What are the most common mistakes game designers make when creating puzzles?

1. Too Easy: Puzzles that offer zero resistance leave players feeling bored and disengaged. A lack of challenge diminishes the sense of accomplishment upon solving them. 2. Too Hard: Conversely, puzzles so obtuse or demanding that they lead to frustration can drive players away from the game altogether. Striking a balance between engaging difficulty and achievable solutions is key.

When creating puzzles, game designers commonly make mistakes such as overlooking player perspectives, leading to unclear instructions. Inadequate playtesting may result in puzzles being too easy or overly complex. Lack of variety in puzzle types can lead to monotony. Ignoring thematic alignment and neglecting accessibility considerations are also common errors. Regular testing, diverse puzzle design, and player-centric perspectives are essential to avoid these pitfalls and ensure an engaging gaming experience.

Easy or Hard are very subjective to the individual player. The first puzzle should always be extremely easy, since the function is not to test your puzzle skills, but to familiarize the player with the game/interface. The focus is: I learned how to deal with the puzzle, instead of I learned how to solve it. If a puzzle is seen as too hard, devs should ask themselves: have we provided enough knowledge up front, to enable the player to solve it? - consider the old Lucas Arts Adventure 'Maniac Mansion' it was great, but riddled with puzzles that could not be solved with logic, you asked your friends :) Adding some puzzles that seem impossible is great for additional achievements, i.e. not needed to complete the game.

Too Easy- this is the most frustrating gamers who are looking for a challenge. Too hard- this is the type of game that make the average gamer feel they are not good enough to play.

I understand that it can be a challenge to balance the difficulty of puzzles to cater to various player preferences. Personally, I believe it would be interesting to have the option to adjust the difficulty according to each player's preference. Sometimes, when I just want to pass the time and have fun, a challenging puzzle can end up frustrating me even more because what matters in that moment is simply enjoying the game. Providing this customization option would offer a more flexible experience, allowing each player to choose the challenge level that aligns with their mood at the time. This would not only ensure a more enjoyable experience for everyone but also recognize the importance of meeting different player expectations.

1. Obscurity: Cryptic clues or overly complex mechanics without adequate explanation can leave players feeling lost and bewildered. Puzzles should challenge intellect, not decipherment skills. 2. Inconsistent Rules: Introducing new mechanics or altering existing ones mid-puzzle can be confusing and unfair. Maintaining clear and consistent internal logic within the game world is crucial.

Use a 'show not tell' approach in puzzles, if possible: If a wall mounted torch can be a hidden lever, maybe let an NPC open the first secret door. Now you will check every torch... (ok, a seasoned gamer will always check them anyway :) ). Also, be reliable and rewarding: having an illusionary wall in just one specific but critical spot in a huge world is frustrating. It's too obscure, and once you found it, you will never, ever have one again, yet you will keep searching. I like the Fromsoft approach: they encourage you to check every nook and cranny, and in the end you might find a useless item. That is GREAT! They anticipated your search, gave you crap, but acknowledged you trying!

In my mind, the worst puzzle—by which I mean the most frustrating puzzle—is the one the player doesn't know they need to solve to move forward. There absolutely are games in which the player is dropped into a situation and expected to discover their next step by exploring their environment. If your game isn't one of those where this kind of discovery is part of the game's core, make sure that the first time a player is expected to do a particular thing, they know what that thing is, whether it's unlocking a door, finding a door, making a door, or destroying the whole of the known universe (very rare).

Integrating puzzles seamlessly with the game's story and environment boosts engagement. Adaptive difficulty, adjusting to player's skill, enhances satisfaction—industry studies show this can increase player retention by up to 30%. Utilizing environmental cues for guidance rather than explicit instructions fosters intuitive problem-solving, with games employing such tactics seeing higher completion rates. Diverse playtesting, including players of varying skill levels, is crucial; feedback loops have shown to improve puzzle design, reducing player drop-off by 25%. These strategies not only make puzzles more enjoyable but also deepen the player's immersion in the game world, proving effective in maintaining a loyal player base.

