-

[seeee]

-

[Anian]

Copy? Deconstruct puzzles you liked in the "classics" and analyze them, then integrate them into your story/game/plot. Take for example RPGs, it's a lot of grinding and bascially all the quests are a variation on talk to NPC->kill monsters->take loot->back to NPC, real simple, but good RPGs adapt it to the world they're in and to the characters that are inhabiting it.

Besides, even if you don't think of anything while copying, you'll still learn how they are put together and then even if you have just an idea, it'll be easier to think of a way to turn it into an actual puzzle....
...that's what I'd in any case.

[Eggie]

One technique is to think of something obvious your protagonist needs to do for the story to progress (dig a hole, unlock a door, eat a pear) then take away their means to do it (make the shovel factory be on strike, put the key on the other side, make the character have no mouth).
Like a lot of narrative constructs it's about forcing the protagonist to become something they weren't before; in this case that thing is: resourceful). By dropping appropriate hints (preferably in interesting ways that think outside of simple exposition) you can provide the player with enough information to A) Accept why the obvious won't work and B) Set their minds onto the less obvious, more convoluted solutions and work out that pears can be taken as a contraceptive tablet, that the key in the lock is magnetic or that by joining the shovel-makers union the complimentary  'no more shovels until we get justice' sign makes an excellent shovel.

At least... that's my theory.

[joelphilippage]

Here's a great list of adventure game puzzles.

http://www.adventuredevelopers.com/featuredetail.php?action=view&featureid=30&showpage=1

[Ryan Timothy B]

You pretty much just do what Eggie said.  The player knows the goal, but the path isn't going to be what you'd expect.

Lets say you have a time machine in the basement.  Before you can use it you must turn on the power.
Turning on the power you notice it doesn't work.
Something must have happened to the power connections to the machine.
There is a metal panel that covers the power connections.
You have to rummage through things to find a screwdriver/knife/penny etc (it's better if it's not the obvious, which in this case would be the screwdriver)
You open the panel to discover a mouse has made a nest in there and chewed through the cable.
The mouse is vicious and won't leave the nest--and bites your hand every time you try.
You take the vacuum from the shelf, but the motor is broken.
You replace the motor with one from a robotic arm--or something as crazy.
Then suck up the mouse with the vacuum cleaner (it of course lives and you can see it in the clear vacuum dust container, still angry--you don't want to murder a mouse )
You fix the cable connection by wrapping a sheet of metal around it--one you found in the room somewhere.
Then you turn on the power and the time machine works!


It's actually pretty easy to think of puzzles.  Just try to think of things to prevent the player from doing what they know they must do.

[seeee]

-

[GreenBoy]

One technique is to think of something obvious your protagonist needs to do for the story to progress (dig a hole, unlock a door, eat a pear) then take away their means to do it (make the shovel factory be on strike, put the key on the other side, make the character have no mouth).

From Cyberdreams unsuccessful sequel "I Have No Mouth, and I Must Eat Pear".

[MrColossal]

I have to disagree with Ryan Timothy's technique, I know his suggestions were random top of the head puzzle ideas but they all seem designed to annoy the player. Everything is broken or lost or out of reach.

Say there is a time machine in the basement, there is no "before I can use it", I want to use it now! It's a time machine in my basement! Let me use it! I'm running around putting a screw in a hole when there is a TIME MACHINE in my basement! I should be whipping through time and space solving puzzles in the old west and the future, not messing around with mice!

Anyway, the reason I feel the need to post that is because there is a time and place for puzzles and sometimes fewer puzzles is a good idea. If you've set up an obvious path for the player to take, let them take it with few roadblocks, if you keep breaking things or locking doors in front of them I fear they're going to get frustrated and not care that they finally fixed the time machine because they are worn out on tiny puzzles.

I consider this like RPG battles. Every few steps you are confronted with a puzzle. Just getting out of your house takes 30 minutes because of all the locked doors and fetch quests you have to do!

Let them walk the obvious path and struggle at the non-obvious path. Or make all paths easy enough because being stuck in an adventure game is not the same as being stuck in any other game. Being stuck in an adventure game means NO PROGRESS. NONE. The player will not advance a single bit until they've solved the puzzle before them. They will try everything on everything and then talk to everyone again and then give up and look for a hint. Say they are stuck for 2 days on the puzzle and then finally solve it on their own, they did not learn a skill by solving this. They did not learn something that can then be applied to the game in the future. They got past 1 puzzle out of X puzzles in the game. Being stuck in Mario means you can't do a series of jumps but through trial and error you should eventually build the skills needed to do those jumps. Or you go back a level and get a power up. When you're stuck in an adventure game you do not slowly build any skills of deduction as you sit there staring at a screen. Anyway this is a different rant for a different time.

The way I personally like to work is that if an obstacle doesn't present itself relatively quickly, no obstacle is created. I've set the player up in a situation and if it only takes 2 puzzles to get out of that situation then that is how many it takes. Hopefully the 2 obstacles are fun to overcome and that is what is important. The player just had fun overcoming 2 obstacles and they weren't worn down by me breaking those 2 obstacles into tiny fragments.

[ThreeOhFour]

Or make all paths easy enough because being stuck in an adventure game is not the same as being stuck in any other game. Being stuck in an adventure game means NO PROGRESS. NONE.

I agree with this.

Other forms of getting stuck mean I either have to learn to get the timing on that jump/minigame/whatever better, run around levelling up so that I'm a bit stronger or simply improving my skills.

Getting stuck because I didn't see something or didn't realize that I could totally have used the badgerpants on the sleeping cactus makes me sad and encourages me to give up .

[Calin Leafshade]

Getting stuck because I didn't see something or didn't realize that I could totally have used the badgerpants on the sleeping cactus makes me sad and encourages me to give up .

