Permia - Duels: The struggle for a good tutorial

Designing a good tutorials for our free-to-play games has proven to be one of the most challenging game design tasks we have faced. When Permia - Duels was first released as PvP-only game, the only tutorial it had was a three page rules summary, that was shown to the player before the first match.

The next step was to create a forced tutorial, which would walk players through the rules with a series of example matches. We expected to see an improved player engagement but the results were a disappointment as described in the The great tutorial mystery - post. Clearly we failed to do very good job with the tutorial.

After that we concentrated on working with Pet Shows and apply the lessons learned for the tutorial there (Tackling the tutorial mystery). Making the tutorial less forced by slicing it into smaller pieces was a clear improvement. Additionally we made some of the game content to unlock while player progresses instead of everything being accessible from the start and added new achievements to reward the player for progressing and giving objectives. Naturally we wanted to bring these elements also to the Duels tutorial. 

After getting back to developing Duels we started the planning of adding a story driven single player campaign to the game. In the process, the old tutorial was thrown away and the tutorial was integrated into the campaign. The PvP game mode is now locked at the beginning, and new players start by playing the campaign. The instructions are given as tips in the first campaign matches, without a forced tutorial. Players start with only a single unit and the first task is to collect a full deck of units by defeating the initial tutorial campaign matches, after which the PvP matches unlock.

While it's impossible to analyze the effects of adding the campaign to the effects of changing the tutorial separately, their combined effect roughly doubled our retention numbers, which was of course a huge success. So clearly we did something right. Regardless, based on the feedback, we still have a lot to do with the tutorial.

Previously players complained about being forced to play the forced tutorial (and rightly so), which felt too much like tutorial. Now some players feel that we are lacking the tutorial completely and they struggle to understand how the game is meant to be played. While being non-intrusive, the tips are also easy to ignore. Even more importantly, many players fail to identify the real depth of the game at the beginning, labeling it too simple or less skill based than it really is. By making the tutorial non-intrusive and as simple as possible, we may have managed to hide the complexity of the game too well. 

Essentially we have two somewhat conflicting objectives: The first encounter with the game should be as easy and welcoming as possible, to prevent frustration for needing to learn many rules at once. On the other hand, the tutorial should convey the feeling of depth to come. A frustrated player will likely quit playing early on as well as a player who does not see enough depth to make it worth investing time into the game.

In order to help the players struggling with the rules, we could add more interactive components to the tutorial: keep the it simple and non-intrusive normally, but when a player seems to be doing poor decision and losing games, the tutorial should become more intrusive and give detailed instructions to improve the situation.

The strategic elements of Duels include the unit development system and the selection of units to the deck. At the beginning it's mostly selecting the most powerful units to the deck, but as the collection grows, the options increase and one should build a deck with units whose numbers work well together. Similarly when upgrading the units, selection of sacrificed units has an effect on the outcome and can be used to direct the process to get desired kind of units. 

On the Tactical side, understanding that it's sometimes better to concentrate on creating a good defensive position or building a trap to allow capturing many units with one move, is sometimes better than simply trying to capture units with every move, separates veteran players from the beginners. Also the starting player shapes the game a lot with the selection of the first unit and it's placement. With a wise placement, one can use a well designed deck with maximum effect. 

These are all aspects of the game, which are not obvious to a new player and not easily communicated through the normal tutorial flow. One possible way to convey the depth at the beginning could be through adding special puzzle missions, where the player is forced to play in an non-straightforward way in order to win. In addition to the tutorial tuning, we could also add new content to the game, which would create the feeling of depth in a more straightforward way, like new unit special abilities and game modes. Again with these we need to be careful not to introduce them too rapidly to overwhelm a new player, but fast enough that he will not get bored.

Story of Pet Shows

Year 2012, October

We needed to find couple of concepts fast to present to an investor. I was playing a few different manager games at the time and we thought that manager game would be one possibility. Idea was to publish the game to Habbo hotel so we wanted to use a theme that suited both boys and girls. Our friend Ari gave us an idea to use pets as a theme and we liked it.

