Upgrades and Progression

[I_smell]

Just starting an open discussion here, I've been thinking about upgrade trees and progression systems. It's typical for new designers to know that they want an upgrade path in a game, because they loved unlocking objects 1, 2 and 3 in a game, and so start building out an attractive unlock system, but I get pretty skeptical whenever I see this plan forming. I've been recently finding them useful as discreet tools to control pace, and organize tutorials over time for a design that you've finished and closed the book on.

 

If you've made a game that's truly too much to take in at once, like The Witcher or Kerbal Space Program or Civilization, then pacing out those features can be a great long-term tutorial.
Another case might be if you want people to develop a routine of taking detours and switching their focus. Unlocking a character in a fighting game is a good nudge that it's time to back out and try something else, and adversely Grand Theft Auto might lock those 3 districts for now to maintain focus, then unfold later when you've got a good grip on how to drive around and accept missions.

 

I think a weak approach to an unlock or progression system would be to make a tight design, like Devil Daggers or Downwell, and then come up with extras and twists that dilute or distract from what you've come up with. If you're sitting around brainstorming upgrades; maybe your design is actually just finished, or needs to be finished.

 

What do you guys think about some really stand-out great progression systems? Or really terrible ones? Have you ever worked on them before? They're very different in mobile games and online competitive games, but I don't think they're 100% out of place.

[itsamoose]

I'm not sure if this would count as a progression system per se, but I really enjoyed the way that Starcraft 2 (all games) introduced new units.  Each time you unlocked a new unit, you would be put into a mission where you could spend maybe 2-3 units just working with that one, and then happen upon a base where you could build more of that unit.  Then for the first few minutes after, when the mission started in earnest, you would be put up against units that were directly countered by the newly unlocked unit, and later on a unit that countered it.  Granted something like this isn't an easy thing to do, and is a bit hand holdy, but it solved the problem many progression systems face where you don't really understand what it is you'll be unlocking or working with next particularly for people unfamiliar with the language of the game.  The mission in Wings of liberty where you are introduced to the siege tank is a pretty good example of this.

 

[juv3nal]

I don't have much to say here, but I think the example of metroidvanias in general might be of instructive(?). I guess they fall under the category of "develop a routine of taking detours and switching their focus."

 

Partly what I like about metroidvanias is that they will typically show you as-yet-inacessible areas, so it serves as a kind of teaser. There are times as well where it could be a kind of a puzzle where the game will have areas accessible with upgrade A and areas accessible with upgrade B, but there might be a third set of areas accessible with upgrade A and B used in combination in some not-immediately-obvious way.

[I_smell]

I think design-wise I would approach a Metroid game on paper, designing a fairly linear progression of combat and puzzle scenarios. I'd come up with a game where you simply unlock the missile 3 meters away from the missile door- which is how most games work!

Maybe this is how Metroid started out. Maybe they were inspired by the practice of back-tracking and key-finding for extending the play-time of other games. Maybe it was a space-saving measure too. I don't think it's an intuitive structure that you'd stumble into as a designer these days.

 

Similarly I've been thinking about Pokemon a lot recently (OBVIOUSLY), and they do a similar thing with the bicycle bridge, the giant Snorlax blocking the road, and required abilities like CUT and SURF. In Pokemon games, these are not only progress blockers, but they're almost always a double-whammy of an upgrade. The road to Fuschia City could've just required a rusty key like Resident Evil, but it requires a BICYCLE that you can ride forever onwards!

I bet this was already a planned feature for the game, but tying it into the progress gates was a great choice.

 

A bit of a more open example might be the Hyrule Field in Ocarina of Time. You get the bombs and there's more to see, you get the gauntlets and there's more to see, etc. Considering that you only ever find Rupee rewards behind these locks though, I think this example might be just an economical way to support the items. Maybe it's an effort to make them feel like incredible utilities while also making the game world feel full of potential and secrets to the very end.

 

 never thought of that as an effect of unlocking things; just reaffirming that there's more in here and you're still far away from being done.