Thats just common sense. you ALWAYS use the badgerpants on the sleeping cactus.

[MrColossal]

One technique is to think of something obvious your protagonist needs to do for the story to progress (dig a hole, unlock a door, eat a pear) then take away their means to do it (make the shovel factory be on strike, put the key on the other side, make the character have no mouth).

From Cyberdreams unsuccessful sequel "I Have No Mouth, and I Must Eat Pear".

I also forgot to mention, in I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream there is a puzzle on eating a pear!

[Ryan Timothy B]

lol yes you're right that my off the top of the ol' noggin puzzles were a little convoluted.  But it's all on the game.  The game I was describing from my head, was actually just that.  Get the time machine running.  Once you get it running you're whisked away into time, game over.

Adventure games don't always have to be about what's on the other side of the street, it's about crossing the street.

But yes, the puzzles were a little random but nothing that didn't make sense.  
It's also all in the dialog: "Oh, the motor is broken, I must find a replacement"
Rather than: "It's broken",  that doesn't tell me anything.  Do I even need to fix it?  What's wrong with it?  etc

You have to basically push the player in the right direction, without actually telling them what to do.

But you can't give the player tons of obstacles at once.  It should be like opening a door within a door within a door.
Not multiple doors, that lead to more doors.  That's just plain confusing.


For example, Ben's Featherweight game.  When you walk past the 2nd sentry the player pretty much tells you "I guess I should have distracted him first".  If that dialog wasn't there, you'd be confused with what you had to do, which is: distract him.

[TheJBurger]

But you can't give the player tons of obstacles at once.  It should be like opening a door within a door within a door.
Not multiple doors, that lead to more doors.  That's just plain confusing.

Actually, you've just described non-linear gameplay, which is generally considered a good thing.

I'll just quote Ron Gilbert from his quintessential overview on adventure game design: "Why Adventure Games Suck." (If you haven't read it, it's a must read)

A lot of story games employ a technique that can best be described as caging the player.  This occurs when the player is required to solve a small set of puzzles in order to advance to the next section of the game, at which point she is presented with another small set of puzzles.  Once these puzzles are solved, in a seemingly endless series of cages, the player enters the next section.  This can be particularly frustrating if the player is unable to solve a particular puzzle.  The areas to explore tend to be small, so the only activity is walking around trying to find the one solution out.

Try to imagine this type of puzzle as a cage the player is caught in, and the only way out is to find the key.  Once the key is found, the player finds herself in another cage.  A better way to approach designing this is to think of the player as outside the cages, and the puzzles as locked up within.  In this model, the player has a lot more options about what to do next.  She can select from a wide variety of cages to open.  If the solution to one puzzle stumps her, she can go on to another, thus increasing the amount of useful activity going on.

The non-linear, "multiple-doors approach," arguably works better because when you get stuck, you don't sit around endlessly frustrated. Instead, you can try to solve a different puzzle and get endlessly frustrated a second time until you run out of puzzles to be solved.

[DutchMarco]

One thing I find helps well is to write the puzzles into your storyline from the get-go.

I guess you've got to have a sort of knack for it (not that I'm boasting that I have such a great knack for it), but as Eggie already mentioned, you've got to decompose the storyline for it. Of course no hero can save the princess without having to slay the dragon first, decompose how you should slay the dragon, what with, where to find those tools, etc. Once the dragon has been slain, find a way to ecologically-friendly get rid of the corpse, then find a way to get inside the villainous mage's castle, of course that presumes that the hero already has knows where the castle is.

[Chicky]

Give the player lots of easy to find inventory items to start with and give them two or three puzzles to attempt from the word go, make the puzzles come together as one to unlock a new set of area's/puzzles. Make sure the puzzles are logical and have a visual problem to solve, use close ups if you need to.

imo

[Danman]

Give the player lots of easy to find inventory items to start with and give them two or three puzzles to attempt from the word go, make the puzzles come together as one to unlock a new set of area's/puzzles. Make sure the puzzles are logical and have a visual problem to solve, use close ups if you need to.

imo

I have to say that chicky has some good advice  . Make sure your puzzles are logical. Nothing is worse than a game that it is impossible to figure out  . If you want to make hard puzzles make them. So that if the player can think of the solution after a while.

[seeee]

0

[Takyon]

also use a variety of puzzles, there's nothing worse than a game full of inventory puzzles.

[Ryan Timothy B]

Actually, you've just described non-linear gameplay, which is generally considered a good thing.

But, but, but... I like linear adventure games--with maybe a little non-linear-ness to it.

Just as long as the linearity is not as crazy as Merry Christmas Alfred Robbins (sorry HillyBilly) .  That game also suffers from a hotspot indicator.  Like clicking a hair piece from a characters hair.  How are you supposed to know that without an indicator?  Even with an indicator, people would still miss it.  Characters are usually a whole interact-able piece.

Some people think a hotspot indicator gives away the puzzle, but if pixel hunting is the puzzle, I'm not interested.  If a hotspot indicator gives away the puzzle, it's probably not a good puzzle in the first place.

edit: Seriously though, if you toss me into an adventure game world that's fully explorable like a GTA map, I'd go insane.  I like small sections in games.  Where you can't get to the next few rooms without solving a puzzle.
I tried playing A Second Face once, and I gave up shortly after the (really long and kinda dull) intro.  There was too much to explore.  And nothing of importance in any of the first rooms I had explored.
If there isn't a Character or Object in that room that I can talk to or pick up or some kind of switch/puzzle, to progress in the game, then that room really shouldn't be there.  IMO.

[Takyon]

Yeah I'd agree that too much non-linear gameplay can often be a pain. I think it's good to have a mix of both.