What we can learn from video game tutorials

[Roadspike]

As someone who has written tutorials for casual games before, this is a fascinating idea to me. Tutorials for MU*s are sort of difficult because as currently put together, they can’t be immediate sorts of things that players can get into right away.

I agree with @YetiBeard’s notion of a mission statement – I think every game should have one front and center: tell players what they’ll be playing and what they’ll be doing and what they can expect out of the game.

I love the idea of Session Zero that @Third-Eye mentioned, but again, it’s hard to do unless it’s a Waking Up vignette like on The Network. In some searching around a while back I found a very interesting Social Contract that I think could help with some of that, and adapted it for a project Blu and I were working on: https://emptynight.aresmush.com/wiki/policy#social-contract

I think that on an original theme game, having an Overview page that new players get sent to can help, especially if it’s a super-light summary of the setting and the themes of the game, and then leads to a handful of places that they could go next to learn more (a literal handful, I think 5 is plenty).

And I think that intro-combat-scenes are a great thing to do before any new player engages with a “big plot scene,” but again, the problem of timing/immediacy comes up with the format.

I would love to find a way to create a playable intro, like @Faraday has for the combat system on the Ares general website (https://www.aresmush.com/fs3/fs3-3/combat-walkthrough.html) – I think this would be a phenomenal way to bring people into theme, but it would have to be a lot smarter than Fara’s example to respond “appropriately” to anything the player could do.

[Tat]

@Roadspike said in What we can learn from video game tutorials:

I love the idea of Session Zero that @Third-Eye mentioned, but again, it’s hard to do unless it’s a Waking Up vignette like on The Network. In some searching around a while back I found a very interesting Social Contract that I think could help with some of that, and adapted it for a project Blu and I were working on: https://emptynight.aresmush.com/wiki/policy#social-contract

I kind of want a whole thread just on this idea. I think there’s a lot of good stuff here.

Tutorials for MU*s are sort of difficult because as currently put together, they can’t be immediate sorts of things that players can get into right away.

I’m REALLY thinking a lot about whether that’s always true. I think a lot of things COULD be automated as part of a ‘you get this info when you do this thing’. The first time you enter combat? A link to the extensive guide we built in the wiki. The first time you’re KO’d? An emit telling you what you can do.

I think prompted vignettes could be a really neat way to pace theme tidbits, too. Writing one can hook you to the character and the theme. Reading the instructions or other people’s versions can teach you something valuable about the setting. I kind of love the idea of spacing these out over time to teach new things.

[Pavel]

I think a tutorial should be written by someone not involved in making the game. They should absolutely have input, answer questions, etc, but it should come from a player.

Why? They’re someone who is doing the things they’re trying to explain but without the bias or baggage of prior knowledge of how the system works. When one spends months (or even years) working on something, their ability to explain it to others just starting out is diminished by exposure.

[Duke Whisky]

Played before on a MUD that had a tutorial and a new person quest system. It was helpful to introduce the original theme, although was probably a little bit too light on the as it also wanted to keep an air of mystery and discovery via player-character interactions.

Basically the tutorial taught the very basic social and movement commands for the game via a ghost before they set the person off on a fetch quest to go to several locations on the grid to unlock a token. Then the person needed to talk to X number of org leader characters to also get a token. So was handy in 1 regard to having a new person explore the grid and meet people. After getting the required tokens, their character got a bedroom. (Yeah dunno where they slept before.)

The downside was it got a bit transactional in terms of the roleplay, plus put pressure on org leaders to go meet new characters. Additionally without an “I’ve played this game for 3 years, I don’t need the tutorial” option it meant older players had to go through the same process.

I don’t think it really retained many players since the tutorial hooks were very light touch.

OH! Also there was an in-character mentoring guild that would be on hand to help new characters. It sort of faded out after the tutorial bot was introduced but was still on hand. It had both fantastic mentors, really good quality RPers in it but also the occasional creeper to hunt new characters to sexy up. The game introduced an unofficial “no sexy until after 2 weeks” rule to sort of put them off.

