Zileas' List of Game Design Anti-Patterns

First Riot Post
Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Xenomorphica

Member

07-08-2011

This thread is the bane of my existence.
It is defined reasoning behind why people think it's somehow right to molly coddle and wrap their players in cotton wool, giving them only one correct choice in how they do things. Or rewarding/not punishing players for being downright bad.

Hint; dota is infinitely more successful and has way WAY less complaints than lol, this should tell you something.
Burden of knowledge is stupid, players learn over time. Limiting the game around what someone can judge the first time they touch it is beyond idiotic.
Giving players choices in how to use their abilities is only ever a GOOD thing. Proudmoores ult as your example, has more than one use. It's up to the player how they want to use it. Stop worrying about making the player feel good, you're not their god**** parent. Your focus should be on making a competitive game filled with unique abilities (read; that doesn't mean just ripping another champions ability that already exists and changing it slightly).

But we all know you wont bother, you'd rather coddle your players at the cost of the skillcap in your game. Even if people didn't read your other posts, based purely on the fact that you're somehow offended by the stone award in bayonetta they'd know this. You want to reward people for doing badly, on you go. Just know that your game will sink and never be taken seriously by any competitive community because of these reasons.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Sinnombre

This user has referred a friend to League of Legends, click for more information

Senior Member

07-08-2011

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xenomorphica View Post
This thread is the bane of my existence.
It is defined reasoning behind why people think it's somehow right to molly coddle and wrap their players in cotton wool, giving them only one correct choice in how they do things.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zileas View Post
Fun Fails to Exceed Anti-Fun
Anti-fun is the negative experience your opponents feel when you do something that prevents them from 'playing their game' or doing activities they consider fun. While everything useful you can do as a player is likely to cause SOME anti-fun in your opponents, it only becomes a design issue when the 'anti-fun' created on your use of a mechanic is greater than your fun in using the mechanic. Dark Binding is VERY favorable on this measurement, because opponents get clutch dodges just like you get clutch hits, so it might actually create fun on both sides, instead of fun on one and weak anti-fun on another. On the other hand, a strong mana burn is NOT desirable -- if you drain someone to 0 you feel kinda good, and they feel TERRIBLE -- so the anti-fun is exceeded by the fun. This is important because the goal of the game is for players to have fun, so designers should seek abilities that result in a net increase of fun in the game. Basic design theory, yes?
In pretty much every one of his points, but especially the one quoted above, Zileas makes it clear that his overarching goal is to make the game as fun as possible for all players, not necessarily to make the most competitive game imaginable for top-tier people. Usually, competitiveness does make a game more fun. Winning feels good because its a validation of one's skills. But when competitiveness and fun conflict (like in skills with a high burden of knowledge or multiple secondary effects), Zileas seems to always side with fun. That's pretty much just the way lol is going to be. I happen to enjoy it. If you want something more competitive, I would suggest Bloodlines Champions.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Kwisatz Haderach

Senior Member

07-08-2011

Dota has MINDSHARE. It's the first and had a LONG time to build it's brand long before any other MOBAs even were in development. DotA's numbers are not growing yet LoL's are (though the slower updates the last 5 weeks or so might have hurt them a little). It will likely be far more respected by hardcore players, but if DotA was reliant on making money to survive, it would not be making that much money considering nearly all casual players will play HoN or LoL, and it should be pretty obvious which demographic makes up the lion's share of the profit.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Fragglerock

This user has referred a friend to League of Legends, click for more information

Senior Member

07-08-2011

The idea that the problem with any ability is Burden of Knowledge has either been proven inconsequential, or Riot doesn't care to follow that one.

Look at ANY ability with %-health damage mechanics; this is completely invisible to the victim. Or getting 1-shot by veigar. Look at almost all the passives. Hell, look at half the abilities.

Burden of Knowledge is here to stay in this genre. Again, it's always about Rupture. This is ability is not a BoK issue any more than Brand's passive is. You can say it creates false choices, but same could be said about Nocturne's fear/spell shield combo, or that running up next to a skillshot champ is the best way to win.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Whatev

Member

07-09-2011

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zingledot View Post
The idea that the problem with any ability is Burden of Knowledge has either been proven inconsequential, or Riot doesn't care to follow that one.

Look at ANY ability with %-health damage mechanics; this is completely invisible to the victim. Or getting 1-shot by veigar. Look at almost all the passives. Hell, look at half the abilities.

Burden of Knowledge is here to stay in this genre. Again, it's always about Rupture. This is ability is not a BoK issue any more than Brand's passive is. You can say it creates false choices, but same could be said about Nocturne's fear/spell shield combo, or that running up next to a skillshot champ is the best way to win.
Unfortunately, Zileas expressed this in a confusing way. What he really means by "Burden of Knowledge" is that he dislikes abilities that force players to behave in an extremely counterintuitive way to mitigate their effects because the lethality of those abilities isn't dependent on the user's behavior but rather the target's.

To apply this to the Rupture example, when taking serious damage your normal behavior is to try to retreat. When you do this with Rupture on you--and keep in mind that you're probably taking damage from other sources too, some of which may also have animation effects--it's not going to be obvious to those who aren't already familiar with the ability what is causing the damage and thus they will try to retreat and it will kill them. This type of situation would be like if in Dune nobody TOLD you that the gom jabbar would kill you if you withdrew your hand. Of course you'd take your hand out of the box and then you'd die.

The point is, none of those other abilities you are citing are of this nature. Naturally, knowing exactly how those abilities function will help you counter them more effectively. But you don't need to understand the mechanics to realize that Veigar can do nasty burst damage or that standing in fire is bad or that percentage damage attacks can really hurt. Not like you need to understand Rupture or abilities like it.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Zoram

Senior Member

07-09-2011

non reliability:

when champion popularity is linked to how OP/nerfed they are and then Zileas says they don't make skins for unpopular champions. Not that it maters since taric IS popular.

Legendary Taric skin. I will never forget Zileas, I will NEVER forget. I will forgive you only when taric has the coolest legendary skin ever.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Purplebro

Senior Member

07-11-2011

Penny Arcade just shat all over this.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

mogonk

This user has referred a friend to League of Legends, click for more information

Senior Member

07-11-2011

This is why you don't see anything like the innovation you used to in the industry. This, right here, is the mission statement of the new wave of game designers who think that paternalism and oversimplification are virtues, who do everything they can to shut down emergent gameplay and dumb down mechanics in the name of making them more "intuitive". I prefer not to have my games spoon-fed to me, thanks.

Warren Spector would be ashamed of you.

As for why I play LoL, I play because in spite of yourself and your screwed up ideas you have made an entertaining game.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Chrystoff

Senior Member

07-13-2011

**** what the community thinks, do whats right, and people will end up not raging and forget all about it, then even later they will see the old aura or champ as pretty **** good.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Uccisore

Senior Member

07-13-2011

Quote:
Originally Posted by mogonk View Post

As for why I play LoL, I play because in spite of yourself and your screwed up ideas you have made an entertaining game.
You cannot comprehend how they did it right, but you will rage with all the fury of your ignorance against their explanation.

The anti-patterns are nothing less than Zileas explaining to you exactly why this game is entertaining, you ****ing ape.