Why Survival Games are Boring (Pt1) / by Gabriel Holzapfel

TLDR

There are many underlying issues game developers that design modern survival games face. Many of these core issues drive away large sections of the player base from the survival games. Here I will outline and condense the issues within the survival genre. In part 2 I will address how to better appeal to more casual fans within the survival genre.

Series Overview

In this part I will be addressing some of the problems people find with survival games and how these problems were established. In the next section in this series I will outline how to fix some of these problems to produce survival games that are more interesting and engaging for the general populace.

Disclaimer

As someone who has played a lot of survival games and put hundreds of hours into Minecraft I understand the appeal of survival games. The ability to come home and play a slower based game or something that requires more thought than a twitch shooter can be relaxing and enjoyable. However, with the exception of a few smash hits, survival games have remained in their niche only played by the highly dedicated. So why is there such a disconnect between the main stream player base and the appeal of survival games? I will be analyzing mostly first person survival games because that is where my experience and interest is. I will also be drawing from many games that people consider non survival games because there is a great deal that survival games can learn from these titles, (IE. Fallout, Farcry, and Tomb Raider).

The spark that started a fire

Though always lingering in the background the explosion of survival games truly started with the introduction of Minecraft. Seeing the massive success Minecraft had with a limited development budget caused independent developers to pour into the scene to get a chunk of this newly discovered market. However, many developers have taken a misdirected approach in designing their games making many survival games boring and lacking substance.

The Pitfalls

So you have a massive world and pretty environment, however many developers make fundamental mistakes that can hinder the enjoyment of their game limit their demographic to the  hardcore survival players. Listed are some of the problems that these games can have listed in no particular order.

  • Reliance on Boring Mechanics: Flat first person melee or one dimensional enemies that just walk towards you can limit the appeal of your game. Where games like Destiny show the power of solid and enjoyable gameplay is the core foundation in which any game should stand.

  • Exploration alone to seed enjoyment: A small part of any audience will be happy for an extended amount of time simply wandering around and exploring the environment. But, for the rest of your audience some sort of payoff must be established. Exploration that is purely visual leads to a devaluation of exploration.

  • No goal: Though games by their nature are meaningless a tangible goal is needed for most players to progress past the initial impressions and exploration. The goal can be very tangible, like a final boss level or story revival (Don't Starve or The Long Dark), or untangle, like seeing the amazing things that you can create or share with your friends (Minecraft). Survival alone is not appealing to many and several approaches to your goal should be available.

  • Major gameplay oversights: Not being able to find your friends or having a situation where the player can be killed over and over when respawning are major issues that should be fundamentally addressed before releasing your game to the public.

  • One way to play: Even if you create a solid play experience, to retain player interest you must have alternative ways to play the game. Even the most hard core of survival games should have a healthy amount of gameplay variety or different ways to approach the game. Though procedural terrain generation can be helpful it does it does very little if every environment you encounter should be approached in the same way. RPG worlds are only fun because you can play as many different classes and approach similar situations in wildly different ways each time.

  • Zero progression: Though some people argue that this is a aspect of of survival that makes it tense and enjoyable, most players do not want to put hours into a game only to have it wiped out while they are offline or by other means. Though ways to insure items or locking them in the world can be helpful a meta progression system can help to maintain a sense of accomplishment in games that still utilize the hard core feature (Don't Starve).

  • Area mistaken for content: A wide range of environmental area does not always transliterate to a wide range or gameplay options with players engaging enemies and harvesting materials in the same manner regardless of environment.

  • Lack of endgame: With this principle related to needing player goals, an end game is needed for most players to invest a significant amount of time into your game. The end game does not always need to be the same for every player. For example, in Minecraft players could strive for either the Ender Dragon, building massive creations, or creating crazy redstone creations. players are motivated by different thing so either different end games or having multiple reasons to strive for an end game will suit you much better than the urge to just stockpile items.

  • Navigation: The mystery of an unusual land is nice but not being able to find the massive base you put hours into after respawning is extremely frustrating and can lead to detachment to the game. This problems is compounded by not being able to find your friends. Being able to upgrade the ability to navigate is not bad, but a basic ability to find critical spots, like your base or friends, is necessary for wide appeal.

  • Only good as long as your friends play: In the same way MySpace is only useful if other people are using it, some games are only fun if they are being played by a lot of people. However, being able to attract a large audience on the hope that they will have fun playing with each other is highly unreliable for smaller studios and one should strive to create a game that can stand by itself and only gets better as people play it.

  • Massive time commitment: Despite every other problem this is the one that trumps them all. Many survival games are complicated and require hours to learn how you "should" play in order to have fun. A huge commitment need is not the same as a large amount of content. RPGs like Skyrim have the potential for a massive amount of playtime but can be fun the instant you jump into the game. It does not require you to look up how you "should" play to have fun. Many people say that this is a staple of the genera with the unforgiving nature of these game a necessity to maintain purity. This may be the case, simply know that by doggedly enforcing the principle of harsh punishment for "improper" play you alienate a large section of your player base.

It is also possible to enforce even hardcore mechanics in a game while still rewarding player gameplay creativity. An example of this would be in Don't Starve where the player is rewarded with XP to unlock new characters when they die to try new ways to play.

Next Time

In Part 2 I will be talking about things that help to improve the survival experience.