I'm curious to know what everything thinks about tutorials in the different games they play. My questions would be do you think they are an absolute necessity? Do you think they should be built into a game, or provided separately (e.g. on a website as movies or something)?
I tend to lean on tutorials that are built into the first mission of a game. I am one of those who just wants to play the game and so I dive right in (and am always grateful when there's help in the beginning). I wish I could say I was the kind of person to sit down and read a manual, but that's just not me!
We are currently working on some options for our own game tutorial, including one that would be part of the game itself vs. a series of tutorials that could be referenced instantly and freely from the website. I would love to know what gamers things about them in general, so that we have an better idea of what would suit our gamers best!
I don't think tutorials are an absolute necessity (in any kind of game actually). You should not need them. But if you do, because your game is way to complex with a monstrous learning curve, or because the UI is not that intuitive then my choice would go for in-game tutorials, and not external out-game videos.
I think the best would be to have a "normal-game" tutorial mode that tells you (and more importantly shows you) what you should know and do. The very first steps you need to take only, in order for you to know basics. Every time you enter in a menu screen for the first time, the assistant/tutorial/whatever agent that is assisting you, shows you around and raises popups with hints on what you're supposed to know and do. I know that some games did this very well, I just can't remember the names now. When you're familiarized with the game you can switch-off the tutorial mode and the popups will not appear anymore. Anytime you have doubts again you can switch them back on. I'll try to remember the games that did this well.
An excellent refinement of this in-game assistants is a tutorial-quest system. The assistant will give you a series of challenges and hints on how to accomplish them. This is very used in MMOs. You learn as you play your way through those "missions". When you finish the tutorial you should have a good knowledge of the game mechanics. I like this system however I'm not sure if it will work for complex games, games where not all mechanics are available at game start where this tutorial/quest system could drag players for a long time.
I prefer in-game tutorials embedded in the normal game but I have nothing against a couple of tutorials (one more basic and another more advanced) that take you to a separate and controlled mini game to explain you the basics. This is the standard option.
I'm not much of a manual person myself either. Occasionally I like to read them but I prefer if the game information is built-in inside the game itself, like Civilization's civilopedia, or other game's galactopedia, encyclopedia, etc.
So, there are several ways you can teach your players to play. You should not need to do that in the first place, but if you do the best way is to go with in-game tutorials for the basics that you can switch off when you're familiarized enough. The extra info to be found (manuals, encyclopedias) should only be that, extra, to give some more context to the player, some background story or a more convenient way to look at some game aspect (like a big tech tree for example).
It really depends. I would include them to be cover your game for people who might have trouble. I would implement it as Adam described. Whatever makes it easier for the player to learn how to operate the game. Nothing worse than fumbling in the dark and getting frustrated.
(Jan 19, 2012 01:45 PM)Azaral Wrote: [ -> ]It really depends. I would include them to be cover your game for people who might have trouble. I would implement it as Adam described. Whatever makes it easier for the player to learn how to operate the game. Nothing worse than fumbling in the dark and getting frustrated.
That's what I think. Many gamers play often enough (and the same type of games) that they don't need one, but when you do need one, it's nice to have it. We would hate to turn away potential long-term customers. Thanks for the feedback. Much appreciated!
I quite like the Distant Worlds way: in the beginning you leave almost all the game in the hand of the assistants that ask you to make some clear cut decision here and there.
Game after game you take in your hand more and more parts of the game until you find your personal, ideal balance.
I will just add some more optional explanations from their part about why they are doing this or that.
In this way the development investment in the tutorial will be also a useful part of the game even after that the basics has been learned.
I think a nice blend between a few stand alone tutorials (very short and simple. Also depends on the complexity of the game), tool tips, hints, and easily accessible help buttons can go a long ways.
(Jan 26, 2012 07:19 AM)dayrinni Wrote: [ -> ]I think a nice blend between a few stand alone tutorials (very short and simple. Also depends on the complexity of the game), tool tips, hints, and easily accessible help buttons can go a long ways.
Absolutely
Tool tips are just king for me. There's nothing better then mousing-over a place to get more info when we have doubts what that stands for. And nothing more annoying then finding out that no tool tip exist for what you're after (or even worse when there are tool tips for some things but not for others and especially not for the ones you need most
I can tell you a name of a AAA game that does this). Good located help buttons can also be a good alternative to tool tips. Hints can also work great yes, every time you start/load your game you're presented with one tip and you could allow the player to cycle-through hints. All that with a simple tutorial, a galactopedia (if your game is complex enough to justify that) and nobody needs a manual really. Although manuals are probably cheaper to produce but very boring to write!
Your condensed tips were precious and right on!
Thanks for the additional feedback. I believe we do have some info tips that identify different buttons and items on the interface (which appear when you mouse-over them). I have also built a collection of short articles on the website which detail different sections of the game. We will eventually be embedding video into those sections as well as trailers to help people visually see how to do things. At this time, it looks like that will be the extent of our tutorial "system". Hopefully we will end up getting enough feedback from beta testers to know whether or not a more complete tutorial needs to be written into the game.
Thanks again!
The need for tutorials highly depends on the game and the complexity of the game's systems.
If your game follows the defacto standards set by its predecessors, then you can probably get along without any meaningful tutorial, even though having one will not hurt you there. If however your game tries to re-invent the wheel and is full of new concepts and things that just do not work like they used to in other games, then some form of tutorial is almost mandatory.
A good UI design can also go a long way towards reducing the need for a tutorial. UI functions that are self explanatory, tooltips that give plenty of information, and THE RIGHT KIND of information (i've seen quite a few game with tooltips giving useless or inadequate information on the item being looked at) can also help a lot. In fact the right UI with a proper in-place help can pretty much replace a tutorial in itself.
What I prefer the most are walkthrough videos. It is important however, that the player should not have to quit the game or task out of it for these.
(Feb 04, 2012 12:12 AM)csebal Wrote: [ -> ]The need for tutorials highly depends on the game and the complexity of the game's systems.
If your game follows the defacto standards set by its predecessors, then you can probably get along without any meaningful tutorial, even though having one will not hurt you there. If however your game tries to re-invent the wheel and is full of new concepts and things that just do not work like they used to in other games, then some form of tutorial is almost mandatory.
A good UI design can also go a long way towards reducing the need for a tutorial. UI functions that are self explanatory, tooltips that give plenty of information, and THE RIGHT KIND of information (i've seen quite a few game with tooltips giving useless or inadequate information on the item being looked at) can also help a lot. In fact the right UI with a proper in-place help can pretty much replace a tutorial in itself.
What I prefer the most are walkthrough videos. It is important however, that the player should not have to quit the game or task out of it for these.
I appreciate the info. Hopefully the movies we're making will work well with the pop-up info that we'll have for button mouse-overs. I'm not completely sure how "standard" the gameplay is in our game compared to other games. Part of the reason is that this game is geared towards tablets and other mobile devices, and the buttons we came up with for such devices will also be in the PC version, which I'm not sure is very common. That said, I don't think it's that hard to figure out, so I guess only time will tell! (and maybe our beta testers...
(Feb 04, 2012 06:46 AM)apalala Wrote: [ -> ]Part of the reason is that this game is geared towards tablets and other mobile devices, and the buttons we came up with for such devices will also be in the PC version, which I'm not sure is very common. That said, I don't think it's that hard to figure out, so I guess only time will tell! (and maybe our beta testers...
Do not even try to go there. If you are thinking about using the same UI for your touch enabled interface and your regular, keyboard and mouse interface, then here is a pro tip for you.
Stop right now.
The input language of mouse and keyboard is drastically different from what you are using in a touch enabled system.
If you are doing the touch interface correctly, then it will simply not work in a keyboard/mouse environment. If however it works in a keyboard/mouse environment, that most probably means that you are not doing your touch UI right, not utilizing its full potential.
I know that it is a major effort but nobody is thinking about a mixed UI/game environment?
Like the starmap on the pc screen and the messages, economic indexes, etc. on the tables/smartphone/gamepad/etc.?
(Feb 22, 2012 06:21 PM)bertipa Wrote: [ -> ]I know that it is a major effort but nobody is thinking about a mixed UI/game environment?
Like the starmap on the pc screen and the messages, economic indexes, etc. on the tables/smartphone/gamepad/etc.?
What would be the point of it? I mean.. separating part of the UI to a different device would only force the player to split his attention between that.
Using multiple screens is an option, as those are reasonably close to eachother and you can usually see both at the same time, but even then you have to be careful on how you do it, because a player can only focus on one area at a time, and if there is more than one that has important things happening, that would seriously deduct from the player's experience.
Not to mention that splitting the UI between the PC and some other device would add a tremendous amount of additional develoment for virtually no gain in functionality or game experience.
(Feb 22, 2012 07:05 PM)csebal Wrote: [ -> ] (Feb 22, 2012 06:21 PM)bertipa Wrote: [ -> ]I know that it is a major effort but nobody is thinking about a mixed UI/game environment?
Like the starmap on the pc screen and the messages, economic indexes, etc. on the tables/smartphone/gamepad/etc.?
What would be the point of it? I mean.. separating part of the UI to a different device would only force the player to split his attention between that.
Using multiple screens is an option, as those are reasonably close to eachother and you can usually see both at the same time, but even then you have to be careful on how you do it, because a player can only focus on one area at a time, and if there is more than one that has important things happening, that would seriously deduct from the player's experience.
Not to mention that splitting the UI between the PC and some other device would add a tremendous amount of additional develoment for virtually no gain in functionality or game experience.
My idea is that is more probable that someone has at home one screen and a smartphone (or a tablet) than two screens.
About the development it becomes less important if you already have the idea to port your game on said smartphone or tablet.
BTW my desiderata is, when I'm in the middle of a diplomatic transaction, to being able to check out the map, my economic indexes, eventual intelligence on the other side etc.
(Feb 23, 2012 12:08 AM)bertipa Wrote: [ -> ]My idea is that is more probable that someone has at home one screen and a smartphone (or a tablet) than two screens.
About the development it becomes less important if you already have the idea to port your game on said smartphone or tablet.
BTW my desiderata is, when I'm in the middle of a diplomatic transaction, to being able to check out the map, my economic indexes, eventual intelligence on the other side etc.
This is perfectly viable with a decently done UI on a single screen as well. You do not need multiple screens, let alone multiple devices for that.
Also porting a game to a different platform and providing an UI on a different platform for a game that is running on your PC are not exactly the same as far as technical requirements go.
For starters, you would still have to make the UI work without the device, unless you want to limit your game only to those own a device of that type AND are willing to pollute it with yet another pointless application.
Then the question begs to ask itself:
If you already have a nicely working UI, that allows you to do what you want on just one screen, then why would you bother using your phone or tablet or whatever else you have as well?
If you really need that device for your UI to work, then it is your UI that you should be worried about and not how you could extend it to a different device, as it is clearly lacking. If however it is not needed, well then.. we just said it: it is not needed.
I can imagine some cases, when extending to a device could add some form of immersion, like for example a management type of game could have you receive virtual text messages, or phone calls on your smartphone, sort of deepening the 'experience' by adding some more immersion to your role of a manager (sort of a reverse augmented reality game), but even then the balance between the added benefits versus the costs involved in making this idea work would probably prevent this from ever happening in a real development.
(Feb 23, 2012 12:08 AM)bertipa Wrote: [ -> ] (Feb 22, 2012 07:05 PM)csebal Wrote: [ -> ] (Feb 22, 2012 06:21 PM)bertipa Wrote: [ -> ]I know that it is a major effort but nobody is thinking about a mixed UI/game environment?
Like the starmap on the pc screen and the messages, economic indexes, etc. on the tables/smartphone/gamepad/etc.?
What would be the point of it? I mean.. separating part of the UI to a different device would only force the player to split his attention between that.
