Trying to start a little discussion here. What type of tutorials do you like the most? I guess my preference is a label that describes things as I play along with starting an easy level. I think I like games that more or less follow a genre, so I don't really need the tutorial also, since they are somewhat annoying. I don't really like it when someone changes something and it doesn't really make the game better.
In game tutorials
fire7side Tutorials are always problematic from player's perspective and a total pain in the butt from implementation and design perspective. I also must admit that I never saw an in-game tutorial that hasn't annoyed me at least a bit.
The less tutorial stuff there is, the better. I think there are two kinda opposite approaches that work best. First is to design the tutorial level in such a way that concepts are introduced one by one gradually and seamlessly without much explicit explanation, so they become self-apparent to the player. The second is to command the player in "do this, do this, do this" fashion, and keeping them stuck at each command until they execute it properly. I'd always opt for the former. Easier said than done though.
- Edited
In my yet-to-be-published game, there's a tutorial, accessed from the main menu, that teaches the basics of playing the game. Most of the tutorial pages cover a single feature, and let the user actively experiment with the feature.
The game is not self-explanatory, and is designed to be very difficult to win unless certain non-obvious tactics are used. But when the user loses, a popup provides game statistics and suggests viewing the tutorial for game tips.
- Edited
i did a short study on this a while ago, and, fortunately, i still have the old text file of all my notes, so, for once, i'm making an educated, well researched and almost-properly formatted post. you cant expect more from a high school dropout...
as far as i'm concerned, there are 3 types of good tutorials
- quick, comprehensive, intuitive
- novel and/or comedic
- super-intuitive and built into the early gameplay loop. i know that's vague, so an example could be Dark Souls, a game simple and intuitive enough to exchange the traditional idea of a guided tutorial sequence for a short, difficult self contained level 1 strewn with environmentally integrated beginner tips for the player to bumble about with and figure out.
the one thing all 3 have in common, and should be true for any tutorial, is interactivity and engagement.
there are very few cases where a simple how-to pop up is anything but lazy. one exception, is in the case of "tips" like @DaveTheCoder's example. obscured tips can nudge the player in the right direction when they're off track, while leaving plenty of room for discovery, which is something that usually does not need its own dedicated setting, scene or moment in time. DO NOT hide vital information here, unless there is a very good artistic reason to do so. what's "clever" to you can be infuriating to a player trying to have a good time.
the type of tutorial you use should absolutely reflect the type of game you're tutoring the player for. you wouldn't use a hardcore "figure it out" tutorial like dark souls for a game like undertale. for that, toby fox made the right move of parodying traditional tutorial sequences with an elaborate joke, that still functions as a casual-friendly tutorial. on the other hand, quick, engaging, guided tutorials fit best in strategy/tactics or management simulator games, like zoo tycoon, where the goal is clear, the controls are intuitive, but the inherently complex nature of the game makes a proper introduction necessary.
tutorials can also serve to help the developer discern if their game sucks ass. if you find it impossible to create an intuitive and helpful tutorial for your game, there's a chance it's not a good game. if no one can come up with a good tutorial for your game, it's either a ground breaking new genre that you should patent immediately, or it's simply not a good game. video games should not be needlessly complex, esoteric, or otherwise unintuitive, and tutorials reflect that.
that's all i've got.
thank you for attending my masterclass, i expect a check to the amount of $21.00 + tip in my PO box next week.
- Edited
All good points. I kind of like Dave's approach of having the tutorial separate and in the main menu. Even maybe breaking it into different subjects if it's a complex game, but I think the first goal is to make the game as intuitive as possible. Sometimes I take a long time looking for a way to escape and get to the main menu. How to get to the inventory. Lots of things like that. I don't know if they are trying to be creative or what, but it's annoying. I'll probably go with a separate one because I like to jump into the game, not have an explanation pop up every time I do something and have the game unusually simple. Of course, you do want to start out somewhat easier at first. It's like with a story game, I want to jump right into it, not start out with my mom waking me up.
- Edited
I think the top annoyance by far is - text. Regardless of which tutorial style is used, taking care to minimize text should be priority. That famous principle from movies/storytelling "show, don't tell" may be a good guideline for tutorial design. "Show" here would entail a wide range of non verbal means; from using various forms of visual explanation to nudging the player to interact as much as possible.
The latest game I played, Tin Can (excellent game btw) had a great tutorial. It was listed as one of the missions so you could skip it if you played before, and it was split into 3 missions each teaching you a little something. They go straight to the point and teach you game-specific things.
How about make a game that is self explanatory? If not then what xyz said, incorporate the mechanics into the game itself slowly nudging player to use and learn how to use.
I dont like where game ask you to complete some part exactly like timed even or something.. i just want to relax man.. escape reality.. why u make me work in game?