they may be making bulk of player-bases, at least on mobiles, by no means they should influence the core game designs. Yes, their experience should be taken into account, still as stated, not for fundamental game design. You can advocate in DST's case for a tutorial of sorts, and that might come in future, depending on number of lobbyists. But what made DS/T famous in first place wasn't this "walk me by hand" "participation trophy" mentality, and its fan base is in accordance to said principle - "uncompromising survival" (or at least what remained of it in multiplayer context).

[ArubaroBeefalo]

part of the game experience is discovering how the game works, removing it means removing a lot of hours of fun in one of the many ways of being played depending of experience and knowledge (you start worlds where you die for dumb things->later you learn to survive enough to experiment with bosses or scary biomes->you barely die and take advantage of most of the game potential), each layer of experience in this cryptic game, being a puzzle is part of its charm, brings a new game. For that there is players with hundred or thousands of hours, because the game is huge and long for this layers

if klei removed that back in the day i probably wont liked the game as much, we are talking about a niche game so it could not be for you, they would remove hundred of hours of playing like a noob with all the laughting that means

 

edit: also the game brings you tools to learn at your own rhythm with the world settings. If a "no gamer" person wants to learn to play without suffering they can remove night, hounds, winter, summer, treeguards, add more food.... all they need to learn little by little or to just play in a "non hardcore" way and have fun like they want

and for pc players exists the workshop which a big portion of the mods there are for making the game easier

[BezKa]

1 minute ago, ArubaroBeefalo said:

part of the game experience is discovering how the game works

this. I wish I could forget everything I know and go through discovering this world again. Because it was incredibly fun. The topic Nostalgic noob memories  is perfect for showing how people went about discovering the game and how many fun adventures they had. Every time something new is added, I'm excited like a child at the prospect of having more to discover.

[ArubaroBeefalo]

Just now, BezKa said:

this. I wish I could forget everything I know and go through discovering this world again. Because it was incredibly fun. The topic Nostalgic noob memories  is perfect for showing how people went about discovering the game and how many fun adventures they had. Every time something new is added, I'm excited like a child at the prospect of having more to discover.

totally, for that i love to introduce the game to my friends and see their reactions and crazy questions hahaha

[viberr]

I think DST has a really amazing design 

I, as a human, am a very "phase-like" person 

I constantly go from loving a game to two weeks later losing that love and passion I had and then a year late, getting that love and passion back.

it happens to me with every game I play. I'm constantly on and off when it comes to video games I like(I have the same thing with music)

but out of every game I've played, Don't starve manages to last a very long time before I get bored of it 

and that the fact it can do that, to me, tells me that the game has a very fun design that I can play multiple times over before getting bored 

and its seems that you OP are trying to say that everyone should look at every little detail and every little thing and sure if everyone did do that, I don't think DST would be as popular as it is 

but what's important, is that the game is fun, and to me(and a bunch of others)it is 

so I disagree with you OP, good day to you

[Erineyes7]

If you want my opinion, I feel it's easier to show through a different game, Spelunky 2.

Spelunky 2 is like Don't Starve in the fact that you start with nothing, and can gain nothing for your next run, Nothing but Knowledge. In these games, Knowledge is power, understanding what is and isn't dangerous, and how you can engage with it. Most new player will end up dying over and over again, without making much progress, or quite understanding how things work. But eventually it all connects and that progress, that understanding, is what makes the game so fun. The game didn't tell you anything, you figured it out by yourself, and that's the reward.

Of course DST differs in it's more nuanced systems and stats, and not all parts are made equal, but the use of the deconstruction staff on nap-sacks rewards the player for interacting with it's systems in a creative way, and that's progress.

Progress is why it appeals to me (and of course it's lovely style).

This games asks a lot, it does, but if you really don't want to, you don't have to answer.

[Bugsworth]

13 hours ago, ZombieDupe said:

 DS/DST have been by far the biggest examples of failed game design that I have seen

you can't argue with taste. if you think its bad game design that's your fault/taste. have you ever wondered why dont starve took off? to me, i believe it did something brave and unique with giving you absolutely no tips and throwing you into a harsh perma death environment. not everyone can get down to this idea/gameplay, some examples are the person i gifted the extra copy to. its not failed, it still has an active growing community which is success, its just that you don't like it i think. also, unless it had only a few hours of development, no game can really be bad. that come down to taste 

[GamePlayer42]

i think the game is pretty good and i disagree what ur saying

[Mike23Ua]

40 minutes ago, Bugsworth said:

you can argue with taste. if you think its bad game design that's your fault/taste. have you ever wondered why dont starve took off? to me, i believe it did something brave and unique with giving you absolutely no tips and throwing you into a harsh perma death environment. not everyone can get down to this idea/gameplay, some examples are the person i gifted the extra copy to. its not failed, it still has an active growing community which is success, its just that you don't like it i think. also, unless it had only a few hours of development, no game can really be bad. that come down to taste 

You’ve never played ET those game cartridges literally sit buried in a land field somewhere as the #1 failed video game of all time.

