Games Unlockable Content.

[taurusnipple]

Today on G4TV there was a call in show with the subject of 'should games have unlockables' ...along those lines. Jist of it was that the three hosts wanted games to have no unlockable content, that this content should be availible from the start of the game, 'because it's what we paid for' & 'we shouldn't have to complete the game on one difficulty just to unlock a harder setting' TBH I'm fuming at this show. My thoughts on this are that games which offer this content try to provide a longer lasting gaming experiance. F-Zero is a great example of this. If I had everything F-Zero had to offer from the start I wouldn't have been playing the game as long as I did, it's forcing me to become a better player and I'm reaping the rewards by doing so. Rant over.

[ryodi]

Sonic Mega Collection. To unlock all the games you have to start each game at least 30 times. Whoever thought that was a good idea should be shot. Repeatedly. My mood has not been improved by the fact I wasted ?4 on Cube (which is a dire magazine) for a cheat disk to unlock those games and the disk doesn't bloody work ft:

[Crispin]

With the utmost respect, I have to disagree. I was fuming when I bought TS2. Great, I thought! I can play all those cool modes that the mags were harping on about. Got it and found the stuff I wanted to sit down and play immediately, was locked and ages away from unlocking, given the harsh, sequential nature of the challenges. I couldn't even try the challenges where I wanted to unlock the content.

It took me 10 months to forgive that game. Now, I think it's the third best FPS ever, but I still wish it had more available at the start. TBH I shouldn't be surprised. Major unlockables have been Rare's trait in games. Shouldn't expect Free Radical to differ too much.

I can understand having singleplayer unlockables. But multiplayer? Not much fun in the early days of any title. Can only play one mode or level. It was a bit disappointing as it has a pick up and play dynamic about it just perfect for multiplayer.

How about singleplayer has unlockables, but multi doesn't. That gives you a chance to play and practice for the singleplayer.

Robotech is the worst offender. The multiplayer, after hours of playing, stands at between one or two maps IIRC. One map. What a joke.

[taurusnipple]

But Crispin isn't that the mags fault for providing you with a misconception? You got the idea from them that levels/modes/weapons were availible from the oft, thus you were dissappointed. I see your point, but if you have a multiplayer game, and as an example you have all the levels/weapons availible for it at the start then the single player game holds less surprise for the player.

[Crispin]

Ah, but TS2 really came into it's own in multiplayer. I'm not saying get rid of multiplayer unlockables, just get the balance right. A person's crapness in singleplayer mode. should not hinder their friend's fun in multiplayer. They should go hand in hand. Perhaps make multiplayer unlockables, only unlocked by playing multiplayer (say time spent in total in multiplayer - not too long though, as you spend less time in it usually). And the singleplayer would have seperate unlockables.

They could both have say ten or twelve maps or something, common to both and then playing each mode unlocks modes/maps specific to them. Makes sense, after all. Stealth based levels in singleplayer would not necessarily work in multiplayer.

I love Rare (I think they're one of the top five developers in the world), but I always feel they get the whole multiplayer balance wrong. I still haven't unlocked everything in Goldeneye.
Perhaps they and Free radical should take a leaf out of Bungie's book. Everything in multiplayer is unlocked. Give lots on options in multiplayer to give it some longeivity.
In singleplayer, give lots of "cute" unlockables. Such an anaconda. That was fun in TS2. I liked that.

[Ghost]

Those presenters are idiots, imo Its these 'extras' that add life to the games. I mean one of the best things about Goldeneye (for me at least) was trying to unlock all of the cheats, the same applies to other games like Smash Bros Melee, Soul Calibur 2 and the resident evil games.

What I dont agree with though is downloadable content which is what alot of xbox games are doing at the moment, all the people who dont go on xbox live (which, lets face it, is most people) cant get all of the content that they should, why should we have to pay ?25 a month (plus ?40 annual subscription) to unlock levels/extras in a game we have already paid ?40 for ft:

[Crispin]

Those presenters are idiots, imo Its these 'extras' that add life to the games. I mean one of the best things about Goldeneye (for me at least) was trying to unlock all of the cheats, the same applies to other games like Smash Bros Melee, Soul Calibur 2 and the resident evil games.

What I dont agree with though is downloadable content which is what alot of xbox games are doing at the moment, all the people who dont go on xbox live (which, lets face it, is most people) cant get all of the content that they should, why should we have to pay ?25 a month (plus ?40 annual subscription) to unlock levels/extras in a game we have already paid ?40 for ft:

Yeah. I noticed how as soon as Splinter Cell had two brand spanking new levels on Live, all the "technical problems" stopping them from releasing Kola Cell on a demo disc with OXM UK, magically disappeared. What a coincidence.

D/L content can be a bad thing. Especially for me, and the vast majority (and it still is a vast majority) who don't have live for whatever reason. And we don't want developers to start thinking of it as a possible solution to releasing buggy games. The two buggiest games in the world that I have played were both Xbox exclusive (at least for three months) - Splinter Cell and KOTOR.

[Manta Ray vs Guitar]

It's a matter of implementation.
Locking does sound really stupid if you argue about it, but it can add a lot of incentive. If the things are unlocked by having you accomplish certain tasks, it's just a part of the game - it sets a challenge for you to overcome and gives a more tangible reward than a CONGRATULATION or a string of numbers.
Does it feel like they're just pointlessly locking stuff away, or does it feel like they're rewarding you for skillful play with bonus material?
I guess that's the trick.

