WYGIB: Part Two! The Sierra Operating System

[LeChuck]

I actually hate both the LucasArts-style interface and the late Sierra-style interface, because they both force you either to take ages cycling through cursors...

This is my preferred interface, actually. It's a breeze once you get the feel over what cursor comes after another, but until then it's a bit messy. It will always be messy if the cursors dont make sense.

I know a lot of people prefer keyboard shortcuts to change the cursor in games like Sam and Max, and seeing as I'm making a similar interface, which keys usually go with what interactions?

u* = use
w = walk
l = look
? = active inventory

This sound about right? I'm figuring people want to be able to open the inventory with the i button, so what button should I script to select the active inventory (if any)? Suggestions? Or am I all wrong in my assumptions?

* This is all AGS' de-l33tifying script... sigh, do we really need one? It also corrupts my homepage urls...

[Makeout Patrol]

I actually hate both the LucasArts-style interface and the late Sierra-style interface, because they both force you either to take ages cycling through cursors...

This is my preferred interface, actually. It's a breeze once you get the feel over what cursor comes after another, but until then it's a bit messy. It will always be messy if the cursors dont make sense.

I know a lot of people prefer keyboard shortcuts to change the cursor in games like Sam and Max, and seeing as I'm making a similar interface, which keys usually go with what interactions?

you* = use
w = walk
l = look
? = active inventory

This sound about right? I'm figuring people want to be able to open the inventory with the i button, so what button should I script to select the active inventory (if any)? Suggestions? Or am I all wrong in my assumptions?

* This is all AGS' de-l33tifying script... sigh, do we really need one? It also corrupts my homepage urls...

I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream went this route, and it was an improvement, though still not optimal in my opinion. If you're doing this, I'd advise you to implement more than one binding for each mode - maybe the u / w / l / i keys for people that are used to that, as well as 1, 2, 3, and 4, so that I can just switch with one hand and without needing to look at the keyboard.

I still maintain that having a GUI pop up when the player right-clicks on a hotspot with buttons for all of the available interactions right there is the best way to do this, however.

[LeChuck]

I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream went this route, and it was an improvement, though still not optimal in my opinion. If you're doing this, I'd advise you to implement more than one binding for each mode - maybe the you / w / l / i keys for people that are used to that, as well as 1, 2, 3, and 4, so that I can just switch with one hand and without needing to look at the keyboard.

Actually, now that I think about it, I think both having multiple  keyboard shortcuts and an optional GUI that will pop up in one of the corners showing all the actions is the best way to go.

I'd still like to know what letter people associate with the active inventory being used, though.

[Vince Twelve]

I can see that I'd better get to work on Part Two which is all about the inherent flaws in both the Sierra and Lucas Arts standard interfaces before you guys bring up everything I was going to discuss!

[Radiant]

Actually, now that I think about it, I think both having multiple  keyboard shortcuts and an optional GUI that will pop up in one of the corners showing all the actions is the best way to go.

I agree.
The best part is that in AGS, it'll take all of five minutes to code. Just have your on_key_press code call whichever interface_click function fits best.

I'd still like to know what letter people associate with the active inventory being used, though.

(U)se, and have (T)ouch be the regular hand icon.

I can see that I'd better get to work on Part Two which is all about the inherent flaws in both the Sierra and Lucas Arts standard interfaces before you guys bring up everything I was going to discuss!

Cool. Actually I don't think they're all that bad, but perhaps that's because I grew up with them. It is quite important to note that (unlike many fangames who apparently use the same GUI) both Sierra and Lucas have numerous keyboard shortcuts. For instance, pretty much any Sierra game has F5/F7/F9 for save/load/restart, and TAB for inventory; and Lucas games like Maniac Mansion have keyboard controls for inventory scrolling (hint: use the mouse wheel, nowadays!)

Right-mouse-button cursor cycling works with just a few cursors (say, the standard five) but gets progressively more annoying with more of them. Verb coins can also be quite annoying if poorly implemented (click, hold, drag, release is NOT something you want for every interaction, imho)

[Hollister Man]

One solution to the hotspot dilemma can sometimes be beta-testing with someone who hasn't worked on the game, watching them but not giving away the puzzles.  Watching them would allow you to see frustrating problems that might be overlooked by normal beta testing.

