A message from Anonymous
If games are art what right do we have to demand otherwise? I understand the issue with womans rights etc. but the civil rights movement didnt start with art? you follow? moreover holding a gun to the painters head demanding better treatment will assuredly lead elsewhere. in short: if games are art, why do you think you have the right to throw a fit over what the artist includes? especially if you're not purchasing it or condoning its consumption inherently.
A reply from discovergames

(This is an ask from a while ago re: representation in games. I haven’t responded til now, because it’s frustratingly bad.)

Okay, it looks like it’s time for another installment of “this comment is so epically and completely wrong, that I just have to go through and refute it all, line-by-line”! 

If games are art what right do we have to demand otherwise? - You tip your hand right off the bat here, and let us know this is not a serious, honest argument, but rather just a rhetorical exercise. You don’t really believe what you’re saying here. You’re the exact kind of person that would discard the idea of games as art the second it interfered with what you personally think games should be doing. And as for the whole “what right do we have” thing, you’re being even less honest. I guaran-damn-tee that if a developer did something you really didn’t like, you’d be up in arms and calling them slurs on Reddit within half an hour. If the next Halo dev decided to make Master Chief gay, do you think you’d still be saying “it’s art; what right do I have to complain?” I don’t think so.

I understand the issue with womans rights etc. - I really don’t think you do. Anyone whose entire discussion of the main issue is this one dismissive phrase clearly doesn’t understand at all.

Read More

Spot on rebuttals, great points made. But I think you were a little bit too harsh/judgemental with him. Most comments like his don’t come from a place of outright bigotry, but rather thoughtlessness. Not saying comments don’t always come from bigotry; there’s tons of bigots in the gaming community, as we all know. But nothing necessarily shows that he’s one of those people. I think you might find people like him to be much more open-minded when addressed more civilly in an honest discussion/argument, eschewing attacks on their character. Aggressive,effective arguments don’t have to stem from personal attacks.

That being said, I admire your passion for the subject

An Interview with Kevin Maxon of Ice Water Games, the developers of Eidolon

image

"Eidolon is a game about exploring a mysterious landscape and uncovering the stories of the people who lived there once before. It is a game about history, curiosity, interconnectedness, and the slow and inevitable beauty of life." - Ice Water Games

Below, Kevin Maxon responds to questions I asked about Eidolon and its development process, and gives some interesting and useful information for aspiring game developers. Many thanks to him for his great answers and willingness to do this.

What are some of the biggest inspirations behind Eidolon? Any non-game inspirations?

"The inspirations which most directly led to making the game were actually academic discussions I’d read about in various papers and books—both the emergent v embedded narrative discussion and, relatedly, the narratology v ludology debate. Eidolon is sort of a manifesto in the shape of a game, in that it was/is my attempt to reconcile these debates. I wanted to free systemic play-narratives from overbearing writers, and free writers from players’ systemic control. Back-story is a part of game writing that never suffered from this, and that’s the part that Eidolon is trying to embrace. (It’s kind of hard to explain, but I wrote a thing about it that’s at least longer-winded if not clearer, that you can find by googling “why eidolon needs to exist”.) We drew inspiration from many games to this effect, most prominently Bioshock and, I think, World of Warcraft (whose immense lore was always more convincing and satisfying than its quest chains).

Rough ideation started on Eidolon a long time ago, maybe 2010 or 2011, so many of the games I think of now as inspirations now actually didn’t exist at the time. However, as they’ve emerged (or come onto my radar), they’ve done a lot to shape the way I think about Eidolon and what’s special/important/valuable about it, and to suggest different directions for development. Games I’d list in this category include Gone Home (very similar narrative structure, strong written story), Proteus (opened up my eyes to slower game experiences, plus we sort of stole their simple/beautiful shader), and Minecraft (a powerful exploration game, for some).

I’d also point to Cloud Atlas, which we borrow a lot from in theme, setting, and structure.”

What made you choose such a distinct, minimalistic art style for the game?

"I’m crazy about flat colors, and about color in general, and a lot of my art outside of Eidolon has focused on that, so it kind of makes a lot of sense to me, but the game didn’t start out looking like this. It actually looked fairly photographic at one point in time—light rays, lens flare, pine needles, normal-mapped bark—but it just didn’t make sense from a development perspective. It takes too long to make a single asset of that style, and then the level of detail means that continuously reused assets are more obvious/jarring for the suspension of disbelief. Eidolon is going to rely on having a large, varied, beautiful world, so we’ve decided to focus on the big picture rather than spending crucial time making assets. Plus, now that we’ve gone this way I just love how it looks."

image

 

How long has Eidolon been in production? Has it been a full-time job, or something you’ve done in your spare time?