[Tat]

@Whisky said in What we can learn from video game tutorials:

Then the person needed to talk to X number of org leader characters to also get a token. So was handy in 1 regard to having a new person explore the grid and meet people. After getting the required tokens, their character got a bedroom. (Yeah dunno where they slept before.)
The downside was it got a bit transactional in terms of the roleplay, plus put pressure on org leaders to go meet new characters.

Yeah, this is always my concern with anything that requires or even requests individual connections from specific players. The newbie meet-and-greet remains a really important aspect of getting new players hooked into your game, but it should be fun for BOTH sides, and something many, many people should do. It’s easy for this type of RP to feel transactional and repetitive over time.

One of the points the PvZ video brings up is that a tutorial MUST be fun - the experience of learning should be engaging. I’m mulling over RP that could be engaging to BOTH players while still be newbie welcoming.

Additionally without an “I’ve played this game for 3 years, I don’t need the tutorial” option it meant older players had to go through the same process.

Yeaaaaah, for anything that’s specifically systemy, I think you need an opt-out unless it’s REAL unobtrusive.

@Pavel

I think a tutorial should be written by someone not involved in making the game. They should absolutely have input, answer questions, etc, but it should come from a player.

This is a really interesting point! I think at the very least it needs to be written in cooperation with players. With a M*, it’s harder to do UX playtesting like video games do - but also, we can iterate constantly. As questions continue to pop up, we can implement something to answer them.

[Pavel]

@Tat said in What we can learn from video game tutorials:

With a M*, it’s harder to do UX playtesting like video games do

Yes and no. Many games these days are opening in limited-run alphas and betas, which is the ideal time to make “create tutorials and introductory information packages” a part of the culture.

The other reason I’d say get either a player or dedicated part-time staffer/consultant to do it is that running a game takes time and effort, not to mention you’d want to RP too around your own life going on. So it’s harder for people already loaded with responsibility to do it on a constant basis.

[Third Eye]

@Tat said in What we can learn from video game tutorials:

This is a really interesting point! I think at the very least it needs to be written in cooperation with players. With a M*, it’s harder to do UX playtesting like video games do - but also, we can iterate constantly. As questions continue to pop up, we can implement something to answer them.

Probably SL’s best combat tutorial was written by @deadscribe though that was at the mid-point of the game’s life. Agree with @Pavel someone doing it after an alpha period would be interesting.

[Pavel]

@Third-Eye I’m the kind of guy that can’t keep a character wiki page updated, so I’m absolutely the wrong person to get to write documentation.

This is especially the case if you’re trying to on-board someone to a game’s theme when the game has been running for a year. Like Arx, for instance, is SO MUCH different to how it was when I played. I’d need an actual textbook to get caught up on everything that has happened since then.

[KarmaBum]

@Tat said in What we can learn from video game tutorials:

The newbie meet-and-greet remains a really important aspect of getting new players hooked into your game, but it should be fun for BOTH sides, and something many, many people should do. It’s easy for this type of RP to feel transactional and repetitive over time.

I think that’s where the real struggle with integrating new people comes into play.

We all want the deeper connections that lead to meaningful RP. You’re almost definitely not going to get that from a brand new PC - not even just because your PCs don’t know each other yet, but because that player is probably still figuring out that character.

Integrating new characters is always going to be work to some extent. It’s like bringing in a new party member in a later chapter of the game: you can see they’re going to be awesome when they level up, but goddamn those first few levels are a grind.

[Jumpscare]

@Solstice said in What we can learn from video game tutorials:

I think this could be translated beautifully into a muck tutorial, where instead of being jettisoned out into an OOC lounge or onto the grid, you’re taken through a character creation process that teaches you the common commands by forcing you to execute them before you can leave the room.

I have a funny story about this. I got a few friends who don’t play MU*s to try out the chargen/tutorial of Silent Heaven. The results were staggering.

First test: The screen says that there’s “a way to the North.” Friend #1 has no idea that she needs to type N. I had to tell her what to do, so that’s no good. Let’s try again with a new friend…

Second test: The screen says that there’s “a way to the North” and in brighter text, “Type ‘N’ to go north.” Friend #2 tells me that N isn’t doing anything. Somehow he had unfocused the input box before typing anything. After I told him that he needed to click on the input box, he expressed with surprise that he hadn’t even noticed the input box.