But I understand what your saying, and the TL:DR version of my own post was that the game literally has a menu full of things you can toggle on/off more/less over- so it can literally be custom tailored to exactly HOW you feel like playing at the time.

In fact: During Mid-Summers Cawnival I turned off all the challenging stuff just to spend a few mindless hours doing the highly unimportant to the core gameplay (but also fun) limited time event stuff.

[Memetan]

[MilesUpshore]

where's that video that explains why klei devs removed player objectives from don't starve due to playtesters' feedback

also if this game is failed game design, then why are many people still playing it and having fun? you really need to elaborate with reasons why rather than slapping a "game design failure" label and not explaining where it fails

[Frashaw27]

3 minutes ago, MilesUpshore said:

where's that video that explains why klei devs removed player objectives from don't starve due to playtesters' feedback

 

[Bugsworth]

39 minutes ago, MilesUpshore said:

you really need to elaborate with reasons why rather than slapping a "game design failure" label and not explaining where it fails

i have a theory, they are farming bad karma from bad reactions. or its a skill issue, they died on day one and called it a bad game. i dont actually know, those are just some theories  

[minespatch]

1 hour ago, MilesUpshore said:

that explains why klei devs removed player objectives from don't starve due to playtesters' feedback

 

[Stonetribe]

It seemed to me that most of the people replying to this thread didn't actually take the time to watch the video that op linked, so to give them the benefit of the doubt I decided to check it out myself to see how it might bring up any good points that could be used to argue that don't starve has terrible game design.

And, no, it really doesn't.

The video is about a little experiment this guy did where he had his wife, someone with almost zero experience playing video games, play though the beginning of like eight different video games. In it, he's mostly talking about the many different and subtle things that can confuse someone when trying to learn how to play a game and how it works. Only, the thing is that most of these things apply to the learning process of video games as a whole and the many things gamers become accustomed to over time such as the now common concept of moving your camera to better see your surroundings. I mean sure, someone who has never touched a video game will have more trouble with a game like don't starve compared to something simpler like say, the original super mario bros, but there will still be confusion regardless.

So, yeah, not a very compelling argument at all.. I guess I should have expected as much after the thread complaining about the tackle box getting a skin though.

[Yuuko]

Its kinda hard to argue a game with overwhelmingly positive reviews has bad game design for the same reason its hard to argue a beloved story is actually written "wrong."  If people are entertained by an entertainment, in what way has it failed?

As some have said - maybe its not for you.

There are some games where you get ramped up into what the game wants you to do and you quickly do that thing until the game is over.  DST is not that type of game.  To start with the developers specifically designed the game to NOT tell you what to do so that you could figure that part out yourself.  Some people might immediately go to the combat tab, fighting their way through any enemies they find.  Others might avoid enemies and combat entirely, preferring to seek out key resources like armor, healing, and allies.  The point of DST is that you decide what "playing the game" is.

One thing I like to do in DST is disable my attack button and see how I can fair.

I'd recommend reading up on Emergent Gameplay - its something the video you linked doesn't realize is a thing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergent_gameplay

[SinancoTheBest]

23 hours ago, ZombieDupe said:

This is why I think we need more updates like the Reap What You Sow

What do you even mean by that? Updates like Reap What You Sow and Hook Line & Inker aim to add more depth to existing mechanisms while inharently making them harder to pick up, especially for non-gamers, quite opposite of what you're arguing, that DST should explicidly aim to guide players how to play (Which is a suggestion that goes against the very philosophy of the wilderness feeling the game is going for).

 

I assure you that players who struggled to farm with the old farms due to their lack of prior gaming experience and transferred knowledge have even a harder time now, finding the rigamajig, trying it out, deploying it, figuring to craft a hoe, opening the plant registry, understanding how the nutrients or stress factors work, how to maximize yield etc. All this knowledge is even more demanding of reading guides, watching tutorials or having someone knowledgeable teach them. And it is a good thing, it's not a failure of game design, it's just the main design philosophy of the game that there is no explicid in-game guidence and knowledge is best acquired through tapping to the social, "Together" aspect of the game.