Topic: RPG Interface preference... 2-click, verb-coin, or more?

[poc301]

Alrighty everyone, just curious as to your preference.  Consider this a poll without the GUI involved

If you were to play an adventure RPG (think along the lines of Quest for Glory), which type of cursor interface would you prefer?

1) Old-school Sierra with the Walk, Look, Use, Talk, Inventory on a taskbar/cycle via the mouse-clicks
2) Verb Coin interface
3) 2-Click interface where one mouse button looks at and the other interacts with the items

Which would you prefer?  Also, for those using the 2-click on any game at all, which layout do you like best?  Do you prefer left-click to look and right-click to interact or vice versa?  I've had beta testers on my Bake Sale game tell me they liked each of the two.  I was curious what the majority preferred

Thanks!

Bill

[CaptainD]

Generally I prefer a 2-click interface (left button interact, right button look), but the old-school verb list can add to some interesting puzzles if used right.

Though there are exception, such as Curse of Monkey Island and Gemini Rue, mostly seeing that a game has a verb coin makes me shudder.  I hate those things.

[Khris]

I also dislike verbcoins, and I too prefer the 2-button interface (left click: interact, right click: examine).

Also, when it comes to RPG battles, I prefer round based ones.

[poc301]

Good point about the battles!  I am also a fan of staged round-based battles.  The free for all clickfest, button mashing makes me cringe

-Bill

[Ascovel]

I don't like the 2-button interface - feels incredibly chaotic and limiting.

For an RPG have a look at the context-based interfaces in Quest for Glory III (IV and V possibly too - I don't remember). I thought it worked really well.

[Snarky]

As a rule of thumb, my order of preference is 2-button, LucasArts (with shortcuts!), Sierra-style, verb coin (dislike), whatever the hell you call what Telltale uses in e.g. Tales of MI (hate!). But a lot depends on the details of the design and implementation (particularly the integration with the inventory), and how well the capabilities of each design are used in the game. A nicely ergonomic, context-sensitive verb coin can be nice if it suits the game.

I don't like the 2-button interface - feels incredibly chaotic and limiting.

I guess I can see "limiting," but "chaotic"?

[poc301]

I don't like the 2-button interface - feels incredibly chaotic and limiting.

For an RPG have a look at the context-based interfaces in Quest for Glory III (IV and V possibly too - I don't remember). I thought it worked really well.

I enjoy 2-buttons for standard adventure games, it is easier than finding the right interaction mode (maybe it is just lazyness), but I tend to agree with your comment about RPGs.  It adds a layer of depth and complexity (without being overly complicated) to an RPG.  I was thinking about it, and I really don't think I'd have enjoyed the Quest For Glory series anywhere NEAR as much with a 2-button interface, and they are my all-time favorite series of games.  Likewise, my Bake Sale game, Abner the Amazing (shameless plug) works perfectly with left/right click interface.  I think the full gambit of interaction modes would've not suited the game.

-Bill

[CaptainD]

As a rule of thumb, my order of preference is 2-button, LucasArts (with shortcuts!), Sierra-style, verb coin (dislike), whatever the hell you call what Telltale uses in e.g. Tales of MI (hate!).

To be fair to ToMI (which I did mostly enjoy), it's only the movement interface that is awful - yes, to the point where if you had a committee meeting to determine the exact worst movement interface that could possibly be made, this is probably what they'd come up with.  But the rest of it was normal point and click.

Just saying... 

[Snarky]

As I recall, the inventory item combination system is equally horrendous, if not worse.

[Ascovel]

I guess I can see "limiting," but "chaotic"?

"Chaotic" as in - you often don't really know what action you are commanding your character to perform. Unless we have a game where every single object has only its cliched function i.e. characters can be talked to, chests open/close, doors open/close - then everything works. But let's say the puzzle idea requires the player to move a chest across the screen instead to open it (one of simpler examples) - your character will interact with it as scripted  and (there's a good chance) not the way you as the player wished for him to interact. I hate moments like that.

