Video Games Are Bad at Explaining Themselves
Video games as a genre are extremely poor at explaining themselves. When you buy a new game you’ll often find little or no information regarding the basic systems and mechanics. The industry assumes that their customers are by default familiar with the fundamentals of playing a modern video game. Hence if a game has a tutorial, it is often based around videos rather than detailed verbal instructions. You are are briefly shown a clip of a specific move being successfully undertaken but it is seldom shown in a wider context. The industry also expects the fan community to take on the role of curating and disseminating information about its games. The move away from forums and bespoke websites to Discord highlights this. Discord is a primarily a real time communication tool and not good at maintaining a historical data archive. If you want an answer to a specific gaming question, you’ll more than likely find it on YouTube in a video made by a fellow gamer.
Video games as a genre are extremely poor at explaining themselves. When you buy a new game you’ll often find little or no information regarding the basic systems and mechanics. The industry assumes that their customers are by default familiar with the fundamentals of playing a modern video game. Hence if a game has a tutorial, it is often based around videos rather than detailed verbal instructions. You are are briefly shown a clip of a specific move being successfully undertaken but it is seldom shown in a wider context. The industry also expects the fan community to take on the role of curating and disseminating information about its games. The move away from forums and bespoke websites to Discord highlights this. Discord is a primarily a real time communication tool and not good at maintaining a historical data archive. If you want an answer to a specific gaming question, you’ll more than likely find it on YouTube in a video made by a fellow gamer.
This issue has been highlighted recently as I’ve watched my grandchildren try new games on my computer. They play primarily on their phones or the Nintendo Switch 2. Hence their major frame of reference are interacting with games via a touch screen or a controller. As a result, PC gaming via a keyboard and mouse is quite abstract for them and also physically difficult for their small hands. The problem is further compounded by their often being no viable tutorial directly available in the games they play. My PC having two monitors helps in so far as you can run a video on one screen while playing a game on another but videos are often a lottery. Information is not always up to date and not everyone who creates YouTube content are skilled communicators. Furthermore, although it is useful to have access to online resources, this does explain or justify why a game such as Fall Guys does not have an integral tutorial?
When playing Roblox with my granddaughters, I often ask them how to do a specific task in games such as 99 Nights in the Forest. Sometimes they’ll know and other times they will not. Most of their knowledge comes from “just trying things” which can be a great way to learn but it can leave you with serious gaps in your knowledge. This matter is compounded as I play with them on the PC, which often has different or even additional controls. Online searches have sometime led to all of us finding out something that we previously didn’t know. Discovering information this way can be fun but it can also be very frustrating. I hit a brick wall today trying to figure out exactly how you used the various game passes in Chivalry 2. I eventually found a Reddit post that cogently explained the specific steps required to activate the pass and how you subsequently accessed unlocked gear. Again, isn’t providing such information incumbent on the developers?
I was going through my bric-a-brac cupboard recently and found the installation disks for several games from the middle 2000s. All had comprehensive manuals. In fact the in-depth instructions that came with the MMORPG The Lord of the Rings Online where so well written, I chose to play the Lore-master class purely on the strength of the written summary. Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 (the 2009 version) has an excellent tutorial level dovetailed into the start of the game, where you’re character has to visit the firing range to undertake basic weapons proficiency. It’s an excellent example of seamlessly integrating practical instruction into a game and making it part of the story and overall experience. If you remember such things, it is a stark contrast to how things are done these days. The videos game industry’s casual attitude towards having to explain themselves to their paying customers seems a least, ill considered and at worse, frankly disrespectful.
However, let us end on a positive note. As I was writing this post I collated a list of games that I’ve played over the last twelve months. Most of which were completely new to me at the time. After some consideration, I remembered that those games that made the best effort to school new players in their respective gameplay, were often so called AA titles. Sniper Elite: Resistance has a bespoke level at the start of the game that provides examples of the most essential mechanics and systems. Tainted Grail: The Fall of Avalon integrates a tutorial into the game prologue as you character escapes incarceration. The more I think about it, the biggest offenders for not making any effort to explain themselves are once again, the big triple A game developers. However, the tide of public opinion is beginning to change against this sector of the video game industry. Perhaps this in another potential lesson that can be added to an already lengthy list, that they can learn.
Fun or Skill?
