Urgency in free roaming games, and/or lack thereof

[Lord Raziere]

God, please, no. These "time loop" games seem to be mysteriously popular recently, and I just don't get the appeal at all--where's the fun in playing through the same stuff over and over again until you find the trick to finishing it?

You might as well ask what fun speedrunners get out of speedrunning, because their hobby is doing NOTHING but perfecting a certain run over and over again they know it by heart and have perfected all the steps to complete the game as fast as possible. they don't just do it once by luck, they practice this kind of thing until the point when someone watches it? it looks like someone performing a dance flawlessly, like a ice-skating ballerina.

with time loop games, you at least have this explorative aspect where you can curiously try a possibility and because your actions there is a different outcome based on what path you took while the rest of the world remains the same. a speedrunner doesn't have that level of flexibility, because their only goal is make the run as efficient as possible.

[Anteros]

Mercenary Pack really changes the early game.

I hate stuff like that. Paying extra money, or pre-ordering, or whatever to get in game loot that just magically appears when you pay. Completely ruins the immersion, and feels like cheating. To me. It's a single player game, so I totally understand if other people want to do it.

You might as well ask what fun speedrunners get out of speedrunning, because their hobby is doing NOTHING but perfecting a certain run over and over again they know it by heart and have perfected all the steps to complete the game as fast as possible. they don't just do it once by luck, they practice this kind of thing until the point when someone watches it? it looks like someone performing a dance flawlessly, like a ice-skating ballerina.

with time loop games, you at least have this explorative aspect where you can curiously try a possibility and because your actions there is a different outcome based on what path you took while the rest of the world remains the same. a speedrunner doesn't have that level of flexibility, because their only goal is make the run as efficient as possible.

Sure, but speedrunners are an extremely tiny portion of the population. You wouldn't make a game out of it.

[Lord Raziere]

Sure, but speedrunners are an extremely tiny portion of the population. You wouldn't make a game out of it.

Okay, I fail to see why whether you'd make a game out of it would be relevant. or why you feel the need to point out the population thing. the point this is a thing that people find fun, what are you implying with this? I don't get it.

Racing games at a certain point are just all the same tracks if you don't play multiplayer.

at a certain point in roguelites/roguelikes no matter how randomized a level is you start to get the feel of it, start to master it, so that the different corridors and drops just feel like minor differences that don't matter.

and a lot of videogame design is basically making the same basic actions feel different rather than actually making them different.

and if you don't like repeating the same thing until you succeed, guess what, thats what you do every time you encounter something hard and die over and over again and restart from last save until you get it right in a videogame. the time loop games just take it up to the entire game being like that.

[Rynjin]

I hate stuff like that. Paying extra money, or pre-ordering, or whatever to get in game loot that just magically appears when you pay. Completely ruins the immersion, and feels like cheating. To me. It's a single player game, so I totally understand if other people want to do it.

They're hard baked into the total package editions or whatever these days with all the DLCs. You can turn them off, but I stopped worrying about "cheating" after my third playthrough.

Sure, but speedrunners are an extremely tiny portion of the population. You wouldn't make a game out of it.

So I take it you've never played a racing game? Or time trials in a platformer?

[huttj509]

God, please, no. These "time loop" games seem to be mysteriously popular recently, and I just don't get the appeal at all--where's the fun in playing through the same stuff over and over again until you find the trick to finishing it?

It turns it into a type of puzzle game, at least when done well.

Outer Wilds, for example, can be finished in a very short time, if you already know how it works. But when playing it new you don't. The fun is in exploration, learning how things work, when things happen, and what your goal even *is*.

[Vinyadan]

-Looks up from Vulpes Inculta's disintegrated ashes-

Wait... You can not kill Vulpes? Huh. Learn something new everyday.

Oh, come on -- even if you can, can you not kill Vulpes?

I never killed Vulpes there simply because attacking him and his squad felt like suicide. Im usually level one or two with a varmint rifle or something at that point.

Explosives from the Powder Gangers. Leave a road of breadcrumbs and run along it as the squad tries to reach you. Then kill a weakened Vulpes in single combat.

God, please, no. These "time loop" games seem to be mysteriously popular recently, and I just don't get the appeal at all--where's the fun in playing through the same stuff over and over again until you find the trick to finishing it?

Reminds me of Alan Wake's American Nightmare. It was probably the easiest shooter ever designed: lots of it played in the open, against enemies without a ranged option, and it was all the same scenery three times over, so you didn't even need to learn the levels. Plus, the artefacted difficulty of the original Alan Wake (laborious reloading and a slow character) was completely gone, so you were pretty much going all Max Payne over those poor souls.