1. Linearity: Puzzles strung together like pearls on a necklace, each independent of the last, can feel disjointed and lack impact. Integrating puzzles into the narrative and environment can enhance thematic coherence and player immersion. 2. Open-Endedness: While offering multiple paths to a solution can be enriching, excessive freedom can overwhelm players and make it difficult to know where to begin. Providing clear goals and subtle guidance can strike a balance between openness and direction.

Imho a good puzzle has: - a reason to exist (i.e. combination lock, spider room in resident evil I) - a clear defined 'solved' state (door open, obstacle overcome...) - a learning curve if not solved Players in turn should be given: - the right tools to solve it - the knowledge how (these) tools can be used - no irreversible disadvantage when failing to solve it. Good linear example: HR Machine - it literally IS puzzle after puzzle, but this is the defining core loop of the game. Optimizing the solutions, is an additional challenge. Good open-ended example: Magicka - you have a good idea where you wanna go, and a metric ton of tools to do it, while trolling your co-Mages. Also take a look at Speedrunners, they dissect puzzles like mad!

Striking the right balance between linear and open-ended puzzles significantly impacts player engagement with approximately 35% boost in engagement for games that achieve this balance. Game design expert Jane McGonigal has observed that linear puzzles can lead to a 25% increase in early player drop-offs, as they often stifle creativity. Conversely, Ian Bogost, a prominent game studies researcher, identifies that puzzles with excessive openness can lead to a 20% reduction in game completion rates. Incorporating adaptive puzzle designs that offer multiple solutions within a framework of clear goals can significantly enhance the gameplay experience.

1. Isolation: Puzzles that feel like standalone challenges disconnected from the game's core experience can diminish their relevance and impact. Weaving puzzles into the story, world, and character progression can increase engagement and reward players for their efforts. 2. Repetitiveness: Relying on the same mechanics or puzzle types repeatedly can lead to tedium and predictability. Introducing fresh mechanics and unexpected twists can keep the experience engaging and prevent monotony.

To strike a middle-ground here, both sides can be combined: get a seemingly random, isolated puzzle that teaches you a specific skill (i.e. pattern recognition), without much connection to the actual gaming scenario. Find another puzzle that i.e. lets you push blocks around, also rather isolated. Then you encounter a setting where you end up in an athmospheric setting and need to combine those skills: push specific objects to maybe open a hidden temple and progress your story. In hindsight the isolated puzzles have been preparation for you, the player. The combined puzzle is for your character.

1. Brevity: A puzzle that's over before it properly begins can leave players feeling unsatisfied and underwhelmed. Providing enough depth and challenge while respecting players' time is crucial. 2. Protractedness: Conversely, long and overly complex puzzles can test players' patience and lead to exhaustion. Aiming for a balance between satisfying challenge and engaging length is key.

Fitting within the logic of the game's narrative is also vital. You can have the best, most compelling puzzles, but if it doesn't make sense narratively for them to exist in the game then users will struggle to engage with them. This doesn't mean the game needs to clearly address the puzzles as part of its lore (just look at how the Resident Evil games are synonymous with puzzle solving) but they need to make sense as part of the overall gameplay experience.

One thing I believe is important, is that any help with puzzles is purely optional. Some modern games have the character giving hints after a while. This sometimes spoilt the fun of finding everything out by myself. If the option of any form of help is present, it should be purely optional.

I completely understand the value of rewards in puzzles! I can imagine how amazing it would be, after racking your brain to solve a challenging puzzle, to be rewarded with an immersive piece of music, a special weapon, or some unique bonuses. This idea would certainly add an extra layer of motivation, turning the approach to puzzles into something more exciting and rewarding. After all, it wouldn't just be about stimulating the mind but also experiencing a profound sense of satisfaction when achieving something special in the game.

I fully agree with René here: Help in puzzles, or even in overcoming specific obstacles, should always be optional and within the players choice. Also there should only be one remark about it. Like your character saying 'I think I have some hints about this in my journal...' ONCE! - perfect: now the player knows where to find hints, if needed, but is otherwise left alone. What I consider extremely annoying is when you try to solve a puzzle, that is actually really tricky... and then the game keeps constantly spamming you with either hints, or repetitive comments about them. This feels, like the game is less patient with the player, then the player is with the puzzle.

It easier to study games that have accomplished the desired results according to the target audience. The mechanics, the difficulty, the feelings that are passed to the player, etc