Why I feel Devs should always have a walkthough made.

[DarkenDragon]

so I just wanted to post how important I felt it is that every developer should have a walkthrough for their games, not only for the benefit of the player, but also for the developer themselves. I personally come from a background of computer science major and I've been studying programming since high school. I understand that many of these developers for these games do not have a large background in programming and many are learning as they go along, which I find is great, but the problem is that they're lacking the most basic thing that is drilled into us when we study programming.

what they lack would be planning. the first thing I've ever learned when learning programming in my early days is the importance of planning and writing up pseudo code before even touching the computer. so for those of you who dont know what pseudo code is, it is when you write out your code in plain English or whatever language you use, in such a way that it explains what you will be doing. this way you can take the same plan and apply it to any coding language you choose by simply replacing the simple steps into syntax. for example, you have a chunk of code where it is an if statement of some sort, or a branching path, in one section you would write out what conditions you need for each path in normal words. and then write out what would happen.

now the reason why I bring this up is because many of the excuses I've seen the devs give out as to why they dont have a walkthrough is because it would take too much time to write out all the different choices and what could happen and the different paths. well my response is, you should have had it written out to begin with because it would be your planned out pseudo code. with it, it should have had all the branching paths and what conditions were required to be met in order to gain any flags or any values for future sets.

also by creating these walkthroughs or pseudo codes, it really helps the developers to keep track of the player's states. of what information they may have had, what flags they have set, and what values they have obtained. many times i've seen games have continuity issues where the MC would do a certain action and then another scene shows conflicting information. with these walkthroughs you'd be able to help yourself keep track of what you have to work with and what the MC's states are in order to figure out what you can write about or how to make the story flow, especially if you are making a game with large amount of branching paths.

now I also hear how some developers say they dont want the player to have a walkthrough because they just want the player to experience the game how ever they wish to play it. and to that I just say that is absolutely wrong. a player is the one that should get the choice of how they wish to play it. the walkthrough shouldn't be a document that tells the player what to do step for step, at least not a good walkthrough. instead the walkthrough is supposed to explain the choices each action has made. also it is the player's choice if they wish to use the walkthrough or not. another reason for why I feel the walkthrough should be the player's choice to use is because there are people who like to see all the different path ways and all the different choices a user can make, but they may not have the time to go through to test all the different permutations of choices. every time you add a choice to the game, the amount of permutations grow exponentially. for example a game with 10 event choices with 2 choices each in it, would have 1,024 different permutations meaning if a player wanted to be sure they saw every event and every situation, they would have to play through that many times. even though many of them wouldn't make a difference but the player wouldnt know that.

also some people may say "well just save before each choice and then return and try the different path to see how it is different" well many games I've known of wouldnt work like this. the choice dosnt effect events until later on. so even though you can see the immediate difference of doing this, you wouldnt know what would happen down the line.

with some games, you might see certain stats or values after you've made a choice, and some may say that you should just choose which ever gives the most improvement. but then again this may not always be the right choice. I've seen many games that have made it such that you have to get a negative hit in order to get a pay off much further down the road.

so I urge developers to take a second thought and please always think about creating a walkthrough for you games, you put so much effort into making it, why not also create a document to simply guide players to see all of it's content when the player wants to see it.

TLR summary
1. should be made since it would be the planning/pseudo code for your game
2. it should be up to the player's choice on how they wish to play the game, either it be them making their own choices, or to be told how to see the most in the shortest amount of time.
3. to help reduce the amount of permutations a player would have to see in order to make sure they see all the content they wish to see.
4. to help the developer keep track of what state the MC is in.

 

[Avaron1974]

I disagree.

These are amateur devs often doing this on top of full time jobs and family time etc..

I would rather they focused on the game and their own lives than spending hours making guides and guides do take hours to make. I've tried to make them myself for some games I enjoy but they take far too long.

This is why devs rely on players to make them. They just don't have the time themselves and to expect them to do so is simply absurd.

 

[redknight00]

No, if the pseudo code polished is enough to be an walkthrough, then the game is simple enough to not need one.

Otherwise, you're underestimating how much work goes in keeping walkthroughs up to date, you have to assume reader is stupid, take them by the hand and guide them to the prize, even then there will still be people asking shit you explained clearly.

 

[wurg]

I would agree to make at least a basic walk through on a game, at least to help the player get started on it.