[Cikomyr2]

God, please, no. These "time loop" games seem to be mysteriously popular recently, and I just don't get the appeal at all--where's the fun in playing through the same stuff over and over again until you find the trick to finishing it?

In this case, the point is that there are events that WILL spin out of control. The game should not have *a* means of resolving it, but rather a large series of means.

Also, the fun of Fallout 4 is that there are like a thousand plots happening at the same time. So you could theoretically have thousand mini influence on the meter. It's just that some thigns are bigger than others.

To be honest, the idea in my head seems really far-fetched. You'd need either a complete rethink of video game story structure/interaction that is more procedural even if the plot is hand-written, or just.. literally invest thousands upon thousands of hours of writing variants on sub-quest.

I don't like the later option tho, but I don't even know if the technology is there for the 1st option.

Basically, I just think there should be a middle point of endless procedural generation of repetitive dungeon and the need to hand-craft every single story beats and variants. The Procedural should play different, the game should throw different story beats and hooks if you act different. "Repeating" the time loop only if you deliberately want to make it repeat.

Just.. say, base it on # of **** explored by the PC, or the distance travelled. What if, going out of the vault, you either go to Sanctuary/Concord, the Agatha Radar station, or the nearby farm. The normal story beat have you go in Sanctuary. But if the story say that the Minutemen get exterminated if you don't intervene in the first 2 days, then the Raiders suddenly become the dominant faction of this region. Maybe you can have the guy at the auto shot try to send goons, etc.. etc..

just.. have local factions interact with each others. Have some timers to some things. Encourage the player to explore special zone at special time.

If you want to have a game where timing matters, somehow, you have to structure the entire story beats around "time matters", not just tag it on top of existing game mechanics.

[factotum]

Outer Wilds, for example, can be finished in a very short time, if you already know how it works. But when playing it new you don't. The fun is in exploration, learning how things work, when things happen, and what your goal even *is*.

Maybe that's why I don't like them--completely directionless exploration just isn't something I enjoy, it reminds me of running around in games 30 years ago trying to figure out what to do next and getting very frustrated.

[Triaxx]

Two points for Shneekey's comment: Navi was at least trying to be helpful. I feel bad for the poor soul who had to do Vi, since it was clearly executives meddling where they shouldn't.

And you don't even have to get through the intro to catch the importance of New Vegas. When you look at Benny, he's larger than life and framed by the lights of the strip. Because it's his center of power. (Not that it helps.)

On Vulpes: Eh merc nade rifle is nice, but you can also find one in one of the houses, and use that to make legion pate out of them.

Vulpes: bad guy walk
Courier: Okay, bored. *phtoo, BOOM*

[veti]

I hate stuff like that. Paying extra money, or pre-ordering, or whatever to get in game loot that just magically appears when you pay. Completely ruins the immersion, and feels like cheating.

I don't disagree. I got the merc pack with the - whatever edition it was of the game I installed. And I can't see any way to stop it from loading. The best I can do is find an otherwise pointless bin and stash the more excessive loot in there and never touch it again, but at this point I'm not even sure what I should be keeping...

I think the 9mm pistol is mine? What about the light leather armour? - I'd really miss that, although there are at least a couple of chances to pick up regular leather or even metal armour before you get to Nipton.

But even without all that stuff, Vulpes is eminently killable. There's practically unlimited amounts of dynamite from the 'Gangers. There's frag mines from Primm, shotguns and cowboy repeaters from the Jackals, and as a last resort there's the service rifle from the ranger at the outpost. It's enough. And he needs killing badly.

Edit:

It turns it into a type of puzzle game, at least when done well.

All Zelda games are essentially puzzle games, just dressed in a veneer of fantasy. But it's always about "try the same thing over and over until you hit on the exact combination or sequence you need to achieve the next goal".

And there's nothing wrong with that, they're great games.

[Anteros]

Explosives from the Powder Gangers. Leave a road of breadcrumbs and run along it as the squad tries to reach you. Then kill a weakened Vulpes in single combat.

Setting up like that would require my character to know the encounter is coming ahead of time. I like to play as if I'm in the character's shoes and not meta game too much.

So I take it you've never played a racing game? Or time trials in a platformer?

I would argue that there are significant design differences between those and speedrunning a game.

