Skip navigation

Instinctive control.

In the original Super Mario Bros. you can ‘get’ the controls very quickly. Instead of thinking “lean left thumb on the right part of the d-pad to move Mario right” and “press right thumb on the A button to make Mario Jump” – you just do these things. Your brain says move right, your brain says jump. The controller in your hands becomes a conduit for you to perfectly control Mario or, if you can forgive the hyperbole: to BE Mario.

Although our modern, complex, 12 button (not counting directions) controllers  mean that this kind of intuitiveness has become less common, it is still something that games occasionally reach. It factors into design as well…

ArmA II's "field manual" - Expect to pause the action to refer to it.

I recently started playing the “military simulator” ArmA II.  The game was heavily criticised for its overcomplicated and unintuitive control scheme and fairly so. When you’re being shot at and one bullet can spell game over – struggling with something as basic as toggling between running and walking is not ideal. Having three separate buttons for going prone, crouching and standing up is also extremely inconvenient.

I couldn’t help but think of how much better the usually unrealistic Modern Warfare games (that’s Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare and Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 – for you statistical anomalies that didn’t buy them) handled it. Tapping the button will lower you into a crouch (or kneel, rather), holding the button down lowers you into a prone position. Getting up from a crouch or going from prone to crouch or to standing is all just as easy to use and to ‘get’.

It’s all handled with perfect animation speed and timing. The lowering time between standing and crouch is enough time for the game to register you holding down the button to go prone and you don’t find yourself accidentally going into the wrong position. It all just comes together perfectly.

HUD

Above: Note lack of anything clickable for the TEN command menus or squad selection. Below: Note obvious damage indicator, directional pointer for damage, prompt to swap weapons and controls to use grenade launcher and mines.

Modern Warfare also communicates with the player very well. Kind of the opposite of Splinter Cell Conviction. Even the unobtrusive HUD offers clear prompts and useful on-screen reminders of d-pad controls.
When you get to a fence, the game will helpfully show you what button to press (sensibly – the climb button is the same button to jump) to climb over it.

Whereas ArmA II might be a more complex game but has a needlessly impenetrable interface. The map screen does nothing to show you what buttons can be pressed. There’s nothing to indicate that numbers 1-0 on the keyboard will bring up different menus, nothing to indicate that F2 will select your second man in a squad – and you certainly can’t click on these things despite having mouse control.
The game will also leave you scrambling for the V key when you need to climb over a fence.

Tutorials

Tiny and rapidly disappearing top right prompt for ArmA II at the start of a timed obstacle course run. Big patient middle prompt for Modern Warfare in a demonstration.

Teaching controls is pretty important for the player getting used to them. ArmA II is similar to Red Dead Redemption in terms of being really bad at this.
Not only are you trying to play the game, managing what’s on the screen, listening to dialogue and/or reading subtitles, but you’re attempting to learn how to play the game from a little box in the top right corner of the screen that throws sentences at you faster than you can catch them – it does not wait for you to try things out.

Compared to, again, the Modern Warfare games which will, for fictitious example have a character say “Pick up some ammo!” and then a big onscreen prompt in the middle of the screen will say “Press X to pick up ammo.” The prompt doesn’t get in the way and somehow manages not to be too intrusive or break immersion that much. You can move on when you’ve done each thing you’ve been told to do. Overall, it doesn’t take up much time and is unlikely to bore a player who already knows what they’re doing.

Mass Effect 2 also uses this method of tutorial and has you escaping a facility guided by a voice on an intercom that knows where you are and what you should do.

The games frame it in the story as well. Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare has you as a newbie brushing up on the basics at an SAS complex. Modern Warfare 2 has you playing a Ranger playing example to a Sergeant teaching some Afghan Army troops how to shoot with accuracy.

(Additionally there’s one more way of teaching controls, which has the in-game characters tell you what to do AND what buttons to press – as seen in the Metal Gear Solid series and in Final Fantasy XII. It usually comes with a degree of figuring stuff out on your own. People have complained about this method hurting immersion, despite being intended to heighten it.)

Set piece design

Now that we’ve learned the controls, let’s focus on how intuitiveness really come into designing a game: Set pieces. This is best summed up by the great Ron Gilbert:

When Indiana Jones rolled under the closing stone door and grabbed his hat just in time, it sent a chill and a cheer through everyone in the audience.  If that scene had been done in a standard adventure game, the player would have been killed the first four times he tried to make it under the door.  The next six times the player would have been too late to grab the hat.  Is this good drama?  Not likely.

This still applies and to more than just adventure games. If you’re trying to make a ‘cinematic’ moment like that, the player shouldn’t be figuring out what they’re supposed to do or what button to press. Everything needs to be a direct reaction. Back to my original example – first time you see a fireball coming towards you in Mario you don’t think about it and then press a button to make Mario do it – you jump over it.

I’m pretty sure this one of the reasons people fall back on either cutscenes or the dreaded Quick Time Events. They feel like the player can’t suddenly know how to handle something slightly different than the previously established game mechanics and they can’t be trusted to handle the situation with the right timing. So instead they take away all the game mechanics and make it a “press the button on the screen or start again”.

