Japanese developers often over-egg the pudding when it comes to teaching audiences how to play, Platinum Games writer Jean Kellams argues in a thoughtful Twitter essay, picked up by Siliconera.
He begins by defending the videogame blockbuster against complaints of superficiality, insisting that while cinematic excess doesn't equal depth, it's not irreconcilable with depth either. "Games today sell on spectacle. Spectacle is also easy to market. However, good ideas lie behind these spectacles.
"They sell on easy to understand themes. Even Western games that don't get that right fail. Just because you make a "dudebro" shooter doesn't mean it is a sure thing."
For Kellams, Japanese developers often ruin good ideas by coupling them with stodgy pedagogy, creating unnecessary "friction". "Where Japanese games need to get better is reducing friction. If we have the best ideas, we need to make sure you don't have to wonder why. Friction means you need to look at a character and identify with what that character is supposed to represent. Friction means never underestimating the intelligence of your audience.
"Culturally, Japanese design is about being inclusive," he went on. "They don't want anyone left behind, so they will add friction to an experience. Except then you move at the pace of the slowest one in a group. It bogs the experience down for people who already get it.
"Just imagine if you had to order McDonald's like a Japanese game's option menu. It would be horrific if you had ever been to a McD's before. Can I take your order. Hamburger. Hamburger is a piece of meat, two buns, ketchup and mustard. Are you sure you want a hamburger? Yes.
"That is friction. Western games stop when the user says hamburger. They assume that user intent is initially correct. JPN games should too."
"Friction for the sake of completeness is one of the things that makes it difficult for JPN developers to make good multiplayer, I think," he added. However, at the other end of the scale, Japanese developers sometimes fail to establish characters for overseas audiences.
"Culturally, I think our touch stones for classic character designs introduces a lot of friction into a narrative. It takes time for a Westerner to parse the boy hero archetype from Japanese design versus the young adult Superhero in Western design. Too often, Japanese design assumes you will 'get it' regarding characters and doesn't establish them. But the touchstones are different.
"We can pull off that boy hero successfully, but we have to execute perfectly on the premise behind the character and communicate it. Another place where Japanese games tend to introduce friction is in narrative exposition. So many 'bad story' complaints come from this."
Plenty of food for thought there. I can't help thinking of Infinite Undiscovery, an RPG which actually has a tutorial break to explain how you open a chest.
5 comments so far...
CunningSmile on 29 Jun '12 said:
Whilst not the most clever game ever I do think the first Gears of War had a very well done tutorial level at the beginning. A small piece of dialogue from Dom asking if Marcus wanted to get to the mission or take the long way and 'work out a few kinks' and you had the ability to opt out of the whole tutorial in a way that didn't stand out as the choice being offered, it just felt right with the rest of the story.
I think tutorials are always going to be a tricky balancing act for developers. After years of gaming it's easy for us to under estimate how much assumed knowledge we've absorbed, even on a subconsious level. Without even realising it we all understand things like the little cross in the middle of the screen is our gun sights, that that specific shade of wall means it's destructible, that red barrels go bang and how a QTE works amoungst others. As the hobby has expanded to a more widestream market do we have to cater to the old hands at the risk of alienating new comers or do we put up with being patronised in order to welcome the new comers?
stevejcrow on 29 Jun '12 said:
If a game is designed correctly from the outset, there is no need for tutorials and endless tips & pointers popping up on screen. A well designed game slowly introduces new skills, allowing you to get to grips with them before adding the next. This way, no new player is overwhelmed and no old-hand is left feeling patronised. Too many games recently more or less hold your hand for the first couple of hours or just throw everything at you at once in a five minute section that leaves you even more confused than you were before. Nintendo killed the last Zelda through the unnecessary level of guidance and I'd hate to see anything similar happening over on the Xbox.
No other medium of entertainment provides so much hand-holding to its audience, although I do miss instruction booklets which I never read before playing a game but usually ended up flicking through rather sheepishly after half an hour of trying to switch on a flashlight!
msbhvn on 29 Jun '12 said:
Pot calling the kettle black? Vanquish had one of the most insultingly obvious tutorial sections I've ever played. "Let's get you used to your new suit".
Baryonyx on 30 Jun '12 said:
What we don't need is Japanese developers westernising their product. I don't think I've played a Japanese game recently where I've thought "there is too much hand holding going on here". On the other hand, I recall Vanquish being pretty naff so I would suggest the writer concern himself with issues closer to home.
Oh, and Dark Souls.
mistergrimm on 30 Jun '12 said:
To be fair it seems he was talking about games design as a whole rather than tutorial sections. The specific example he used was of an options menu.
Still don't know what he's on about though. Maybe I don't play the right Japanese games.