When I first started doing programming they taught us flow charts. There are a lot of games on here that are of the sandbox variety where there are multiple "rooms" you can visit. Some of those games show you where the other characters in the game are, some don't, some give you hints how to advance, some don't. I find it frustrating to play a game any have no way of knowing where/when to go for the next interaction. I feel like I am flying blind. I can meander around the game for 10 minutes and still not trigger the next event, or even know how to trigger the next event in these sandbox games. I've stopped playing a few games because due to the frustration of not being able to advance.

Most VNs I don't find this to be as big of an issue. Generally, at least on this site, there will be someone to take up the mantle to post a good walk through. But there are games like Dreams of Desire that one wrong mistake in the beginning of the game can lead to an ending you didn't want or weren't striving for. When this game finished people figured out how to do the endings with cheats in the console anyway making it a moot point.

The reason they taught us flow charts or pseudo code is because once you get to the coding stage it doesn't take near as long to write it if you have the flow planned out, and it makes a quick reference guide if there is a problem with the code later on to make it easier to find. In my experience in coding it actually saves quite a bit of time.

 

[anne O'nymous]

now the reason why I bring this up is because many of the excuses I've seen the devs give out as to why they dont have a walkthrough is because it would take too much time to write out all the different choices and what could happen and the different paths. well my response is, you should have had it written out to begin with because it would be your planned out pseudo code. with it, it should have had all the branching paths and what conditions were required to be met in order to gain any flags or any values for future sets.

I agree that planning is important, but there's an error in either what you think pseudo-code is or what you think walkthough is.

At no time a walkthough will looks like :

[her room - night]
   choice:
      not fall asleep [need had coffee]
      fall asleep

[her room - fall asleep]
    if player with her three time -> she molest you
    else -> you awake in the morning

[...]

Yet it's an over simplified version of pseudo-code.

And at no time the pseudo code will look like : "Meet her three time at night after having take a coffee, chose to not fall asleep, then play with here. The next night you'll go to her room, do not take a coffee, fall asleep and enjoy."

 

[redknight00]

I would agree to make at least a basic walk through on a game, at least to help the player get started on it.

When I first started doing programming they taught us flow charts. There are a lot of games on here that are of the sandbox variety where there are multiple "rooms" you can visit. Some of those games show you where the other characters in the game are, some don't, some give you hints how to advance, some don't. I find it frustrating to play a game any have no way of knowing where/when to go for the next interaction. I feel like I am flying blind. I can meander around the game for 10 minutes and still not trigger the next event, or even know how to trigger the next event in these sandbox games. I've stopped playing a few games because due to the frustration of not being able to advance.

Most VNs I don't find this to be as big of an issue. Generally, at least on this site, there will be someone to take up the mantle to post a good walk through. But there are games like Dreams of Desire that one wrong mistake in the beginning of the game can lead to an ending you didn't want or weren't striving for. When this game finished people figured out how to do the endings with cheats in the console anyway making it a moot point.

The reason they taught us flow charts or pseudo code is because once you get to the coding stage it doesn't take near as long to write it if you have the flow planned out, and it makes a quick reference guide if there is a problem with the code later on to make it easier to find. In my experience in coding it actually saves quite a bit of time.

That's not a reason to need a walkthrough, it's just bad game design, a game should at any point give something for the player to do, if they are lost and can't progress it's better to invest that precious time in making the game better.

 

[wurg]

That's not a reason to need a walkthrough, it's just bad game design, a game should at any point give something for the player to do, if they are lost and can't progress it's better to invest that precious time in making the game better.

It may be bad game design, a lot of the devs may not have a lot of experience with developing these games, or it may be their first one. A simple walk through will help the player understand what they need to do to advance in the game, especially the games of the sandbox variety.

I was looking for the name of the game but I can't find it. It's a cartoon style game where the sister has purple hair and one of the first scenes is you catch her masturbating. I played the game for an hour or so to give it a shot. You can go to school in the game which advances the story a little and come home and work on your motorcycle. I'm guessing the main interactions are with the sister in the game, but I don't know because I could never find her in the house. Interact and build relationship with the mother, but never could find the sister except when she was in the shower, and you can't interact with her there. You needed I think 30 relationship points to access her room but I had no way of knowing where she was to build those points.

The point I'm trying to make is yes, it's not the best gui, there was something I could be doing in the game most of the time but I didn't know if it would advance the story or not. A simple, basic walk would let me know how to move forward, instead I stopped playing and I must've deleted the game because I can't find it anymore.