When I've needed to use small items or characters (for instance, a 4-6 pixel mouse on the screen) I've usually made sure that the click didn't have to be exactly on the item in question, it could be off by a few px without problems.  I specifically remember this in KQ6, where Alex has to talk to the Ferryboat Captain.  You've only got a second or so to talk to him, and you have to hit just the right spot.  It took getting on my dad's AOL to figure that one out, back in the '90s, I just guessed he didn't want to talk, not that I hadn't managed to click on him in the right spot!

[SSH]

I'd still like to know what letter people associate with the active inventory being used, though.

You could make the letter "U" be the "touch" the first time it is pressed and "use inventory" the second (and then back to touch the 3rd and so on)

[The Ivy]

Actually, the Nanobots cursors underwent quite a few changes.

See here:



A. Preliminary ideas for cursors. Notice how the "walk" icon was originally more like a target.

B. I thought it would be cool to put a box around all of them, with the light green sections moving around like a marquee. Then Vince was like, "Where are the hotspots?" And I was like, "Top left corner?" And he was like, "There's nothing telling the player that." And I was like, "Oh."

I still kind of like the "Loading" one though.

C. I tried to go with something a bit more robot-y so I added the green corners to everything. Vince was like, "That's better, but look at the cursor for 'Go to.' Is the hotspot the arrow, or the green corner?" Back to the drawing board.

D. Finally, we had a nice clean set of cursors that were, above all, consistent. They didn't keep the player guessing. I'd actually be quite happy if no one had noticed the cursors during the game.

E. I included this to show you how I changed Strongbot's GUI; it was functional before, but waaaay too small to click on. I guarantee I would have had a few complaints if I hadn't changed it.

F. The cursor set was by now consistent enough that I could add new items without having to worry about their design (like this inventory item from the tutorial).

G. By the way, we had to make cursors for every possible combination of chemicals, even the ones that didn't do anything in the game. I bet you didn't see many of these, eh? We also had to make Chembot "pouring" animations for all of these, and design a system that would let you mix up to three colours at once in the beaker. While I was hitting my head against my keyboard for not thinking of that in advance, Vince swept in like a ninja and solved the whole thing. I'm surprised that he still speaks to me.

[Vince Twelve]

Part one has been moved to my blog with a little addendum based on some of the good feedback from this thread.

I put Part two into the first post in this thread.  Instead of posting it on my blog at the same time, I'm going to modify it based on the discussion here (if there's any to be had) and then post the final version to my blog later.

So please read and give me feedback!  Down with the Sierra and Lucas Arts interfaces!

[Babar]

I dunno what to say. I really dislike the 2 button system. And prefer the Sierra/Old LucasArts GUI to a verbcoin, mostly because the clunkiness of the verbcoin (1 click, move to desired action, another click seemed counter-intuitive to me, and the verbcoin usually blocked whatever I was working on). But perhaps that is personal preference. In a perfect world, my use, pick up and talk to would all work, and would all be well catered for. Or someone would come up with an awesome new GUI that would easily allow you to do all possible things you could think of doing to all possible objects on screen (a sort of Lure of the Temptress, or those LEGEND 1/2 text adventures with some magical easy to use/navigate GUI).

Don't worry, I'm working on it.

[Za_Uvek]

I do have to say that all the points brought up are good. But, they are all opinionated! You can go ahead and say the Sierra and Lucas system make broken games, but only if the creators swing them the wrong way.
If you don’t like them, fine, but I think they are the most successful interfaces ever made (not so much Lucas). If applied correctly the Sierra interface can form some of the most clever, challenging and logical puzzles to be found. The verbcoin, bah, leaves no challenge and can be tedious most of the times. That’s my little opinion and nostalgic view on favourites (and yeah, not much of an argument, I have more, but its not why I write).
The real issue (and its painful playing most of these games) is plain and simple. NONE HAVE BEEN UTILISED PROPERLY. Every game I come across using most any interface has never filled in all the gaps.