2-button interfaces are much improved when the designer transforms certain less used actions into inventory items (e.g. special gloves for lifting heavy objects). But it's really just a Sierra/Lucas multiple verbs interface in disguise then.

As I recall, the inventory item combination system is equally horrendous, if not worse.

TOMI was just a more cumbersome version of the Sam & Max 1-button interface that tried to make it a bit more like a 2-button one. Still, I appreciated having the ability to examine and combine items.

[Stupot+]

TOMI was just a more cumbersome version of the Sam & Max 1-button interface that tried to make it a bit more like a 2-button one. Still, I appreciated having the ability to examine and combine items.

Yeah, I'm playing through Sam and Max Season 1 and am finding that I quite miss being able to combine inventory items.  I don't mind a 1-button interface as such.  It keeps things simple.  But on the other hand, most of us have 2 buttons on our mice... we might as well put them to good use.  My preferred system is Left-click to interact, right-click to look/examine.

I find myself more tolerant of verbcoins these days, but they can be riddled with problems if not done properly. 

[Shane 'ProgZmax' Stevens]

I think the Tales combine interface came out of Telltale's desire to cater to the very lowest common denominator and didn't think casual players would possess whatever it takes to figure out that dragging one item over another (or USING x on y) could be analogous to combining them, thus we get an overcomplicated combine interface that smacks you in the head every time you open the inventory with it's oversized buttons and glossy finish.  STICK A THING HERE AND ANOTHER THING HERE AND PRESS THIS BUTTON, DUMMY!

Companies can't expect people to actually think for themselves these days.



As far as interface x > y goes, I've found that it really depends on the application.  A verbcoin worked well for Full Throttle because it kept the UI minimalistic and gave you a more 'action' sensation, and the specialized actions that popped up when clicking on objects in Broken Sword worked well.  Verb lists work well for complex games where a variety of actions are not only possible but ENCOURAGED; more simple left click, right click works fine for straightforward games where one click produces a variety of results in a logical manner.  For an RPG like quest for glory, I'd probably opt for a small numerical keypad-type iconbar that could be hidden and had all the 'typical' things you'd want, like sneak, casting your current spell, accessing spellbook, character sheet, save menu, stuff like that.  The left and right click would be used for picking up/walking/using and examining, and then in combat the gui could change to reflect combat options.

[Anian]

Game like Broken Sword 1 (the old version) has a 2 button interface left is walk and pick from inventory, right is examine/interact/talk and hotspots are rather limited in numbers, but the inventory is cleverly accesible (more than the new version) and there aren't that many difficult puzzles but the story is the key, so it makes sense the game is streamlined and functional.

ToMI just sucked with inventory combining and general orientation when moving (unlike Grim Fandango, which had very clever system and with an extra mouse option would've been awesome, there was some trouble with the inventory, especially when you had multiple number of one item, but still better).

In most cases, I don't like the old style with verbs and coins are only slightly better. In general it would be fine, but let's face the fact that in every adventure game you're bound to at least one time try to guess the solution and then it gets tiresome, especially when the problem is "what the game designer meant" instead of what seems logical to do.

[Ascovel]

In most cases, I don't like the old style with verbs and coins are only slightly better. In general it would be fine, but let's face the fact that in every adventure game you're bound to at least one time try to guess the solution and then it gets tiresome, especially when the problem is "what the game designer meant" instead of what seems logical to do.

Classic multi-verb interfaces can hinder puzzle-solving only if your main strategy is "try using everything on everything". Otherwise it's just the same as with 2-button interfaces.

[Anian]

Classic multi-verb interfaces can hinder puzzle-solving, only if your main strategy is "try using everything on everything". Otherwise it's just the same as with 2-button interfaces.

I'm not talking just about that. Well maybe if you played them from the begining (not implying you're old, just what you got used to first  ) you don't get it that much, but for example in Monkey 1 and some other games, I really got frustrated more than a couple of times when I needed to do things like Push, instead of Pull or Pick up, and when you have to do that (even for a few items from your inventory) it just gets annoying really fast.

