Geometry Dash Is Bad Game Design
| Back On Track  38 posts | Post by 70UNIKITTY on Aug 21, 2019 1:53:43 GMT -5Many of my levels (especially recently) have quite good decoration, yet many have commented on bad gameplay. To me I personally don't care about gameplay much, as long as it syncs with the music and has no bypasses. I care more about the decoration of the level (BG, block design, art) instead of the gameplay and I think it's more important than gameplay, because as of right now, there are many tools to at least create good decoration and decoration is basically a level's first impression. How much do you care about the gameplay and if so, do you think it should be more important than a level's decoration? |
| My latest level: TREE OF LIFE ID: 60501308 |
| 0 posts | Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2019 3:52:52 GMT -5I have a view on this that differs from others I find. Geometry Dash at its core is a rage game inspired by The Impossible Game. It irks me when people say that fun gameplay should be required for a rate. Of course though, people are playing this game for fun, and fun levels are preferable. But levels with frustrating, unnatural or inconsistent gameplay have their charm in this game as well. Geometry Dash is sort of all about becoming frustrated and working through that frustration until you beat the level and come out victorious. Sometimes having trouble with a level and having a horrible time beating it can be better, because when you BEAT it, it's the best feeling on the planet, and you become proud of what you've done. You can say, 'I beat this level!!' with satisfaction. Not everything in this game is gonna be a fun ride, otherwise it might even be more boring. Breezing through levels can be great but when it happens too much it's just meh. So, I'll always defend levels that have 'bad gameplay'. Besides, some people might find it fun anyways while you don't. There's always going to be somebody who finds a level fun because it's such a subjective thing. Anyways that's a 'pro player' perspective on this I suppose. I like actually having a journey with my hardest completions and a story with them rather than just playing them |
Post by Ezel on Aug 21, 2019 4:28:01 GMT -5I care about gameplay a lot, however it's subjective what do you find bad or unfun. I have specific elements I enjoy, and that usually differs for every player. For example I like really fast paced gameplay that's easy to read, but other people might like for example difficult and unusual timings. It's all up to the person. There are things that people don't like in general though, such as sudden transitions, poorly placed portals, janky hitboxes, etc. | |
| My IGN: Ezel142 |
| Polargeist  78 posts | Post by Yendis on Aug 21, 2019 9:09:12 GMT -5Gameplay is extremely important if you expect people to want to play your levels, Geometry Dash is a game after all so of course it's a very prioritised factor. I personally didn't get into GD for the design aspects, and I don't keep playing for them - there are better suited softwares for creating art & designs than GD, so i find people saying they don't prioritise or care about gameplay/game-design in levels (They're called levels not art showcases lmao) very strange. A level should be a gameplay experience guided by decoration, not just focused purely on just showing off art or design as in my opinion it defeats the point of the medium. Limit testing the editor in your levels can be fun to watch on youtube or something, but in most senses those levels aren't actually played or completed by many people in-game (This is also why RobTop doesn't rate levels with bad gameplay often, or laggy levels). The above reasons are also why people value gameplay a lot. Because if they actually want to y'know, play the game, they don't want to slog through a level that is about as enjoyable as dragging their nails on a chalk board. Also on the note of gameplay being only subjective, I don't think that's necessarily true. For the most part people often overlook that a level's gameplay is way more than just a layout. Using colour, lighting and synced decorations can add to the satisfaction & clarity of ones gameplay -or detract if used incorrectly. Really gameplay is all about execution of game design concepts, and people will often quite consistently lean towards & enjoy gameplay that is clear & well synced - and as there are many creators who have generally agreeable gameplay quality (Taman, Haon, Lemons) I'd say it's not even close to as subjective as people think. Sorry for randomly ranting with a post out of the blue, but this is a subject I'm passionate about & I couldn't resist chiming in |
| Retired level judge & creator guy. |
(Now I'll go back to being dead on here)
Post by jordan853 on Aug 21, 2019 9:45:07 GMT -5I don't care about the gameplay too much when deciding whether I think a level is rate-worthy or not but when it comes to whether I like the level or not, I care about it a lot. If a level has good design but shitty gameplay, I'll still think the level is rate-worthy but I'll consider it as an awful level. At the same time, if the level has shitty design but good gameplay, I won't think the level is rate-worthy, but I'll consider it as a much better level. | |
| I'm bad at making good arguments. Top 10 hardest demons I've beaten *3 and 4 are interchangeable* |
| 0 posts | Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2019 10:24:25 GMT -5i care immensely about gameplay, nothing pisses me off more than 1 section of a level where a creator goes full idiot mode and makes something awful to play. if you're going to make a bad gameplay part, at least make it easy so it isn't annoying, but generally as a whole just make gameplay have 3 things: good sync (not over the top tho), good transitions and most of all enjoyable to play! also because gameplay is subjective make stuff you enjoy personally, that's always important |
Post by gamecubeguy214 on Aug 21, 2019 12:24:56 GMT -5I do care about gameplay, but whether it's fun or not is not the only defining factor. It's bad if it's buggy and luck based, but if it's just annoying and the level functions properly, it still works and is a good level. If gameplay has to be fun for it to be good, Krmal would be a bad creator. But the truth is, he is good at fulfilling the goal of making an annoying level, so his level is successful at achieving what it wants to, and therefore good. Gameplay can also be bad if it's too repetitive. Game Over and Punchdrunk are just jokes, but if you make a genuine level and your gameplay is copypasted, that's not good either. Basically, gameplay is good if there is effort put into it to make it function. Being fun is not mandatory, but I do think there needs to be both fun levels and annoying levels in the game so that there is variety. | |