Third test: Now it says “Type ‘N’ in the box below to go north.” Friend #3 tells me that typing N just makes the letter N appear and that nothing else happens. I sighed so hard and told him to press enter. Yay.

Fourth test: “To go north, type ‘N’ in the box below, then press enter.” Friend #4 types apostrophe, N, apostrophe. I cry inside.

Fifth test: I’m starting to run out of friends who are willing and available to blindly try this. It now says, “To go north, type the letter N in the box below, then press enter.” Friend #5 does it successfully! We did it! Confetti and streamers rain from the skies!

It was like this for every section of chargen. I had to edit the phrasing of sentences, add explanations for things MU* players tend to assume are common knowledge, and so on. I learned a whole lot and it was very beneficial in the long run.

[IoleRae]

@Jumpscare

That’s incredible. NICELY DONE.

[Roz]

@Jumpscare omg that’s FASCINATING

[eye8urcake]

You clearly need a thread to share with us your experimentation on these human mice that are your friends who will try this stuff out.

I honestly cannot remember for the life of me how I made it through my first MU* tutorial.

[L. B. Heuschkel]

@Tat said in What we can learn from video game tutorials:

I’m curious whether any Ares game runners have found people actually pay attention to this.

I’ve heard people mention it a couple of times as incentive so the knowledge is certainly out there. I don’t think it plays a big part, though.

[Mourne]

In reply to the general original question of: What makes you get invested in an original theme?

The answer for me is documentation.

Oh no, not more reading! (I hear some cry in the back of my head) Yes, more reading.

Have a clearly presented ideology behind the game.

Express what kind of initial stories are being told, the overarching theme, the playground so to speak.

Making theme and help files /easily/ accessible, both on game and off is important. Not everyone wants to go to a wiki or webpage and there’s no reason why the documentation can’t be accessible on game too.

If it is a custom system (Which honestly, it needs to be at least adapted. Many TTRPG’s are not an easily put into place whole cloth into a MU*) make sure the rules of that system is easily available so it’s a level playing field.

Beyond those more design level things, for me, overall setting is a huge thing.

Generic Chronicles of Darkness, probably going to pass. Interesting take, even if it’s crazy (Looking at you CrackMUX, even if you were oWoD), a lot more intriguing than seeing the default race to Power Stat 8+ and who can make the most broken combat sheet to lord over everyone else.

I can generally make fun for myself, but being able to engage with the theme because it’s well written enough that everyone can make use of it is another thing entirely.

Sorry about the ramble, and probably missing the point.

[Pyrephox]

When I think about adapting tutorials to MU*s, I come back to the thing that really seems to trip people up: What does this character do in this world.

So, in a tutorial style setup, one of the first things I think a game would need to do is identify a) what are our core gameplay elements, and b) how do characters fit into that.

Then, for each character that is approved, generate a hook that introduces the character and player to each core element that is most relevant to their character in a structured way that’s designed to give the PC something to build off on in their interactions with other PCs and NPCs.

So, for example: let’s take an urban fantasy setting where what you want people to do in the game is a) become aware of extra-dimensional abominations that threaten the world, b) use their various supernatural powers or mortal talents to act in the world, and c) accomplish A & B without making magic and supernatural beings common knowledge among the mundane. For my money, you also want to include d) it’s okay to take a loss.

In that case, for every PC that’s approved, you’d want to give them a narrative bone (say, from an NPC) that will lead them towards A, require B, and have C as a meaningful challenge towards progress. Ideally, that initial hook ends in some sort of setback or failure. Why? Because that gives the PC motivation to find new resources (like other PCs) and come back stronger. On an OOC level, it helps the GM assess how the player takes a loss. If they CAN take a loss, mostly.

If you have a sorcerer who has made a deal with a demon and that’s the source of her power, then you want that sorcerer to hit the grid with, say, a demand from her demon to investigate why several Imps have gone missing in a certain part of the city. Investigating that should require the use of her powers AND there should be a threat from some mortal agency that is about to uncover the supernatural that she has to counter. And then, something happens that puts her on the backfoot; maybe she uncovers a mysterious ritual circle with symbols she’s never seen before, but cultists descend and she has to flee. Maybe she gets the shit kicked out of her, but they dump her in the harbor instead of checking to make sure she’s dead, and she hears a name that she can follow up with.

In a perfect world with unlimited, excellent GMs for a game, this would happen in the very first scene where she hits the grid - “Okay, you’re approved. Now, let’s start you off in a warehouse in the Docks district. Your patron, Azorith, has promised you a power boost if you check out this place and see why a couple of Imps that were working here have disappeared.” And the challenges would be tailored to encourage the sorcerer PC to use her key abilities, and - honestly - get to be pretty damn cool. Even if she does take a loss in the end, it’s a loss that sets her up for MORE RP - sets her up to be invested in those bad guys, in getting revenge, and reaching out to other PCs.

It also gives her something to immediately RP about, and lets the GM seed a lot of little plot hooks and emphasize points of theme.

[Mourne]

@Pyrephox While I think the above is an excellently cool idea, it works in video games because it can be automated by the code, scripted to have events happen in specific way. It’s a lot more difficult to constrain in a free floating RP setting such that it would require each and every player to be hand rolled through an event by an ST/GM which, again, very cool is an immense drain on staff resources.

Aka awesome, but very hard to reasonably do in practice on a MU*

[Roadspike]

@Jumpscare Back when I was writing for casual games, I put together the tutorial for one of them, and had my (now ex-) wife come in to try it out. She got about 2 steps in, having followed the directions, and then said she couldn’t figure out what to do next. The instructions were in flashing white and red letters in the exact same place she had been reading instructions before. She just hadn’t looked back there. When it was pointed out to her (not by me, which I considered a major win), she was able to continue, but it took her like 5 minutes of being frustrated.

It is impossible to make a tutorial simple enough that people will not get confused/stuck, but wow, that’s a lot of good effort being put into it, @Jumpscare.

@Pyrephox That example sounds awesome… but it also sounds like a TON of work for a staff to do for a game with more than 15-20 characters. Because that investigation will have to be GMed, and the encounters will have to be GMed, and the follow-on would have to be directed to other PCs by a GM. As @Mourne said, awesome, and I would love to do it, but way too much effort to be practicable on most games.

[Pyrephox]

Yes, that’s why I said “in a perfect world with infinite GMs”.

However, I think that you can get SOME of that if you sit down and really think about why PCs are involved in the game, and what they need in order to fully engage with it.

There may not be the staff to give every PC a custom opening scene. But you could very easily condense what might happen in that opening scene into an opening vignette, that has at the end “Here’s some ideas for following up on what your PC learned, here’s a few PCs you might immediately reach out to, either because they’re likely to find someone who’s been tossed half-dead in the harbor, or because they’re sorcerers like you, or whatever.” You could even give PCs a very definite goal with a reward in it: “Post scenes talking to four PCs (alone or in any combination) about what you discovered during your opening vignette. Put in a job linking to the logs, and you’ll receive a lead/bonus/NPC contact/XP/WHATEVER.”

Give people something to work with, and give them some starting ideas on how to work with it.

EDIT: It’s also worth thinking about if a game SHOULD have “more than 15-20 players” if staff aren’t capable of GMing for that many people. A good deal of MU* issues come, at heart, from being too large, and not having enough staff to give the players the oversight and interaction that is needed. I’d much rather have a landscape with five games with 25 players, at most, than 1 game 225 players who can’t get any response back from staff or do anything because there’s no one available to adjudicate it.

[Roadspike]

@Pyrephox I agree that it would be fantastic for Staff to talk to players as they’re creating characters and make sure that they have hooks to metaplot and other characters. And I think that’s a realistic goal.

And while I agree that games shouldn’t over-player for what staff can handle, trying to run an intro scene for every character is significantly more time commitment than “normal” GMing. I definitely agree that 5 games with 25 players getting regular GM attention is better than 1 game with 225 players not getting enough staff attention.