These videos have become a part of my morning routine. Grab a glass of water and get things done while listening to Tim take us to school. I hope you keep it up!
XCom is so engaging to me because not only do you switch between systems (tactical combat, base building) but the systems feed into each other. When I'm fighting aliens I look forward to research their techs and interrogate the ones I stunned. When I'm in base I can't wait to try out all the new toys I made and see the promoted soldiers in the field. Also there is no friction between the two, only a squad selection/debrefing screen with a kickass music. In many other games though either the systems are fully separate or you're kind of punished from switching from one to the next. Maybe going back to town means trekking back slowly because of encumbrance and getting harassed by random encounters as your characters are exhausted. That makes it a chore. And it makes me want to maximize my time in the field or in town, which in turn makes it even more of a chore.
Either that or one of the two things you spend your time doing isn't part of the fantasy the player was sold, so it's a chore. Both the area 51 building/alien autopsy/tech research elements and the soldiers in the field getting killed off by by aliens are part of the alien invasion fantasy, just as both sneaking around and getting in big fights are part of the Batman fantasy. But building up your castle walls to avoid small raids may not be a big part of the adventure quest fantasy and sneaking around heavily armoured guards as Mary Jane isn't really a big part of the Spider-Man fantasy.
Another advantage of unlocking gameplay through advancement of the story or skills is that your game will be much simpler and easier to begin with. This can be extremely important if, by the time it ends, it has extremely complex mechanics. As long as you introduce a few things at a time and allow the player to become familiar with them, there really isn't a limit. The Zelda games are really good at doing this.
I love Timothy Cain's videos! The topics help me to challenge myself to improve via self-reflection. In recent games, I am noticing my DM rulings, and choices, that can lead to players disengaging, getting frustrated, and simply becoming bored/turned off. One awareness is doing more "Yes, and..." or "No, but..." and simply giving away easy successes and more information (without a lore dump). Thanks!
UA-cam animator Zee Bashew did a wonderful and funny little animated series about dice in D&D It's a tongue in cheek guide on how to train your dice, spotting bad dice, etc I think it's great and it really shows the point about people seeing meaning and decisions in randomness :P
The way you were explaining the different kinds of gameplay that can keep a player engaged made me realize why a lot of my favorite were the designed the way they were.
Hey Tim, Not a developer, not connected to games in any way outside being a player of them. Love your videos. Huge fan of your perspective on things and the high narrative quality of how you compose your ideas. I grew up on the Arcanum Inn, back when VN Boards were a thing. Arcanum is one of my favorite games and one I frequently revisit. Your projects, the offspring of your projects, have been a significant and positive detail in my life as well as so many others. Thank you for continuing to avail yourself to us
6:50 Age of Conan had combat like that, you did combos that had different finishers that could trigger effects, buffs, debuffs, heals, ect, and then would sometimes give you awesome fatalities on your enemies. It usually don't like MMO's but the engaging combat in that one got me hooked for a good while back in college.
Great video! I find a lot of games are afraid to add long-term rewards in gameplay - I have been playing Underrail, and I’ve found the crafting system very satisfying because you can do things like purchase a piece for a crafting recipe and hold onto it for hours and hours and hours, waiting for the rest of the recipe, and once you find the other pieces to craft this high level powerful weapon or armor piece or whatever, it is immensely satisfying.
I appreciate hearing the clear distinction between addiction and engagement. When I comment about how designing a game around addiction is a choice and unethical, many commentators clearly do not get it (i.e. addiction is construed as being only the fault of some players, when clearly some games are designed to prey upon those who will become addicted [trying hard not to name here some examples on PC]). I first noticed how design choices affect addiction actually from a positive example (non addictive system) in the old MMO City of Heroes/Villains which had some nice features to help casual players; it made me think about how designers can encourage players to not play all day, etc. // I avoid such games, which are common in MMOs in my opinion.
Hey Tim loving the videos, so interesting to learn as just a person who plays games. I wanted to know if you could do a video on the work it takes to port a video game from console to Pc or vice versa. How it was back in the day compared to now, how many developers does it usually take etc Hope you’re doing well, have a great day 😊
Tim said it all. Variety. Allow the player to freely (agency) choose how to act/react to situations. It is the best way to create engagement, and reminds me of how other entertainment media already discovered the need for highs and lows in the narrative to grab the audience attention. Great video as always. Thank you.
Gonna be honest dude I normally spend about zero minutes watching people sit in front of a camera and talk but it works with you. I dunno if it's the novelty of being the OG fallout guy or if it's the merit and knowledge/wisdom you put out, but I've been enjoying your content a lot.
I still think some games add a secret aspect to the accuracy rolls. I don't know about Fallout per se, but Morrowind for sure. Some games tell you a percentage chance and unless it is 100% the fail rate is always slightly higher than the player is told, like 5-10% higher sometimes.
Interesting topic regarding player agency and random negative outcomes at the end. I would be curious to know your thoughts regarding dynamic difficulty and difficulty options. I.e. player mentality and whether game difficulty should adapt to the player vs the player adapting to the game.
I really like the world map in Fallout and Fallout 2. It creates a unique feeling of distance and time and just adds atmosphere, also with the very varied random encounters. I wish we could have it in modern games. It is a great idea for a postapocalyptic game, as there is actual real wasteland with huge amounts of empty space, making a journey feel like an actual journey. I guess it was more a workaround for technical limitations? Could you give your opinion about it? I dislike e.g. Fallout 4, where everywhere is just some location maker on your compass and you never feel like in a real wasteland. Mainstream player base adaption for guidance?
As a counterpoint: Monster Hunter Monster Hunter is a series about exclusively hunting monsters (speak Bosses). Naturally, other games don't have to be like Monster Hunter but I think it's a good showcase of "engagement" being way less important than creating a enjoyable/intriguing "core loop". The series was a multi-million seller since its second Iteration but really took off with Monster Hunter: World (especially in the West). Now, what was the biggest chance from Monster Hunter: Generations (the Game right before World) to that one? Quality of Life. While there are a few aspects about Monster Hunter than can be appealing: The Monster and armor designs, cooperation (has been a co-op game since the start) and the combat. But with World Capcom took it upon themselves to: 1 drastically increase visual quality, 2 downsize a lot of simple repetitious tasks, 3 reduce the amount of instances the player was punished for making bad choices. So in a sense it reduced the frustrations of the game instead of widening what the game does. Apart from that the game stayed very much focused on selling the fantasy of "hunting monsters" and nothing else. To be fair you kinda addressed this topic already with lowering the bar of entry and also what types of games you enjoy personally. And even if we talk about "engagement" instead of "addiction" I think it still cynically portrays a game as nothing but a product when it is, at least to my definition, an art form and there is more to it than just to "make money" with it. I get that video games are very potent money makers and if a company wants to persist they have to make some money to get through. So in my definition engagement =/= fun/excitement/stimulation (and more like "sustainer of attention"). Anyway; Always interesting to hear your POV.
Great video! Question: How do you accomplish all of these points in specific genres (versus RPGs)? Take Gears of War, which focuses on linear fps gameplay. How would you add player choice or the ability to use old skills in new ways.
I'd say for player choice you could use the narrative of the game such as the NPCs to allow the player to make choices and also provide two or more outcomes to choices you make during quests or side requests that might change the direction of the game slightly or just the path but doesn't divert the player too far out of the way of the overall goal if there is one. Maybe someone in the game needs to be saved and you can choose if you want to or not. Or maybe someone tells you to meet them somewhere and you can chose if you do or not. Or maybe when your in a mission someone might tell you not to harm a certain character and it's up to you if you do it or not.
You know, I bet it probably is pretty fun to think about what topics to talk about for your vids and then before you go to bed do the possible outlines in your head. That would put me to sleep like a baby each night.
Not everyone cares about being a successful UA-camr. I get the feeling Tim is doing this more as a way of sharing his experiences and answering people's questions rather than for views. He generally uploads early in the morning so as long as you check in once a day you're good.
Point is, don’t be afraid of taking breaks! Even rewarding and fun work is work, and if you don’t have some good rest periods and breaks and such, you can start finding something you enjoy miserable! The struggle of a creative!
just thoughts & questions that come to him so quickly that he makes a video as to not forget. They are one take vlogs I think don’t require editing. Vlogs are common way to get things off your mind and into place where you can easily Remember it like a video. So... I’m just sayin he may actually look forward to making vlog and posting them doesn’t necessarily drain his energy like writing a script and editing a video would. Just my 2cents taking breaks is key to all kinds of things though no doubt about that.
Monster Hunter World is Capcom's best selling game of all time and it is only bosses. Many of the modern MMOs have completely thrown out trash mobs from their hardest raids, because the interesting part of gameplay in those are the bosses, not the trash. I think that one Wildstar dev was onto something way earlier than much of the other industry.
The best way to keep every player I’ve ever met engaged is just to make a world that is fun to inhabit, and easy to get lost in, something I learned from playing the early Fallout games versus the later ones
I hate random rewards. Which is one of the reasons why I hate looters like Diablo or Borderlands (I also hate sorting through massive loot and many other things in those games). I like to plan on second playthrough (usualy to max one thing) and if one weapon I really want is not in same place as before I cannot enjoy it as much. In Borderlands 2 I loved using sniper and I easily pulled off headshots with only 2 types of scope, I got those snipers early at lvl 5 and 7, then I did not get any new snipers with those scopes for 30+ hours, so I just respecced to go full melee to not rely on game giving me good sniper rifle.
In Diablo 4, the player engagement leans heavily towards the addictive aspect. Even when I wasn't initially inclined to play, once I started, I'd find myself engrossed for hours. On the other hand, Baldur's Gate 3 captivates me through its compelling narrative and decision-making dynamics. I'm already brainstorming characters for my next playthrough!
Hi Tim, I think you meant variable ratio is the most addictive instead of what you called variable interval, but you really described random rewards, which is what causes the superstitious behaviors. I think it would help your point to have delineated the difference between these, or at least pointed out that it's the variable ratio schedule that really reinforces a behavior into a difficult to extinguish addiction.
Whether variable ratio or variable interval is ultimately inconsequential. The distinction is between operant conditioning and player agency. That operant conditioning of any kind is in widespread use in the video game industry as elsewhere is precisely what's cast a shadow over the pastime and is actively severing relationships between game development studios and other members of the communities they actually helped to create over the years. That Tim is trying to draw a distinction between operant conditioning and what's now being called "player engagement" [in the industry] is grand except that that [operant conditioning and the industry's idea of player engagement] are one and the same. The onus is not on the game developer to engage players. Just as no one else can make us happy, no one else can make us enjoy a game. It's a choice we make. If we enjoy a game or even just elements of a game, we've created that enjoyment ourselves. It's the thinly veiled coercion tactics some will nonetheless insist is no way forcing players to do something they otherwise might not that are in question today and a very different thing from the kind of player investment in a game Tim is talking about. Everything he's mentioned can faciliate a player's enjoyment of a game, but doesn't create that enjoyment. When it comes to RPGs, It helps immensely if there are ideas in the game that are worth the life-time and effort it takes to engage with them in my experience. Edit: Parentheticals for clarity.
@@lrinfi Hello, what you say is very interesting but I am confused on a few things. How is it that operant conditioning of any kind is what's bad, when operant conditioning is the inevitable consequence of any challenge: you do something, you get rewarded. It happens all the time in games and in life in general. It seems to me that pointing to operant conditioning as the culprit is too broad of a target. Nobody complains about operant conditioning but most people begrudge the variable ratio operant conditioning of slot machines, for example. Also, you say that the onus is not on the game developer to engage players, that no one else can make us happy, no one else can make us enjoy a game. But even in designing a Rubik's cube, the developer had the option to make them as they are now, or to make every tile the same color, taking out any enjoyment from the toy to everyone except for babies. It seems to me ridiculous that you say game developers are powerless to make players enjoy the game. "You don't enjoy the game? what's wrong with you! Just make the choice to enjoy the game already, dummy!" Obviously a player can hate life and hate everything and enjoy nothing. That not the common case. It seems to me that you're saying your main enjoyment is from the "ideas" in a game, which I take you to mean philosophical ideas? Do you deny the other form of enjoyment in games that is "solving a problem of a novel quality"? That is what I'd say is the main form of enjoyment from games, and what you dismissively label as merely "operant conditioning". In every chess game, the enjoyment comes from solving a complex problem with the pieces at your disposal. In every soccer game, you engage your skill and strategy to solve the problem of scoring a goal. When you get a new ability in a game, that is just a another chess piece for you to play with in that game's fighting system. Even in this conversation we are dancing with our words, and propositions are our chess pieces, all for the novel problem of hopefully finding the truth in each other's words, with this conversation being slightly different qualitatively from all other conversations, which makes it so fun to hopefully, both of us. These game designs genuinely engages the mind in novel ways, it's in fact the essence of "play", and is clearly different from "operant conditioning", and especially distinguished from the addictive variable ratio. And to look at the Fight-Explore-Talking loop in fallout games. This is not merely operant conditioning. This model is acknowledging that people get bored of every "problem of a novel quality", and that to switch between them, the player leaves two "problems of a novel quality" fallow, and engage with a third one. And if you accept the premise that to solve "problems of novel quality" is beneficial and fun to the player instead of uselessly addictive, then this model is really pretty smart, as well as a good thing for the player. It's true that none of the Fight-Explore-Talking challenges in fallout games are all that difficult, not as difficult as say, a chess game. But still, it isn't the same as merely operant conditioning. Although when you say, "this doesn't help me long term. This isn't worth the life-time and effort it takes to engage with them." I agree. Maybe I should just replace all games in my life with good novels. So I can better myself even when relaxing. Logically, why should I play these video games at all that are qualitatively distal compared to the "games" in real life of making money, solving problems, talking to real people.
