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 😎

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


🕹️ My Games
boghog.itch.io/
🎙️ Game Design Vids & Streams
www.youtube.com/@boghogSTG
☠️ Small Updates + Dumb Takes
twitter.com/boghogooo

Boredom is a very common way games punish or discourage certain things, and I don't like it.

I'm not talking about the more "natural" type of boredom-as-punishment, like replaying the same stage or boss 20 times - that will be a problem for difficult games no matter how they are designed. What I'm talking about is the more obvious stuff. Farming health items if you run out, waiting around for a boss to get back into range if you missed an attack opportunity, running around a level smashing crates to collect resources you've lost, burning corpses, re-opening chests. All kinds of basic, repetitive wait times or actions.

I think the rationale for this stuff is twofold :

  1. It's a "soft" way to punish players. They won't feel like they are losing anything, rather they feel like they are just delaying the win
  2. It's effective. People are lazy and there is nothing we love more than to optimize & automate away tedious tasks as we improve. Hell, programming runs off this principle

The main problem with this is very simple - it's boring. The games are wasting your time, they think that you failing something is license to put you into timeout in order to do dull shit until you can get to play again. What's more is they do it because they are afraid of causing player frustration. They want difficulty, but they are afraid of committing to it fully because difficult games are discouraging. And I think this is lame, instead of accepting what they are the games skirt around it and end up wasting our precious time on this earth because of it.

This kinda stuff is everywhere if you really think about it, especially as games become "softer" in how they punish players - relying on psychological incentives rather than direct punishment. And other players will defend it with "if you don't want the game to be boring, simply get good". I'd rather have games just kill me outright, cause frustration, make me curse its name, and even want to quit - just be direct and ramp up emotions, instead of trying to pacify the player.

Bayonetta's Angel Slayer is a good example - if you take damage you can heal back up to full by taunting. But it's so fucking boring and repetitive that I would rather have no healing period instead of be forced to make the tradeoff between continuing without taunting and risking a run, or go through the mind numbing taunt loop.

A more ubiqutous example of this design would be boss cycles - in a lot of games bosses will exit your range or become invulnerable or too hard to hit if you let them do something. So being inefficient in how you dish out damage during their vulnerability phases often locks you out of further damage, rather than being more difficult per se.

You can even apply this to arcade games. Take 2 games, one I like and one I love - Devil Blade & Radiant Silvergun respectively. DB's highest difficulty mode forces you to score if you want to stay alive because it works off a timer that'll kill you if you let it run out. RSG forces you to score if you want your weapons to do enough damage in order to kill stuff within a reasonable timeframe. Even though I much prefer RSG as a game overall, I would definitely rather have it kill me more directly than fuck with my firepower if I play badly enough to not be able to kill enemies, ideally it'd kill me through more enemies, more bullets, etc. That said, in shmups it's a very minor issue cause "tedium" just means "I'm not doing as much damage & have to let enemies go" or "I'll have to dodge this boss' hard attack more than 2 tiems" or something like that.

This "boredom as punishment" design is also a slippery slope. It's fairly effective at getting players to stick around so games can increasingly add more tedious bs and force players to work around it. If playing a game poorly is simply tedious rather than very hard and frustrating, I think the game fucked up.

I don't have a particularly strong formal argument against this shit or anything, I just really dislike it and think devs & players should be more mindful of how willing games are becoming to waste the player's time. It's a type of "friction" that sucks, cuz there are much more direct punishments. Also I gotta add that if games use boredom as punishments for some really interesting/novel/artistic reasons, or if the whole game's about that type of thing, I can understand. But how often is that the case? Not very, IMO.


You must log in to comment.

in reply to @boghog's post:

It's kinda true though isn't it? The better you know the map layout/objectives the less you'll have to worry about crimsonheads since you can plan your routes accordingly, and the better you are at dodging zombies the less you'll be put into a position to even need to burn them

this is a total non-sequitur from your post though. first we're talking about how burning corpses is boring busywork, now we're talking about how it's not even a factor assuming you play the game perfectly. i don't agree with either of these points but one at a time please

Well I'm assuming we're taking it as a given that it's boring busywork - you walk up to a corpse, select a lighter & watch an animation play out. It's even worse if you wanna keep extra inventory slots cause then it's walk to box -> get lighter/petrol -> use it -> go back to box.

Establishing it as a non-factor is just an argument for why this particular bit of busywork is a punishment for bad play

we're talking resident evil, a series based holistically around getting an item, putting it in the right place to solve a problem, and watching a little animation. particularly where this intersects with resource management. and particularly if you want to plan ahead -- you know that one zombie is a huge problem, so you plan ahead and bring the lighter/canteen (does this place any strain on you?), or try the various other methods that prevent V-ACT, or... just kill it, leave it to fester and take your chances. like, that's survival horror, that's the pleasure of it, i don't know what purist resident evil gameplay this incredibly rich and complex decision is pulling me away from

LOL yes, RE is a game that made me hesitate a bit when writing this cause the thing really is optimizing away tedium: the game, remove that and there's really not much to it. Still though, even by those standards the body burning is just an extra nuisance which didn't have to work the way it does. It literally seems balanced through tedium cause it's not like petrol's particularly scarce. Maybe scarcity (but quicker burning/petrol + lighter not taking up inventory slots) would help the mechanic shine. Cuz the idea of giving meaning to zombie kills & dynamically making certain areas more risky when backtracking is really interesting

i dont feel like putting on my nerd glasses and going "well actually there are x doses of petrol across however many zombies" -- it's a rare, finite resource and accessing it safely creates further problems and bodies, that's how it's communicated to the player, that's generally how they'll interface with it.

i will however put on the nerd glasses and say that chris gets the lighter as a personal item that has a dedicated slot

moreover, this is a series that has always put emphasis on playing fast and efficient -- every game throws some cool reward at you for getting a hot speedrun. certain actions, often safer ones, consume time more than others, that's part of the game, that's another layer on which decisions are carefully made and balanced -- ask yourself why the save rooms are tucked away in the 1f wings while the hub lobby rooms have no such thing

I don't think it's a good enough excuse, especially if you're going to involve speedruns/efficiency in the convo. There are ways of creating efficiency cost without involving actual real life time via time-as-scoring (action 1 adds +20s to your clear time, action 2 does not, despite them both being near instant in real time, something mercs does). Even having a literal global speed up button like what you have on emulators (and Kunitsu Gami which kinda realized the problem!) would be better than actual real time cost simply because there's no mechanical reason to have it. You could justify it in terms of atmosphere or even genre but not in terms of mechanical tradeoffs.

Granted like I said, RE's tedious top to bottom so it's a bit of a special case, but in action games this is a horrible design mentality IMO.

An example I've encountered now and then in platforming games is when they don't have instant death pits... but they DO have pits you have to slowly climb out of again if you fall in, which just feels like a worse way of doing it.

Isn't it kind of a puzzle game? With puzzle games it's trickier cuz oftentimes if you really want to you can just sit there and do calculations/draw diagrams/whatever the fuck to escape having to make quick decisions based off heuristics, but I think at that point it's more like a type of boredom inherent to the games, similar to how you can't escape repeating the same content in a shmup. But maybe in Balatro it really is just busywork and I'm wrong LOL

Err, it's kinda of a puzzle game but not in the sense you described, because at least IMO, doing that busy work in shit like Portal or Stephen Sausage Roll is part of the inherent fun of them, since it's designed for you to use your brain to find a solution, and if you have the strategies/techniques to find them easier, better for you. Balatro is a "roguelite", and if you take your time to actually calculate shit you will never softlock yourself as it's basically poker deck building with more cards and variables, so it's essentially like playing a variation of Tetris we're the pieces don't fall down automatically and you have all the time in the world to place them.

Even players who actually like it acknowledge the only reason they aren't just doing the math for the best hands every time is because of said shore, I even saw a dude say this is fine cause it's a "last resort" from playing "normally", even though there is no setback for doing so lol. The main difference here I suppose is that Balatro discourages you to engage with it deeply, thus eliminating any creativity or synesthesia you would normally feel in an art piece, and becoming more like a dopamine generator and escapism enabler, whereas said in those other examples, even in Tetris for some extent, escaping said quick decisions IS engaging with it, sometimes even expressing through it.