"The first pre-production stories in the current Eidolon world were written at the end of 2012, and a few months into 2013 was when we’d sort of figured out what engine we were going to use and assembled most of the team. I did a lot of work on Eidolon for college credit through independent study programs, and that’s true for some of the other people on the team as well. I probably spent a little less than “full-time job” hours on the game during 2013, and it was partially for credit, partially in my spare time. I was taking a reasonable credit load outside of the game as well. Since graduating in December 2013, it’s been my full-time job."

How has the game changed throughout its development cycle?

"It used to be visually realistic. It used to be less explicitly magical (documents were supposed to have just inexplicably lasted for hundreds of years, where now players get them in the form of orbs of light / memories). The goal has always been exploration, but mechanics used to be much more focused on hindering the player (brutal survival) and have since moved towards giving the player the means to navigate: compass, binoculars, and more on the way. I think Proteus and Gone Home inspired me with the lightness of their systems and their complete reliance on what they do best: audio-visual and narrative exploration respectively."

How do you market your game?

"Our game is marketed entirely through our attempts to maintain a social presence online. Tumblr is our largest source of new eyes, followed by Steam, Facebook, IndieDB, TigSource, and YouTube. I’m learning2tweet currently so that we’re not completely hopeless on that front as well. Our game had been picked up by some reasonably large publications (I think Indie Statik & Indie Games) just before our trailer came out, and that gave us a large bump of press attention for the trailer itself. We were lucky! We hadn’t sent anything out to journalists, but we plan to do more of that (intentional press releases) when our next trailer comes out (hopefully soon)."

How did you go about achieving Greenlight status?

"We put it up on Greenlight, put links to it everywhere, and then made it as obvious as possible to anyone following us that we wanted them to go click “Yes.” We put links to the Greenlight on all of our Tumblr posts. We occasionally went and uploaded new content to the site, which seemed to bring in some amount of votes. We probably could have done more, but it seemed like a lot of Greenlight was driven from within the Steam community, since you need to have a Steam profile to vote on something. Driving a community/marketing effort like that also takes a lot of time, and we are constantly trying to spend as much time as possible on actually making the game. We’d probably be doing much better if we had a devoted marketing person on-team."

Is the game made in any particular commercial engine, or is it all home-grown? What other major software tools have been used for the game?

"We’re using Unreal Development Kit (which seems to be a kind of neutered version of Unreal Engine 3). It would have been crazy, in my opinion, for us to build an entire game engine when quality tools for making first-person 3d games are out there for cheap. We use Photoshop and Blender for art assets, Illustrator and Flash for UI, and Notepad++ with a little Unrealscript language pack for writing code."

When first beginning the project, were you comfortable in your abilities to complete it without a problem, or has it been a learning process?

"For the first 6-9 months, every time we encountered a new problem on the code side, we thought, “Well, it was a good run, but I guess we just can’t do it after all.” None of us knew anything about Unreal or had ever made a 3d game. I’ve written the majority of the code, and my formal education in programming extends exactly as far as a minor, and not even that far when we started. Luckily, we’ve always (fingers crossed) been extremely wrong about our seemingly-insurmountable problems. I think my experience teaching myself to code while making my first Flash games has helped me stay resilient throughout the process, because I’ve felt all these things before."

image

What have been some of the biggest hurdles while developing Eidolon? How’d you go about solving development problems you didn’t know the answers to?

"Our lack of experience with professional workflows and team structure has been really inhibiting time-wise, but we’re scrappy and okay with moving a lot slower than a more experienced team would. It’s been mostly a process of deliberate, continued work to overcome that, plus open discussion and the willingness to reorganize communications and expectations on the team-structure side.

Map size limits were an issue, but we fixed that by scaling everything (player, world, move speed) down a good deal. Dynamic loading of objects was an issue, but also maybe everything we’ve written has at some point seemed like a big hurdle, now that I think about it. We don’t have very good documentation on hand for a lot of UDK, so our problem-solving mechanism often devolves into reading old, partially-related forum threads, and hand-sifting through code files other people wrote, plus lots of testing to find out what things really do. It’s messy!”

