Denial

Yet another game aesthetics question. Sometimes I have a lot of extra memory. I could use the space to add bonus rounds or ending sequences or whatever. With story-less games like Tetris, these additions would seem pointless to me. So, the other option would be instructions.

How would you prefer a programmer use precious space? Instructions could be made available in outside documents. And some games (especially smaller games like those for the VIC) should be fairly intuitive. I would hope instructions are not needed. They may actually be annoying after one is used to playing (even if you can skip them with a press of the trigger).

I know it really depends on the game, but I am asking in general. Of course, language becomes an issue as well.

There's a 64 cracking group called Hokutoforce and I love their releases because they include descriptions of the games as well as instructions and trainers. I really appreciate the effort they put into their releases. I think having everything in one is a great idea so I voted yes.

No other instructions than controls and maybe some score details. If there are other instructions necessary, they should be accessed through a menu.

i'd much rather see extras like more sound, presentation graphics and so forth... instructions could be added in the same way groups like Hokuto Force or Nostalgia do, by compressing the game first and then linking the documentation to that compressed file but "traditionally" the docs were on the tape inlay and meant to fill the bus journey home from the shops. =-)

In the case of the VIC, I'd rather the space was used for extra graphics, sound, levels, etc. than instructions. I still really like games being released on real disk / tape / cart, so put the instructions on paper with them

TMR wrote:"traditionally" the docs were on the tape inlay and meant to fill the bus journey home from the shops.

mmm... this is true only for "official" releases. I spent my childhood playing with some pirate or otherwise home-made programs, sold on cassettes in the newsstand. They often had their magazine with all the instructions, but they also enclosed a short on-screen description of the game. Sometimes, the text came out with a teletype sound. This added more "computer" feeling to the game, in the particular way of thinking "computers" back then.

That's why I voted for in-game instructions.

I wonder if other Countries around the world had such a "newsstand cassette magazine" phenomenon.

Here are examples related to the very first computer game I had:

Mag cover and cassette:



Screenshot of instructions:

If the instructions are complex, you may want to print them anyway instead of reading off screen, in particular 22 columns.

What is really cool is if you make some game which has a "document" window on the upper or lower part, and then the main game window next to it. In that way, you could display live instructions, hints and messages as the game keeps playing. It makes the instructions a natural part of the game, but may limit the playfield a bit.

carlsson wrote:What is really cool is if you make some game which has a "document" window on the upper or lower part, and then the main game window next to it. In that way, you could display live instructions, hints and messages as the game keeps playing. It makes the instructions a natural part of the game, but may limit the playfield a bit.

Carlsson has the craziest ideas.

No, really. In this day, many games have been seperated from the original documentation. I am often thankful for instruction screens. But how many of us actually read instructions when provided. I would think most just dive in and try to figure it out first.

I think the best games usually require little or no instructions at all.

If they are complex enough to require detailed instructions then I supposed it is best to have them printed rather than included in the game. Especially, as Carlsson said when viewing on a 22 column display.

I like in-game instructions, but I like to be able to skip them.

Bumping an old thread. The poll at thus moment is 6 to 9 in favor of not having in-game instructions. I have a great game that will not be easy to learn without examples. I don't know if I should trust that the player will figure it out or read the instructions or walk away because the attention span for a 3k game is pretty low.

I think it's quite simple: If you think instructions are needed: Add instructions - inside or outside of the game. If the game is self-explanatory, don't add instructions.

I vote for extras

Instructions can add to the fun, like a fictional background story that makes the dots and bleeps actually mean something.

If you don't want to miss any detail of the game instructions are a good thing. Even Pong had clear instructions: "Avoid missing ball for high score." Not needed perhaps but you know right away what needs to be done without taking a test run first.

But instructions can be just as fun as the "extras" ...

I like "attract" and "demo" modes of a game, which make for the best visual training aid. Instructions need not be so complex with a lot of text -- that's best left for a Player's Guide and not taking up precious 8-bit address space.