@@harrywang3098 "It seems to me ridiculous that you say game developers are powerless to make players enjoy the game." -- Perhaps because that's not what I said. If a developer makes a game s/he truly wants to play, others will likely want to play it also, but there is no onus on the developer to "engage" players or "offer incentives" to play the game. When players consider a video game worth engaging with, the player has made the choice to engage with it, not the developer the very same as readers choose to engage with the novels of which you speak, not the novels' authors, if you follow. I do think video games have the potential to ignite our imaginations in ways other forms of media cannot and that most games no longer do because most are being made to satisfy the demands of the stock market as opposed to engaging in novel storytelling as Tim's games so often do. Hope that makes more sense to you.
It would be great to get Tim’s perspective on the trend of developers from AAA studios telling consumers to lower expectations with the releases of Elden Ring, Tears of the Kingdom, and Baldur’s Gate 3.
On the dice roll thing i like that Baldurs Gate 3, Disco Elysium and Citizen Sleeper amongst others show you the dice being rolled. It brings in extra strategies whilst showing the working out.
Talking about player engagement, Baldurs Gate 3 keeps mantaining high concurrent player numbers through the almost 2 weeks since it was out. Yes, I know, it's what everyone is talking about right now but hey, there is no denying it is really a phenomenom.
would it be accurate to say that "player addiction" has been renamed to "player retention" for many modern AAA developers? It seems that a lot of unhealthy game design choices are claimed to be made with the goal of retaining players these days
You know, I was thinking about Outer Worlds today before I saw this vid. I never did finish it, because I just got bored. It wasn't that it was a bad game, and I think I will go through it once more, but I just got 80% through the game and just got disengaged. I think it's biggest trouble was at the time it was hyped so much for being created by the people who made New Vegas, I just subconsciously rated it as the same as New Vegas, and it's not. Do you think the trouble was more Marketing rather than the game itself? It's just something I could never put my finger on, to what the issue I was having with it. But something just took me out of the immersion.
So many games mistake addiction for engagement. You look at a lot of talks and interviews for heavily monetized or ad-dependent games, and the rate of "engagement" is the backbone of their design formula, often cited as a direct correlation to revenue. I think it's a toxic way of designing games, but it does bring in the money, so it's probably not going away
I feel like modern is a dirty word for "we don't care about why things were done the way they were in the past. That's OLD." And everyone misses the point because they think they're free in their little box or circle of ignorance.
Tim outer worlds engagement is a disaster xD i m sorry man, but i haven't seen so fast dying game ever you made the game about corrupted greedy corporations just to make it EPIC EXCLUSIVE DEAL and sure, maybe you didn't had final say in this, but it came up very weak
Having watched most of your videos, I've noticed you've made many comments about people and their issues with acceptance, blame, and faults. With the 'dice jail' example, I now believe you're a very literal person who has limited understanding of metaphor, nuance, and coping behavior in others with little empathy. I'd be more interested to hear more about programming and development practices from you and how it's changed through your career.
These videos have become a part of my morning routine.
Grab a glass of water and get things done while listening to Tim take us to school.
I hope you keep it up!
Aye, nothing better than having my bowl of oatmeal and coffee in the morning watching Tim while getting ready for work.
its so pleasing to know any time I wake up ill have a new Tim video to enjoy
ohh no, this guy...
XCom is so engaging to me because not only do you switch between systems (tactical combat, base building) but the systems feed into each other. When I'm fighting aliens I look forward to research their techs and interrogate the ones I stunned. When I'm in base I can't wait to try out all the new toys I made and see the promoted soldiers in the field.
Also there is no friction between the two, only a squad selection/debrefing screen with a kickass music.
In many other games though either the systems are fully separate or you're kind of punished from switching from one to the next. Maybe going back to town means trekking back slowly because of encumbrance and getting harassed by random encounters as your characters are exhausted. That makes it a chore. And it makes me want to maximize my time in the field or in town, which in turn makes it even more of a chore.
Either that or one of the two things you spend your time doing isn't part of the fantasy the player was sold, so it's a chore. Both the area 51 building/alien autopsy/tech research elements and the soldiers in the field getting killed off by by aliens are part of the alien invasion fantasy, just as both sneaking around and getting in big fights are part of the Batman fantasy. But building up your castle walls to avoid small raids may not be a big part of the adventure quest fantasy and sneaking around heavily armoured guards as Mary Jane isn't really a big part of the Spider-Man fantasy.
I love how in this video he basically talked about skinner boxes and the aesthetics of play without directly mentioning either of them
This video perfectly sums up original WoW and current WoW.
You explained the difference between variety and random chance really well.
Another advantage of unlocking gameplay through advancement of the story or skills is that your game will be much simpler and easier to begin with. This can be extremely important if, by the time it ends, it has extremely complex mechanics. As long as you introduce a few things at a time and allow the player to become familiar with them, there really isn't a limit. The Zelda games are really good at doing this.
I'd love to see a video delving into the intricacies of game balance. I think it's a topic many of us would find fascinating and insightful.
I love Timothy Cain's videos! The topics help me to challenge myself to improve via self-reflection. In recent games, I am noticing my DM rulings, and choices, that can lead to players disengaging, getting frustrated, and simply becoming bored/turned off. One awareness is doing more "Yes, and..." or "No, but..." and simply giving away easy successes and more information (without a lore dump). Thanks!
This channel is such a gold mine. Tim is really special.
UA-cam animator Zee Bashew did a wonderful and funny little animated series about dice in D&D
It's a tongue in cheek guide on how to train your dice, spotting bad dice, etc I think it's great and it really shows the point about people seeing meaning and decisions in randomness :P
The way you were explaining the different kinds of gameplay that can keep a player engaged made me realize why a lot of my favorite were the designed the way they were.
Hey Tim,
Not a developer, not connected to games in any way outside being a player of them. Love your videos. Huge fan of your perspective on things and the high narrative quality of how you compose your ideas. I grew up on the Arcanum Inn, back when VN Boards were a thing. Arcanum is one of my favorite games and one I frequently revisit. Your projects, the offspring of your projects, have been a significant and positive detail in my life as well as so many others. Thank you for continuing to avail yourself to us
6:50 Age of Conan had combat like that, you did combos that had different finishers that could trigger effects, buffs, debuffs, heals, ect, and then would sometimes give you awesome fatalities on your enemies. It usually don't like MMO's but the engaging combat in that one got me hooked for a good while back in college.
Great video! I find a lot of games are afraid to add long-term rewards in gameplay - I have been playing Underrail, and I’ve found the crafting system very satisfying because you can do things like purchase a piece for a crafting recipe and hold onto it for hours and hours and hours, waiting for the rest of the recipe, and once you find the other pieces to craft this high level powerful weapon or armor piece or whatever, it is immensely satisfying.
The addiction in fallout is Me going a 4 Luck build and criting a deathclaw in the eyes after 40 turns of shooting and reloading.
A game engaging that people go out their way to make amazing mods to add play time, forum discusion/theory crafting going on and on.
Engagement vs Addiction was very much an 'A-HA!' moment. Are you playing any online games these days, Tim? MMO or otherwise.
1:59 I appreciate you going into this subject, Tim.
Mr Cain you are a gentleman and a scholar.
I appreciate hearing the clear distinction between addiction and engagement. When I comment about how designing a game around addiction is a choice and unethical, many commentators clearly do not get it (i.e. addiction is construed as being only the fault of some players, when clearly some games are designed to prey upon those who will become addicted [trying hard not to name here some examples on PC]). I first noticed how design choices affect addiction actually from a positive example (non addictive system) in the old MMO City of Heroes/Villains which had some nice features to help casual players; it made me think about how designers can encourage players to not play all day, etc.
// I avoid such games, which are common in MMOs in my opinion.
Quite the helpful video! Thank you Tim! :D
Hey Tim loving the videos, so interesting to learn as just a person who plays games.
I wanted to know if you could do a video on the work it takes to port a video game from console to Pc or vice versa.
How it was back in the day compared to now, how many developers does it usually take etc
Hope you’re doing well, have a great day 😊
Love you Tim! ❤
don't burn out tim! idk how you do it! absolute beast
Tim said it all. Variety. Allow the player to freely (agency) choose how to act/react to situations. It is the best way to create engagement, and reminds me of how other entertainment media already discovered the need for highs and lows in the narrative to grab the audience attention. Great video as always. Thank you.
Gonna be honest dude I normally spend about zero minutes watching people sit in front of a camera and talk but it works with you. I dunno if it's the novelty of being the OG fallout guy or if it's the merit and knowledge/wisdom you put out, but I've been enjoying your content a lot.
