The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
There was a post in here a few days ago on simulation games (by Fuzzy, I think) that got me thinking about one of my old favourites, Sim City. Apart from the obvious attraction of building your own metropolis, the game succeeded because it never seemed random. Despite being based on a mass of complex algorythms the PRINCIPLES around which the game was structured were made clear to the player. If your settlement was failing, therefore, its fortunes could be reversed through careful study of the situation and a good understanding of the game's underlying dynamic. This was possible for just one reason: the manual.
The Sim City instruction book is one of the few examples of a manual that desrves the name. It went beyond the 'Click X to do Y' structure that is the norm in the industry - even for complex strategy games that might warrant further explanation. So not only did you learn how to build roads but also how this infrastructure would affect traffic flows, property prices, commercial development, the environment and (naturally) the attractiveness of your city. In effect the manual functioned as a primer on urban development: and, dull as this might sound, it made the game infinitely more enjoyable.
Part of the attraction of games is a feeling of being in control, but in order for this to be achieved the player needs some understanding of the reasoning behind the game. Such an understanding comes naturally in a platform game of course, but if a developer were to produce a platformer based in a universe with different physical laws (where, for instance, something going up did not necessarily have to come down) then it would be reasonable to expect an explanation as to what on earth was going on before attempting to play it. Hopefully all would be revealed in the manual.
But in today's climate it is more likely that you would have to buy the increasingly ubiquitous 'strategy guide'. Or, as I like to call it, the instruction book that wouldn't fit in the box.
I don't expect to be given a hefty tome just to play Quake III but there are cases where a decent manual is essential to properly enjoy a game. The various Sid Meier games have excellent manuals - allowing the gameplay to become a matter of skill rather than luck. But other strategy titles, notably the spate of Sim X and Y Tycoon games, are not so well catered for. Of course it's possible to find strategy guides for free on the internet but, the question is, should we have to print up an ugly ASCII document at our own cost just to get a handle on a game that we have already paid good money for?
An objection that might be raised to my point is that games are played as an escape from school or work or university and that it shouldn't be necessary to do a lot of reading just to play a game. I agree, and console action games have in large part dispensed with the need for manuals all together, relying instead on in-game tutorials. For the simpler kind of game nothing else is needed.
But what about a game such as Gran Turismo 3? This can certainly be played as an arcade-style racer but the best of the game is in its simulation mode. Success here depends not only on good driving skills (in various kinds of car) but on tuning gears, suspension and so on. The trouble is that that the manual only runs to a few pages and so the information on these sorts of things is limited. It would be unthinkable to let a driver enter a real life race without some understanding of the physics of the car - so why do it in a game? It's impossible to win GT3 at higher difficulty levels without knowing something about drag, traction and so on; not to mention the difference between FF, FR, 4WD etc. Apart from practical experience (limited by the speeds you need to race at!) this kind of knowledge isn't easily acquired. Why then is it neccessary to buy a strategy guide to find this all out? Why not just put it in the manual? I don't want an engineering textbook on the subject but a few pages making the fundamentals clear would be sufficient.
The obvious objection is cost. But, at a time when the industry is getting increasingly vocal about piracy, the need to add value to original games is important. If all we get with a game is a pretty box and flyers for upcoming titles, then this just pushes more and more people away from legitimate sellers to car-boot pirates.
A decent manual wouldn't just increase enjoyment of a game but might also boost its sales.
The Sim City instruction book is one of the few examples of a manual that desrves the name. It went beyond the 'Click X to do Y' structure that is the norm in the industry - even for complex strategy games that might warrant further explanation. So not only did you learn how to build roads but also how this infrastructure would affect traffic flows, property prices, commercial development, the environment and (naturally) the attractiveness of your city. In effect the manual functioned as a primer on urban development: and, dull as this might sound, it made the game infinitely more enjoyable.
Part of the attraction of games is a feeling of being in control, but in order for this to be achieved the player needs some understanding of the reasoning behind the game. Such an understanding comes naturally in a platform game of course, but if a developer were to produce a platformer based in a universe with different physical laws (where, for instance, something going up did not necessarily have to come down) then it would be reasonable to expect an explanation as to what on earth was going on before attempting to play it. Hopefully all would be revealed in the manual.
But in today's climate it is more likely that you would have to buy the increasingly ubiquitous 'strategy guide'. Or, as I like to call it, the instruction book that wouldn't fit in the box.
I don't expect to be given a hefty tome just to play Quake III but there are cases where a decent manual is essential to properly enjoy a game. The various Sid Meier games have excellent manuals - allowing the gameplay to become a matter of skill rather than luck. But other strategy titles, notably the spate of Sim X and Y Tycoon games, are not so well catered for. Of course it's possible to find strategy guides for free on the internet but, the question is, should we have to print up an ugly ASCII document at our own cost just to get a handle on a game that we have already paid good money for?
An objection that might be raised to my point is that games are played as an escape from school or work or university and that it shouldn't be necessary to do a lot of reading just to play a game. I agree, and console action games have in large part dispensed with the need for manuals all together, relying instead on in-game tutorials. For the simpler kind of game nothing else is needed.
But what about a game such as Gran Turismo 3? This can certainly be played as an arcade-style racer but the best of the game is in its simulation mode. Success here depends not only on good driving skills (in various kinds of car) but on tuning gears, suspension and so on. The trouble is that that the manual only runs to a few pages and so the information on these sorts of things is limited. It would be unthinkable to let a driver enter a real life race without some understanding of the physics of the car - so why do it in a game? It's impossible to win GT3 at higher difficulty levels without knowing something about drag, traction and so on; not to mention the difference between FF, FR, 4WD etc. Apart from practical experience (limited by the speeds you need to race at!) this kind of knowledge isn't easily acquired. Why then is it neccessary to buy a strategy guide to find this all out? Why not just put it in the manual? I don't want an engineering textbook on the subject but a few pages making the fundamentals clear would be sufficient.