If the set of things that I need to use "Talk to" on is completely separate from the things that I need to use "Use" on, and trying to use the other verb just results in a useless "I can't do that" comment, your game is broken.  There's no puzzle in it.  No thinking required.  Person equals talk, thing equals use.  That's it.  It doesn't make me feel more "in control" of my character.  If anything, I feel less in control, since my character systematically refuses all my commands that don't fall in line with the above diagram.

And this is why I say these are good points that have been brought up. I don’t agree that the interfaces are flawed. I believe that they have not been master by any amatures out there yet. Ya! The games are broken! But please, someone out there prove that the Sierra and Lucas systems can be used to make a great amature adventure game!

For more Email: advenreview@ymail.com

[MashPotato]

Hmm, lots of things to think about

One thing I've always disliked about the default Sierra system is having to open a new window to get to the inventory and having to press "OK" to select an item.  That's at least 3 clicks, 5 if you accidentally select the wrong item at first and have to go back to the regular cursor in order to select another.  Far too many!

On the other hand, I personally don't have a problem with the Sierra cursor interface (assuming that there aren't too many extra cursors to cycle through), and I don't believe it is inherently flawed--it's just that few games take advantage of having separate cursors for Talk and Interact.  I agree that the Broken Sword interface is the best one if that's the case (that's the one I've used for my games so far).

That said, I still think it could be improved.  One of the things I like about the BS interface (which was also mentioned) is the default walk when you're not clicking on a hotspot, and I was thinking that this could be combined with the Sierra style to make a more comfortable interface.  You would have Examine, Interact, and Talk cursors that would cycle normally, but when you click anywhere that's not a hotspot, the cursor would briefly turn into the walk cursor (just to indicate that the walking action is beginning), then default back to whichever cursor mode you were on before.  It would eliminate the walk cursor, making cycling much faster and thus less of an annoyance if you accidentally miss a mode.  I could swear some games do this, but I can't remember which ones (possibly The Longest Journey).  I can't think of any drawbacks to that interface at the moment (assuming, of course, that separate interact/talk actions ARE needed).

Keep the articles comin', Vince!  Reading this one made me think of the default-walk-thingy I just described, which is what I will probably use in my next game unless I can think of something better--these articles have been very timely, I must say

[Babar]

Hmmm...yeah, I guess a major point is that those games are broken only if more than 1 cursor is not used on most objects. But if there is more than 1 interaction on a certain object, and I can't do them due to lack of options, I'd be annoyed. Like if I clicked the ACTION button of the 2 button system on a person, and he was pushed off a cliff instead of me getting a chance to talk to him.

[olafmoriarty]

I have to agree with most of what you're writing here. Let me add a suggestion: For those games where one or two items can give meaningful responses to more than one interaction, I think a verb coin would be appropriate -- as long as this verb coin appeared only when more than one interaction was possible (and was disabled if one of these interactions no longer were valid, of course).

[Stupot]

I'm not really convinced this is too much of a problem.  I think the main reason people like to have multiple actions/verbs in their games is because it provides the player with an illusion of depth.  And I would say most of us fall for this illusion.  If a game simply had interact on the left mouse button and look on the right button, then one might come away from completing the game with the sense that it was a bit too easy.

I'm not saying that we should riddle our games in verbs and cursors to create a false illusion of complexity, but I'm tempted to think there is something satisfying in trying lots of different combinations of actions; the more you are clicking on the mouse, the more you feel as though you are doing something rather than simply watching an interactive movie.

In the real world every action has a reaction, but in an adventure game world it would be boring if could only select an action that would be guaranteed to have a reaction that would progress the game.  One of the beauties of the adventure game is the trial and error - the red herring.  If you only have a choice of two buttons for every object or person then you are severely decreasing the scope for this kind of gameplay device (and the longevity of the game itself).

[MashPotato]

I'm not saying that we should riddle our games in verbs and cursors to create a false illusion of complexity, but I'm tempted to think there is something satisfying in trying lots of different combinations of actions; the more you are clicking on the mouse, the more you feel as though you are doing something rather than simply watching an interactive movie.

The problem I see with having more verbs/cursors is that in order to keep immersion up there has to be a unique response for almost every interaction, or else you feel even more restricted than if the options weren't there at all since you see you CAN do them, but the game's not LETTING you.  However, if the varied responses are present, than this could be a big boost to the game--it all comes back to choosing the right interface for your game

[Stupot]

I'm not saying that we should riddle our games in verbs and cursors to create a false illusion of complexity, but I'm tempted to think there is something satisfying in trying lots of different combinations of actions; the more you are clicking on the mouse, the more you feel as though you are doing something rather than simply watching an interactive movie.

The problem I see with having more verbs/cursors is that in order to keep immersion up there has to be a unique response for almost every interaction, or else you feel even more restricted than if the options weren't there at all since you see you CAN do them, but the game's not LETTING you.  However, if the varied responses are present, than this could be a big boost to the game--it all comes back to choosing the right interface for your game

Absolutely.  If the author is willing to put time into writing the extra speech then, as you say, it can really add to the immersion of the player and the depth of the story.

[edmundito]

Vince, I like how you mentioned that "Anyone who can manage to take off their nostalgia-tinted glasses should be able to see that these interfaces are irritating." Sadly, a lot of adventure games are still made for adventure gamers, which is good for the fans, bad to move such a rich genre forward and return it into the mainstream.

In this day and age, the Sierra and LucasArts interfaces need to be abandoned. They were practically made-up right before everyone else (like your mum) started using a computer with a mouse and a GUI. Sure, we had the Macintosh OS since 1984, but sadly it never caught up to the masses. Windows98 was probably the most widely spread OS, and came out only 10 years ago. Not to mention that the Sierra/Lucas interface is pretty poorly made (and does not deserve to be called designed except maybe the verb coin in Full Throttle/CMI, which was, in a way, borrowed for The Sims, one of the most popular games ever made.).

Another important thing that needs to be mentioned is that the poor interface just leads to lousy game design. I often see a lot of puzzles where the solution is to figure out which verb needs to be used next. So a lot times adventure games become a guess-the-interface/guess-what-the-designer-was-thinking-but-is-not-really-clever-nor-logical disaster. There are no other game genres out there where you have to use one single action one time in the middle of the game, ever, because it's too obscure and frustrating to do that. Instead, the genre should focus more on teaching the basics first (what are all the possible actions the player can do and when they are appropriate to use them),  then allowing to solve problems not through guessing and doing things in a proper order but from truly using the player's intelligence. Designing the puzzles needs to be something completely independent of the interface. After all, the gui is just the means for how the player can interact with your game. It can make your game more enjoyable and fun, but it can't really make your game's design better.

[TheJBurger]

I agree wholeheartedly about the Sierra system, but not so much about the Lucasarts system, the reason being keyboard shortcuts. When I first played Monkey Island and Fate of Atlantis, yes, the interface was annoying and took too much time to move my mouse back and forth. So that's why I always had one hand on the keyboard and one hand on the mouse, and it make the GUI experience streamlined, and close to perfect, in my opinion. My left hand would pick up the keyboard shortcuts instantaneously, allowing me to switch between cursor modes without ever having to touch the GUI at the bottom, save for perhaps inventory items. It was extremely intuitive, in my opinion.

About the 2-interaction system (left click interact, right click look, or vice versa), I used to always disagree with it, seeing how it limits the players choices to only two interactions, thus dumbing down the game and guessing at what the player was trying to achieve with use. Recently though, I've come to agree with what you've said with your article, in that it's basically a more efficient version of the current Sierra system of Look-Talk-Interact, because Talk and Interact are 98% of the time used separately in games.

I dislike verb-coins for the reason of the "Holding down to bring it up" aspect. If I have to wait a second for the GUI to pop up, that's too long for me. However, verb-coins that do pop up instantaneously (ala 7 Days A Skeptic), I love. Those seem to be close to the most improved version of the Sierra interface.

p.s. Vince, did you get my PM? 

[olafmoriarty]

Stupot, I could agree with you if it weren't for that adventure games have at least two other aspects to add to the trial and error: inventory items and advanced nested dialogues.

I agree that complexity in a game can be good and make it feel more realistic, but I really don't see how it makes a game better in any way that I have the opportunity to speak to the grass only to find that it surprisingly enough doesn't talk back.