We got a masterclass series getting put out here LFG
I still think some games add a secret aspect to the accuracy rolls. I don't know about Fallout per se, but Morrowind for sure. Some games tell you a percentage chance and unless it is 100% the fail rate is always slightly higher than the player is told, like 5-10% higher sometimes.
In Darkest Dungeon you get a slight bonus to accuracy every time your heroes miss until they get a hit
Interesting topic regarding player agency and random negative outcomes at the end. I would be curious to know your thoughts regarding dynamic difficulty and difficulty options. I.e. player mentality and whether game difficulty should adapt to the player vs the player adapting to the game.
I really like the world map in Fallout and Fallout 2. It creates a unique feeling of distance and time and just adds atmosphere, also with the very varied random encounters. I wish we could have it in modern games. It is a great idea for a postapocalyptic game, as there is actual real wasteland with huge amounts of empty space, making a journey feel like an actual journey. I guess it was more a workaround for technical limitations? Could you give your opinion about it? I dislike e.g. Fallout 4, where everywhere is just some location maker on your compass and you never feel like in a real wasteland. Mainstream player base adaption for guidance?
I spent about 7 hours playing grounded yesterday, the vast majority of it was gathering and base building.
Thanks Great advice
As a counterpoint: Monster Hunter
Monster Hunter is a series about exclusively hunting monsters (speak Bosses).
Naturally, other games don't have to be like Monster Hunter but I think it's a good showcase of "engagement" being way less important than creating a enjoyable/intriguing "core loop".
The series was a multi-million seller since its second Iteration but really took off with Monster Hunter: World (especially in the West).
Now, what was the biggest chance from Monster Hunter: Generations (the Game right before World) to that one? Quality of Life.
While there are a few aspects about Monster Hunter than can be appealing: The Monster and armor designs, cooperation (has been a co-op game since the start) and the combat.
But with World Capcom took it upon themselves to: 1 drastically increase visual quality, 2 downsize a lot of simple repetitious tasks, 3 reduce the amount of instances the player was punished for making bad choices. So in a sense it reduced the frustrations of the game instead of widening what the game does.
Apart from that the game stayed very much focused on selling the fantasy of "hunting monsters" and nothing else.
To be fair you kinda addressed this topic already with lowering the bar of entry and also what types of games you enjoy personally.
And even if we talk about "engagement" instead of "addiction" I think it still cynically portrays a game as nothing but a product when it is, at least to my definition, an art form and there is more to it than just to "make money" with it. I get that video games are very potent money makers and if a company wants to persist they have to make some money to get through.
So in my definition engagement =/= fun/excitement/stimulation (and more like "sustainer of attention").
Anyway; Always interesting to hear your POV.
Great video! Question: How do you accomplish all of these points in specific genres (versus RPGs)? Take Gears of War, which focuses on linear fps gameplay. How would you add player choice or the ability to use old skills in new ways.
I'd say for player choice you could use the narrative of the game such as the NPCs to allow the player to make choices and also provide two or more outcomes to choices you make during quests or side requests that might change the direction of the game slightly or just the path but doesn't divert the player too far out of the way of the overall goal if there is one. Maybe someone in the game needs to be saved and you can choose if you want to or not. Or maybe someone tells you to meet them somewhere and you can chose if you do or not. Or maybe when your in a mission someone might tell you not to harm a certain character and it's up to you if you do it or not.
@11:26 Even if that was the case, that would not excuse a buggy mess that made the player fail a quest.
You know, I bet it probably is pretty fun to think about what topics to talk about for your vids and then before you go to bed do the possible outlines in your head. That would put me to sleep like a baby each night.
cool vid!
first
Can u upload a gameplay video? loves from Turkey...
A... watched pellet dispenser never distributes?
Tim, relax a bit, you're going to burn out if you're keep uploading videos at such pace. And I wouldn't want to miss you.
Not everyone cares about being a successful UA-camr. I get the feeling Tim is doing this more as a way of sharing his experiences and answering people's questions rather than for views. He generally uploads early in the morning so as long as you check in once a day you're good.
Point is, don’t be afraid of taking breaks! Even rewarding and fun work is work, and if you don’t have some good rest periods and breaks and such, you can start finding something you enjoy miserable! The struggle of a creative!
just thoughts & questions that come to him so quickly that he makes a video as to not forget. They are one take vlogs I think don’t require editing. Vlogs are common way to get things off your mind and into place where you can easily Remember it like a video. So... I’m just sayin he may actually look forward to making vlog and posting them doesn’t necessarily drain his energy like writing a script and editing a video would. Just my 2cents taking breaks is key to all kinds of things though no doubt about that.
