Moogy on difficulty curves

Is he right?

>Sup Forums - Twitter Screencaps

Go away, kid.

I fucking hate twitter and the twits that use it. It encourages people to write novels one sentence at a time.

Next time you want to make a thread, maybe try having your own opinion, you limp-dick ignoramus.

>It encourages people to write novels one sentence at a time.
More like someone writing a novel one sentence at a time while battling Alzheimer's.

>games shouldn't have any tutorials whatsoever

what a dumbass

sage

I agree somewhat. Gonna use BotW as an example because for all it's faults, it's opening is a good example of how to treat a player. You've got a short corridor to teach the absolute basics; moving, jumping, climbing. This is for the 1 or 2 people who have honestly never played a game like this before and is necessary to some degree. After that, the player is let loose on a contained, small version of the larger map to experiment and learn through play. You can go along the path and learn about shrines, you can head behind you and learn about stamina management through climbing, you can go straight ahead and learn about fall damage. Whatever the case, the player will come across enemies to fight and learn about combat, and will inevitably have to complete all of the 'tutorial' actions to progress. Not once has anything been spelt out to them. The first shrines follow this approach, telling the player what buttons to use to activate a rune and then letting them figure out what to do with it. The end result is every player leaving the starting area with a good understanding of the basic game mechanics, without feeling like they've sat through the same tutorial that 99% of games have already shown them.

A bad example would be Skyward Sword, where every mechanic has to be explained in a text bubble and then again by Fi. It assumes the player won't understand basic stuff, rather than trusting that they can learn through doing.

Literally who?

He's comparing something fundamental as the level of writing with something less fundamental like difficulty challenge in a game. A more fair comparison would be the plot being simpler at the start of the novel and getting more complex as it goes, which is really common.

Difficulty is fundamental.
Your level of writing dictates how complex the plot of your movie can be, but in contrast to your comparison,
Your level of difficulty dictates how mechanically complex your game can be, not the other way around.

this faggot is still alive?

That comparison is actually retarded.
If you pick up a book that is written in english you will be able to read it. Yes, different writers have different styles of writing but that's less comparable to the basic controls of a game and more comparable to a games overall style and finer details.
A lot of Games also REQUIRE extensive tutorials.
People praise Guilty Gear Revelator for having 70 Missions that teach you the basics of the game and people write 1000 word essays on how to play Paradox Games.
Extreme examples but generalizing like in OP's image is pretty dumb.

Of course you'll probably be fine if a modern FPS just throws you into the game and gives you a quick rundown of buttons but that's exactly what most of them do.

>you will be able to read it
Read it sure, understand it? Different kettle of fish.

What's moogy-dono up to these days?

Who?

i know bringing up dark souls is a meme these days but silver knight archers in anor londo are the best example of this, if you wanted to have a difficulty curve leading up to that scenario then you would fight 1 archer, then 2 archers, then 1 archer on a narrow walkway, then 2 archers on a narrow walkway and it would be boring and no one would remember it

this is kind of whats wrong with shrine on amana in dark souls 2, it's the same time consuming concept repeated 3 times with gradually increasing difficulty such that it takes a long time but is never actually too difficult

That's a weird assumption, difficulty can stem from a huge number of things, very few of which have anything to do with mechanical complexity. Take a look at rhythm games, they are some of the most mechanically simplistic games around yet they are also very difficult simply because of the demanding execution. You're right though, difficulty is fundamental but in a different way. It provides context for all the mechanics in-game.

this, different games can be way more different than different like, newspaper articles. Books and movies aren't coming at you actively trying to make you fail reaching the end of them. There's no rules to it.. Everyone agrees the handholding is getting a little extreme but games are pretty fuckin complicated and you cant just because you're sick of it doesn't mean that nobody is picking the game up. Not everyone playing it is going to be a gaming veteran who picks shit up intuitively. Fuck this dork who even is this faggot

Who?

This. BoTW's was really organic, and I think a great way to introduce the mechanics of the game while feeling like you are making progress. If it had just started and allowed you to go into whatever direction from the get-go, it would have been rough, overwhelming and somewhat confusing due to all the changes the game had from previous Zeldas.

Morrowind is a example of having this huge sandbox, but doing a absolute shit job of explaining the core elements and getting people used to it. I think less people would have ragequit Morrowind if they actually had a small tutorial section and explained shit better.

Not all games move left and right and jump the same, Super Meat Boy has incredibly unique momentum and aerial movement that a player needs to familiarise themselves with before heading into levels that challenge their mastery of said controls. It's not as simple as knowing what the buttons do, otherwise we'd all beat every game without dying once.

These tweets read as someone who doesn't understand the slightest thing about platform games, is it someone significant?

Well he is right, but that doesn't have as much to do with a smooth difficulty curve as a concept, it's the result of a really low starting point and slow escalation. I would say devs take the concept too seriously and ignore the excitement and variety that comes with an unusual difficulty curve filled with dips and spikes. Consistent, slow escalation is overrated. Too predictable.

>mfw I see some EOP diss Moogy-denka or Kastel-sama

I bet you fags didn't even comprehend Nier: Automata on so many intellectual layers as Kastel-sama.

Why do people use twitter?
How do these people not realise that if you have to split up a simple message into sevea individual posts you MIGHT be using the wrong platform for this?
That's like eating a soup with a fork.

That person who I assume is a tranny is right.

>who is MOOKy?
A good learning curve is subtle, such as the opening level of super Mario. It teaches you everything quickly without holding your hand, by actually playing. An example of a bad learning curve would be might no. 9, which fails to explain some pretty vital concepts to the game play.

Who gives a shit? It's a random faggot. Also Sup Forums has a much bigger character limit than twitter so why not just write the post here?

I agree with some points but not the others. Especially I agree with
>A certain level of "difficulty" is necessary to properly explore design concepts in gaming
I'm 100% agree and I see this all the time. Some design decision tend to "drown" in the easiness of the game. Especially in games with leveling systems or the like. The designs choices are only seen properly if you are doing a low level run or some other way of gimping yourself or doing a self-imposed challenge. Of course the design is there if you play ti normally but there is no reason to see it when you can just button mash or just do whatever to win. Games NEED to be difficult enough so design choices become visible.