Basic idea behind the concept is to manage a team of pets. Pets have three different age phases. When they are puppies, player can train them, when they are adults, they can participate in competitions and when they are seniors they can breed with other pets to get new puppies.

It has taken about two years to complete the game. During that time almost everything has been rewritten or changed. Even tools that we use to create the game has been changed. Basic idea behind the concept is still there, but the whole game experience is totally different. Latest big change came at the beginning of this year when Pet Shows was accepted as AppCampus project. We added mini-games to the concept that are used to train the pets and to compete with other players teams.

This is just a beginning

Few days ago we got the news that AppCampus review team has accepted our release candidate and we can publish the game when we see fit. This is a huge step and allows us to continue to the next phase. Now we can start gathering feedback from the players. We will carefully go through the feedback and develop game further to give best possible experience for the players. It is hard to describe how exciting it is when you are just about to get real information from the real customers and to learn what they think about the game. All the feedback is good. If players don't like the game, we try to find out why and make the game better. If players like the game, then we are happy and continue to bring new features for them to enjoy.

Pet Shows

What is it about? Pet Shows is most probably different than you have used to see with pet themed games. The game has over 300 different pet profiles to collect, 5 different mini-games to attend and possibility to compete against other player teams from all over the world. It is about being best pet trainer in town. There is no payment wall and everything in the game can be achieved without using real money. Real money is used only to buy in game currency that can be used to help player to progress faster.

Pet Shows is now available in Windows Phone store. Check it out.

Journey of game designer

Welcome young designer! Here for my help you are, yes...?

Yes, O lead designer! I have the greatest game idea in the world and I want to found my own game company, what should I do?

"Love games you must!" Are you crazy enough to work long days for years without vacations, salary or any guarantee of eventual success to see the dream to become reality?

"Yes, you say? Good, great potential in you I sense." Then you will only need to find others who share a similar vision and have the right skill set to form a team. Finding the right team is the most crucial part in setting up the company so make sure to pick the right people. It's better to have no one than the wrong one.

I'm scared that someone will steal my great game idea, how do I protect it?

"Worry, you should not." The game industry is not short on ideas, everyone has them. Your unique idea is likely not nearly as unique as you might think. As such, ideas themselves have no real value. The value is in the ability to make quality games out of the ideas. And for that, you need a lot of feedback from anyone who is interested in your game as early as possible.The real risk is that you get too little feedback and fail to make a good game as a result rather than someone stealing your idea.

Oh well, could you take a look on my plans then? It's all here in the 750-page design document... 

"Ready the design is, hmm?" Creating too detailed plans early on tends to be a waste of time and resources. The plans should be kept on a high level at first and just start doing as soon as possible. Prototyping can be used as necessary to learn what works and what does not. Prototyping can be used as necessary to learn what works and what does not. During the process you will learn and the game will change so much that your original plans will be outdated in no time. As resources are limited, prioritizing is essential. The first goal should be to implement only the absolutely minimum setup containing only the very core of the game and get it right through testing.

But the design is already perfect! I don't want to make changes that taint my vision!

"A great designer, hmmm...? Learn humility, you must." It's good to have a strong vision, but it should not become a principle. A good game designer is always ready to listen and adapt the ideas. Don't fall in love with your own ideas. If something does not work, fix it or ditch it without second thoughts, no matter how much effort or love you have put on the idea. Always be ready to question any and every aspect of your design as well as the design as a whole. 

Well, how do I know what works and what does not?

"To listen, you need learn." Mirroring your own ideas to all the feedback you get is the key. Be it from the players, the data you collect from the game, testing sessions, other team members, things you learn by playing other games or any other source. Never dismiss new viewpoints at first hand, even if they seem unrelated or contradict your own vision. They rarely come in clearly understandable form. You need to always consider what is the heart of the idea and can it be used  in some form to make the game better? Best ideas often come from unexpected sources.

