Elden Ring's developers know most players use guides, but still try to cater to those who go in blind: 'If they can't do it, then there's some room for improvement on our behalf'
Elden Ring's developers know most players use guides, but still try to cater to those who go in blind: 'If they can't do it, then there's some room for improvement on our behalf'
FromSoftware boss Hidetaka Miyazaki says reading guides is "perfectly valid," but doesn't want it to be a necessity.
You're viewing a single thread.
Disclaimer: I did read it.
Is it just most players of these games that use guides or like all games? If it’s all games, I find that fascinating.
I absolutely hate needing to look anything up, and I get super upset with myself when I don’t think of the convoluted solution or discover the hidden quest on my own. I shouldn’t, sure, but always have. Since getting stuck in the vine forest in illusions of Gaia on SNES (think of the korok forest in breath of the wild, or the woods to Canada in the South Park games -wrong turn reset), and needing my older sister, who didn’t game, to navigate it for me, I’ve always wanted to solve it myself.
I mean I look stuff up if I really get stuck, or if I’m not sure the game has “missable” stuff (which I absolutely hate, because I’m not gunna play a game through again in most cases to make different choices; too many games I haven’t played for that to be desirable), but I hate doing it and don’t internally understand why you’d want to, I suppose.
Like I’m not judging anyone who does, those guides totally exist for a reason.. I just have never understood the print guide or super detailed walkthrough thing, because it’s the opposite of how I like games. I always wondered who they were made for.
I think it chases a different goal. Guideless chases the experience and struggle, guided chases the power fantasy and complete victory/domination over all challenges. Both are valid I think, but I'm a very strict guideless type of player in all games.
That’s fair.
I’m a big fan of 100% in games (well, that used to mean a lot more before achievements and open world everything, but I do still try) and do it without guides, but I do totally get that different people play differently, so no judgement.
I was playing an RPG and I started using a guide because there were a lot of ridiculous consequences and missables. Like, you didn't check the third closet? Well you can never come back to this house and now you can never upgrade your shield. You didn't go back to the river between missions 3 and 4, because nothing told you to do so? Well you don't get a whole ass party member and you never can. I found this really annoying.
By contrast, Elden Ring playing blind I missed a lot of stuff, but it didn't feel so final. I could go back and reexplore in the same playthrough up until the point of no return. I missed the sorcerer training lady for hours and hours, but it wasn't like "well now you can never learn magic"
But that’s where a lot of the roll playing and replay value comes in.
More games need to have actually hidden content, secrets and obscure mechanics. Fomo is holding back so much of gaming. All nuance and thought is being lost when it comes to structuring games these days because the devs don’t want players to feel the bad fomo while also using fomo as a motivator for sales with timed sales and events.
What’s the point if the whole game is just a checklist of chores and none of the exploration or choices I make change anything?
The examples I gave aren't interesting or meaningful choices.
Witcher 2 has two mutually exclusive middle acts. That's cool.
Elden Ring has a bunch of optional stuff that you can miss, but missing it doesn't really adversely affect the game. You also have most of the time to go find stuff. I really dislike "missables" that are like "if you don't do this arbitrary thing right now, you miss out, even if it makes no narrative sense."
That's a whole other beast than guide dang it stuff. Like "if you lose this card to this kid, then win that card from that lady, repeat four times, you get the mega summon." Stuff you'd never figure out. I think ff10 also has some of that nonsense.
That kind of guide dang it has nothing to do with nuance or intersting choices.
I’d argue it does.
If you can miss anything at all, how’s it any different from a hand guided tour?
How are you supposed to build intrigue or mystery day one of release if nothing is hidden? The whole dark souls community coming together every time a new games gets released and people comb over everything inch to see what they can find.
All of that is gone if nothing is hidden or if everything is obvious.
It’s ok to miss something, it’s fine that you didn’t get the best reward or lost the chance to get a cool weapon. Not having the opportunity to lose them removes all uniqueness and value that finding them would bring.
Fomo is a hell of a drug.
Not having the opportunity to lose them removes all uniqueness and value that finding them would bring. This statement is false.
Even in Elden Ring, the game at hand, there is a counter example. If you miss Ranni at the first grace, the summoning bell shows up in the shop. Would it be a better game if it didn't, and you were permanently locked out of summons because you never went back to the first grace? No. No it would not. It remains unique and valuable.
Was my playthrough of FF7 enhanced because I didn't find the ribbon in the temple of ancients? Not especially. Was it further ruined because you can get one much later? No.
How are you supposed to build intrigue or mystery day one of release if nothing is hidden? I'm not advocating for "nothing is hidden".
Let's consider some scenarios.