[Ascovel]

I agree that Monkey Island 1/Maniac Mansion versions of SCUMM had a bit too many verbs. Or at least inconveniently placed on the screen. I remember large amounts of verbs working well in the adventure games from Legend.

[Trapezoid]

I always liked having a number of different verbs, and the sentence-constructing aspect of the multiple verb system. Remember that it evolved out of interactive fiction which, though occasionally sadistic, was still generally solvable. It's up to the designer to keep the complexity of the interface in account to the actual crafting of the puzzles.

The heart of most adventure games is that the player is exploring a world that he or she can actually physically affect. In any game, having multiple tools (be they verbs, items, weapons, spells) with which to affect the environment can deepen the immersion, but the creator has to be careful to design the puzzles and story of the game so that it sits nicely between streamlined progression and challenging flexibility.
This has to be coupled with a satisfying level of interactivity in the game-world. If you have a lot of verbs, you have to allow them to have application. Red herring actions, or at least something beyond the stock "Why would I pull that?" style responses.
And if you have a two-button interface, the same applies. If you don't at least make the environments have a variety of hotspots that can be and examined and interacted with outside of the ones that advance the plot, the player will feel that they're on some sort of linear slog. A roller-coaster that you have to manually pedal.


Are there any interfaces that use a sort of context-based list of verbs? All I can think of is the verb coin, which occasionally would change the mouth icon to mean "eat", etc.

[Babar]

I recall that Lure of the Temptress had a sort of context based interface, i.e. when you used the knife in your inventory, you had "cut" "jab" "give" as options and such, but that was a lot closer to the interactive fiction model (each item had tens of verbs you had to scroll through).

Personally, I don't like the idea of 2-button interface, for the reasons mentioned, and I don't really like the verbcoin either. Maybe it is because I grew up with it, but the verb-list doesn't bother me so much...when it comes with a "default action button" like most LucasArts games did, and with all the keyboard shortcuts, I'd say it works great.

Someone should really make a graph or something for this :

Parser input (most IF games)
Listbox of all possible verbs usable in game (Legend games like Eric the Unready)
Context sensitive Listbox of verbs that changes according to the item (Lure of the Temptress)
Verb-list with the traditional 9 (or 12) verbs (Maniac Mansion, Monkey Island, etc.)
Condensed 4-action walk/talk/use/look (most of the Sierra SCI-VGA Games)
Verbcoin (Full Throttle, Curse of Monkey Island)
Two-button interface (Broken Sword)
One-button(?) interface (Telltale's Sam 'n' Max(?))

From top to bottom it goes from most complex to least complex, and also from most freedom to least freedom, and (kinda) most screenspace used to least screenspace used (which I guess isn't really an issue with games these days).

[Shane 'ProgZmax' Stevens]

Maniac Mansion versions of SCUMM had a bit too many verbs

I wouldn't say too many, I'd say too similar.  Like Turn on/Turn off, Open/Close (when use would've done just as well).  It was the redundancy of verbs in older games that oftentimes made them more difficult since you'd have to navigate to a very specific verb to perform a generic action like using the radio.  Thankfully, they soon realized this and pared down the verbs to something more manageable in Secret of Monkey Island, but as long as you have verbs that don't seem to be condensible into a more utilitarian one (and all the verbs are actually put to use in the game, and more than once) I see no problem with a good selection of verbs. 

For example, 'KICK' could be condensed down as part of a use action but it wouldn't make as much sense to the player, who wanted to kick something.  Specific verbs like that, if used enough in the game, are better off left as separate verbs imo.

[Radiant]

#1, hands down.

I really dislike verb coins - they're so slow to control, and the writers tend to forget to put in  keyboard shortcuts.

One-button(?) interface (Telltale's Sam 'n' Max(?))

If you need an example here, I tend to use one-button interfaces for my adventure games, e.g. Warthogs and Quasar.