100% Completion Freak

I am that person. Though I will hasten to add that I don't always get there.

I want to argue that there are two ways to go about playing a game, the 'complete the narrative' approach and that the '100% completion' aim.

Just when is a game completed?

I am just offering my thoughts on the subject. I can imagine there is lots of academic writing on this subject already, and if you can think of any beauts then please let me know and I will happily devour them :)

Some preparatory reading!

First of all I would like to invite you to read a blog post by my friend.  http://gamasutra.com/blogs/SimonBrislin/20130529/193201/Balancing_Narrative_And_Gameplay.php

He writes about narrative in games and it is a very enjoyable read. After reading this I wanted to reply to some of the points he makes; particularly about sidequests and how they can detract from the narrative, because completing them can seem quite contrary to the point of the game.

To understand this fully we need to understand what audiences view as 'the point of the game'.
Is it to complete the storyline? Is is to collect all items etc. (100% completion). Or might it be that you can enjoy a game thoroughly without completing anything?

I can think of plenty games that I have played/watched that I haven't completed and I have still enjoyed. The failure (if you want to call it that) to complete could have been down to skill level (ahem), especially in the Mega Drive era of not being able to save. But is is also often due to a lack of time; and sometimes when you leave a narrative based game for a while and come back to it, the twists and turns of the plot are such that they can become overwhelming, and frankly, lost on me.

The game gets left, but enjoyment is not necessarily tarnished. Now this might be a *me* thing, I have also done this with Cloud Atlas (a book), I just didn't bother reading the last scenario as I felt satisfied enough with the others.

So Deus Ex: Human Revolution remains unfinished, but I am happy. On the other hand, when I finished Silent Hill 2, I wished I hadn't, as the final boss was much easier to fight than some of the other characters (e.g. Pyramid Head *shiver*) and it was a massive anti climax. I was disappointed, as I felt I should have had a better reward (a more difficult boss fight).

Satisfaction

So completion could be linked to satisfaction, and obviously this is going to be different for each player. The narrative itself doesn't always offer satisfaction. Sometimes a player might enjoy a game so much, that they wouldn't want it to be over, and this is where sidequests come in.

I want to talk about two games in particular that I think are kings of the sidequest. Any Final Fantasy game, and Fallout 3.

In the Final Fantasy games there are always loads of other quests to complete besides the main narrative. It wouldn't feel like you were playing a Final Fantasy game unless you fully interacted with these other adventures. You know you are taking on a 100+ hour beast when you first turn one of these games on. Who can forget Chocobo racing, Chocobo digging (my personal favourite!), Blitzball, the card game in Final Fantasy IX and everyone's favourite- maxing the health to 9,999 (until they pushed it to 99,999- that is a challenge too far, even for me :( ) Some of the quests did directly help with the main narrative; you might get a more powerful weapon for example, but the game is still very much complete-able without grinding every single map and looking in every single nook and cranny. So there is more to it than just feeding into the main narrative. I guess there is a lot of pleasure to be had here if you are a 'collector', or dare I say it, an obsessive type.

In Fallout 3, it was the thrill of finding somewhere new and 'off the beaten track' that pushed me towards the 100% completion aim. Obviously you weren't going to find anything that the developer didn't put in there, but I still felt that what they did put in was there to challenge you, and I'd love to think that they were placing cabins, underground bunkers and deserted towns in the outer reaches of the game world, hoping that no one would ever find them. Am I the first to wander into this abandoned factory??? Has anyone else picked up all the radio signals??? Make sure you talk to EVERY SINGLE CHARACTER as well, as you do not know what juicy tidbit you might miss out on. I felt a great sense of wonder and discovery when stumbling across something new because of my relentless self-imposed quest to reveal everything. So again, here I gained a lot of pleasure. (Writing this made me think of Baldur's Gate, and how I insisted on revealing every single pixel of the maps between towns, and if there were trees or rocks that prevented this, it really annoyed me- that's the 100% completion aim!)

So it satisfied me to search these places and it gave me great pleasure to find something new, or to collect all of a set of something. If I had just played the narrative and wanted to stay immersed in the game world (more specifically the unity of time- 'we have to fight the monster immediately' etc) then I would not have been able to get this kind of pleasure and satisfaction.

Sidequests for all?

I am not totally disagreeing with the points made in the article. I do think that there is a time and a place for sidequests. The games I discuss above are both ideal for this kind of gameplay, whereas others aren't. So developers need to consider sidequests carefully. Are you making a sidequest kind of game? Or not? Make sure they add value and don't detract/distract.