[rjpageuk]

Does it feel like they're just locked away, or does it feel like they're rewarding you?
I guess that's the thing.

I think this is a key point.

Time, or number of play style unlockables (e.g play 30 times, or play for 10 hours) really feel locked away rather than a real reward, whereas unlockables for completing on easy, or for doing a particular task tend to feel more as rewards.

Personally I hate unlockables of the first described type, there is nothing more annoyning then than losing your save or something and not being able to instantly get the unlockables back.

[Crispin]

Yeah, having to play through SSB:M over 20 or something times just to unlock the final character wasn't skill. It was a test of your ability to put up with with something that taxes your patience.

Skill rewards are satisfying. But you should be able to determine when you "sit the test" as it were. In TS2 if you couldn't complete one event then you were buggered. Didn't matter how easy you found the next one along, you were still buggered.

But the vast majority of multiplayer content should be unlocked from the word go. Pretty characters are fine as unlockables. But modes? Is a sin. If you get the balance wrong then most players will get bored before they are able to unlock these modes that give the game crucial longeivity.

How do you feel about Super Monkey Ball.
On the one hand it rewards skill. On the other, since certain stages seem impossible (launchers and coin slot in the second version), you are reduced to playing the early ones again and again in order to unlock the modes. For only the most super skilled players will it not feel like a chore (since they can accumulate enough in one go through). For the majority, it is wearisome. Especially since it has to be done for each mode you want to unlock.

Ultimately it is all about balance. And not repetition. And skill. Up to a point. And multiplayer modes/maps shouldn't ever be dependent on singleplayer skill or hours logged in singleplayer.

I was so disappointed when I unlocked the Ikaruga art stuff just through playing it for long enough. Didn't give me a chance to achieve something.

That said, I doubt I'll ever beat it in 1 credit, so the later options are appreciated.

[rjpageuk]

Yeah Ikaruga is a little different.

For those that do not know, the unlockables are unlocked upon completing certain very difficult tasks, such as 1 crediting the game. However, they are also unlocked after a certain number of hours, if you havent already unlocked them.

This was fine, although I did lose my 100 hour + save on Ikaruga, and then couldnt play in Prototype mode until I 1 credited the game again, which ended up being a real pain.

Really I think nothing should have been locked in either Ikaruga or Super Monkey Ball, after all why should you have to play SMB it for ages in single player before you can play the multiplayer options?! It doesnt make any real sense.

Unlockables, as Crispin has sort of eluded at, should be confined to their area of implimentation. Unlock single player stuff for single player actions, and multiplayer stuff for multiplayer action.

[tankplanker]

Multiple & exclusive unlock conditions is the way to do it; that way its much harder to get frustrated at your inability to complete just one task to unlock a really cool feature.

As a last resort, developers should be forced to include a selection of cheats issued to the magazine a month or two post release that selectivly unlocks everything for anyone really struggling.

Unlocking through repetition gets boring, with the worst case having to complete an identical but slightly harder game (Devil May Cry) over and over to unlock the content. Whats the point in locking away content if only a few people get to see it, as everyone else got bored trying?

[mid]

"Unlockables, as Crispin has sort of eluded at, should be confined to their area of implimentation. Unlock single player stuff for single player actions, and multiplayer stuff for multiplayer action."

Absolutely. I'm of the more general opinion that multiplayer stuff that actually affects gameplay shouldn't need unlocking at all. By all means have extra player models, skins and silly cheaty things as unlockables, but I should be able to play all the basic multiplayer modes on all maps with mates as soon as I've bought the game.

In 1-player, however, unlockables are a good idea. If you can't handle the slow cars well enough to win a few games there is little point in being handed twitchy monsters of supercars. Being able to play through a story with a silly character without doing it first the way the game was intended is pointless, and so on.

[Bassman]

I am not a huge fan of unlocakbles. If I play a "Beat 'em up" I am rubbish so games like DOA3 are somewhat limited for me in the state they come in. Mostly I like them for two player games.

In my opinion Project Gotham Racing had is exactly right as far as I was concerned. You had the "Nosliw" user name which unlocked absolutely everything AND (!!) you could save it. That made it great for two player action. Why bother about single player? I played the single player until I reached a point I could go no further. I was on the last set of races (excluding the Bonus) and the only car of consequence I could not unlock was the F50. But again with "Nosliw" I could go drive it any time. I would be extremely happy if more games were like this. I just hope that they continue with the same thing for PGR2.

OK, with the PS2 or Gamecube I have the luxury of an Action Replay, but then that in a sense "spoils" the single player in that you cheat to get everything unlocked and then can't be bothered to go back to do the single player properly. OK, if the game has the option for multiple saves then this isn't an issue, but not all games have that option.

[rjpageuk]

Unlockables are almost always a way for the devlopers to artificially extend the life of the game to try and make it appear much longer than it is.

This is really down to the games culture nowadays - it seems people want games to be as long as possible. Average Joe will cry now if a game is less than 10 hours long, yet in the SNES era hardly a single game was anywhere near this.

Solution make a 5 hour game which has to be played through 10 times. Voila!

If you use the solution to this problem posted in the previous post - a username or some method to unlock all the unlockables, it wont help this. People will just use it then complain it was only a 5 hour game, and that there is no incentive to get the unlockables, because you can just enter the name and get them all from the start.

Anyhow, I suppose I am going off at a tangent now, because I am now longer discussing what is best for a game IMO, but rather what Average Joe (and mainstream reviews) expect from games.