How did you put together your development team?

"I know a good number of good people who want to work on games, and seem to have just slowly accumulated all of them. At the beginning I approached a few people I’d worked with in the past and trusted (Meagan Malone, Adam Murgittroyd, Jeff Klinicke), and since then people have mostly approached me, asking if there’s anywhere they can help out. I feel a bit corrupt because they’re all good friends of mine, but it’s largely a matter of trust. Opening up an artistic process can be pretty exhausting. Plus my friends tend to be excellent human beings, in my completely unbiased opinion."

Any advice you’d want to give to aspiring game developers?

"There are ‘aspiring game developers’ of many kinds and I think I’d want to give different kinds of advice to different ones, but I’ll just assume ‘myself 5 years ago’ and write to that guy.

Stop reading those horrible “How to Get Into the Game Industry” articles. You don’t need to get hired to make games. If you really want to make games, just make games! It’s completely doable, even if it doesn’t seem so at first. If you’ve got confidence issues, start with something small. I always recommend looking into FlashPunk because it’s free and easy, and because it’s what I started with when I didn’t know how to code yet, so I know it’s manageable if you’re patient and deliberate about self-educating.

Also, if you have any experience with another artistic practice—poetry, drawing, painting, writing, music, whatever—try to use your experience making in those fields to contextualize what you’ll feel while making games. I think it will help you to have a better mindset about everything. Artists working in those better-understood mediums know how to constructively make art, but I think game designers are still learning.”

"And to be honest, a lot of it is just bashing your head on the keyboard and wondering like, why doesn’t it work? And then bashing your head a bit more and then suddenly it works and you don’t know why."
Vlambeer on game development. (via gamedesignnovice)

There’s a reason why games aren’t taken seriously.

Recently, a professor of mine wanted to class to write a blog post. It could be about anything, she said, as long as it was pertinent to your intended industry. But she made one sort of post off-limits: game reviews. At first, this annoyed me. What makes game reviews off limits, while book, film, or other entertainment reviews are fair game? We all know that games can be serious works of art with depth meeting that of books or films, so it must have been her ignorance of that fact that led her to prohibit game reviews. It’s her fault, right?

Right?

Maybe not. While games can be magnificent works of art, the mainstream game press rarely treats them as such. Large game news outlets such as Game Informer and IGN like to say that games are art, but then refuse to actually take them seriously. They have created a game review culture which is comparable to large-scale Amazon reviews of children’s toys. It’s no wonder that anyone would get the impression that a game review would lack substance of good professional writing, or that games themselves should not be taken seriously. The following is the review summary for Game Informer’s review of Bioshock Infinite: Burial at Sea Pt. 2:

image

The full review can be found here. I’m afraid it’s no better than the summary. Reviews like this, which unfortunately make up the vast majority of game reviews, are little more than buyers guides. They approach games like children’s toys: how pretty are they? Does it sound good? does it work right? Is it easy to use? Will I want to use it for a long time? Game reviews today lack the substance and depth required to portray games as anything more than children’s toys. Imagine if films were reviewed like video games. The absurdity seems to be far clearer when the common game review format is pasted into a film review.

It’s time game reviewers grapple with the art of games, with their themes, subtleties, plots, character development, art style, and how they all contribute to the whole.  Game writing needs something more than “This game has a good story, but it could use some work. The graphics look great. The sound effects are satisfying. The controls work. There are very few glitches. 9/10”.

If you were to read the aforementioned Burial at Sea review, or this Bioshock 2 review, might notice something: they don’t tell you anything at all about the meat of the game. Bioshock games are famous for having in-depth, striking political commentaries, attacking extremism, american exceptionalism, capitalism and communism (kind of), all the while mixing that in with imaginative science concepts and the projected impacts of inter-dimensional travel between the multiverse (admittedly that sounds ridiculous on the surface, but the game presents these themes thoughtfully and with careful precision).

image

These issues are incredibly complex and the Bioshock series makes some seriously impactful commentary and crafts a wonderful plot that far outshines it’s traditional gameplay mechanics. However, traditional gameplay mechanics and basic game functionality seem to be all Game Informer, the largest videogame magazine in the world, wants to talk about. It’s no wonder that such a huge number of people treat games as children’s toys, incapable of reaching the level of artistic expression of novels and films.

I want to see game reviewers discussing the real substance that today’s games bring to the table. I want to see reviewers grapple with games’ underlying themes and their implications. I want games art styles to be analyzed against those themes. Really, I just want to see critics dissect games as literature and art. I’m not saying every game assessment needs to be such a terribly deep analysis, especially reviews by everyday consumers and non-professionals. But it’s time for game critics to be just that: critics.

discovergames:

Ladies and gentlemen: Ed Key, designer of Proteus.

discovergames:

Ladies and gentlemen: Ed Key, designer of Proteus.

icewatergames:

Hi everyone! Eidolon is getting really close to being on Steam, but we’re losing momentum and need another boost! It would be huge if you could help by sharing the link and asking your friends to vote for us!

guilelessmonk:

discovergames:

polygondotcom:

Your stack of shame is a lantern for your future, and a gift to the industry
We call it a few different things. The backlog. The stack of shame. Maybe you don’t have a name for it, and you simply watch it grow while feeling guilty about your buying habits.
Many of us have experienced the odd sensation of seeing our time grow scarcer than our ability to purchase new games.
(Link to the full story)

This is a really great article and a unique perspective on gaming backlogs. Rather than the usual hand-wringing and finger-wagging, the author talks about the positive aspects, both for you and for developers, of buying games you might not play anytime soon.

Day[9] said it best, buy to support not to own. Don’t get me wrong, owning is nice and all but when I put down money I like to imagine saying “This is neat. I want you to be able to keep making things like this.” This has caused me to pay for games I don’t really expect to play just because I think the developer has promise and I want to support them even if the game they are making isn’t exactly what I’m looking for right now.
This attitude has also caused me to not buy games when I find some things a developer does distasteful (overly restrictive and pointless DRM or just general ass-hattery).
I get that I can support this view monetarily though. I happen to do all right money wise (rolling around in all this Computer Science money) but when you are feeling bad about games you haven’t played remember you are supporting cool people’s ability to make cool things. More cool things are being made than they would if you weren’t around, which is cool.

guilelessmonk:

discovergames:

polygondotcom:

Your stack of shame is a lantern for your future, and a gift to the industry

We call it a few different things. The backlog. The stack of shame. Maybe you don’t have a name for it, and you simply watch it grow while feeling guilty about your buying habits.

Many of us have experienced the odd sensation of seeing our time grow scarcer than our ability to purchase new games.

(Link to the full story)

This is a really great article and a unique perspective on gaming backlogs. Rather than the usual hand-wringing and finger-wagging, the author talks about the positive aspects, both for you and for developers, of buying games you might not play anytime soon.

Day[9] said it best, buy to support not to own. Don’t get me wrong, owning is nice and all but when I put down money I like to imagine saying “This is neat. I want you to be able to keep making things like this.” This has caused me to pay for games I don’t really expect to play just because I think the developer has promise and I want to support them even if the game they are making isn’t exactly what I’m looking for right now.

This attitude has also caused me to not buy games when I find some things a developer does distasteful (overly restrictive and pointless DRM or just general ass-hattery).

I get that I can support this view monetarily though. I happen to do all right money wise (rolling around in all this Computer Science money) but when you are feeling bad about games you haven’t played remember you are supporting cool people’s ability to make cool things. More cool things are being made than they would if you weren’t around, which is cool.

Game Informer’s New Year’s Resolutions for Gamers gets it.
But in all seriousness, why do people criticize EA for microtransactions so much? Sure, one could criticize EA for faulty game launches, poor customer service, etc, but criticizing microtransactions is just unreasonable.
Gamers today demand cutting edge games- those with absurdly detailed graphics, huge sprawling worlds, detailed intense combat, immersive stories, and movie-like production. Hell, a huge portion of the gaming community practically had a circle jerk about Crysis 3’s graphics. The problem with this is that these games cost ungodly amounts of money to develop. This production cost, coupled with the fact that games are the cheapest they’ve ever been. means that either a game needs to sell immense amounts of copies to turn a profit, or they need to utilize another monetization method to help ensure that the tens or hundreds of millions of dollars put into the game will be a good investment.
Microtransactions are pretty clever. They help to make sure that gamers of more lower economic brackets can get their hands on a game like Dead Space 3 for the price of any normal game, while allowing those who are more fiscally endowed to buy some minor enhancements and toys within the game. As long as these microtransactions are not necessary to enjoy the game, they help to make sure that the developers get the money they need in order to make more games in the future, and make a living, while keeping the game at a low price.
As a community, let’s try to stray away from this hate on microtransactions and Electronic Arts. There is no reason they should be named the worst company in America for something as trivial (and even as helpful) as microtransactions. They may not be saints of the game industry, but give them a break.

