I dont get it, if beating hard parts of a game is fun for you then you dont have to use it. Others may not find that fun and can skip parts. Everyone would win
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
‘Unskippable gameplay’ is the new ‘unskippable cutscenes’
- Thread starter dock
- Start date
There's no easy solution to this problem.
You can decide to force the player to do "special" sections in order to achieve your artistic vision, and this will make some people not finish the game and will hurt the replay value for sure, but these risks exist.
One think is having some hard/tedious boss or area like in the Souls games, that you will know how to face in a more optimal way in further playthroughs. But a totally different thing is forcing the player to endless barely interactive walking sections or forcing constant badly implemented half-assed minigames/side-mechanics to make the game more diverse instead of creating a more robust game. The former is the main reason I won't play games like Uncharted, God of War or other big "cinematic" games, and the latter is the reason I'm not excited at all to replay Nier Automata or TW 101.
And I liked all these games, but are far less re-playable because some decisions the developers made, which is fine, not all the games need to be really replayable.
You can decide to force the player to do "special" sections in order to achieve your artistic vision, and this will make some people not finish the game and will hurt the replay value for sure, but these risks exist.
One think is having some hard/tedious boss or area like in the Souls games, that you will know how to face in a more optimal way in further playthroughs. But a totally different thing is forcing the player to endless barely interactive walking sections or forcing constant badly implemented half-assed minigames/side-mechanics to make the game more diverse instead of creating a more robust game. The former is the main reason I won't play games like Uncharted, God of War or other big "cinematic" games, and the latter is the reason I'm not excited at all to replay Nier Automata or TW 101.
And I liked all these games, but are far less re-playable because some decisions the developers made, which is fine, not all the games need to be really replayable.
Most mobile RPGs will grind themselves. Nintendo has several games that let you skip or cheese hard levels. When all else fails, Youtube and live vicariously through someone better.
Though I find this preference of "I need to finish with minimal frustration" to be more generational. It would seem being a part of the social zeitgeist is really what gamers focus on these days over the basic challenge and process of playing. Not to say that's wrong but I wonder how self-reflective people are about it.
Though I find this preference of "I need to finish with minimal frustration" to be more generational. It would seem being a part of the social zeitgeist is really what gamers focus on these days over the basic challenge and process of playing. Not to say that's wrong but I wonder how self-reflective people are about it.
Ahhh Clank sections in Ratchet and Clank.
Absolutely hate playing the Clank sections ruins the replayability a lot.
If there's another forced Clank section in the next R&C game ima pass.
Absolutely hate playing the Clank sections ruins the replayability a lot.
If there's another forced Clank section in the next R&C game ima pass.
I'm all in favor of making games more accessible. I play every game on the easiest difficulty and even then I've played games that piss me off too much to continue.
An option to skip a fight or some difficult section that has no story content could pop up for the player after X unsuccesful attempts. But being able to skip directly would probably be abused in some way or another, some people could ruin their own enjoyment of the game by compulsively skipping sections to see the next story bit.
However for hacking minigames and QTE, an option to skip or autocomplete them would be welcome ; Spider-man PS4 did that perfectly.
However for hacking minigames and QTE, an option to skip or autocomplete them would be welcome ; Spider-man PS4 did that perfectly.
If your game is so bad that people don't want to play it then maybe fix the game instead of creating "auto pilot"?
Games should be enjoyable and playable. If they're not, they're bad games. If you don't have to play them then they aren't games at all.
Games should be enjoyable and playable. If they're not, they're bad games. If you don't have to play them then they aren't games at all.
Why would you not want to experience everything the game has to offer? What is the fun in skipping sections? Huh?? I get some parts in games are bad/annoying but clicking a button and skipping them is just lame. Skipping lame hacking minigames in SPiderman or QTE's is fine though.
It wouldn't hurt but I feel it should ultimately be up to the developer. Not everything has to be for everyone.
Tim Rogers on Kotaku has a whole thing about the "I Get It" button.
From his NSMBUDX review:
The thought experiment goes like this: imagine there were a button on the controller labeled "I Get It." Heck, imagine it's right beneath where the "Share" button is on the PlayStation 4 controller. When you press this button, the game pauses, and asks you a trivia question. Like, right here, it would ask,
"How do you kill this boss?"
And you have to choose one of multiple choices. Then it asks a follow-up question such as "What then?" If you answer enough questions, it says, "Okay. You win."
When play-testing a level or a boss or an encounter or any tiny shred or scrap of a video game you're developing, keep The I Get It Button in mind. If any isolated encounter ever makes you wish for this button, fix your darn thing.
From his NSMBUDX review:
The thought experiment goes like this: imagine there were a button on the controller labeled "I Get It." Heck, imagine it's right beneath where the "Share" button is on the PlayStation 4 controller. When you press this button, the game pauses, and asks you a trivia question. Like, right here, it would ask,
"How do you kill this boss?"
And you have to choose one of multiple choices. Then it asks a follow-up question such as "What then?" If you answer enough questions, it says, "Okay. You win."
When play-testing a level or a boss or an encounter or any tiny shred or scrap of a video game you're developing, keep The I Get It Button in mind. If any isolated encounter ever makes you wish for this button, fix your darn thing.
I mean, on one hand I don't think it's strictly necessary, but on the other hand many games nowadays are filled with needless padding and long drawn out "intro" sections that serve as a tutorial/introduction to the story. For instance, in Assassin's Creed Odyssey I would hate to have to replay the beginning of the game, if I went through it again.
I would feel like i'm the stupidest person in the world for deciding to play that section anyway. Even stupidier for bougth that game in the first place. Why the hell not just watch on youtube then?
Besides, how you decide what is a while? You mean i can't play the entire game automatically? I tried auto pilot in final fantasy 3 remakes and few mobile mmo. It came a moment that i realize i was not really playing anything, i was just pressing ok in pop ups telling me i'm doing great.
Do you know how much i hated how nsmbu decide to offer "help" every time i died more than 3 times in some of its levels? You just died, and the game comes with a loud noise and a big button to tell you: give up already and let me help you. Every single extra time you die. Do they really think i'm that incapable? Just because i'm not good at video games, the game should not assume i hate that section.
The only part of the games that need a skip button are cutscene. Every other section of the game can be avoided in smarter ways. If you think a game mechanic is loved by ones and hated by other, make what everyone else do: offer classes. Hate Magic? Play as paladin. Hate snipers? Play as medic. A section of the game is too hard? Offer a hidden short cut for those who have reason to look for it. Is afraid a section of the game can trigger people (like fear of spiders, as example), why don't put a questionaire in the start of the game and them genarate the enemies that will show up based on that?
Every time a game decided to put a skip button in a section, its like turning to the player and saying: here's a section of game that almost everyone liked but people like you, so here's a option to you keep playing that would not make our development team think about your tastes too much.
If its a small pocket, why was enough for player to give up on it? If i'm playing a good game, and come across something bad, i put up with it for some time. The time i can put with it depends on how good the game was so far. If the game was just okay, of course i not put with it for more than 10 mins, but if was great, then i can spend hours on it.
Also, i imagine that a obrigatory part of the game will not show up just once, ritgh? It will return later a number of times ritgh? so if coming across once was enough for the player to not want to bother with the game anymore, i imagine that seeing more of the game just to see it appearing again will be infuriating as hell, no?
The idea of skippable content sound more dev driven than consumer driven to me. When the consumer plays a game, they don't want to miss on anything. They go in the game hoping they can enjoy all of it. They don't want a option to skip anything, they just don't want to see anything that its not good for them.
Devs, on the other hand, not always only put stuff in a game that they think its great. Or not always put stuff toward the same goal. And if the content is skippable, it s way to avoid criticsm related to that content. "This part is bad? Well you don't have to play it so its just not for you" Its the spolletto model of gaming really: you go, try ingredient you don't know, and dont mix well together, and if the meal is bad, well, that's on you for asking for it.
There is also another possibility off some devs not trusting another dev in the same team so they don't want people juding their work because of someone else works, but thats just speculation...
The real question desingers need to ask themselves is: what is the core of my game? From them, everything else must fall in two baskets: mandatory and optional. It adds and evolve the core of the game? goes on mandatory. It is cool, but not really what the game is about? put on the optional. There is only 2 ways this can fail; first is when devs don't know what the core fo their game is; the second is when they don't know how to say what is cool and what is not. And if any of these conditions is met, doesn't matter what is skippable and what is not, the game will be bad anyway.
If more games need trainers to skip dull moments then maybe what games really need is tighter design, better conveyance and more gradual difficulty ramps. Padding and mandatory filler content needs to go away, especially in AAA games where it's more common.
Streaming save states might actually end up solving some of these issues as a side benefit. If you can't beat level 3 then just load up a level 4 stream save.
I think some games should not have auto pilot but chapters you can skip to next, with some kind of text and visual recap for parts you miss. There are genres where being a challenge is the whole point, but by having just selectable sections it'll increase completion rates for sure.
By not auto playing also you give incentives for players to go back with their new skill set to finish a chapter/section.
By not auto playing also you give incentives for players to go back with their new skill set to finish a chapter/section.
Shouldn't game designers focus on trying to make a game that's fun to play for their target audience on its own terms, rather than implementing skip features? Like, we're supposed to be here to play something, not to rush through content arbitrarily.
It comes off like an excuse to leave in all sorts of tedious or poorly tuned sections and then tell your audience "well if I made something that sucks you can skip it so who cares"
As flippant as this is... this is honestly what flits though my mind when I see topics like this one. Are you guys here to play games, or purely to rush from completing one game to another without having to engage with it meaningfully, simply because it's the "current thing"?
Just watch them on youtube or twitch. You get the cultural experience you're looking for, and probably get to see someone really good rip through the content in entertaining ways you might not be capable of.
It comes off like an excuse to leave in all sorts of tedious or poorly tuned sections and then tell your audience "well if I made something that sucks you can skip it so who cares"
As flippant as this is... this is honestly what flits though my mind when I see topics like this one. Are you guys here to play games, or purely to rush from completing one game to another without having to engage with it meaningfully, simply because it's the "current thing"?
Just watch them on youtube or twitch. You get the cultural experience you're looking for, and probably get to see someone really good rip through the content in entertaining ways you might not be capable of.
GTA let's you skip a gameplay segment if you fail three times and just moves you to the next cutscene. I think that's a decent way to go about it. I don't think the game playing itself is a bad way to go though, since there's in-game dialogue and scenes you can miss.
I hated playing the Gummy Ship segments in the Kingdom Hearts series. I just want to beat up some heartless.
People talking about youtube really don't get that, for some, the challenge is not the fun part.
I play for the story, world, characters, decisions, exploration. Not for the hard boss fight.
And that's 80% of the reason I play on PC, just let me cheat if I need to.
I play for the story, world, characters, decisions, exploration. Not for the hard boss fight.
And that's 80% of the reason I play on PC, just let me cheat if I need to.
No, not all games should be expected to be literally beatable on autopilot.
There's virtue in accessibility, but "unskippable gameplay" is not a matter of accessibility, it's straight up denying designers and developers the ability to, so to speak, 'choose' their audience through crafting a game that will appeal to some people but not to others.
If you dislike parts of the game enough to not replay the game, that's okay. That they'll technically be turning some people off with every creative decision they make sounds like something designers already know, to me.
If you want to implement such a feature, do so by all means.
There's virtue in accessibility, but "unskippable gameplay" is not a matter of accessibility, it's straight up denying designers and developers the ability to, so to speak, 'choose' their audience through crafting a game that will appeal to some people but not to others.
If you dislike parts of the game enough to not replay the game, that's okay. That they'll technically be turning some people off with every creative decision they make sounds like something designers already know, to me.
If you want to implement such a feature, do so by all means.
"Should games play themselves and be totally skippable." No.
"Should they have fast forward, rewind, infinite save points, easy mode...." No.
"Can they?" Yes.
I have no doubt that a games with or without options can be just as good one way or the other. And no you don't get to declare options as absolutely better. Limiting options is no less valid - because it's a game. Games are famous for having rules.
"Should they have fast forward, rewind, infinite save points, easy mode...." No.
"Can they?" Yes.
I have no doubt that a games with or without options can be just as good one way or the other. And no you don't get to declare options as absolutely better. Limiting options is no less valid - because it's a game. Games are famous for having rules.
Devs should just put cheats again in games. You can put god mode on for the parts that are tedious necessary, en big head mode or high pitxhed voices for fun for the unskippable walking segments
I agree with devs returning with cheats. But i think that simply putting cheat options on menu would break the immersion of a lot of games.
They could do cheats as a kind of free dlc, or even button combinations described in a section of the game's manual. But something like boosters in FF remasters where the player can see them all the time on menu or even activating them by accident, is not a very good way to do that imo.
Now, the option to actually skip the gameplay just doesn't make sense to me.
They could do cheats as a kind of free dlc, or even button combinations described in a section of the game's manual. But something like boosters in FF remasters where the player can see them all the time on menu or even activating them by accident, is not a very good way to do that imo.
Now, the option to actually skip the gameplay just doesn't make sense to me.
Unskipable gameplay is definitely a new phenomenon since games tried incorporating story directly to gameplay. I dread replaying God of War because of how many walky talky scenes there are, and the slow as fuck climbing which tbh id rather not do again.
Aside from making the game play itself in fast foward (kinda like the automode and fast foward buttons in some mobile games like Dragalia Lost) I have new ideas on how to fix this without losing some of the pros. Maybe shortcuts that are pretty hard to get to and only experienced players will access?
Aside from making the game play itself in fast foward (kinda like the automode and fast foward buttons in some mobile games like Dragalia Lost) I have new ideas on how to fix this without losing some of the pros. Maybe shortcuts that are pretty hard to get to and only experienced players will access?
Last edited:
I play games in large part for the compelling gameplay mechanics and the difficulty that comes from trying to break them.
An auto play option, while it would largely be ignored by me, would provide accessibility to a larger market. So aside from the opportunity cost in dev time, I don't see why I wouldn't want games I support to have a larger audience.
And no, watching a "fair use" full playthrough on Youtube is not at all the same as someone with a handicap playing a game and getting stuck on a specific part that requires more dexterity than that player has to proceed, or a color-based puzzle that a color-blind player can't possibly figure out on their own. Instead of making these players take time out of the game to look up guides/cheats/help from a friend, just let them skip the unfun parts and get back to playing the part of the game that they enjoy.
An auto play option, while it would largely be ignored by me, would provide accessibility to a larger market. So aside from the opportunity cost in dev time, I don't see why I wouldn't want games I support to have a larger audience.
And no, watching a "fair use" full playthrough on Youtube is not at all the same as someone with a handicap playing a game and getting stuck on a specific part that requires more dexterity than that player has to proceed, or a color-based puzzle that a color-blind player can't possibly figure out on their own. Instead of making these players take time out of the game to look up guides/cheats/help from a friend, just let them skip the unfun parts and get back to playing the part of the game that they enjoy.
Adding a new feature to a game is always a positive thing, if it's an option. So yeah, if there were a 'skip gameplay' option, that would be a positive feature in the game.
As a developer though, you really have to ask yourself, is it a high priority feature? You only have a limited amount of resources to make a game, so would you spend it on this feature compared to another?
Speaking for myself, I wouldn't use an 'skip gameplay' feature, so I personally think it would be better for developers to prioritize other features. That's just me though, I guess only you know your audience. That said, if I were to be a bit bold, I'd suggest that maybe if resources were spent making the game more fun and player friendly, then less people would want to skip certain sections of it? That makes sense to me, anyway.
As a developer though, you really have to ask yourself, is it a high priority feature? You only have a limited amount of resources to make a game, so would you spend it on this feature compared to another?
Speaking for myself, I wouldn't use an 'skip gameplay' feature, so I personally think it would be better for developers to prioritize other features. That's just me though, I guess only you know your audience. That said, if I were to be a bit bold, I'd suggest that maybe if resources were spent making the game more fun and player friendly, then less people would want to skip certain sections of it? That makes sense to me, anyway.
I like 'if you fail x amount of times then you get the option to skip', and I REALLY like the system Trails in the Sky has where if you fail/lose a battle, the AI gets weaker on the next try to give you a better chance of succeeding. Imo autopilot would be very unsatisfying way to get through any section, cheat codes would be preferable to that.
OP
OP
I agree with everyone saying intrusively timed 'hint' and 'skip' pop ups are bad. There are of course better ways to design features.
I'd also like tutorials to be skippable. What if the player misses something crucial? I considerate that a design challenge. Pushmo's tutorials were so excruciating and slow that I stopped playing during the second batch.
I'd also like tutorials to be skippable. What if the player misses something crucial? I considerate that a design challenge. Pushmo's tutorials were so excruciating and slow that I stopped playing during the second batch.
I just want to be considerate. Most devs want their players to keep having a good time, and accessibility is much easier when you consider people's needs upfront.
I like this being an option, especially with GTA's history of having "barrier missions" that for many players were simply too hard and/or frustrating. They've definitely learned lessons from their past.
Depends, I do think all RPGs should have a "resolve combat" button that takes the stats and abilities into account though.
Do you read a book and periodically skip a couple chapters here and there? Do you watch a movie and occasionally skip 10 minutes ahead? The only reason why skippable cutscenes are "correct" is because all too often you can find yourself forced to rewatch cutscenes you've already seen... if a fat cat sat on your remote and rewound the movie you were watching by 10 minutes, you'd probably want to skip back to where you were rather than rewatch those 10 minutes of that movie.
To that end, games already employ techniques to minimize the amount of gameplay you'd have to redo in the event of a fail state, such as the ability to save and liberal use of checkpoints. And to a degree, redoing gameplay is inherently less of an issue than being forced to rewatch something. Because gameplay is dynamic, things won't necessarily play out the same way each time. And since some games are about challenge, "redoing" just means you didn't actually do it... so it's to be expected that you'd need to make another attempt.
Though sure, once you've beaten a game, it'd be nice if there was some sort of option to freely skip around if you just want to re-experience some of your favorite segments. For instance I've seen Cowboy Bebop in its entirety to death, so usually I just opt to watch certain key episodes when I get the Bebop itch. But implementing a feature to allow players to freely skip around in a game could potentially be a lot of work, so I don't think it's necessarily something that should be expected. And besides, you could just opt to skim a blind let's play as a way to vicariously relive it.
To that end, games already employ techniques to minimize the amount of gameplay you'd have to redo in the event of a fail state, such as the ability to save and liberal use of checkpoints. And to a degree, redoing gameplay is inherently less of an issue than being forced to rewatch something. Because gameplay is dynamic, things won't necessarily play out the same way each time. And since some games are about challenge, "redoing" just means you didn't actually do it... so it's to be expected that you'd need to make another attempt.
Though sure, once you've beaten a game, it'd be nice if there was some sort of option to freely skip around if you just want to re-experience some of your favorite segments. For instance I've seen Cowboy Bebop in its entirety to death, so usually I just opt to watch certain key episodes when I get the Bebop itch. But implementing a feature to allow players to freely skip around in a game could potentially be a lot of work, so I don't think it's necessarily something that should be expected. And besides, you could just opt to skim a blind let's play as a way to vicariously relive it.
There are games that have this feature as a genre wide standard, and its on grindy gacha games, so how'd i feel about it? bad, i would nt like it because the need for the feature would mean the game is designed to have you grinding for hours, that's bad game design, i'd rather have a game that doesn't require grinding.
OP
OP
I had forgotten about this. I remember agreeing with Hepler at the time but there was so much fury at the suggestion.
Incredible that many still aren't ready to consider making certain moments of gameplay optional, for some players only.
OP
OP
Exactly this. It's only the undesirable sections of games, be it one particular task, or a boss, or even a needless tutorial.
Players often face the choice between experiencing a small skip in content vs never playing the game again. I'd like a third option that lets them keep playing.
OP
OP
I often skim through fighting and sex scenes in books. This has helped me finish books I otherwise might have dropped.
I often see the TV shows or movies my partner is watching and miss certain chunks while I'm drawing or doing something else. I'm less invested but I still enjoy them.
Sometimes enjoying a game is about keeping pace rather than dwelling on one challenge.
I see it more about replaying. With a great TV show you can return to any episode you want or with a great book you can return to any chapter/page you want. Pure scrubbing of all the content is possible. Right there from the beginning. In a game, you don't get that, the rest of the content is locked until you read the first parts of it.
Being able to skip to the end of a movie or book doesn't devalue the movie or book, does it? You probably don't want to do it anyway.
I find the LA Noire/GTA5 method works well for me. Hell, I almost hung it up on GTA5 early on trying to chase down the motorcycle with Franklin. I wasn't familiar enough with the driving mechanics and kept screwing up enough to have the cops on my ass constantly. Finally, I noticed the 'Skip' option and continued on with the game, and I was happy to do so.
The first boss in Far Cry 5 had me so pissed off after numerous times of chasing that dude down with the plane. It was only a glitch that actually enabled me to finish him off. It was enough to make me reconsider the rest of the game, though.
The first boss in Far Cry 5 had me so pissed off after numerous times of chasing that dude down with the plane. It was only a glitch that actually enabled me to finish him off. It was enough to make me reconsider the rest of the game, though.
A better designed/more enjoyable game is the solution. If you have to ask whether or not you can skip something, it most likely shouldn't be in the game in the first place.
Yeah pretty much this.. if your game sucks at it it's gonna cost it
God of War (ps4) wouldnt exist without those parts, since the whole game is loading in those slow/talking parts. Nevertheless, I agree, some parts were tedious even if some of the dialogue was good
Gotta post this again...
1) Most Let's Players spend more time commenting than playing, which is annoying.
2) Some Let's Players are just annoying in general.
3) Some Let's Players play too slowly for my liking (spend way too long in areas when I'm ready for them to get a move on).
4) Opposite of 3), some move way too quickly for my liking (not spending enough time in an area I'm interested in).
5) Some Let's Plays outright skip parts via jump cuts.
6) Some Let's Players add unnecessary effects like zoom ins (Let's zoom in on this face I think is funny and make the overlay red or whatever) in an attempt to be "funny".
7) Some Let's Players are the 100% completion type who must do every last side-quest before getting on with the finale.
8) Some Let's Players put fucking spoilers in their thumbnails before you even click on the damn video.
All valid reason the above "solution" is hardly one.
1. How do you know it's undesirable when designing the game?
2. If you know it is undesirable then make it better/more desirable