Okay... Do you have any advice how to make the game a success?

"Easy will it not be".Game industry is a hit business. Only the best succeed, nobody cares about mediocrity. You need to be able to stand out with something, be it the original idea, polished mechanics, great story, known brand, special style, unmatched gameplay, innovative controls, less contested category or distribution channel, superior marketing plan or anything else you come up with. Don't polish the game forever before publishing but don't publish crap either. It's better to have half of a game that works than full game that doesn't. The rest of the features can be added later once the potential of the game is confirmed.

How can I be best with so many games around?

"Learn from others you must." If something has already been done, make sure you don't make a game which does the same thing but worse. Making a game differ from another is a wrong motive to do changes: if you can not improve an existing concept, use it as it is. If this would make you game a copy of an existing product, you are in wrong market. If you can not honestly say that your game will be better at least on some aspects than your most direct competitors, the game is not worth making in the first place.

Oh... Any more concrete advises?

"Bite more than you can chew must you not." Always consider the resources you have available. If your game concept is too big for the available resources, do something smaller first. Don't let the project bloat with new features, concentrate in getting the game ready first. Concentrate on one project at a time and give that your full attention.

"Also remember finances you should." As cool as it is to make games, if you can not make money from them, the company will be short lived. Especially in the free-to-play world the monetization is an important part of the design process. It must be taken into account from the start to integrate it flawlessly in the game. Poorly designed monetization can easily destroy the game balance and player experience. And of course, if people don't know about your game, they can not buy it. Be it a publisher, marketer, self marketing or a combination of those, the earlier the marketing is planned and started, the better.

"Pick your battles, you must." Challenging the big studios and their huge resources in the AAA market might not be the most productive idea. Luckily game industry is in the middle of big changes and many of the trends favor small indie studios.

What are these trends you mention?

"Opportunities I see, hmmm..." There are several big trends currently in the game industry which offer possibilities for small companies which are willing to adapt to the rapid changes. Digital distribution, rise of mobile and social gaming, triumph of free-to-play business model, popularity of crowd funding and the possibilities of cloud computing are among those. Technologies like Unity3D and HTML5 allow easy ways to make multiplatform games and not be restricted to a single platform and it's success or lack of it.

Thank you O lead designer! I will now retire to meditate on the wisdom you shared.

"May the ideas flow freely from you, my young designer. Farewell."

Luck in games

One of the big questions in game design is the luck factor: should there be any luck in a good game, and if so, how much? There is of course no right or wrong answer here as different people prefer different games. What I'm going to write about today is my take on the different aspects of luck in game design.

Image: Lee Daniel Crocker

A good, classic example of a game without any luck is of course Chess. While the design is solid and has stood the test of time, I'm not myself a big fan of pure skill games like that. They tend to be a bit too serious and dry for me. Rather, I enjoy games with enough luck to keep things interesting, but not too much to take the feeling of control away. Let's take a look of different ways of adding luck to a game.

Dice rolls in action results

When talking about luck in games, most people think about dices. In chess every action has a clearly defined and guaranteed outcome: a piece always kills the opponent's piece in the square it moves to. In Risk, the result of an attack is decided by a dice roll instead. Games that add uncertainty directly to the action results define the probabilities for different outcomes of the action and then roll a dice to decide the actual outcome. Typically, the player has ways to affect the probabilities and decide the desired actions. The decision is based on the possible rewards/penalties of the action as well as the probability of success. 

Including this kind of a luck element may easily take away the feeling of control: it's natural to think that when I have a 75% chance to succeed, it's a guaranteed success and won't fail. When it does fail (which happens every fourth time in this case),  it often feels unfair, especially if it was an important action. On the other hand, such an uncertainty can add a lot of tension to the game as one can never be sure of the outcome. As such dice is best used for actions that are repeated many times to even out the dice rolls. It is a dangerous approach to be used for major actions that can change the course of the game.