And yes, no matter how detailed a walk through is people will still ask questions about it. You can tell people water is wet and some of them will still be surprised or confused when they get wet from it.

 

[DarkenDragon]

No, if the pseudo code polished is enough to be an walkthrough, then the game is simple enough to not need one.

Otherwise, you're underestimating how much work goes in keeping walkthroughs up to date, you have to assume reader is stupid, take them by the hand and guide them to the prize, even then there will still be people asking shit you explained clearly.

a good example of what I am talking about would be to look at the guide made for the game "Lancaster Boarding House"

You must be registered to see the links

that game is clearly not simple enough to not need a walkthrough, there are so many choices that you can play through it at least 4-5 different ways and have totally different experiences. and the way it is written is very simplified and is easily used as a planning tool to figure out how to write the code. you have your variables that you'll increment and also all the flags you'll be using. this is the type of pseudo code I am speaking about. not to mention this doesnt hold your hand and tell you what to choose, it just shows what your options are and what are the rewards or consequences are and allows you to make your own choices on how you want to play.

as for those saying "oh I'd rather them make the game live their full time jobs and such" well making the walkthrough and planning it all out would help them make the game faster because they would have it all planned out. I know it sounds like it wouldn't but from my own experience, when you dont have it all planned out, it takes longer because you make more mistakes and back track quite a lot, and you'll have to do way more hot fixes. better to plan it out first and then code it once.

plus it is always best that a dev create the walkthrough because they are the ones that have the insights of what variables and flags are being created. like I said it should have been made at the beginning and as they go along. a player creating a walkthrough would have to spend an exponentially longer time because they dont have all this insight and thus has to go through all the different amount of permutations in order to figure out everything. especially if the game is using a point system and certain events happen during specific amounts, they would have to manipulate those values to see at what point the events change, and that takes a huge amount of time, or they have to dig though the code them selves to find it. where as the devs would have had that knowledge to begin with because they know exactly where it is in the code, especially if they have it planned out to begin with.

 

[kimoo]

i don't really like walk through when the game contain consequences especially
beside i don't like when the game unplayable without walk through

 

[DarkenDragon]

i don't really like walk through when the game contain consequences especially
beside i don't like when the game unplayable without walk through

never said every player should use one. a player should have the freedom of choice to use it or not. I personally only use it after I am done a playthrough and then I want to see all the other options. for example i've replayed babysitter at least 5 different ways just to see all the different possible paths I can take, and within that game there are so many choices that without the walkthrough, it would have taken me ages to figure out how to see all the different possibilities.

but you are right, if a game requires a walkthrough in order to be played, then it was poorly designed. but that isnt my point. my point is that a walkthrough is a great tool for a developer to help them plan out their game and to make sure they are creating the paths they want without conflicting themselves.

 

[redknight00]

a good example of what I am talking about would be to look at the guide made for the game "Lancaster Boarding House"

You must be registered to see the links

that game is clearly not simple enough to not need a walkthrough, there are so many choices that you can play through it at least 4-5 different ways and have totally different experiences. and the way it is written is very simplified and is easily used as a planning tool to figure out how to write the code. you have your variables that you'll increment and also all the flags you'll be using. this is the type of pseudo code I am speaking about. not to mention this doesnt hold your hand and tell you what to choose, it just shows what your options are and what are the rewards or consequences are and allows you to make your own choices on how you want to play.

as for those saying "oh I'd rather them make the game live their full time jobs and such" well making the walkthrough and planning it all out would help them make the game faster because they would have it all planned out. I know it sounds like it wouldn't but from my own experience, when you dont have it all planned out, it takes longer because you make more mistakes and back track quite a lot, and you'll have to do way more hot fixes. better to plan it out first and then code it once.

plus it is always best that a dev create the walkthrough because they are the ones that have the insights of what variables and flags are being created. like I said it should have been made at the beginning and as they go along. a player creating a walkthrough would have to spend an exponentially longer time because they dont have all this insight and thus has to go through all the different amount of permutations in order to figure out everything. especially if the game is using a point system and certain events happen during specific amounts, they would have to manipulate those values to see at what point the events change, and that takes a huge amount of time, or they have to dig though the code them selves to find it. where as the devs would have had that knowledge to begin with because they know exactly where it is in the code, especially if they have it planned out to begin with.