| I love insane demons! |
Post by Atlantist on Aug 21, 2019 23:23:30 GMT -5I'm not a player, I'm a spectator. I haven't opened GD in months. Gameplay is the least of my concerns; the only time it concerns me is when it concerns people I'm interested in. In all other cases, as long as it looks good, I'll fuck with any level. | |
| Signed, Atlantist |
| 0 posts | Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2019 0:42:26 GMT -5You can have the most immaculate decoration in the world, but it's utterly pointless if the player becomes so frustrated that they quit out before they ever get to see it. Gameplay is the core of the level when it comes to the player and is the key determinant in the enjoyment of the level. You can have fun playing a layout with no decoration at all, because the gameplay is what you're actually doing to interact with the level. Obviously it's also going to be fucking boring to actually look at, but that's sort of the point with the layout. The gameplay is the foundation, and the decoration builds upon it to create an atmosphere and guide the player through the gameplay in a more presentable way. Note how this doesn't really work with the converse. A level with decoration but no gameplay is just a movie. Another thing I've noticed in previous posts in this thread is that annoying gameplay is what creates fulfillment, and I'd have to disagree. Ultimately the achievement of beating a level is what creates that pride. However the journey to completion doesn't have to excruciating on the player to achieve that. What this assumes is that the reward comes from the satisfaction of getting through the pain and finally having the level be over, which honestly sounds more like relief than accomplishment. The pride is supposed to come with oneself in the skills and investment they had to put in to beat the level. I can spend 1000 attempts on a fucking abhorrent level, with terrible transitions, buggy transitions, unreadable sequences and offscreen jumps, invisible portals, ridiculous memorization, and just about every possible thing that can make a level infuriating to play. But when I get to the end of the level, I'm not thinking "yes I finally beat i I'm so happy", I'm thinking "holy god fucking shit finally this fucking shit is over what a fucking waste of my life that was". Obviously people react differently than this psycho, but the thing about bad gameplay is that no matter how skilled the player is, it sets everyone at a disadvantage, whether it's not knowing what's coming up or other stuff. And if getting better at the game still yields the same results of dying at these annoying places everyone else is, then what's the point of even trying to get better then? Gameplay should really aim to level the playing field in a good way, and in theory anything with adequate skill should be able to one attempt any level. This sort of pertains more to bad obstructive gameplay though. That covers bad gameplay in terms of "annoying". As for just in general bad gameplay in terms of "boring", which usually equates to repetition and lack of dynamics/smooth flow, it's the complete other side of the spectrum. This eliminates the journey all together, and equates to mindless tapping to avoid the ceiling/floor, tapping over single spikes on the ground level 10 times in a row, or orb spam. By making bad gameplay, you are disconnecting the player from the immersion of the level and devolving your level into nothing more than cookie clicker. The player needs to have a fair shot at beating the level, but they also need some sort of challenge. They need to be actively doing something to keep their attention up. The more you see something, the less of an impact it makes in reoccurring instances. The first time you saw a triple spike, it probably seemed like an insane timing. After years of seeing triple spikes, it's probably no biggie and you don't even care. That's the long term though, speaking in the short term 80-90 seconds of a level's span, things can turn repetitive in even as little as two iterations. If you don't make the player actually do something, then your level will simply fade into obscurity with the others if they haven't already fallen asleep and hit their head on the exit button. So in conclusion, while decoration is important, it should never be prioritized over gameplay. Ultimately we play levels to do exactly that: play them. Video games are intended for recreation and fun after all, and to challenge us in different ways. If decoration is truly the main focus and you're going to neglect gameplay for it, then you might as well just make an auto level. Any annoyances in the gameplay should not be the fault of the level itself, but because of the errors in playing it made by the player. Not only that, but the level should pose a variety of challenging situations as well (with the difficulty being a general guideline for the base skill level needed), and the combination of both of these is what should generate the satisfaction when they finally overcome it. |
Post by burrito1 on Aug 22, 2019 16:27:53 GMT -5 I don't care about the gameplay too much when deciding whether I think a level is rate-worthy or not but when it comes to whether I like the level or not, I care about it a lot. If a level has good design but shitty gameplay, I'll still think the level is rate-worthy but I'll consider it as an awful level. At the same time, if the level has shitty design but good gameplay, I won't think the level is rate-worthy, but I'll consider it as a much better level. Why would you want awful levels to be rated though? The whole point of the rating system is to showcase good levels. | |
Post by gdphoenix888 on Aug 30, 2019 21:05:49 GMT -5lmao when JY calls himself a psycho honestly though gameplay is really important in levels because it doesn't matter how you decorate when you have a straight fly section at 84% that everyone is yelling at you about because it's unbalanced. gameplay is meant to be fun and at the most bug free. because bugs make the player feel like they are cheated and that the reason they died was cheap as hell. | |
| just a normal guy who plays gd and osu. i've left the forums for good. bye. |
Geometry Dash Is Bad Game Design
Source: http://gdforum.freeforums.net/thread/62143/ti-serious-care-gameplay-levels
Posted by: arnohaductincer.blogspot.com
0 Response to "Geometry Dash Is Bad Game Design"
Post a Comment