For me, killing the big boss means the game is over. No more game. On to the next game. And I feel like when a title has so much more to give then that is a shame.

Or am I just a little bit obsessive?

L2P Noob

How seriously should you take online gaming?

Is it for fun or is it a serious pastime?

When playing a team online game, what should your attitude be towards winning?

Sometimes I play ranked games and the consensus is that these are the games that you should take seriously. If you play in a real world sports team (which I also do) there are friendly games, pick up games and league/tournament games. The league and tournament games are the ones you should take seriously, and in online gaming these can be compared to ranked games. Especially if you play for a pro team; then obviously you should always want to win, and you will spend a lot of time preparing and practicing so that you can do just that.

When you play an unranked game, especially when you have been automatically matched up with teammates, then this is what I would consider to be like a pick-up game in the real world. Pick-up is arguably more fun than a tournament, because it is more relaxed. You are playing the game for the fun of playing the game, nothing is at stake here. This doesn't seem to be the way in online gaming.

But...? Winning...???

Now obviously winning does increase the fun, and so I can see an argument for wanting to win. However we know how this works- if there are two teams then *someone* will have to lose. It's annoying when that happens, but it does happen. So does losing always mean that the enjoyment of the game is immediately lost?

I don't think so. You may still feel that you as an individual played a good game, or you developed your skills in some way. Sometimes it is actually down to technical difficulties, though a "lag!" call is hard to greet without skepticism. Sometimes you are simply outclassed by the opponents (which will quite often be denied by your furious teammate - no they're fed/op- *humph* *sulk* *whine* etc)
But you have the knowledge that it is only a game, you can play another (if it isn't past your bedtime- zing!) and learning to cope with losing from time to time is something we all have to deal with in life.

If you genuinely are bitter about losing, then I suggest you take a break from the game and do something else, because this angry energy is going to ruin you. And if you are just in it for a good old troll, then again, there are more healthy ways to be, not just towards others, but to yourself.

Good Grief!

What surprises me when I play online games, is the incredibly negative attitude some people have, even your own teammates. You will all be familiar with cries of "noob!" More lately I have come across "Waste of an Account", "Pls uninstall this game", "Worst (insert character here) EU".

So to call someone the worst player of that character in the whole region is, in my opinion, just a little extreme. For starters there is no way they could have played with everyone who has every played that character. Seemingly logic has no place here.

Or what about "L2P, noob!". Again logic would say that if someone is playing unranked, then they are learning to play- by taking part in a game against real world opponents they are developing their skills and applying and consolidating their knowledge, all key components of learning something. By definition, learning means to develop, not to just be instantly good at something from the word go.

But ultimately it seems that what these people really mean is:

You cannot see me, you do not know who I am, I am protected by the internet, so therefore I am going to boost my ego by being rude to you.

Its incredibly tiresome, but most of the time it is easy to ignore the comments. And when you do feel ready to play ranked, you will be surprised to find (as I was) that most people are nicer there.

Of course you should always play to win, but it is important to accept that this isn't always going to happen. So be competitive, but well spirited. Be ready to learn from others and remember, it is only a game.

Finally a big should out to all the people that say nice things and congratulate teammates, and even opponents from time to time. This is what makes you feel a better person. I look forward to meeting more of you when I am next online.

A Handy Glossary!

If anyone is reading this but you are not familiar with some of the terms I used above- have no fear :)

L2P - Learn to play

OP - Overpowered (a particularly strong character)

Fed - A character that has a lot of kills, usually because of a weak opponent

Log in Screen

Hello all, welcome.

There are two things on your mind right now; the first is that the layout is a bit shonky, (this might improve in time...) and the second is that the name of the blog is only half decent.

Why a shed?

Well it rhymes with dead; and as we all know, I am trying to make a pun on the title of a video game, The Typing of the Dead, which looks like this:

Extraordinary

So this blog is about video games. I really do love playing and watching games and I hope that I will be able to write something here that you might like, or you might want to discuss. I hope not to be just another games blog, but I am not quite sure what my USP is yet.

How you can help...

I really like the "Typing of the..." part, but if anyone can think of a more suitable pun then I'd be glad to hear it.

I went out specially to take a photo of my shed, but if anyone has any ideas I can always take another photo. As another little challenge to keep you all interested, who can tell me the name of the game referenced by the  little dude in the top left corner? And for bonus points- what do you think he is shooting at?

Let me know what you think so far, but bear in mind my brain will only process sensible comments, so I will have to delete anything that isn't polite or clean.

OK I'm off to write a sensible post now.