Hi, I'm a game dev interested in all sorts of action games but primarily shmups and beat 'em ups right now.

Working on Armed Decobot, beat 'em up/shmup hybrid atm. Was the game designer on Gunvein & Mechanical Star Astra (on hold).

This is my blog, a low-stakes space where I can sort out messy thoughts without worrying too much about verifying anything. You shouldn't trust me about statistical claims or even specific examples, in fact don't trust me about anything, take it in and think for yourself ๐Ÿ˜Ž

Most posts are general but if I'm posting about something, it probably relates to my own gamedev in one way or another.


๐Ÿ•น๏ธ My Games
boghog.itch.io/
๐ŸŽ™๏ธ Game Design Vids & Streams
www.youtube.com/@boghogSTG
โ˜ ๏ธ Small Updates + Dumb Takes
twitter.com/boghogooo

This is a type of gameplay technique which :

  1. Doesn't come with any negative tradeoffs or risks - it's always good to perform it.
  2. Requires a very minor time investment to learn, or is obscure enough that it isn't immediately apparent.

Essentially, it's a mechanic whose entire purpose for existing is to be quickly discovered and fade into the background once the player learns it's there & quickly works it into their muscle memory.

For a pure example of this, imagine a beat 'em up where you do a 3 hit combo by pressing punch, the final hit would have 20 recovery frames. Now imagine if, tapping down/up at any point of the combo would cut down the final hit's recovery frames to about 10. This is trivial to do, and there's never a reason not to do it once you've discovered it. It's a pre-requisite for decent gameplay.

While pure examples of this are hard to find, similar mechanics with a higher execution barrier, or very minor tradeoffs are everywhere. Bayonetta's Dodge Offset, Smash Melee's L Canceling, Resident Evil 6's weapon swapping, hell even Double Dragon Gaiden's dashes are kinda like this, but more demanding/a bit less universal.

It's worth pointing out that this is not the same as good stuff gated behind a high execution barrier, though. Difficulty in execution is meant to always factor into your decision making to some extent - are you consistent enough to go for a tight dodge or parry, or will you move out of range? Are you going to go for a high damage combo, or an easier one? The low execution barrier of these mechanics is, to a large extent, the whole point.

Making the mechanic granular also, IMO, justifies it because it creates a range of optimization. The player can work on improving it in the long term instead of the mechanic being "solved" and fading into the background after a few hours. Sure you can cancel your move at any point, but can you cancel it on frame 1 consistently? Didn't think so!

All of this is completely arbitrary, of course. You have to figure out how easy is too easy, how discrete is too discrete, and how few tradeoffs are too few.

From a designer's perspective, these mechanics can be used in three ways :

  • As a kinaesthetic element - sometimes performing inputs just feels nice, even if it's completely redundant.
  • As a way to add a depth signifier in to trick people into feeling like a game's more complicated than it is. Any existing mechanic can serve as Bigness fodder when viewed this way.
  • As a "softer" version of a tutorial shop where you buy moves.

The last one is particularly interesting from a Staging perspective. Similar to shops, the goal of adding this tech can be to highlight certain other, more meaningful aspects of a game. The player might think - if I missed this cancel, then what other cancels did I miss? They can think, if I can carry over my string through dodges, maybe the goal is to finish the strings? Giving it a name and maybe even having some nice VFX when the player successfully performs it can help even more!

NGL though, I hate these mechanics due to their highly manipulative nature and wish games did the exact opposite - giving attacks tradeoffs or automating them and letting players override them manually if the moves serve a purpose in very niche cases. But it is what it is.


You must log in to comment.

in reply to @boghog's post:

I think Dodge Offset is not a mechanic you're always better off doing. You don't always want to dodge, you don't always want to continue your string after the dodge.

Another example is EX ACT and MAX ACT from DMC4 and 5. There's no cost to doing it, no associated animation, and it powers up your next attack, which is always better.

Weapon swap cancels show up in a number of games, including MGS2-4, Doom Eternal, and Vanquish

I don't know about minor time investment for L Canceling or EX ACT. Many people struggle with that for a very long time, and I sure did.

I think having a granular range of optimization for these types of techniques is the exception rather than the norm actually.

Also they tend to be much more common in racing games, which are about optimization more than decisions.

I agree with you that they're not the best thing for games, and it's usually better to build something intended to create an interesting choice. They tend to make games more about optimization than choices.

The way I think of it is basically - if players are gonna do it more often than not, you should reverse how it's done. So instead of having players hold down attacks during dodge to keep the string timer going, just have it offset by default and then add a way to manually cancel the DO somehow. Alternatively, just make it a toggle. The latter might be best cause in a game like Bayo it's a bit complicated. It's a sandbox so to the combo demons not offsetting can very much be the default choice