Okay, I fail to see why whether you'd make a game out of it would be relevant. or why you feel the need to point out the population thing. the point this is a thing that people find fun, what are you implying with this? I don't get it.

Racing games at a certain point are just all the same tracks if you don't play multiplayer.

at a certain point in roguelites/roguelikes no matter how randomized a level is you start to get the feel of it, start to master it, so that the different corridors and drops just feel like minor differences that don't matter.

and a lot of videogame design is basically making the same basic actions feel different rather than actually making them different.

and if you don't like repeating the same thing until you succeed, guess what, thats what you do every time you encounter something hard and die over and over again and restart from last save until you get it right in a videogame. the time loop games just take it up to the entire game being like that.

Because someone said "why are these types of games so popular?" And you responded by saying "well, a tiny portion of people enjoy something else that's similar" it doesn't answer the question.

[Lord Raziere]

Because someone said "why are these types of games so popular?" And you responded by saying "well, a tiny portion of people enjoy something else that's similar" it doesn't answer the question.

It does though.

Because its similar enough to work.

Some people just like perfecting the same thing over and over until they get it right. You may not agree with that kind of fun, but the principle is the same regardless of whatever minor differences you have decided to emphasize. figuring out how to do a speedrun and how to do the right series of actions during a time loop game is the same set of skills of timing and following a step by step plan, one is just slower and with more room to make a mistake and still succeed.

[Rynjin]

I would argue that there are significant design differences between those and speedrunning a game.

That seems like a hard argument to make, I'm interested to hear it.

[Anteros]

Things like racing games require mastering mechanics as intended. They also usually include things like upgrading your car, multiplayer, or circuits to add variety. Speed running is (generally) more focused on abusing mechanics or bugs to do the exact same content as fast as possible, no matter how much of the actual game is skipped. There are some similar aspects, but theyre also very different.

[Anteros]

It does though.

Because its similar enough to work.

Some people just like perfecting the same thing over and over until they get it right. You may not agree with that kind of fun, but the principle is the same regardless of whatever minor differences you have decided to emphasize. figuring out how to do a speedrun and how to do the right series of actions during a time loop game is the same set of skills of timing and following a step by step plan, one is just slower and with more room to make a mistake and still succeed.

It has nothing to do with if I "agree" with it. My point was that things like speed runs appeal to such a tiny percentage of the population that it can't be used to explain why people like games like Deathloop.

[Lord Raziere]

Things like racing games require mastering mechanics as intended. They also usually include things like upgrading your car, multiplayer, or circuits to add variety. Speed running is (generally) more focused on abusing mechanics or bugs to do the exact same content as fast as possible, no matter how much of the actual game is skipped. There are some similar aspects, but theyre also very different.

Yeah, but the original question never was about whether it was intended it was about specifically:

God, please, no. These "time loop" games seem to be mysteriously popular recently, and I just don't get the appeal at all--where's the fun in playing through the same stuff over and over again until you find the trick to finishing it?

That was what I was answering. whether or not the fun was intended was never apart of the conversation until you brought it up and started emphasizing its importance out of nowhere. the fact that for example: you lose units in Fire Emblem permanently as intended and in pokemon nuzlockes you have to hold yourself to rules to make sure they perma-die on a run is irrelevant, the perma-death rule is enforced either way, thus leading to a more cautious mindset. the experience is similar even if the design behind it is different.

while the primary comparison isn't racing games and speedrunning, its time loop games and speedrunning so your point about racing games is tangential, I only brought them up in a certain context and specified "if you don't play multiplayer" and such as other minor examples, they're not the main point I'm making. the fact that you bring it out of the context I was talking in and getting sidetracked by that is not really relevant to me.

the main point is: time loop games and speedrunning has similarities in that you plan out a route, you time it so that you do things at the right time efficiently and you have to time it so that you do it in a certain amount of time. now certainly there is a difference in a speedrun can be as long as you want in that its as long as your inefficient or fail something while a time loop has a set time for you to work within, but the commonality is a form of time restraint your trying to work within. and you do experience probably experience a lot of the same content over and over again in the process of doing both. and that people find both of things fun, they're not exactly the same, sure, but they both require a willingness to try and try again until you get a string of actions correct enough to succeed. again different design, similar experience.

[Forum Explorer]

Setting up like that would require my character to know the encounter is coming ahead of time. I like to play as if I'm in the character's shoes and not meta game too much.

It's still explosives from the Powder Gangers, but not it's dynamite instead and frantic back pedalling. He's actually a really tough boss, but he is beatable in a straight fight. But he often leaves me pretty dry on resources. Which is good. There aren't a lot of points in a Betheseda game where I actually have to use all the resources I have available to win or have the good choice have negative consequences.

[Rynjin]

Things like racing games require mastering mechanics as intended. They also usually include things like upgrading your car, multiplayer, or circuits to add variety. Speed running is (generally) more focused on abusing mechanics or bugs to do the exact same content as fast as possible, no matter how much of the actual game is skipped. There are some similar aspects, but theyre also very different.

Yep, just what I figured. You don't know what speedrunning is.

[Anteros]

Yep, just what I figured. You don't know what speedrunning is.

Maybe enlighten me as to what you think it is then instead of making snide remarks? Does it make you feel superior that you use a different definition of a niche internet hobby than me or something? If I'm wrong then fine, it happens frequently enough.

[Lord Raziere]

Anteros, there is such a thing as the glitchless speedrun category for stuff: you do it fast as possible without glitches or bugs. doing it with glitches is just one way to speedrun.

[Rynjin]

Maybe enlighten me as to what you think it is then instead of making snide remarks? Does it make you feel superior that you use a different definition of a niche internet hobby than me or something? If I'm wrong then fine, it happens frequently enough.

I'm just kind of tired of seeing people **** on speedrunning by claiming it is "lacking skill" or "relies on abusing mechanics/glitches".

There's a ton of different kinds of speedrun. Glitchless, no skips, 100% runs, any% runs, etc.

All variants require a deep understanding of the game and more mechanical proficiency than the average player.

[Anteros]

Indeed, there is such a thing as the glitchless speedrun category for stuff: you do it fast as possible without glitches or bugs. doing it with glitches is just one way to speedrun.

And now we're talking about a subcategory of an already tiny hobby that much less than 1% of gamers participate in to explain why something is popular. Obviously. How foolish of me for questioning. Clearly if .00005% of gamers have enjoyed something similar in the past, that must be why it's suddenly mainstream.

I'm just kind of tired of seeing people **** on speedrunning by claiming it is "lacking skill" or "relies on abusing mechanics/glitches".

There's a ton of different kinds of speedrun. Glitchless, no skips, 100% runs, any% runs, etc.

All variants require a deep understanding of the game and more mechanical proficiency than the average player.

I never made any sort of claim that those things don't take skill. They clear take hours and hours of practice. I said it's different from mainstream racing games and such. Which is true. Even the ones that use glitches still obviously take tons of practice. I certainly wouldn't consider any varient of them to be mainstream though. That isn't an insult. It's just a measure of popularity.

[Lord Raziere]

And now we're talking about a subcategory of an already tiny hobby that much less than 1% of gamers participate in to explain why something is popular. Obviously. How foolish of me for questioning. Clearly if .00005% of gamers have enjoyed something similar in the past, that must be why it's suddenly mainstream.

I've said it before: the time loop stuff is slower and has more room to make mistakes. that means its easier. speedrunning is harder. harder things are more niche than easy things which can be more easily get popular since its more accessible. time loop games are more accessible than learning how to speedrun but fulfills a similar skillset of planning routes and stringing together a bunch of actions in succession within a certain amount of time. its not exactly the same, but time loops are more accessible because the work of holding yourself to certain rules socially/mentally is done with mechanics instead.

[Rynjin]

And now we're talking about a subcategory of an already tiny hobby that much less than 1% of gamers participate in to explain why something is popular. Obviously. How foolish of me for questioning. Clearly if .00005% of gamers have enjoyed something similar in the past, that must be why it's suddenly mainstream.

You entire argument was that speedrunning is different from time trials in racing games, platformers, etc. because they "abuse mechanics and bugs".

Your argument was wrong: entirely based on false information. Don't try to turn this into an argument about what's "mainstream" all of a sudden.

Hell, it would be wrong even if there was no such thing as a glitchless speedrun. Normal players figure out how to "abuse mechanics" to trim down times or gain an advantage all the time.

Did you ever play QUake or Unreal Tournament? Or any game inspired by them. Did you know rocket jumping (a core mechanic in quite a few games, even in the modern day) is based on a glitch? People still jump around everywhere in FPS games because bunnyhopping was such a common (and purposefully reproduced) engine glitch in shooters for so long.

"Abused mechanics" often become just "mechanics".

[Forum Explorer]

From how you are talking; either other time loops games are much more intense, or I wouldn't call Majora's Mask a time loop game at all. I mean, yeah it has a time loop. But you can control when you are in the game pretty easily, and there are very few things that require you to do stuff on multiple days. Do a thing on a certain day, or before a certain amount of time passes sure. But that often led to hammering it down by going to the spot you need to be and changing the time until you could do whatever you needed to do. There is very little route planning required.


Now that being said, speed running isn't that niche. You can find a lot of speed runs with very minimal effort. And the appeal is pretty easy to understand. It's to be the best at the game, or to see someone challenge the best. It is impressive to see people hit these microsecond reactions to pull off stunts that are completely unnecessary for anything other than a speed run.

And yeah, it takes immense amounts of skill, practice and research to be a champion speed runner. It isn't easy at all.

[Anteros]

You entire argument was that speedrunning is different from time trials in racing games, platformers, etc. because they "abuse mechanics and bugs".

Your argument was wrong: entirely based on false information. Don't try to turn this into an argument about what's "mainstream" all of a sudden.

Hell, it would be wrong even if there was no such thing as a glitchless speedrun. Normal players figure out how to "abuse mechanics" to trim down times or gain an advantage all the time.

Did you ever play QUake or Unreal Tournament? Or any game inspired by them. Did you know rocket jumping (a core mechanic in quite a few games, even in the modern day) is based on a glitch? People still jump around everywhere in FPS games because bunnyhopping was such a common (and purposefully reproduced) engine glitch in shooters for so long.

"Abused mechanics" often become just "mechanics".

The argument was literally always about popularity. Im sorry you felt your hobby was insulted. I do not consider speed runs under any definition a mainstream hobby. I would venture that more people agree with that then not. Maybe I'm wrong. Ultimately it's just my opinion and nothing to get hostile over.

[Eldan]

God, please, no. These "time loop" games seem to be mysteriously popular recently, and I just don't get the appeal at all--where's the fun in playing through the same stuff over and over again until you find the trick to finishing it?

I don't know, I'm quite enjoying The Forgotten City, where you go through a short mystery with the same couple of characters, just going to different places each time and asking different questions until you find out who of them did it.

[Cikomyr2]

Time loop games are still very early.

What I'd like is a time loop game that tracks narrative time rather than actual gameplay time. So you don't have to feel pressure to speedrun everything.

[Brother Oni]

Time loop games are still very early.

What I'd like is a time loop game that tracks narrative time rather than actual gameplay time. So you don't have to feel pressure to speedrun everything.

There's Ephemeral Fantasia which is a very old PS2 RPG where the character is stuck in a timeloop. As you figure out clues and solves puzzles in the loop, you can can bring people with you during the reset so that now also also retain memories from the previous loops and help you figure out the way to break the timeloop.

I believe The Sexy Brutale is also similar, but I've not played it.

[Psyren]

"Time loop games" are just an attempt to explain in-universe what you'd do in many difficult games, save scum essentially. They bake the act of reloading/reviving into the universe's fiction to keep the illusion/immersion going. We've been doing it since System Shock if not before.

Things like racing games require mastering mechanics as intended. They also usually include things like upgrading your car, multiplayer, or circuits to add variety. Speed running is (generally) more focused on abusing mechanics or bugs to do the exact same content as fast as possible, no matter how much of the actual game is skipped. There are some similar aspects, but theyre also very different.

There are speedrun variants that do involve "mastering mechanics as intended." 100% glitchless usually entail this, and those are probably the ones you would find enjoyable if that is the form of mechanical mastery you want to see displayed.

As in the sole survivor is building settlements while trying to convince everyone they meet that they’re urgently looking for whatsisname. Meanwhile Geralt is chasing question marks and playing gwent while similarly turning the continent upside down looking for that girl he knows.

Am I to conclude that an open world game with tons to explore just should not have a main plot that implies urgency? Because I do enjoy chasing question marks and exploring all the cool stuff the devs put into the game. But then I progress the plot a bit and I’m supposed to snap out of that and feel like we’re desperately trying to do something or another.

It's a tough balance to strike because you want the player to feel like they can explore without the world being damned as a result. One good way to do it is to have the villain(s) be off exploring or trying to gather information too, rather than pursuing their main plot. In Dragon Age Inquisition, the big bad Corypheus is basically in the background chasing down one rumor or tidbit after the next, and whenever you start a big plot mission you just happen to arrive at the same time he does no matter what you were doing in the interim. They made a point of letting you know you had freedom to explore after both Mass Effect 2 and 3 had timed missions that could sneak up on you out of nowhere, and they consciously wanted to avoid that.