They'll keep going because one arrives every time I wobble my head in a certain way and I'm pretty sure that's what causes them to be uploaded.
@@stuartmorley6894have a pellet.
Hey Tim, are you enjoying Baldur's Gate 3?
I am!
I am!
I am!
I am!
Monster Hunter World is Capcom's best selling game of all time and it is only bosses. Many of the modern MMOs have completely thrown out trash mobs from their hardest raids, because the interesting part of gameplay in those are the bosses, not the trash. I think that one Wildstar dev was onto something way earlier than much of the other industry.
The best way to keep every player I’ve ever met engaged is just to make a world that is fun to inhabit, and easy to get lost in, something I learned from playing the early Fallout games versus the later ones
So we're going to find out what happened to Earth in The Outer Worlds 2? 😉
I hate random rewards. Which is one of the reasons why I hate looters like Diablo or Borderlands (I also hate sorting through massive loot and many other things in those games). I like to plan on second playthrough (usualy to max one thing) and if one weapon I really want is not in same place as before I cannot enjoy it as much.
In Borderlands 2 I loved using sniper and I easily pulled off headshots with only 2 types of scope, I got those snipers early at lvl 5 and 7, then I did not get any new snipers with those scopes for 30+ hours, so I just respecced to go full melee to not rely on game giving me good sniper rifle.
In Diablo 4, the player engagement leans heavily towards the addictive aspect. Even when I wasn't initially inclined to play, once I started, I'd find myself engrossed for hours. On the other hand, Baldur's Gate 3 captivates me through its compelling narrative and decision-making dynamics. I'm already brainstorming characters for my next playthrough!
Hi Tim, I think you meant variable ratio is the most addictive instead of what you called variable interval, but you really described random rewards, which is what causes the superstitious behaviors. I think it would help your point to have delineated the difference between these, or at least pointed out that it's the variable ratio schedule that really reinforces a behavior into a difficult to extinguish addiction.
Whether variable ratio or variable interval is ultimately inconsequential. The distinction is between operant conditioning and player agency. That operant conditioning of any kind is in widespread use in the video game industry as elsewhere is precisely what's cast a shadow over the pastime and is actively severing relationships between game development studios and other members of the communities they actually helped to create over the years.
That Tim is trying to draw a distinction between operant conditioning and what's now being called "player engagement" [in the industry] is grand except that that [operant conditioning and the industry's idea of player engagement] are one and the same. The onus is not on the game developer to engage players. Just as no one else can make us happy, no one else can make us enjoy a game. It's a choice we make. If we enjoy a game or even just elements of a game, we've created that enjoyment ourselves. It's the thinly veiled coercion tactics some will nonetheless insist is no way forcing players to do something they otherwise might not that are in question today and a very different thing from the kind of player investment in a game Tim is talking about. Everything he's mentioned can faciliate a player's enjoyment of a game, but doesn't create that enjoyment. When it comes to RPGs, It helps immensely if there are ideas in the game that are worth the life-time and effort it takes to engage with them in my experience.
Edit: Parentheticals for clarity.
@@lrinfi Hello, what you say is very interesting but I am confused on a few things. How is it that operant conditioning of any kind is what's bad, when operant conditioning is the inevitable consequence of any challenge: you do something, you get rewarded. It happens all the time in games and in life in general. It seems to me that pointing to operant conditioning as the culprit is too broad of a target. Nobody complains about operant conditioning but most people begrudge the variable ratio operant conditioning of slot machines, for example.
Also, you say that the onus is not on the game developer to engage players, that no one else can make us happy, no one else can make us enjoy a game. But even in designing a Rubik's cube, the developer had the option to make them as they are now, or to make every tile the same color, taking out any enjoyment from the toy to everyone except for babies. It seems to me ridiculous that you say game developers are powerless to make players enjoy the game. "You don't enjoy the game? what's wrong with you! Just make the choice to enjoy the game already, dummy!" Obviously a player can hate life and hate everything and enjoy nothing. That not the common case.
It seems to me that you're saying your main enjoyment is from the "ideas" in a game, which I take you to mean philosophical ideas? Do you deny the other form of enjoyment in games that is "solving a problem of a novel quality"? That is what I'd say is the main form of enjoyment from games, and what you dismissively label as merely "operant conditioning". In every chess game, the enjoyment comes from solving a complex problem with the pieces at your disposal. In every soccer game, you engage your skill and strategy to solve the problem of scoring a goal. When you get a new ability in a game, that is just a another chess piece for you to play with in that game's fighting system. Even in this conversation we are dancing with our words, and propositions are our chess pieces, all for the novel problem of hopefully finding the truth in each other's words, with this conversation being slightly different qualitatively from all other conversations, which makes it so fun to hopefully, both of us. These game designs genuinely engages the mind in novel ways, it's in fact the essence of "play", and is clearly different from "operant conditioning", and especially distinguished from the addictive variable ratio.
And to look at the Fight-Explore-Talking loop in fallout games. This is not merely operant conditioning. This model is acknowledging that people get bored of every "problem of a novel quality", and that to switch between them, the player leaves two "problems of a novel quality" fallow, and engage with a third one. And if you accept the premise that to solve "problems of novel quality" is beneficial and fun to the player instead of uselessly addictive, then this model is really pretty smart, as well as a good thing for the player. It's true that none of the Fight-Explore-Talking challenges in fallout games are all that difficult, not as difficult as say, a chess game. But still, it isn't the same as merely operant conditioning.
Although when you say, "this doesn't help me long term. This isn't worth the life-time and effort it takes to engage with them." I agree. Maybe I should just replace all games in my life with good novels. So I can better myself even when relaxing. Logically, why should I play these video games at all that are qualitatively distal compared to the "games" in real life of making money, solving problems, talking to real people.
@@harrywang3098 "It seems to me ridiculous that you say game developers are powerless to make players enjoy the game." -- Perhaps because that's not what I said. If a developer makes a game s/he truly wants to play, others will likely want to play it also, but there is no onus on the developer to "engage" players or "offer incentives" to play the game. When players consider a video game worth engaging with, the player has made the choice to engage with it, not the developer the very same as readers choose to engage with the novels of which you speak, not the novels' authors, if you follow.
I do think video games have the potential to ignite our imaginations in ways other forms of media cannot and that most games no longer do because most are being made to satisfy the demands of the stock market as opposed to engaging in novel storytelling as Tim's games so often do.
Hope that makes more sense to you.
It would be great to get Tim’s perspective on the trend of developers from AAA studios telling consumers to lower expectations with the releases of Elden Ring, Tears of the Kingdom, and Baldur’s Gate 3.
On the dice roll thing i like that Baldurs Gate 3, Disco Elysium and Citizen Sleeper amongst others show you the dice being rolled. It brings in extra strategies whilst showing the working out.
Talking about player engagement, Baldurs Gate 3 keeps mantaining high concurrent player numbers through the almost 2 weeks since it was out. Yes, I know, it's what everyone is talking about right now but hey, there is no denying it is really a phenomenom.
would it be accurate to say that "player addiction" has been renamed to "player retention" for many modern AAA developers? It seems that a lot of unhealthy game design choices are claimed to be made with the goal of retaining players these days
You know, I was thinking about Outer Worlds today before I saw this vid. I never did finish it, because I just got bored.
It wasn't that it was a bad game, and I think I will go through it once more, but I just got 80% through the game and just got disengaged. I think it's biggest trouble was at the time it was hyped so much for being created by the people who made New Vegas, I just subconsciously rated it as the same as New Vegas, and it's not.
Do you think the trouble was more Marketing rather than the game itself? It's just something I could never put my finger on, to what the issue I was having with it. But something just took me out of the immersion.
So many games mistake addiction for engagement. You look at a lot of talks and interviews for heavily monetized or ad-dependent games, and the rate of "engagement" is the backbone of their design formula, often cited as a direct correlation to revenue.
I think it's a toxic way of designing games, but it does bring in the money, so it's probably not going away
I feel like modern is a dirty word for "we don't care about why things were done the way they were in the past. That's OLD."
And everyone misses the point because they think they're free in their little box or circle of ignorance.
Rolling three 1's in a row is not the player's fault. The player has no control over the outcome of the dice. It's nobody's fault, it's just bad luck.
Tim outer worlds engagement is a disaster xD
i m sorry man, but i haven't seen so fast dying game ever
you made the game about corrupted greedy corporations just to make it EPIC EXCLUSIVE DEAL
and sure, maybe you didn't had final say in this, but it came up very weak
Having watched most of your videos, I've noticed you've made many comments about people and their issues with acceptance, blame, and faults. With the 'dice jail' example, I now believe you're a very literal person who has limited understanding of metaphor, nuance, and coping behavior in others with little empathy. I'd be more interested to hear more about programming and development practices from you and how it's changed through your career.