I have written in the past about the video games we cannot play. The ones that require a keen understanding of a game’s mechanics, along with a strong degree of manual dexterity and situational awareness. Being 58 years old, I tend to have neither the co-ordination necessary to succeed or the patience to master such complex skill requirements. With this in mind, I recently watched a YouTube video for Chivalry 2 and thought, that looks like fun. The fact that it showed someone picking up a chicken and throwing it at an opponent is neither here nor there. However, after watching a few more videos I realised that combat in the game was complex and that, as usual, the reality of playing such a game would be different from my expectations. Hence, I came very close to not buying Chivalry 2. However, I eventually decided that I would, so I bought it for just under £10 from an online vendor.
I have written in the past about the video games we cannot play. The ones that require a keen understanding of a game’s mechanics, along with a strong degree of manual dexterity and situational awareness. Being 58 years old, I tend to have neither the co-ordination necessary to succeed or the patience to master such complex skill requirements. With this in mind, I recently watched a YouTube video for Chivalry 2 and thought, that looks like fun. The fact that it showed someone picking up a chicken and throwing it at an opponent is neither here nor there. However, after watching a few more videos I realised that combat in the game was complex and that, as usual, the reality of playing such a game would be different from my expectations. Hence, I came very close to not buying Chivalry 2. However, I eventually decided that I would, so I bought it for just under £10 from an online vendor.
So why did I change my mind? Because I fundamentally do not like the idea of there being a “skills gate”. It probably didn’t help that I watched a video by someone who had obviously spent a lot of time playing Chivalry 2 and they were rather contemptuous of newer players. They didn’t care for gamers that are happy to just potter about in the game and aren’t that fussed about mastering combat. But then again, I’ve no time for the fallacy of the “you’re playing the game wrong” mindset. Nor do I like self appointed gatekeepers. Excelling at a game is fine in itself but is it not an adjunct to playing and having fun? We don’t say to children “here is a sport or a musical instrument that you can learn but don’t bother even trying if you’re not going to strive for total excellence in it”. Society seems to be losing sight of the fact that enjoyment and fun are an integral part of many hobbies and pastimes. Everything doesn’t have to be competitive.
I regularly encourage my grandchildren to draw and paint. We sit down together and talk while doing something creative. The idea is to simply take pleasure in what you’re doing. No one judges anyone else’s work and you can always find positive comments to make. “That’s interesting, tell me about it” being a good line of enquiry. Children are happy to express themselves creatively and they only stop when someone says something critical or imposes rules on what they’re doing which leaches the fun out of the activity. Its the same with sport. As well as being enjoyable to play sports can teach other valuable social and moral lessons. However, it only takes a coach who takes things too seriously and a leisure activity becomes a chore. As a child I used to enjoy being in the school choir. We were fortunate to have a good musical director who favoured enthusiasm over perfection. Sadly, they retired and their replacement was a perfectionist who drove out at least half of the choir members.
Being skilful in a video game or trying to improve your gameplay is not a bad thing in itself. I have regularly played Battlefield 6 since its release last October and have overtime become nominally better at it. Familiarity with the maps, learning how weapons handle and using simple tactics have all contributed to improving my gameplay and the quality of my overall experience in game. However, all of this has been approached in a casual fashion. I certainly haven’t trained or formally practised and the object of each game played remains to be entertained. Today, I played my first 64 player game in Chivalry 2. I died a lot but it doesn’t matter. I was laughing out loud most of the time due to my incompetence and the absolute mayhem that was happening around me. Occasionally even I could get a kill on a veteran, due to being in the right place at the right time and my random play style. I’m sure it infuriated some players. The thought of which delighted me even more.
I will always play video games primarily for fun. Any improvement in my gameplay is simply due to increasing familiarity, rather than a concerted effort. If you’re the sort of player that wants to be the best of the best, then that is your prerogative. Just don’t make the mistake of thinking that your gaming philosophy is correct by default. It is just a subjective opinion and as such is simply one of many. There is certainly a debate to be had about how you efficiently match players with comparable skills or whether it is better to just throw everyone together. The problem with this area of discussion is that a definitive answer has still not been reached. However, playing against bots is an interesting halfway house and certainly something I favour when I don’t want the hassle of dealing with people. As for the issue of skill versus fun, they don’t have to be mutually exclusive but I believe that there relationship is asymmetrical and that fun is always the starting point and not vice versa.