Using multiple screens is an option, as those are reasonably close to eachother and you can usually see both at the same time, but even then you have to be careful on how you do it, because a player can only focus on one area at a time, and if there is more than one that has important things happening, that would seriously deduct from the player's experience.
Not to mention that splitting the UI between the PC and some other device would add a tremendous amount of additional develoment for virtually no gain in functionality or game experience.
My idea is that is more probable that someone has at home one screen and a smartphone (or a tablet) than two screens.
About the development it becomes less important if you already have the idea to port your game on said smartphone or tablet.
BTW my desiderata is, when I'm in the middle of a diplomatic transaction, to being able to check out the map, my economic indexes, eventual intelligence on the other side etc.
All this feedback has been great. Our UI system has already been developed with the mobile device in mind, but I feel the way we've done it has been working well on the PC... at least when we've been testing ourselves.
This forum thread has helped us figure out new ways to "teach" people in the game since tool tips and other things will not be an option on a phone or tablet (not enough room on such a small screen).
Our game has a lot of depth when it comes to strategy and a lot of that will be missed without some kind of a tutorial, so ultimately we've agreed as a group to go ahead and get something in the game for people. Hopefully our beta testers will feel like it works (or will provide some good ideas on how to make it better). Our game is different enough that even our idea for a tutorial had to be different. We're approaching full testing of the game here in a few weeks, so I guess we'll see.
Thanks again, all this feedback has been really helpful!
Bit late to the thread,
I've read a few different articles on tutorials at gamasutra that might be helpful. Most recently:
GDC 2012 10 tutorial tips from Plants vs Zombies creator George Fanp
Conversely:
Darwinian Difficulty: How Throwing Players In Headfirst Can Work
And also how not to do it:
The Designer's Notebook: Eight Ways To Make a Bad Tutorial
(Feb 23, 2012 12:20 AM)csebal Wrote: [ -> ] (Feb 23, 2012 12:08 AM)bertipa Wrote: [ -> ]My idea is that is more probable that someone has at home one screen and a smartphone (or a tablet) than two screens.
About the development it becomes less important if you already have the idea to port your game on said smartphone or tablet.
BTW my desiderata is, when I'm in the middle of a diplomatic transaction, to being able to check out the map, my economic indexes, eventual intelligence on the other side etc.
This is perfectly viable with a decently done UI on a single screen as well. You do not need multiple screens, let alone multiple devices for that.
Also porting a game to a different platform and providing an UI on a different platform for a game that is running on your PC are not exactly the same as far as technical requirements go.
For starters, you would still have to make the UI work without the device, unless you want to limit your game only to those own a device of that type AND are willing to pollute it with yet another pointless application.
Then the question begs to ask itself:
If you already have a nicely working UI, that allows you to do what you want on just one screen, then why would you bother using your phone or tablet or whatever else you have as well?
If you really need that device for your UI to work, then it is your UI that you should be worried about and not how you could extend it to a different device, as it is clearly lacking. If however it is not needed, well then.. we just said it: it is not needed.
I can imagine some cases, when extending to a device could add some form of immersion, like for example a management type of game could have you receive virtual text messages, or phone calls on your smartphone, sort of deepening the 'experience' by adding some more immersion to your role of a manager (sort of a reverse augmented reality game), but even then the balance between the added benefits versus the costs involved in making this idea work would probably prevent this from ever happening in a real development.
If you were creating an MMO, or a game that runs on a server on the cloud somewhere, then it makes sense to have multiple interfaces. For example, if you were admin on a counterstrike server, you could have a mobile app that allows you into the in-game chat and allows you to ban people remotely. It could send you a text if x people type voteban or call for an admin.
Or something like Eve-Online, you could check your skills queue and market orders from a mobile app, but not actually undock and fly around space until you got home and were in front of the pc
Like the link pointed out, I really hate being forced to take a tutorial. I find it quite annoying. For example, FF13 was pretty much a 20 hour tutorial, ARGH!