I'd say that it's better to see it in motion, but really - it's best to play it.

In Modern Warfare 2, there’s a section where you and your fellow soldiers are creeping through a forest on your way to a terrorist lair . Suddenly it goes into slow motion – you remain in first person and control. Pillars of dirt shoot up from the ground ahead of you and then one in front of you. It brings a cylindrical object floating in front of your eyes. Mines! You hear one of your fellow soldiers shout “AMBUSH!” and you instinctively hit the ground. It’s just a natural reaction. From all the times you’ve gone prone you know exactly how to do it. The slow motion gives you enough time to react while not losing the tension.

Plus, if you didn’t react fast enough, the game helpfully fades in text warning you what to do  – the game over screen would do the same. End result: mine goes off, you survive using normal game mechanics and feel like you ONLY just made it – all within a few fluid seconds.

That gripping (sorry) climbing mission also has a way of eliciting appropriate reactions from the player. Then there's jumping for helicopters.

The game does similar things elsewhere, for example near the end, controls flash up to drag yourself across the ground towards a gun. After two movements you can recall the same controls from the earlier ice climbing so you know what to do and it all just pulls you into the scene more. Or the part where you’re supposed to throw a knife, despite never having done this before, while it’s obviously the shoot button –  it once again comes naturally.

That’s to name but a few. The intuitive controls, presentation and use of slow motion always works very well at creating those ‘hat-grabbing’ moments.

(Another more basic example of this kind of integration of controls with set pieces would be at the end of Shadow of the Colossus where you naturally run forward as forces in the game push you back – although directional control is almost always intuitive.)

The Bulletproof Glass Dilemma

Bioshock 2 might offer more examples of bulletproof glass than any other game ever.

This links to what I like to call the Bulletproof Glass Dilemma. Certain games set it up so that unless you are meant to kill them, every normal human you see in person will talk to you from behind bulletproof glass. The basic reason is that the developers don’t trust the player not to shoot them, even though most of us immersed in the game wouldn’t do that.

They could develop a system to stop you shooting people you’re not meant to, but taking away control is generally a bad thing. As are bullets going through people or not hurting them. Plus, with all these fancy expensive production values, it’s just easier and faster to stick a wall between you and them. The alternative is actually coming up with a reaction for when the player does something they’re not supposed to.

Shooting the explosives on the rail bridge at the right moment in Metal Gear Solid 3.

An extension of this is the other problems with player trust about whether they have the skill to do something on time. Say the game gives you one shot at the bad guy. A closing gap, a door, a helicopter taking off. It’s another case of coming up with a reaction if you fail.

Modern Warfare handles this with a quick blurring of the screen and what is essentially game over text saying what you did wrong “Such-and-such got away” or “Friendly Fire won’t be tolerated”, etc. it then jerks you back to the last checkpoint.
It’s abrupt and it hurts the immersion, but most of the time, you’ll do it right and it will work. It makes the moments all the more satisfying and is still more immersive than a bad quick time event or the kind of cutscene that makes you wonder “Why couldn’t I play that?”

Conclusion

Keeping the well taught and intuitive controls in a new situation with a possibility of failure leads to great moments like these.

Making the controller ‘an extension of yourself’ should be a desirable thing in game design. Developers should learn from what Modern Warfare does right – and I don’t just mean by being a military shooter with a big multiplayer component. But maybe next time there’s a quick time event or an action-packed cutscene in the works, developers will give a thought to gameplay.

Advertisements

3 Comments

  1. I want to comment with some meaning behind it… but unfortunately I don’t know half the shit this article is about. My weak little woman mind can’t handle it.

  2. You bring up a lot of good points. Call of Duty did do a great job with the controls. I didn’t like it at first because I was an avid halo player but now its the opposite. I try to play Halo Reach and it is nothing compared to Modern Warfare 2.

  3. I’ve got to agree now that I’ve played it, MW2 has some of the most intuitive controls I’ve seen in a game. For probably the first time ever I’ve rarely had to stop and think ‘what button does this?’. Everything just came so naturally, even from the moment I started playing. More games need to be made that way.


5 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. […] as not to break up the timing, the game would go into very slow motion, Modern Warfare style, whenever you activate the gravity-gun-style mechanic. Naturally, getting hit by an enemy would […]

  2. By Real war in video games « Grimly Enthusiastic on 17 Sep 2010 at 2:36 am

    […] can be linear and full of set pieces like the Call of Duty: Modern Warfare series. The control and ‘do-or-fail’ moments from those games could demonstrate all the excitement, the horror, the restraint and the importance […]

  3. […] It lacks the variety and set-pieces, the highs and lows of Modern Warfare 2. It’s just meaninglessly shooting hundreds of people […]

  4. […] Portal for the first time and going on to play ArmA 2 and Fallout: New Vegas, I forced myself to use the standard WASD controls. Maybe I’ll get […]

  5. […] Plus, check out all these greyed out options we are not allowed to click in the menu. It’s worth noting, I first ran the game in High and it ran terribly. On a computer that can run Crysis and ArmA 2. […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: