Puzzles in RPG's

[Neo Samurai]

How many puzzles do you like to see in an RPG? For me, between a lot or a good number.

EDIT:

Actually, now that I really think about it, I like a lot!

It's just that games that keep you thinking the whole time and on your feet make it more exciting. I don't expect a really challenging puzzle every corridor I step through in a dungeon. Every now and then, something that really gets my brain moving would be fine.

Even simple puzzles such as "push the blocks onto the switches" I'm cool with. To make it even better, make those switches be on a floor lower than blocks and push them down the holes and hope they land on them (or else they get trapped in a pit and you have to leave the room and go back in to start over again).

So what do you guys think?

[Dungeon Warden]

I enjoy puzzles as long as they are well thought out and not too fustrating, but I don't want a lot of them as it takes away from the story. Ultimately, the style of game play will determine the level of puzzles. Epics should have few puzzles while zelda style action/adventures can have many. Lots of simple, boring, run around (ex. hit the switch and hurry to a spot before the time runs out), or fustratingly hard puzzles get old fast and can ruin a game. Balance is the key.

[vespuleth]

dw is fairly right. i have always like the idea of the savvy hero more then the brute, so i like more puzzles in my epics as well. things that make the player think. thats why strategy is so important.

on another note, topics like this are good for the 'our created games' forum.

[Neo Samurai]

My bad!

Wasn't thinking at the moment where I was posting it and I ended up placing it there.

[NASH7777]

LOTS AND LOTS OF PUZZLES!!!!!!! Fun, challenging, deep thinking, entertaining, puzzles! ;D ;D

[Deleted]

It all depends. These are my thoughts:

1) I should have a better chance at solving the puzzle than a monkey, meaning that the puzzle should be logical and not just trying random crap. The best example is most/all of FFX's Trial of Hallway things.

2) If the puzzle is really hard, it should not be mandatory (this is along the lines of what DW said). The game does not benefit from the player getting stuck on some really friggin' hard puzzle for hours on end and either giving up, using a FAQ/Walkthrough, or finally randomly getting it after trying everything else that should've worked that came to mind.

3) Yeah, it depends on the style of play.

4) (also along what DW said) The puzzles should vary more. Having block pushing puzzles 3 times in a row or 20 out of 40 total will annoy the player. This is similar to repetition in dungeons of 'there are 3 paths, one's a dead end, one has a treasure, the other leads onward' that some RPGs have done too much of.

That's all. I find most puzzles in games annoy me because they're not well thought-out, and therefore I'd much rather have less puzzles because that the creator left out the ones that frustrated all the test players and were detrimental to the game.

In my game I plan to have pretty easy puzzles that mostly aren't even neccessary; sorry to disappoint you Zelda fans.

[Neo Samurai]

You're only putting simple puzzles in your game, Will !? ;D

Anyway, I'm a good Zelda fan (as you can probably tell) so, of course, I'm big about puzzles in RPG's.

1) I should have a better chance at solving the puzzle than a monkey, meaning that the puzzle should be logical and not just trying random crap. The best example is most/all of FFX's Trial of Hallway things.

Yeah! I like my puzzles to fit with the environment. Like, in Golden Sun, I think they pulled that off real well in the Sol Sanctum when you had to move the statues to try to change the Sol and Luna tiles.

2) If the puzzle is really hard, it should not be mandatory (this is along the lines of what DW said). The game does not benefit from the player getting stuck on some really friggin' hard puzzle for hours on end and either giving up, using a FAQ/Walkthrough, or finally randomly getting it after trying everything else that should've worked that came to mind.

Yeah. As much as I like a good puzzle, I have to agree with you there. One example is that puzzle at the Shinra Mansion where you had to find the combination for the lock that had that key. That 3rd clue was a bit confusing to grasp for me. Trying to walk in the right direction and such was hard. Of course, I don't think earning Vincent was mandatory.

3) Yeah, it depends on the style of play.

I suppose. I can see where you're going. In epic RPG's, you have to concentrate on random battles, which can be a real pain in the ass. However, in action RPG's, they can have many. But I may make 3-4 puzzles in each of my dungeons (most likely, no enemies will be in those rooms so the player can concentrate on the puzzle, and they may not even be random, where as enemies will be walking around and if you bump into one, you get into a battle).

4) (also along what DW said) The puzzles should vary more. Having block pushing puzzles 3 times in a row or 20 out of 40 total will annoy the player. This is similar to repetition in dungeons of 'there are 3 paths, one's a dead end, one has a treasure, the other leads onward' that some RPGs have done too much of.

Yeah. I may have a few block pushing puzzles in my game (I sort of see it as a classic), but I agree with you when you say that having them over and over again can really get annoying. And I'm not a fan of the dead end puzzle myself (I don't really consider that a puzzle, just an annoyance).

[Draygone]

It depends on several things. For one, dungeon length. If a dungeon has a lot of battles, there better not be too many puzzles. I don't want to spend an hour in a single dungeon. It also depends on the length of those battles. In Zelda games, battles last just a few seconds, so they can throw in a lot of puzzles. But if most battles take a few minutes (which is a little too long for a regular battle anyway), then the puzzles need to be spread apart some.

Plus, there should never be random battles in the same room with a puzzle that requires walking around (like moving stone or carrying an artifact). Non-random battles are okay, if a little distracting.

[KingSpoom]

I agree with the optional puzzle thing. Puzzle, by large, are not really challenging in the least. All they end up doing is spending time. Honestly, I'd rather be battling or progressing with the story. That being said, hard optional puzzles are things I think should exist. The possibility for failure, the exclusion of someone... that's what makes victory a great thing. If everyone and their monkey can solve the puzzle, did it serve it's purpose? As for how many should exist... as many as it takes to feel right. I might only have 1 "puzzle" in my game. They don't really fit the tone. It's hard to take a game seriously when you have to go through a maze and a pair of puzzle locked doors just to reach the end boss.

[Deleted]

Exactly.

What I've planned is more to have the player do something in the dungeon but not be hard at all. Take for example my first dungeon is a volcano. It's good as the first because the player will know what works well against most of the enemies pretty easily (duh ). In it the player'll push boulders (which doesn't cost money to buy tools to use like bombs/rope/etc. which is also good for the first dungeon) into the lava and hop across. It won't be anything hard at all to advance forward and beat the dungeon and there'll likely be some simpler puzzle-ish-like pushing boulder stuff to get some chests, but overall it's just to make the player more involved in getting through the dungeon. This is the kind of gameplay for dungeons I prefer.

And, yeah Link05, I thought Golden Sun's puzzles were very good, and definitely the main attraction in the game.

[NASH7777]

You can still have lots of block puzzles and stuff in the gam if you vary where they are and add new elements each time. That's what I did in my game. The first dungeon had your basic block puzzle of pushing around, the aqua dungeon then added that blocks could float on water.Then the plant dungeon added the pushable stairs, the ice dungeon was blocks that slid on ice, the wind dungeon was using block that floated and blocked wind for you, the lava dungeon the blocks floated on the lava, the mansion made blocks that were sometimes at different elevations depending on certain switches, along with a block that was 4X bigger than link, and finally the monster dungeon used blocks that appeared and disappeared with the cane of somaria. See so if you mix up some of the things that interact and keep them a minimum to a dungeon there still fun and don't get old as fast.

[vespuleth]

i agree almost totally and completely w/ spoom (and am beginning to think hes a sage on matters such as these).

first of all, i dont want a puzzle that a monkey can do. i want to actually think about it. again, thats why i play the tomb raider series. while i dont agree that all puzzles should be optional, i do agree that the ones that arent optional should maybe be a little more straight forward, while not being totally obvious. if its totally obvious, its not a puzzle, its a task. if i dont have to think during a game, and if its all relatively easy, if there is no challenge at any time, im going to hate it.

[BloodKnight]

I like puzzles in games. But I think they should at least have one purpose, something that makes the world change in some way. For example, a puzzle that opens a door, and in turn waking a boss enemy up(copyright!).

I also think that puzzles should be scarce, and require some thinking. But at the same time, clues should be given in case the player can't figure it out.

[The Final Rune]

I love puzzles in games. I know it sounds cruel, but I love puzzles that make people scream in agony, because usually, when you eventually figure it out you want to hit yourself for being stupid. I've been toying with the idea of creating a game where solving the puzzle would require outside study, (what was Mark Twain's real name? / how many sonatas did mozart create? / how many points countries are there in the world? / etc. ). Puzzles like this of course would be purely optional and only offer some fun experience to the gamer. Also I would never use such lame questions in a puzzle, these are only for example. Block puzzles, timed puzzles, sequnce and number puzzles, riddles, brain teasers, I love them all. Expect to be challenged in my game!

[Dungeon Warden]

I do love a good puzzle. The more challenging the better, but not something that requires a walkthrough/FAQ to figure out. I want to figure it out myself, and it is very fustrating when I can't.

One problem with puzzles in RPG Maker 2 is that it is hard to know if the creater actual made the puzzle possible. If you know all the puzzles were fully play tested and mistake proof (ex. you can't move a block and lock yourself in so you have to reset the game and start again.) that's one thing, but if you don't know if the puzzle actually works, you can give up too easily (this happened to me with one of Nash's puzzles). Hints are nice, even if you have to go back to town and ask a wise man for a clue to what you can do next.

If you are putting puzzles in your game, try to do them wrong. Do everything you can think of that shouldn't work or that might trap the player. If you have a friend you can get to play test the game, watch him play it and see what he tries to do. This can also give you ideas for new puzzles.

[Tinbok]

Personally, I like a good number but not a puzzle in every room. I'm not sure if anyone mentioned Legacy of Kain games but those are the kind of puzzles I really enjoy. The ones that get your brain working. Not the kind of puzzles that require you to go around half the globe where the answer is in the bushes.

[NASH7777]

That's why have the option to use square to get you to go back to you last save/town/dungeon etc... So if your really stupid and lock yourself up you can get out of this. However you should still test play and make it very challenging for the player to trap themselves if they can, like they have to go out of there way and purposely trap themselves to do it.

[Neo Samurai]

It mostly depends on the player how a puzzle is or not. I, myself, also don't like looking in the strategy guide to solve a puzzle. It takes away the accomplishment of solving a puzzle. However, I'm big on puzzles. To tell you the truth, I enjoy them more than the battles.

As the designer, I believe you should balance them out so all people can enjoy them. Make them challenging, but not too challenging so those that get frustrated turn off the game. Keep it at a balance.

[Doan the Nado]

Here's an idea: make two versions of your game. I myself would prefer very difficult puzzles (but still logical or solvable without a strategy guide, of course), but others may like easier ones. You could make two separate saves (or an easy/hard mode) and have easy/hard puzzles in your game. This is something that seems to be strangely lacking in commercial RPGs, but I really don't think it would be terribly hard to accomplish.

[Draygone]

Puzzle, by large, are not really challenging in the least. All they end up doing is spending time. Honestly, I'd rather be battling or progressing with the story.

Yeah, but some people don't like dungeons that consist of nothing but battling. Throwing in a good puzzle or two can help make things a bit more interesting.

You could make two separate saves (or an easy/hard mode) and have easy/hard puzzles in your game. This is something that seems to be strangely lacking in commercial RPGs, but I really don't think it would be terribly hard to accomplish.

Actually I haven't had much trouble with puzzles in RPGs, but I really wish there was some difficulty levels. Not because a game might become hard, but too easy after playing it so much.

[Deleted]

Mainly it's just important that the puzzles aren't stupid and make sense, and otherwsie I think the game'd be better without them (those damn FFX puzzles!). I think doing something like I said's good for more commercial rpgs.

[Doan the Nado]

I really loved the FFX puzzles, that was probably my favorite part of the game. They may not have made much sense, but I enjoyed them.

[Dungeon Warden]

I don't have any trouble this FFX's puzzles except one of the temple puzzles had me confused for a long time because I couldn't find out how to do it. I finally had to look at the strategy guide to figure out what to do. Some of the side puzzles were too hard and illogical, but the main quest was simple enough.

[The Final Rune]

I've always been a personal fan of riddles more than puzzles. Cleverly worded riddles can stump some one for days to years (if they're that obsessive). From classics like:

"What runs but but has no feet, has a bed but never sleeps, has a mouth yet never eats?"

to over stupid ones like:

"Why did the dead baby cross the street?"

These are just two examples of riddles and word puzzles that help keep me going when I get bored.

Expect quite a few in my games.

[Neo Samurai]

I think, for more difficult puzzles, a clue or hint to solving it should be somewhere close by. However, create it in a sort of cryptic way. It makes the puzzle more like a riddle and if the player solves the riddle, he/she can solve the puzzle. It could point the player in the right direction and could be quite enjoyable.