The obvious objection is cost. But, at a time when the industry is getting increasingly vocal about piracy, the need to add value to original games is important. If all we get with a game is a pretty box and flyers for upcoming titles, then this just pushes more and more people away from legitimate sellers to car-boot pirates.
A decent manual wouldn't just increase enjoyment of a game but might also boost its sales.
Page:
very good post. Bets manual I ever came across was for Alpha Centauri on the Mac/PC. It's more like a mini-book! 200 odd pages long but it told you what you needed to know in detail and easy to find. Plus there was the story of the game, a few tactics and faction summaries that are incredibly useful. :-D
Still, very good post.
Still, very good post.
what's a blokess?
Good point there UK. I really like the Half Life manuals, as they have pictures of the weapons and info on them, and letters to you, booted with other storyline information etc that you wouldn't know otherwise. Manuals do have a use, if they are intersting.
Another good example is the Final Fantasy ones.
Another good example is the Final Fantasy ones.
Cheers for the feedback guys.
I take your points that manuals can contain way too much information or can be totally offputting. In fact, like Shaneo, I hardly ever read manuals myself. A decent game should ease you in: no study beforehand, just decent tutorials and a bit of context-sensitive help. Gran Turismo 3, with its arcade mode, and Civilization, with its handy on-screen hints, both manage this. But if a game has enough depth and quality to draw you in, then I think the publishers should provide enough info for you to get the best out of a game. In this respect Civ beats GT3 hands down. Ideally a manual should make you want to play the game - by letting you draw your own conclusions as to where and why you're going wrong.
On another note, a manual doesn't just have to be no-frills instructions. Another of my old favourites, Colonization, had a load of info on the game but also had mini histories of the various Indian tribes and South American civilisations you encountered, and potted biographies of various important figures in the colonial Americas. Might seem a bit sad, but I found all that interesting - not only did it increase my enjoyment of the game but it made me want to find out more about the subject. Educational games, who'd have thought it?
I take your points that manuals can contain way too much information or can be totally offputting. In fact, like Shaneo, I hardly ever read manuals myself. A decent game should ease you in: no study beforehand, just decent tutorials and a bit of context-sensitive help. Gran Turismo 3, with its arcade mode, and Civilization, with its handy on-screen hints, both manage this. But if a game has enough depth and quality to draw you in, then I think the publishers should provide enough info for you to get the best out of a game. In this respect Civ beats GT3 hands down. Ideally a manual should make you want to play the game - by letting you draw your own conclusions as to where and why you're going wrong.
On another note, a manual doesn't just have to be no-frills instructions. Another of my old favourites, Colonization, had a load of info on the game but also had mini histories of the various Indian tribes and South American civilisations you encountered, and potted biographies of various important figures in the colonial Americas. Might seem a bit sad, but I found all that interesting - not only did it increase my enjoyment of the game but it made me want to find out more about the subject. Educational games, who'd have thought it?
Interesting post UK. Personally I don't think that manuals are all that interesting or important. Juggling around with the game's features until you get it right is a lot more fun for me, as it allows another level of exploration. I never read the manuals (as don't another 500,000), because they just don't appeal or just put people off by the lack of colour/number of pages.
You've got lots of valid points in your post there unknown kernel, what I'd say is copy your post and mail it off to every gaming publisher there is and hope they take note.
It's just a matter of balance really. I think with Sony, and consoles in general, they have decided that gamers don't want to get bogged down in details but just want to dive in there and have fun, whereas with PC gaming, and in particular the simulation genres, more detail is necessary because it allows the player to get more out of the game.
When Gran Turismo was first released on the Sony Playstation, there was a whole host of pages at the back of the manual discussing the ins and outs of spring rates, spoiler settings, tyre selection etc., and with GT3 there was nothing in the way of this type of advice. Perhaps the publishers thought that this was purely because most users of GT3 would have already played the first game and that the information, should it be required, was widely available on the internet anyway. (And of course an 'official' strategy guide would be an extra source of income anyhow).
The danger is too much information. When I got Sim City 3000 UK Edition I was very daunted by the 104 page manual that arrived with it, and realised that to get the most out of that game I would have to study quite hard, which isn't to me what gaming is about.
If they did the same kind of thing with, say, Metal Gear Solid, most of the replay value would go out of the game because in MGS there is so much to do that most of the fun is in the discovery of these things for yourself.
So I don't mind a little extra information now and again in terms of strategy, but what I'd hate to see is spoilers in there as well.
It's just a matter of balance really. I think with Sony, and consoles in general, they have decided that gamers don't want to get bogged down in details but just want to dive in there and have fun, whereas with PC gaming, and in particular the simulation genres, more detail is necessary because it allows the player to get more out of the game.
When Gran Turismo was first released on the Sony Playstation, there was a whole host of pages at the back of the manual discussing the ins and outs of spring rates, spoiler settings, tyre selection etc., and with GT3 there was nothing in the way of this type of advice. Perhaps the publishers thought that this was purely because most users of GT3 would have already played the first game and that the information, should it be required, was widely available on the internet anyway. (And of course an 'official' strategy guide would be an extra source of income anyhow).
The danger is too much information. When I got Sim City 3000 UK Edition I was very daunted by the 104 page manual that arrived with it, and realised that to get the most out of that game I would have to study quite hard, which isn't to me what gaming is about.
If they did the same kind of thing with, say, Metal Gear Solid, most of the replay value would go out of the game because in MGS there is so much to do that most of the fun is in the discovery of these things for yourself.
So I don't mind a little extra information now and again in terms of strategy, but what I'd hate to see is spoilers in there as well.
Page: