Interaction and Intent

This is a look at my change in perspective regarding my approach to design. The main reason I went back to school after a couple of years of working was to realign my practices with input from my teachers who are veterans of the industry. Over the last month, I have already reaped many benefits; the teaching approach at George Brown has been very constructive in solving the big problem I wanted to resolve. In this time I have developed my fundamentals in visualizing level designs, and concepts of game theory - of what has worked before and why - reinventing the wheel is unnecessary every time. I have polished my ability to document and communicate concepts and finally, tell a story in my work.

This has not only given me the confidence to form structured ideas but has also broken the bounds of how my brain looked at puzzles. Breaking down core gameplay interactions into their primitive pen-and-paper form gives me a look into how the mechanic functions, its intention, and its interaction.

I want to elaborate on this with 2 examples.

First, in an interaction, the difference between mashing a button and pressing and holding the same could seem minute to the average player but convey very different emotions for the player subconsciously.

Pressing and holding a button is a common interaction when your character has a vehicle to enter, a crate to unlock, or a mission to begin. These interactions are affirmations of what the player wants to do, a sort of definitive decision-making device.

Mashing the same button is often used in quick time events or high-intensity moments where timing is crucial and failure could result in a game over. Moments like Kratos smashing into the head of a God, Joel fighting off a clicker about to bite him, and even Lara Croft attempting to free herself from a bear trap.

These interactions, if switched will break the intention of what the designers want the player to feel. Mashing the button to open a crate creates a subconscious barrier to your goal that needs to instead, be effortless. Similarly, holding the button as your character fights for their life breaks immersion and the sense of input you might be feeling in an otherwise scripted sequence.

The latest Spider-Man game by Insomniac is a great example of how simple puzzles you may see in casual games, given the right context and feedback, can be a great fit in AAA experiences. The Problem-Solution and the simplicity of interaction can elevate the experience greatly.

This example is a very common interaction of holding down the trigger buttons in the right spot for a given amount of time. *** SPOILER ALERT *** The following is a spoiler for the newly released Spider-Man 2 so come back after finishing the story!!

This conveys a sense of balance and timing. These puzzles are very similar to the fishing mechanic in Stardew Valley, where you press and release the button to keep the fish in the sweet spot for a few seconds.

This take on the casual puzzle makes the player feel more connected with the interaction they, as the character, are doing. Coming back to Spider-Man, this mechanic appears very commonly but the genius use of this mechanic comes in the final story mission of the game. You have to hold back Venom as the events reach the final crucial seconds of saving the day. Here the puzzle resurfaces but you are not balancing the triggers, you are not finding the sweet spot, just like Spider-Man, you are at the height of your adrenaline and want to put an end to Venom. The puzzle requires you to pull back the triggers completely. The visual image of Spider-Man using all his might and the reuse of the trigger animation subconsciously gives the player the satisfaction of pulling in completely.

The approach to designing these kinds of basic puzzles detached from their context is a skill and adding context to make the puzzle relevant to your game and your player's emotions is another. These are the fundamentals I've been exploring and implementing into my own designs and game concepts.