Game Informer’s New Year’s Resolutions for Gamers gets it.

But in all seriousness, why do people criticize EA for microtransactions so much? Sure, one could criticize EA for faulty game launches, poor customer service, etc, but criticizing microtransactions is just unreasonable.

Gamers today demand cutting edge games- those with absurdly detailed graphics, huge sprawling worlds, detailed intense combat, immersive stories, and movie-like production. Hell, a huge portion of the gaming community practically had a circle jerk about Crysis 3’s graphics. The problem with this is that these games cost ungodly amounts of money to develop. This production cost, coupled with the fact that games are the cheapest they’ve ever been. means that either a game needs to sell immense amounts of copies to turn a profit, or they need to utilize another monetization method to help ensure that the tens or hundreds of millions of dollars put into the game will be a good investment.

Microtransactions are pretty clever. They help to make sure that gamers of more lower economic brackets can get their hands on a game like Dead Space 3 for the price of any normal game, while allowing those who are more fiscally endowed to buy some minor enhancements and toys within the game. As long as these microtransactions are not necessary to enjoy the game, they help to make sure that the developers get the money they need in order to make more games in the future, and make a living, while keeping the game at a low price.

As a community, let’s try to stray away from this hate on microtransactions and Electronic Arts. There is no reason they should be named the worst company in America for something as trivial (and even as helpful) as microtransactions. They may not be saints of the game industry, but give them a break.

loced:

cod4 still the best

Call of Duty 4 is great. The game maintains depth in multiplayer while staying away from ridiculous over-complications of its sequels, and the maps are tight, balanced, and just overall well designed. I’ve yet to see a shooter with better maps than those of the original Modern Warfare.

(Coincidentally representative of Sonic 06’s development dilemma.)
Anyway, as my friend and I were playing Sonic The Hedgehog (2006), one question persisted as we continually yelled profanities at the TV: “why on earth does this exist?”
It’s easy enough to pass off Sega as consisting of total dipshits with their heads exploring their cavernous rear ends, but maybe that’s not totally fair. Sonic 06 was created using half of their development team, while working with the same deadline they established while utilizing their full team. Using advanced calculus, one can conclude that 1/2 team = 1/2 output.
So, basically, these game developers were in hell. Imagine getting one of your legs and one of your arms removed, and then being told to ride a bicycle. It just won’t work. Well, if you’re persistent enough, you could maaybe do it, but it would be far too arduous, and you’d scarcely cover any distance at all. You might also end up with a couple of bruises on the way. Such is the nature of Sonic 06. The game’s atrocious, and there’s no denying it. I don’t see how any sentient human being can honestly say that it’s a good game. I don’t fault the designers though, that’s not fair. The real cuprits are deadlines and bad management decisions. (Splitting your team in half for an average Wii game- are you kidding me, Sega?) Game development deadlines can be poisonous. They might be necessary evils for fiscal reasons, but they mark the deaths of way too many games with good potential. I would have loved to see Sonic 06 the way they had envisioned it. I honestly think that it could have been the next new Sonic Adventure. The split development team could have put out a good game despite the cut, but the deadline made that impossible. Deadlines stifle creativity and put limits on an art that needs room to breathe.
If Sega (or whoever was in charge of the publishing deadline) were to extend the deadline to the next holiday season, would marginal increase of sales due to an increase of quality in the game make up for the cost of added labor and assets? I don’t know for sure, but I’m tempted to say yes. Gamers tend to know what they’re buying (unless they’re too young to care). A game with a big, shiny 8 or 9 in Game Informer magazine that all of their friends are enjoying and telling them about is bound to sell far more than than a sorrowful 5 or 6 that their friends warn them to avoid like the plague. Sega needed to have a sharper focus on the quality of their game, because quality sells. Holiday deadlines can wait till the next year, because people will buy your game if it’s good and has good advertising.
Don’t get me wrong, there’s nothing wrong with capitalizing games. It’s important to make sound market decisions when in the industry, otherwise, well, you’ll end up like Sega (a company notorious for killing off their products). A problem is created, though, when the capitalization becomes a burden on the creative process. Money should not stifle a game’s quality, it should be an incentive to improve it. When game makers prioritize quick money over sound, quality game design, bad things happen.

(Coincidentally representative of Sonic 06’s development dilemma.)

Anyway, as my friend and I were playing Sonic The Hedgehog (2006), one question persisted as we continually yelled profanities at the TV: “why on earth does this exist?”

It’s easy enough to pass off Sega as consisting of total dipshits with their heads exploring their cavernous rear ends, but maybe that’s not totally fair. Sonic 06 was created using half of their development team, while working with the same deadline they established while utilizing their full team. Using advanced calculus, one can conclude that 1/2 team = 1/2 output.

So, basically, these game developers were in hell. Imagine getting one of your legs and one of your arms removed, and then being told to ride a bicycle. It just won’t work. Well, if you’re persistent enough, you could maaybe do it, but it would be far too arduous, and you’d scarcely cover any distance at all. You might also end up with a couple of bruises on the way. Such is the nature of Sonic 06. The game’s atrocious, and there’s no denying it. I don’t see how any sentient human being can honestly say that it’s a good game. I don’t fault the designers though, that’s not fair. The real cuprits are deadlines and bad management decisions. (Splitting your team in half for an average Wii game- are you kidding me, Sega?) Game development deadlines can be poisonous. They might be necessary evils for fiscal reasons, but they mark the deaths of way too many games with good potential. I would have loved to see Sonic 06 the way they had envisioned it. I honestly think that it could have been the next new Sonic Adventure. The split development team could have put out a good game despite the cut, but the deadline made that impossible. Deadlines stifle creativity and put limits on an art that needs room to breathe.

If Sega (or whoever was in charge of the publishing deadline) were to extend the deadline to the next holiday season, would marginal increase of sales due to an increase of quality in the game make up for the cost of added labor and assets? I don’t know for sure, but I’m tempted to say yes. Gamers tend to know what they’re buying (unless they’re too young to care). A game with a big, shiny 8 or 9 in Game Informer magazine that all of their friends are enjoying and telling them about is bound to sell far more than than a sorrowful 5 or 6 that their friends warn them to avoid like the plague. Sega needed to have a sharper focus on the quality of their game, because quality sells. Holiday deadlines can wait till the next year, because people will buy your game if it’s good and has good advertising.

Don’t get me wrong, there’s nothing wrong with capitalizing games. It’s important to make sound market decisions when in the industry, otherwise, well, you’ll end up like Sega (a company notorious for killing off their products). A problem is created, though, when the capitalization becomes a burden on the creative process. Money should not stifle a game’s quality, it should be an incentive to improve it. When game makers prioritize quick money over sound, quality game design, bad things happen.

Duck Tales (1989) is often said to be one of the best games for the NES; I can offer no opinion in regards to this assertion since I’m bad at things and got stuck in the game, but I did have fun playing what I could. However, this game had a pretty striking flaw in an early level (if not the first). The game required that the player traverses an area that is generally assumed to be inaccessible due to the nature of the rest of the game and most games before it. Super Mario Bros (1985) does this sort of thing, but it is optional and contains only warp zones to skip levels of the game. Duck Tales, drawing on the idea of Super Mario Bros (I have no proof of this, I only assume), implemented the same sort of thing, but with in-game money instead of warp zones.

While this might seem as a copycat thing for the Duck Tales developer to do, I like to think of it more as a pleasant throwback- a nod to one of the most influential games of its time. I enjoyed it; I like it when you can use information you’ve learned in one game and apply them to another in interesting, surprising ways. This becomes an issue though if a game’s progression relies on these skills, which this particular level does. While I don’t think this was a huge problem for this game (as I’m sure almost every NES gamer at the time had played Super Mario Bros to death), I can see how this level design can be a roadblock for less experienced players, since finding this area is basically mandatory in order to complete the level. Something like this should contain something extra- a pleasant surprise. Not a key to advance progress. So that’s where I fault this design, though I doubt it caused too many players to be stuck here permanently. Advice to game designers past, present, and future- if you’re going to implement a “reference mechanic” like this game did, then don’t make it obligatory if it’s something that isn’t obvious or apparent. It can lead to easily avoidable roadblocks. While I disagree with this design choice in Duck Tales, I still enjoyed it. “Reference mechanics” can be a lot of fun, but leave them on the side with a little reward for those who find or utilize them. Use reference mechanics to make players smile, not to frustrate them.