Planning and making a walkthrough are very different things, a plan can be a simple flowchart on paper with notes on important bits, a walkthrough is meant for any people regardless of their experience. To make a good walkthrough, one must go out of their way to take the info and write in a cohesive and reader friendly document. I'll be blunt, what you said about Lancaster House is just a bunch of screenshots with notes, were I a developer, it's not something I would give my patron under any circumstances (especially because it seems to be only binary nice/jerk choices).

Not saying a dev can't make, Jikei for example does a pretty good job with his guide, but he's also known for releasing an extraordinaire amount of content on a monthly basis and releases the guide for 10+ patrons.

 

[anne O'nymous]

a good example of what I am talking about would be to look at the guide made for the game "Lancaster Boarding House"

You must be registered to see the links

This is a good reminder for the dev himself and a pretty lame walkthrough.
Part of the information are totally useless like, "help Abigail -> leads to Abigail scene" ; thanks, I thought it leaded to a scene with Rose :/ And the other parts are given without context. Alright, if I do this I'll have more Jerk points, and more Nice points by doing that. But why one or the other are important ? How much would I need in a near future if I want to pursue this path ?
The worse is probably when the screen tell you that you can just go fuck yourself ; "you need X this points to have the choice you'll have to peek... Yes, I know, it would have been useful to inform you way before". The only parts with real content is the ones that tell you that "this scene" will be needed for "that ending", so less than 5% of the total content.
And yet, when I say that these parts have real content, I mean it "for people who don't want to use their brain". The real problem in Lancaster Boarding House is that you need to balance the nice/jerk/manly points, while still having a given amount to trigger some of the scenes you'll need. For everything else, just interact as much as possible with the girl you want to have at the end, and you're sure that you'll do it right ; if the said girl isn't here, then chose the "I'll not do this with you" option, to find the right girl somewhere else.

The purpose of a walkthrough is not to explain the obvious, nor to take you by the hand. No, its purpose is to answer your question.
"If you want to have Eve ending, you'll need to raise a little the Jerk points, and more the Manly ones ; and this before the day X. After that, you should have enough points to go through the end, so choice what you want, it will not really matter. Then at this time you really need to chose her (you'll need the points later), while at this time you can go for the other scene if you want (it give you no points with Eve)". But there's nothing like that in the one you pointed, and there's also nothing like that in pseudo-code. You find this in the dev's notes, the ones he wrote on the corner of a table and that describe the pace of his game.
Still, here we're just talking about a game based on a simple decision tree. When the game is way more difficult, like

You must be registered to see the links

by example, the walkthrough need to be way more talkative. In this case, even dev's notes will not be understandable enough to make an effective walkthrough.

 

[exer]

I lol'd.

What's the point in making the game, if they're just going to tell everyone exactly what to do to get everything? At that point, might as well just release all of the CG and not even bother spending the hundreds/thousands of hours making the actual game.

And why even bother playing the game if you're just going to use a walkthrough from the start? I get wanting a walkthrough if you get stuck, but if you're just following a list, you're not playing a game anymore. You're just following directions.

 

[HopesGaming]

This is my way of doing the planning.
I don't think that would be a very good walkthrough. Also, too many spoilers in stuff like those.

In the end - I am not for walkthroughs. I rather have the game to be as clear as possible.

 

[Egglock]

You're not wrong that it's important to have a walkthrough, though I disagree that every developer should have a walkthrough. Here's why

Let's look at it from a different perspective and examples. Let's step outside the realm of games/vn on F95, and take a look at AAA title games for a second. How often do you see them releasing a walkthrough alongside their game? Most likely none, these are done by players and third-parties. If these big studios aren't publishing a walkthrough for every game they release that should give an indication of the importance in walkthrough v.s production time.

This takes me to the next point, planning. In AAA titles, there is no doubt that the upmost planning is made, even then they don't spare time and resources for a team to make walkthrough, why is that? Well I'd assume, that time is better spent some where else. Walkthrough aren't important in the sense that it doesn't contribute to the production, it's just adding more unnecessary work. If the developer planned according and isn't lazy about their project design there shouldn't be a need for walkthrough. The players should be able to navigate and understand the mechanics and act accordingly. Hence why in AAA title games, they have tooltips/hints to point the players in the direction they're suppose to be taking to progress.