Accuracy

Image: Xiaphias

Another way to add uncertainty to actions is to add a dexterity element into the game. Examples of such games include Angry_birds, Jenga, Pool, Bowling, Darts and sports in general. Truthfully the accuracy element in this kind of games is directly dependent on the player's skill and thus the word luck does not describe it well. Still, when we compare Chess to the games listed above we notice an interesting difference: Chess is all about strategy and a huge decision space, where one needs to be able to outhink the opponent. Once the move has been decided, the execution will always succeed. In bowling the strategy is very simple: always knock out all the pins. It's the execution part that makes the challenge as even the best players are not able to do that consistently with every throw.

Adding an accuracy element to a game can make otherwise very simple game more interesting and challenging. A good example of using accuracy as a minor element in a game is HellFire. Both HellFire and its predecessor Rage of Bahamut are essentially sophisticated card collection systems with very simple game mechanics. In Rage of Bahamut, battles are decided almost directly by the card stats, while in HellFire the opponents employ weak points to which the attacks should be aimed at by swiping the touch screen. This adds an interesting accuracy element to the battles as skilled swipes give an advantage over poor ones.

Complex action chains

A slightly different approach to accuracy is found from the attacks in Clash of Clans. The game is essentially a multiplayer tower defence game, where players build their villages and decide the defensive tower setup. Then other players use their army to attack the villages and try to steal resources and points. An army may contain over 200 troops. While placing a single troop is simply a tap on the screen, deciding the order, timing and placement of the whole army offers almost endless possibilities.

After being placed onto the field, each soldier automatically attacks based on its behavior model which is defined by its type. The behavior is predictable and thus in theory there is no luck involved, except traps and invisible towers which are hidden information and thus not completely predictable. But even without those, the sheer complexity of the setup means that it's not possible to exactly predict what will happen. It's a common thing to see my troops go to a completely different direction than I predicted and then get slaughtered by a tower they should have destroyed earlier. This unpredictability keeps the attacks interesting as there is always the chance of failure. Yet,  the failure does not feel unfair as the result was not due to an unlucky dice roll but rather the decisions I made.

The challenge in complex action chains is in the execution part similarly to the accuracy element. The difference is, accuracy uses independent actions which should all be executed perfectly. In complex action chains, the actions are are simpler by themselves, but not independent and the goal is to execute the whole action chain flawlessly.

Hidden information

Many people have asked me why do we keep the opponents hand units hidden in Permia - Duels. Wouldn't it be better if all the information was always available to both players, like in Chess? As you might guess, my answer to the guestions is no. But why is that? What do we gain by hiding the information and adding a luck element to the game through that?

Opponent's hand is hidden during a match

In games like Chess, where all information is always available, the only limitation when deciding the strategy is the computational capability of the player's brains. This makes the decision base huge and easily leads to an "analysis paralysis", which means that the players can analyze a single move for ages if the time is not limited. Of course we can limit the time, but again, it becomes a task of analyzing as much of the available information in the given time as possible. For me this kind of games often feel dry and exhausting to play as there are no real surprises, only raw calculations and memorizing chains of moves.

Hiding opponent's units takes away some of the strategic depth and puts more weight on the tactical side. One cannot calculate the exact strategy for the whole game at the beginning as all the information is not available. Rather, the decisions must be based on the own units and their strenghts and one needs to be able to adapt when something unexpected happens. This drastically reduces the decision base at the start of the game and makes the game feel lighter. Additionally waiting for an opponent's moves is more exciting due to the uncertainty: "does he have the unit which wrecks my cunning plan or not?" Rather than knowing all in the beginning, one needs to try to deduce the opponent's hand during the game based on the units he has already played. This adds the possibility for bluffing, which is another element not possible in a full information game. Simply put: for me, games that have hidden information tend to be more fun to play.

Limited options

Another way to reduce the decision base of a game is to limit the options the player has available at once. Good examples are most card games, where the player's hand decides the available actions while the deck defines the whole actions pool. The player typically knows what to expect from the deck and thus has a vision of the grand strategy, but the decisions which cards to use are tactical ones: How to make the best use of the cards in hand, which might or might not be the optimal ones for the situation at hand.

Limiting the options is often used together with information hiding, which allows even more interesting bluffing elements. Limiting the player's options is also an excellent way to make game sessions feel different as the actions available in different phases of the game vary from session to session even if the whole action pool stays constant.

Varied setup

Varying the game setup can also be used for making different playing sessions feel different and to keep the game interesting for a long time. Instead of limiting the options available, the gameboard or gameworld behaves differently from session to another. A good example is Bejeweled, which always generates a different playing field for the game. Varied setup also reduces the advantage gained from memorizing certain chains of moves, as different situations require new solutions.

In Permia - Duels, the varying gameboard is one of the key elements of the game. Differently positioned landscapes form a new challenge for each game session and require the players to their update strategies accordingly.

 Jani Rönkkönen / Lead designer of Seepia Games.

Permia – Duels

Welcome to the Seepia Games blog also on my behalf! I’m the person responsible for the design of our games and today I will tell you something about our upcoming game: Permia – Duels, from the designer's perspective. You can sign up for the Windows Phone closed beta at http://permiaduels.com/. The game will be released soon for Windows Phone and later for iOS and Android.

As the name suggests, Duels is the first game to be situated in the fantasy world of Permia. Don’t expect to encounter dwarves, elves or even humans though. Permia is populated by completely unique humanoid races and prehistoric animals like dinosaurs. The Permia lore will be revisited later in detail though, so stay tuned! But for now, let’s get back to Duels. 

Seepia Games are all about multiplayer games and Duels is no exception. We wanted to create a collectible card game which can be played in five minutes, is accessible to anyone and still offers enough strategic depth to make you think. To keep games short, the basic mechanics need to be rather simple but still allow new tricks to be added in updates to keep the game interesting in long term.

Two Final Fantasy mini games, Triple Triad and Tetra Master, were both built around the idea of capturing tiles by playing stronger tiles next to opponents. For me, Triple Triad had too little variety as it is always played on 3*3 grid. Tetra Master offers a more varied game board, but the game system feels too random and it does not give enough feeling of control. While neither of the games managed to capture my interest for long, I believe that similar basic idea has a lot of potential when done right and that's where Duels comes in.

Deciding the tile shape was the first big design decision for the game. Using squares would allow either four (Triple Triad) or eight (Tetra Master) attack directions. We decided to go with hexagons instead. The resulting six attack directions give more options than four and give enough room for extending the game in future. Eight directions would make the game harder to grasp and be graphically less appealing.

We tested different versions of the attack system and in the end decided against using any kind of randomization. Instead, the game board is varied each time making games feel different. Especially interesting are the mountain and water land types which prevent normal unit placement. Units with flying or swimming ability can ignore these restrictions though. The game ends either when players run out of tiles or if no more free hexagons exist. Thus players don't know beforehand if all tiles will be played and who will play the last tile. These are affected by decisions to where flying and swimming units are played, which adds an interesting twist to the game.

The last major design issue I want to mention here is the card collection system. One thing I don't like in many collectible card games is that I tend to end up buying cards among which only small portion are usable and majority is excess copies of cards I already own. In Duels, the units can be combined to increase their power. One does not end having a huge collection of useless units but rather the excess units are useful for improving others.

Well, is Permia - Duels a game for you? Probably yes. :) I’m very excited about the game myself. Be wary, though. Our testers tend to get hooked to it, so you might too! Stay tuned for the exact release dates.

Jani Rönkkönen / Lead designer of Seepia Games.