Hello again Survivors!
In our previous post, we shared our interpretation and questions regarding the “puzzle game feel” feedback and thanks to your help, we feel confident we’re going in the right direction now. Once again, thanks to every one of you that helped!
Keeping up this momentum, today we want to share our thoughts on another major feedback point, which was the issue of the game being too punishing, and we would like to hear your opinions on it.
As the game's narrative is set in an apocalyptic setting, we do not think players simply want an easy game...
In fact, there has been positive feedback about the high difficulty and tactical aspects. The issue, in our view, is not the "threats and crises themselves" but rather a lack of rewarding feelings when overcoming them.
We can list out these lacking situations as below:
- Due to insufficient tutorials and learning opportunities, it's easy to experience punishment (death) more than intended.
- Even when choosing “strategic builds” such as character perks and weapon modifications, there is not a strong sense of getting “stronger”.
- Lack of emotional/cinematic rewards corresponding to “good play” during combat.
- Insufficient narrative delivery at the completion of each stage to give meaning to the gameplay.
Of the issues above, the first one “lack of tutorials and learning opportunities,” was similar to what we discussed in the previous post about the “puzzle game feel.” The analysis suggested that, if the intended balance between punishment and reward is 50/50, the absence of learning opportunities could shift the weight much more towards punishment.
However, it's not simply that one problem. Even players and streamers who quickly grasp the game mechanics and clear stages up to the Stag Manor have provided feedback that something is still lacking.
Since understanding what is lacking and how to address it is our next challenge, we would like to share our thoughts on it!
Lack of Perceived Room for Growth
With the current linear-based stage structure, elements of “growth,” such as acquiring character perks or weapon modifications, are more like essential requirements than actual rewards.
As the threat level and enemy density increase with each stage, even if a player can come up with a well-thought-out build in “hard” or “despair” difficulty, it is difficult to feel that you have become stronger. This makes it feel like “you have to do this” in order to survive.
Even games known for their high difficulty like Darkest Dungeon, Battle Brothers, or well-known titles like XCOM don't seem to constantly escalate difficulty with every battle. Initially, they present a challenging difficulty, but once you overcome it and achieve a significant level of growth, you can feel “strengthened” until the next boss or major threat.
We did notice this during the internal level design process, however, we concluded that it was unavoidable if we wanted to showcase the “inherent fun of a tactical game” we are aiming for. The limitation stemmed from the number of stages we could implement before Early Access.
We hoped to create a sense of “'relative strength” by consistently having the weakest Infested, “Knawer” present and there were limitations like not introducing pursuing enemies on maps like the “Barracks.”
However, in the end, while this design allowed us to showcase “tactically,” we missed the quality present in many good turn-based strategy games – the enjoyment of growth.
To this end, it seems that, similar to the “puzzle-like feel” discussed in the previous post, addressing the linear design issue while providing 'learning opportunities' could at the same time fulfill the role of “perceived growth space.” This approach might be a potential solution.
However, I am cautious not to quickly conclude, "All problems lie in linearity, and if we fix that, the game will level up!" So, I would like to ask players if they agree with this analysis.
Disappointment in Combat Presentation
On the other hand, we also considered that the lack of emphasis on “combat presentation,” which we did not prioritize while focusing on creating the logic of the game, might be contributing to the “lack of reward.” As mentioned in the initial post on linearity, since we have only one artist, the time was limited for both creating the current number of stages and essential elements for the game.
Therefore, we have been concentrating on basic combat satisfaction, focusing on the “resulting satisfaction of solving difficult situations.” We have made efforts to design and portray combat situations as efficiently as possible.
The aspect of presentation definitely becomes more satisfying as the development team invests more effort. However, increasing the standard for this could potentially hinder the already limited production speed. We have to approach this carefully!
I would like to ask if players feel that the level of combat presentation, such as critical hits, is lacking and disappointing when compared to other games with similar gameplay styles. If so, prioritizing improvements within a range that doesn't significantly decrease the production speed per unit content seems necessary.
Disappointment in Narrative Delivery
The last possibility we considered is that, similar to combat presentation, due to the lack of resources allocated to artwork, most of the narrative is delivered through text. Consequently, the emotional reward after clearing challenging stages might have been weak.
[Caution!] The following section contains spoilers for the 3rd stage, “Inn”. If you prefer not to have spoilers for this map, I recommend skipping this part of the post.
On the “Inn” map, the rescued NPC “Wyvern” not only serves the functional purpose of being able to “scavenge” but also carries a narrative as the husband of the cook NPC “Ayela.” Originally, in the early planning, there was a narrative cutscene planned for Ayela expressing great joy and gratitude after the successful rescue mission, portraying her happiness more strongly.
However, feedback suggested that when expressing this scene solely through character movements and dialogue boxes, the emotions were not conveyed effectively, and the scene felt like a meaningless time-consuming moment. To convey it as intended, it was concluded that additional elements such as character animations and dedicated space for cutscene direction would need to be created.
Even if this scene was the game's ending or some other “crucial” part, it might have been considered appropriate to implement despite the required investment. However, this scene is only a “mid/early-game moment.” Considering the level of investment required for this scene, a concern arose about the emotional balance if similar levels of investment were not present in clearing other maps.
As a result, the expression of Ayela's gratitude for Wyvern's rescue was ultimately decided to be conveyed in a simple text format.
However, ultimately, we feel the reduction in the “reward” for the player's efforts in clearing the map and rescuing NPCs contributed to the feedback that the “reward satisfaction (sense of accomplishment or satisfaction) compared to the difficulty of the game” is weak.
While this is just one example case there are many episodes where the enhancement of direction could have been better achieved.
Especially due to its linear structure, it was crucial not only to progress through the stages but also to strengthen the reward for a feeling of “meaningful progression.” Given that even games with non-linear progression like XCOM or Darkest Dungeon strongly portray emotional rewards such as cutscenes when players achieve significant tasks, it seems even more crucial for our game.
Conclusion and Question!
We have discussed three main causes of “lack of reward satisfaction” from our perspective. If our interpretation of these issues is correct, we can conclude that our efforts to invest in aspects other than tactical elements in the overall development were, in effect, unsatisfactory.
However, if player’s feel we are shooting in the wrong direction here, we would like to know. Therefore, hearing from you whether you find the points mentioned so far to be the most important causes or if there are other more critical factors, we might be missing would be a huge help!
Over the past three posts, we have focused on our analysis and questions. Next week, we plan to switch gears and discuss the details and intentions behind the upcoming short-term updates!
Thanks again and see you next time!