Not sure what your experience in game/vn development is, but it isn't a breeze in the park. Even as simple as a VN there are many gears turning, for example, story progression and writing, character design, dialogue trees, rendering, coding. These all eat up a lot of time and I mean a lot. I'm not developing vn, but what working on is on a much larger scale and even then, I can't spare any time to write walkthroughs as I go, instead to compensate for it, I make sure that the game is easily understood and that the players know exactly what they're suppose to do. On top of all of this, let's say mid way through the developer decides they want to do some major changes to their project, now they'll have to revisit that walkthrough and make changes to those specific areas, again unnecessary work and that time can be spent on something more productive.

Walkthrough is a means to help players navigate those extra bonus they might of missed. If the player has to rely on the walkthrough itself, are they really playing the game/vn?

 

[おい！]

IMO devs should not have to put in the extra time and effort making walkthrough's for their games. Even when walkthrough's are available, you still get questions asked about how do I get this or that. So what was the point of the walthrough in the first place? To me it is simple, just save the game before you click on a decision, if the decision is wrong, load the save and carry on.

I remember the days when people used their own brains to make decisions and did not rely on someone else to do it for them. It is not as if you need a Master's Degree to play any game on here, just some common sense.

 

[polywog]

It's really sad what has become of our education system. When I went to school, the goal was to teach students how to learn, so they could teach themselves, but not anymore. Now they teach kids to memorize answers so they do good on tests that make the school look good, but the kids don't learn anything. We also learned to be a little competitive, you needed a 4.3 GPA to be the best in your class. Today they give awards for 17th place, because every special snowflake is precious.

Unfortunately, I have to agree with OP. A lot of young people today can't tie their own shoes without mommy's help. Expecting them to figure out a game without step-by-step instructions is asking too much of them, given their lack of proper education.

Too embarrassed to ask mommy to help them with an incest game, they really need a guide or walkthrough. Unless they can overcome that fear, who knows maybe mommy would enjoy playing too.

In some older flash games we had hints pop up if the player was stuck. If the player sat in one spot for 120 seconds, the path would light up.

 

[GuyFreely]

In classic internet fashion I read your TLDR, skimmed a few of the posts and now here I am. A well done game should gently nudge the player down the path to finishing the game. The player should never be confused about what's supposed to happen next. Things like "The bandits ran south, you should be able to catch up to them." or "Perhaps that creepy guy at the antique store knows about this amulet." If a game features 'hidden' content, then finding it is supposed to be part of the challenge. If the games is puzzle based, then figuring out the puzzles is part of the game. If the game requires some seemingly random combination of actions to get where you need to go, you may be playing a bad game. If a game is impenetrable without a walk through, then good luck getting a dev who couldn't be bothered to use good design to make a walk through. Honestly, if you are talking about seeing content, a straight up CG rip is easier than a walk through most times.

Your argument is games should have walk throughs. My argument is games should be made so you don't need a walk through, which I think others said above me.

 

[polywog]

In classic internet fashion I read your TLDR, skimmed a few of the posts and now here I am. A well done game should gently nudge the player down the path to finishing the game. The player should never be confused about what's supposed to happen next. Things like "The bandits ran south, you should be able to catch up to them." or "Perhaps that creepy guy at the antique store knows about this amulet." If a game features 'hidden' content, then finding it is supposed to be part of the challenge. If the games is puzzle based, then figuring out the puzzles is part of the game. If the game requires some seemingly random combination of actions to get where you need to go, you may be playing a bad game. If a game is impenetrable without a walk through, then good luck getting a dev who couldn't be bothered to use good design to make a walk through. Honestly, if you are talking about seeing content, a straight up CG rip is easier than a walk through most times.

Your argument is games should have walk throughs. My argument is games should be made so you don't need a walk through, which I think others said above me.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Game
noun
noun: game; plural noun: games
a form of play or sport, especially a competitive one played according to rules and decided by skill, strength, or luck.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It wouldn't be a "game" if it didn't challenge the user.

What if there's an easy path, for those with disabilities, and a hard route for everyone else, so every player can "win".


Extra treasures, and rewards IF you complete the challenges, but you at least get a hand-job just for playing the game.

 

[Carion_Crow]

I took some programming, game making classes. I have played games my whole life. People, get your selves some basic problem solving skills. Read what is on the screen it might literally say what you must do next, look around in the game people took time to make. I've seen few games I couldn't amble my way threw unguided. A small guide might be nice for some things, but not an pseudo-code.

VN that are all A or B choices sometimes get flow charts, but its literally a point to point of questions to end a,b, or c.

A maker who is clear doesnt need to make a guide if fans like the game they will be the ones to make the guide.