lexyeevee

troublesome fox girl

hello i like to make video games and stuff and also have a good time on the computer. look @ my pinned for some of the video games and things. sometimes i am horny on @squishfox



alright. fantastic. fox flux DELUXE now has candy. you can run around and collect huge arcs of jelly beans.

but, lo! something is wrong.


one big way games can be categorized is by how much information about the game state is generally available to a player. in a game like chess, the entire state of the game is represented by the arrangement of the pieces on the board, which both players can see at all times — thus, chess has perfect information, and the only thing you don't know is your opponent's strategy.

on the other hand, in a game like magic: the gathering, you don't know what's in other players' hands or decks, or the order of cards in your own library. with this imperfect information, an entire set of mechanics around information control emerge: you want more information, you want your opponent to have less information. you also have to devise your play strategy in such a way that it works against any (or as many as possible) opposing cards, without knowing in advance what they are.

sidescrolling platformers, especially of the puzzle variety, have mostly perfect information. you can't see the whole level at once, but you most only care about what's going on in your immediate vicinity, and you can generally see what that is. it's 2D, so nothing is hidden by your camera angle, and there isn't even an opponent scheming against you. you see, you think, you execute.

that means that you can look at the screen and already know what's going to happen. which is fine, but in a way, it feels ever so slightly... static? you've already plotted your path in your head, so you've essentially already completed this part, and now just need to execute.

this isn't a huge deal. it's a very small deal, in fact. it's the sort of deal that i'm not sure anyone else even thinks about. but it is a teeny tiny bit of a deal, and the sort of deal that feels like it could add up over the course of a longer game.

what i wanted was just a little bit of mystery.


mario, of course, already has this. question mark blocks are one of the most iconic elements of the franchise. what could be in there? who knows? i mean it's probably a coin, but what if it's not?

i think that's cool. it puts something on the screen that doesn't immediately explain itself. it draws you forward. it gives you something to fiddle with.

and i love fiddling! it's one of my favorite parts of games. that's what i love about doom, even — it's so heavy on switches, things to fiddle.

so i wanted something like this myself. but i didn't want to do Hey Look It's The Mario Thing Again. not least because it just doesn't make any goddamn sense; you bonk your head on a solid cube, and something comes out of it, and now it's a more solid cube. what? why? no one knows.

this game takes place in an existing world, and while i'll do some handwaving for the fundamentals of sidescrollers — why does all this stuff float in midair? — i would still like the objects themselves to be somewhat accountable. i want to have things that make sense as things, even if it doesn't entirely make sense that they're arranged the way they are.

enter the gift box.

a pixel art fox jumps up into a gift box, which is facing the camera; its lid falls away, revealing a spiral candy inside

i mean, the whole game is a gift from cerise to lexy, so why wouldn't it be peppered with smaller gifts?

the gift box is solid until you jump into it from underneath, at which point the lid falls away and the collision goes with it. that lets you get at the contents, which are physically inside the box. this has some interesting effects:

  • i don't have to have an alternate version of candy for putting in gift boxes, e.g. mario's auto-collect coins or the physics-enabled coins you can sometimes find in wario blocks. it can just be regular hovering candy.

  • i have the opportunity to arrange the candy in different ways. a lot of spare creative energy has gone towards making different little patterns of jellybeans that still fit within a gift box.

  • i can put whatever i want in gift boxes, as long as it's smaller than the lid. but they can do more than just candy, too. there's one gift box in the demo that spits out a (slightly alarmed) vaccoon when you open it. you don't need the vaccoon for anything; it's just a little surprise.

  • i always felt like the empty question mark blocks left a trail of... cold, "dead" blocks in my wake. gift boxes simply open and fall away, which to me feels like i'm tidying something up.

also the way the lid falls over is just very satisfying to me. i don't know what it is. i just enjoy it a lot. i would probably open gift boxes even knowing there's nothing inside at all. they're like a fidget toy. they're nice to fiddle with!

But there is an elephant in the room


so, the gift boxes are solid, and once you open them, they are no longer solid. and that... really, really, really invites "puzzles" like this:

lexy stands underneath a gift box, above which is a heart; she clearly cannot reach the heart without standing on the gift box

it's almost a trap for the unwary level designer. because it feels like a puzzle — we have a set of objects, and interacting with them one way will yield success, but interacting with them another way will not. is that not a puzzle? and it's so simple! who could resist?

but it sucks. it's not just that you can softlock this contraption; that isn't quite enough to write something off, though it's close. the real problem is threefold:

  1. you can softlock this contraption before you realize it's a puzzle, meaning you never had a chance to solve it in the first place.

  2. the game trains you to perform the action (opening the giftbox) that causes the softlock. until now, it's rewarded you every time you've done so! so not only has it subverted your expectations here, but it's mocking you for... what, not having expected it to trick you?

  3. as a result, a player who has encountered this puzzle even once will likely be skeptical of every gift box for the rest of the game. they INSTANTLY change from being a fun fidget toy to being a suspected trap, every single time. the player may never trust them again, and rightfully so.

after a couple early experiments with this sort of "puzzle", i resolved never to do this. and to the best of my knowledge, every single pickup in the demo could still be obtained even if every gift box were deleted from the game.

but i've still had a few players comment on how as soon as they realized that gift boxes were destructible platforms, they became slightly more hesitant about opening them.

i can't very well demonstrate via gameplay that i'm not going to do something unfair, of course, so i'm not sure what else i can do about this. but for what it's worth, hearing that made me realize that i've trained myself out of standing on gift boxes at all while playtesting.

so i know there are a few places where gift boxes work as shortcuts or alternate solutions, or even let you solve a puzzle earlier than you could otherwise... but they are, generally, intended to always be safe to open. they are presents, after all.


You must log in to comment.

in reply to @lexyeevee's post:

I get where those comments are coming from. Even if you strive to avoid creating certain expectations, they're still genre expectations being set by other games who do not treat the player the same way you are.

I'm not a game dev so I'm speaking out of turn here, but did you consider making them not platforms? Like what if standing on top opened the box just the same way as bopping it from underneath. This would remove the mechanical possibility that a gift box could be useful un-opened. Of course, trade-off being those "secrets" there they provide an alternate solution.

there are several fair-er types of mini puzzle i can do with them as they are, and pretty much anything that would make the boxes less "temporary" would break those, which seems like a shame :/

what if you made a little line of passthrough platform available at the top edge, even if the boxes are open? that way you can still stand on the 'empty' box, but it still 'feels' like it's been opened cuz you can crouch and fall through it instead of just being able to stand on it when it's closed

earnest question/thinking out loud, do you think this would be helped by introducing puzzles where opening giftboxes creates a path rather than closes one? say, a wall of boxes you need to get under first to clear, a button hidden in one, or a transformation that lets lexy interact with them in some way, to signal that if they're ever necessary for a puzzle then you as the dev will make sure the player has the necessary means?

I actually find it interesting that you think this sort of "puzzle" is harmful. If I were to design a puzzle game like this, it would be a common trick. You perhaps might have noticed that while opening a gift box can block a path, doing so can also open a path. So puzzles can get as far as, "in what order should you open the gift boxes so you can collect everything?" I'm thinking of a variety of puzzle games: Sokoban lets you push a box to a corner, Sokobond lets you bond atoms with no way to separate them after, Baba Is You lets you destroy objects entirely.

That said, you have your own vision for the game. In fact, I believe you said you wanted fox flux to be a platformer game first and foremost, that only happens to have puzzles. If you don't want it to be an aspect of the game, that's perfectly fine. I'm just saying, it's equally as valid to make it an integral part of the game. But only if you wish it to be.

bear in mind:

  • in sokoban and baba, you can undo a move. in fox flux, you cannot
  • in sokoban and baba, you can see the entire level at all times. in fox flux, you cannot

it's not that i don't want to have puzzles like "how do you open the boxes in order to get everything" — it's that i don't want the player to have to second-guess whether there's a puzzle at all every time they see a gift box. because it might not be obvious at a glance; perhaps there's something a little further offscreen that needs additional work to reach, but it's high enough that you can't see it when standing underneath the boxes. they're intended to appear fairly consistently throughout the game, so having to inspect every cluster of them to convince yourself they're not necessary for some platforming would add a huge amount of friction to the 95% of cases when they're just there for funsies.

but i'm not opposed to playing with them, as long as it's clear that's what's happening. it feels like something i might make dedicated, perhaps secret, levels around — after convincing the player that gift boxes are generally safe. maybe i'll make a separate sprite that behaves the same way, but visually suggests somehow that it's intended for a puzzle? (that even opens the door for mind games where there's a "puzzle box" out in the open and the puzzle is to figure out how on earth it could be important)

Both valid arguments, although you can replace the example with Braid instead. (And with green objects, you can't undo things by just rewinding.) I think the key is that, once the player realizes the issue, it shouldn't take much work to get there. Games with undo do this easily; games like Braid tend to have smaller levels to reduce that friction.

i don't want the player to have to second-guess whether there's a puzzle at all every time they see a gift box.

I think this returns back to how you want fox flux to be a platformer first and foremost, and a "nice" one in a way, one that doesn't want to trick its players. Which, again, is perfectly fine to do! You can play it fully straight all the way. Your idea of having a "puzzle box" sprite can also be interesting.

I got reminded of two games I played that did secrets in an interesting way. Just to emphasize, you can design fox flux the way you've already been doing and be perfectly fine. I'm just giving these as some food for thought, as examples of what other games do.

In A Monster's Expedition, the map is covered with clouds. Whenever you find an island, the cloud over that island is lifted up. Now, the "main islands" are telegraphed well: your next destination is usually partly visible through the clouds so you can plan your solution. However, there are also numerous secret islands off the path, and these are normally barely visible if at all.

If you wanted to search for these secret islands, you normally would have to just pray and try: build a solution to explore off an island in a different direction than suggested (which itself may or may not be possible), and once you did that, there's no telling whether you would actually find a secret island or not. However, once you finish the main game, most of the cloud is lifted; everything that's not hiding anything is gone. So all remaining clouds do hide islands, and your search space is reduced considerably.

In N Step Steve: Part 1, there are numerous secret stars scattered over the map. They are plainly visible, but they look impossible to get, and the game even suggests you to leave and return later if you need so. Turns out, at the very end of the game, you learn about an entirely new mechanic -- or well, the mechanic has always been there, but it wasn't used anywhere. That mechanic is the key for all these stars.

With respect to fox flux:

  • The AME example says, you can have secrets that might at first be obnoxious to search, but once you finish the game, it now tells you more precisely where the secrets are. For your puzzle box example, it might mean turning some of the gift boxes into puzzle boxes.
  • The NSS example says, you may introduce a new technique that opens up more puzzles, giving a reason for players to revisit old levels. Maybe you never use the fact that gift boxes are platforms, until the very end of the game where you teach that to the player, and hope the player catches on that so many things in the past could have relied on that.

(And just to repeat again: these are just food for thought. You're perfectly fine not to use them.)

braid does also design itself so that it's generally difficult to get a green object in a state such that you have to restart the whole level

i do have some ideas for (possibly several tiers of) secret levels/areas, and i will probably throw all the niceties out the window and fill them with all the garbage i've been holding back on. these kinds of thoughts are definitely more about the main game, the stuff between the beginning and the end

(i never 100%ed AME, i still have like seven left 😩 knowing where they are isn't even a total giveaway!)

(and i found NSS a little tedious so i didn't get very far, but now i'm extremely curious what it could possibly have as a hidden mechanic)

((edit: lmao nevermind i know what it is))

(((edit 3: no wait i totally beat this before? i thought it was really long for some reason)))

these kinds of thoughts are definitely more about the main game, the stuff between the beginning and the end

That's understandable, yes. I think I missed that from the post. I think secrets to find post-game are fun and add more value to the game, so I'm all for putting them in. But it's going to be tricky to design it in a way so a casual player won't accidentally stumble on them (which would lead to looking at each gift box excessively, yes).

Yes, knowing where AME secrets are isn't a giveaway; on the contrary, it helps reducing the arguably boring part of "is there a secret here? no? and here?" and make you just focus on "how do i get here?"

NSS Part 1 wasn't very long, although as its name states, it's mostly an introduction to Part 2 where it gets even bigger and harder. Part 2 also introduces one such mechanic.