A Baldur's Gate 2 style RPG. There are many locations you can travel to on the world map. There are several party members you can recruit, where they play roles in your party and the story. You cannot create your own party members.
Scenario A: If you return to location B between Chapter 3 and 4, you will find a wizard. He joins your party. There are no clues indicating you should return to location B. The story in fact guides you towards location C to advance the story.
Option 1: If you do not visit location B during this narrow window of time, the wizard is gone forever. He never joins your party. His role in combat and narrative remains unfilled.
Option 2: If you visit location B during this narrow window of time, the wizard joins your party. However, if you do not, he moves to another location as is appropriate for the story. If you find him earlier, you enjoy the advantages of the wizard earlier. Finding him later may have other disadvantages, such as him starting with a less favorable opinion or requiring resources to recruit him.
I feel like you think Option 1 is better. I think Option 2 is far superior. You get to reward people who are lucky or diligent, and everyone else doesn't get completely stiffed. Having the wizard show up now or later doesn't really impact the intrigue or mystery.
FromSoft games are often like this. You can meet NPCs earlier or go find loot sooner, but it rarely does a "You didn't do this exact thing at this exact time, so now you irreparably miss out." If you miss the ember in the depths, you can always go back and get it.
There are some things in the FromSoft games that you kind of have one shot at. Mostly the fixed NPC invasions. Those don't really bother me though since they're not that big a deal to miss.
There is a difference between locking a core mechanic and additional content. No duh, give the player all the gameplay tools. That shit shouldn’t be missable and nobody is arguing that but you should have missable side quest and loot. Or one way story choices.
Those options you present are not mutually exclusive. You can have multiple quests with different outcomes, both are valid.
But by denying any kind of missable content you are robbing players of potential experiences and catering to fomo.
It’s alright to miss out on something, especially if it’s irreparably. That’s how life works and should be present in games, especially in rpgs.
There is a difference between locking a core mechanic and additional content. No duh, give the player all the gameplay tools. That shit shouldn’t be missable and nobody is arguing that but you should have missable side quest and loot. Or one way story choices.
I like sign posts. It's fine to me that once you leave Lothering you can't do the quests there anymore. I don't really like the "you did a thing, and now you can't do these other unrelated things" thing. That's the "You didn't go to the river to meet the wizard" example. That's just annoying and arbitrary. That's not a choice. There's no way to intuit what's going to happen. That's not interesting.
And yes, yes, if I go to the subway now versus an hour from now I'll see different people and have a slightly different experience, but that's not very interesting to me. I would be annoyed if a game was like "On day 2, if you go to the subway between 7:58 and 8:03 you meet a wizard and can join his academy" without any foreshadowing or clues. Maybe you like that kind of thing. I'm probably going to use a guide (on a second playthrough if it seems like a game I'll replay, or right away if it seems like I'm not going to).
you are robbing players of potential experiences
You could easily make the argument that you're robbing players of potential experiences by putting a cool thing in an easily missable spot. I don't think that's a very compelling argument.
That’s how life works and should be present in games, especially in rpgs.
This is a terrible argument. Life is terrible and full of nonsense that does not need to be represented in games. You don't need to model swallowing water wrong and having a coughing fit in games, but that's in life all the time. The goal is not to make a completely accurate model of life. The goal is often to make a fun experience.
Anyway. I think we probably disagree in degree rather than in form. A lot of things I don't really mind are missable- like kirk's armor in DS1. But some things are just really annoying, like the wizard-at-the-river example. I don't know if I can come up with an objective rubric for when I go "no, this is bullshit let me see that guide."
Man. Sounds like you are hard into the fomo.
You could easily make the argument that you're robbing players of potential experiences by putting a cool thing in an easily missable spot. I don't think that's a very compelling argument.
Not at all. Sometimes you need to pay attention to your surroundings. That item isn’t there for the player just looking to have fun. That item is for players that look. You have to hide things otherwise nobody will go searching for secrets that don’t exist.
You need to come to terms with potentially missing a minor lore, item or quest. If everything is sign posted and checklisted then nothing is secret.
Ok we're going in circles. We don't have to like the same things. You're not accepting my arguments and I don't accept yours.
Your tone is also extremely condescending with "you need to come to terms".
You’re not alone, fomo is rampant amongst gamers.
Help is out there. Call 1-800-fomo
Witcher 2 has two mutually exclusive middle acts. That’s cool.
Well, one of them is.
The "Humans" middle act is so fucking boring!
It's actually been so long since I played the game I can't remember either of them very well 😅
Same. I think the human act is just dealing with a Banshee and some harpies while the humans are just complete assholes towards you.
Meanwhile, the non-human act has you going on this cool magical adventure with your friends and a dragon lmao.