Making puzzle game that has high replay value?

[JungwooYom]

Hello. I am making a 3D puzzle game inspired by Portal (but the mechanic is very different)

Is there anyway to increase replay value in puzzle game? Since puzzle game is all about figuring out how to solve puzzles, they mostly lack of replay value after finishing it first time.

Games that have a high replay value, such as Journey, Metal Gear Solid 5, Shadow of the Colossus are games that can be beaten in more than one way. But puzzle game almost always have only one way to beat.

How can I create a good puzzle game while maintaining some replay value? Thanks

[BIGTIMEMASTER]

progression system, relatively easy puzzles, and make them easy to make for yourself so you can make hundreds/thousands.

angry birds is technically a puzzle game. I think phone games like that are the gold standard for replayability.

All the games you mentioned i dont think of highly replayable. At most people play them a couple times? I dunno, not games I would play more than once anyway. Just because you can skin a cat more than one way doesnt mean that there is incentive to.

You can design multiple paths to lead a horse to the water but enticing it to drink is the catch, if you know what i mean.

There has to be a dangling a carrot that is never quite reached, and the path to the carrot has to provide steady stream of satisfaction so that the general experience of trying to reach that carrot can become a habit. Nobody plops down on the couch after long day and says, “hey ya know, there is technical an alternate way to finish that game so I guess I’ll do that because I’m bored.” It has to a strong feeling associated with playing the game, and then when the thought pops up, “should i go play that game?” thats where the carrot comes into play. “Yeah i will play that game because, 1. it make me feel good and 2. I sitll havent got the thing!”

Typically I dont like puzzle games because its too much frustration before getting the satisfaction. I dont know the genre or the crowd but if you cant point to any major puzzle games that have fans playing for years on end I think that is good indication of a limit to the genre. Of course you can make new rules but I think that relies on having keen knowledge of your target audience.

[dgoyette]

I can tell you what I’ve tried to do to create replay value in my game. But first, as you’ve already said, true “puzzles” don’t really have much replay value. It’s like hearing a joke or a riddle if you already know it. I can go back and relay a puzzle game I played years ago, and still get some enjoyment out of it. But that’s usually because I’ve either A) Forgotten most of the puzzles, so it’s kind of like solving them for the first, or B) It’s nostalgic and fun for other reasons, like mostly enjoying the story.

So, “Replay Value” and “puzzles” really are at odds with each other. I think that pretty much by definition, puzzles don’t/can’t be replayable. At least not in a satisfying way. So, if you want to add “replay” value to your game, I think what you’re looking at is adding alternate content that isn’t necessarily a puzzle. At a high level, think of mini games within a larger game.

As for how I’ve personally approached this, it’s broken into two main topics:

• Optional extra content
• Alternate game modes

In my game, so far, there are about 50 levels. The game is completely linear, but it’s also designed to be (hopefully) approachable to a wide range of player skill. However, hidden within most of the levels are optional extra-hard challenges. Sometimes those are pure puzzles, sometimes they’re more platforming challenges. They’re all optional, and players can choose to engage or not. In practice, most players prefer to come back and do that content later, after playing the “main” game. So, in one sense, you could call that “replay” value, but not really. That content is still the kind of stuff players will probably only do once. They just do it later on. So, it’s probably not fair to call this “replay” value. But it mostly feels like it’s replay value, since it’s optional, more challenging, and you usually come back later after “playing” the normal game. I’m not yet sure what percentage of players are actually interested in coming back and doing the optional content. I’d say it’s probably in the range of 10-20% of players try it out, with a much lower percentage doing all of the optional content.

The other thing I’ve included in my game is an alternate game mode where you try to speedrun individual levels. This was a really easy thing to add into the game, since it’s mostly just a bit of UI to show a timer and a few other things. But this sort of thing tends not to be very popular. Personally, I might enjoy this kind of content for a very short time, mostly to test how good my skills are. But I’m not going to spend hours perfecting speed running techniques in levels. So I think that hardly anyone really wants to do speedrunning, given the option. But again, it was an easy thing to include, and technically it has a lot of replay value, as long as you like that kind of gameplay.

[JungwooYom]

@BIGTIMEMASTER

progression system, relatively easy puzzles, and make them easy to make for yourself so you can make hundreds/thousands.

angry birds is technically a puzzle game. I think phone games like that are the gold standard for replayability.

All the games you mentioned i dont think of highly replayable. At most people play them a couple times? I dunno, not games I would play more than once anyway. Just because you can skin a cat more than one way doesnt mean that there is incentive to.

You can design multiple paths to lead a horse to the water but enticing it to drink is the catch, if you know what i mean.

There has to be a dangling a carrot that is never quite reached, and the path to the carrot has to provide steady stream of satisfaction so that the general experience of trying to reach that carrot can become a habit. Nobody plops down on the couch after long day and says, “hey ya know, there is technical an alternate way to finish that game so I guess I’ll do that because I’m bored.” It has to a strong feeling associated with playing the game, and then when the thought pops up, “should i go play that game?” thats where the carrot comes into play. “Yeah i will play that game because, 1. it make me feel good and 2. I sitll havent got the thing!”

Typically I dont like puzzle games because its too much frustration before getting the satisfaction. I dont know the genre or the crowd but if you cant point to any major puzzle games that have fans playing for years on end I think that is good indication of a limit to the genre. Of course you can make new rules but I think that relies on having keen knowledge of your target audience.

Thanks for your advice! I think the only way to have replay value in puzzle game is having a lot of levels as you said. Portal 2 has a high replay value because of its numerous levels, plus community maps.

Thanks again

[JungwooYom]

@dgoyette

I can tell you what I’ve tried to do to create replay value in my game. But first, as you’ve already said, true “puzzles” don’t really have much replay value. It’s like hearing a joke or a riddle if you already know it. I can go back and relay a puzzle game I played years ago, and still get some enjoyment out of it. But that’s usually because I’ve either A) Forgotten most of the puzzles, so it’s kind of like solving them for the first, or B) It’s nostalgic and fun for other reasons, like mostly enjoying the story.

So, “Replay Value” and “puzzles” really are at odds with each other. I think that pretty much by definition, puzzles don’t/can’t be replayable. At least not in a satisfying way. So, if you want to add “replay” value to your game, I think what you’re looking at is adding alternate content that isn’t necessarily a puzzle. At a high level, think of mini games within a larger game.

As for how I’ve personally approached this, it’s broken into two main topics:

• Optional extra content
• Alternate game modes

In my game, so far, there are about 50 levels. The game is completely linear, but it’s also designed to be (hopefully) approachable to a wide range of player skill. However, hidden within most of the levels are optional extra-hard challenges. Sometimes those are pure puzzles, sometimes they’re more platforming challenges. They’re all optional, and players can choose to engage or not. In practice, most players prefer to come back and do that content later, after playing the “main” game. So, in one sense, you could call that “replay” value, but not really. That content is still the kind of stuff players will probably only do once. They just do it later on. So, it’s probably not fair to call this “replay” value. But it mostly feels like it’s replay value, since it’s optional, more challenging, and you usually come back later after “playing” the normal game. I’m not yet sure what percentage of players are actually interested in coming back and doing the optional content. I’d say it’s probably in the range of 10-20% of players try it out, with a much lower percentage doing all of the optional content.

The other thing I’ve included in my game is an alternate game mode where you try to speedrun individual levels. This was a really easy thing to add into the game, since it’s mostly just a bit of UI to show a timer and a few other things. But this sort of thing tends not to be very popular. Personally, I might enjoy this kind of content for a very short time, mostly to test how good my skills are. But I’m not going to spend hours perfecting speed running techniques in levels. So I think that hardly anyone really wants to do speedrunning, given the option. But again, it was an easy thing to include, and technically it has a lot of replay value, as long as you like that kind of gameplay.

Thank you! I realized replay value isn’t that import thing Maybe a good initial gameplay is more important than making some more shallow gameplay after beating it. I am making openworld puzzle game, so maybe I should put more value in wandering around the world.

Thanks so much!

[dgoyette]

@JungwooYom

Thank you! I realized replay value isn’t that import thing Maybe a good initial gameplay is more important than making some more shallow gameplay after beating it. I am making openworld puzzle game, so maybe I should put more value in wandering around the world.

Thanks so much!

That’s probably a good plan. I think you’ll find a lot of overlap between people who enjoy puzzle games, and people who enjoy exploring. So, good synergy there.

[Arkade]

I’m kind’a surprised no-one has mentioned procedural puzzles. I guess it depends on the hook of the puzzle and the game. If each puzzle should have an “ahha!” moment, obviously that’s a once-per-designed use. However if you intend players to enjoy solving certain types of puzzle (say by incorporating certain types like Sokoban) then perhaps they can be generated. This makes the challenge replayable but, if nothing more is done, too many might become boring. Perhaps combining them with interesting movement challenges or other puzzle types can restore some replayability?
Guess it all depends what your audience expect / value.

[JungwooYom]

@Arkade

I’m kind’a surprised no-one has mentioned procedural puzzles. I guess it depends on the hook of the puzzle and the game. If each puzzle should have an “ahha!” moment, obviously that’s a once-per-designed use. However if you intend players to enjoy solving certain types of puzzle (say by incorporating certain types like Sokoban) then perhaps they can be generated. This makes the challenge replayable but, if nothing more is done, too many might become boring. Perhaps combining them with interesting movement challenges or other puzzle types can restore some replayability?
Guess it all depends what your audience expect / value.

the game I making is not a sokoban game, but I’ll try that out later! cuz I am planning to make another puzzle game that is sokoban typed

Thanks for your advice!

[Martin_H]

@JungwooYom

But puzzle game almost always have only one way to beat.

How can I create a good puzzle game while maintaining some replay value? Thanks

I haven’t read the other replies but you definitely should check out several puzzlegames by zachtronics, starting with Infinifactory. They make puzzle games that have more than one solution and there are metrics to measure how “good” your solution is. And at the end of a level you’re visually shown how well you performed on each category compared to other players.

[JungwooYom]

@Martin_H

I haven’t read the other replies but you definitely should check out several puzzlegames by zachtronics, starting with Infinifactory. They make puzzle games that have more than one solution and there are metrics to measure how “good” your solution is. And at the end of a level you’re visually shown how well you performed on each category compared to other players.

Oh that’s a great idea! Thanks so much

[JungwooYom]

@Martin_H

I haven’t read the other replies but you definitely should check out several puzzlegames by zachtronics, starting with Infinifactory. They make puzzle games that have more than one solution and there are metrics to measure how “good” your solution is. And at the end of a level you’re visually shown how well you performed on each category compared to other players.

Oh this is the guy who made Shenzen I/O! I came up with some ideas Thank you!

[Megalogue1]

You can look up Simon Tatham’s puzzle collection if you want an example of just how many different types of puzzle can be procedurally generated. Procedural puzzles usually have less “character” (I.e. you can tell that they were created by an uninspired computer), but depending on who you ask, they make up for that by being effectively infinite.

[JungwooYom]

@Megalogue1

You can look up Simon Tatham’s puzzle collection if you want an example of just how many different types of puzzle can be procedurally generated. Procedural puzzles usually have less “character” (I.e. you can tell that they were created by an uninspired computer), but depending on who you ask, they make up for that by being effectively infinite.

Thanks! I’ll try making procedual puzzle in my future projects!

[Not_Sure]

This isn’t a popular opinion, but replayability is over rated.

Not without value, but certainly over rated.

Last of Us and, yes, Portal has very little replay value.

But in an age when there’s a thousand games being released a day there are a lot of players, myself included, that want a clean 5 to 10 hour experience and move on.

No milking the experience. No dragging it out. No more damn rogue likes!

That’s me, at least.

[JungwooYom]

@Not_Sure

This isn’t a popular opinion, but replayability is over rated.

Not without value, but certainly over rated.

Last of Us and, yes, Portal has very little replay value.

But in an age when there’s a thousand games being released a day there are a lot of players, myself included, that want a clean 5 to 10 hour experience and move on.

No milking the experience. No dragging it out. No more damn rogue likes!

That’s me, at least.

I agree! To some extent, I don’t want to waste players’ time in loose replay modes. Although It would be perfect to have both clean one time experience and replay gameplay, focusing on the former is better sometimes.

Thanks for your opinion!

[angrypenguin]

@Not_Sure

This isn’t a popular opinion, but replayability is over rated.

Quoted for emphasis.

@Not_Sure

But in an age when there’s a thousand games being released a day there are a lot of players, myself included, that want a clean 5 to 10 hour experience and move on.

Indeed. Many designers get sidetracked by replayability without realising that the vast majority of people aren’t finishing your game once*, let alone going back to the start and doing it again.

If you’re making a roguelike, or a mastery based game, or something competitive, then sure replayability is actually important. However, in many games it just isn’t even a consideration for the player. They’re looking to have a good time on the way to “finishing” the game, and then they’ll move on to the next one. For those games and those audiences the idea of “replayability” is a distraction. Focus your limited resources on making the first time as awesome as you can.

• In fact, these are higher numbers than other reports I’ve seen. In particular, notice that the only titles with completion rates over 50% are massive budget “blockbusters”.

[Martin_H]

@angrypenguin

• In fact, these are higher numbers than other reports I’ve seen. In particular, notice that the only titles with completion rates over 50% are massive budget “blockbusters”.

My firtst thought was “those are crazy high numbers!” I almost couldn’t believe some of them. Are console gamers way more dedicated than pc gamers? Is perhaps the age average much lower and the ratio between available time vs available money to buy games more in favor of finishing your games?

[BIGTIMEMASTER]

I’m all for the bite-size game that doesn’t overstay it’s welcome and I have no doubt a person could make a living making games like that… but it does seem like trend nowadays is that gamers want a game that they’ll play for years. A “sandbox” that provides endless emergent engagements.

Really depends what sort of game you want to make, but my general idea is that if I want to tell a story, that is going to be the main focus of my game and I’m pretty much making a visual novel with maybe light gameplay elements involved.

Otherwise, I try to make a game that provides endless gameplay (or at least hundreds of hours before user gets bored and moves on).

And I dont think either way is necessarily more or less work, it just comes down to design decisions. Like I thought making visual novel is easier, but it’s not. In fact it’s a mountain of work even when simplified as much as possilbe. In some ways making a sandbox game has been simpler, especially when it comes to workload. But in some ways it’s harder too.

[angrypenguin]

@Martin_H

My firtst thought was “those are crazy high numbers!” I almost couldn’t believe some of them. Are console gamers way more dedicated than pc gamers? Is perhaps the age average much lower and the ratio between available time vs available money to buy games more in favor of finishing your games?

Most likely it’s just because it’s a small sample of high quality, highly successful titles. Selection bias.

If another dozen random games were added I expect the distribution would change.

[BrandyStarbrite]

This might seem small and trivial, but put in lots of good music tracks. Music in puzzle games, have a tendency to bring people back to playing your puzzle game. Bejewelled 2 is a great example of this. Oh, and having cool backgrounds, is another one too. Bejewelled 2 is also a good example of this too.