Why were dead ends even created in the first place? Game Design question.

[Takalol]

So... I was really close to 20 hours, but still a bit confused about how routing works since it's not that clear how anything works and stuff is not really explained. I prefer staying far from guides and other peoples gameplays for games like this one and I could figure pretty much most of the most imprtant stuff, or so I thought.

I got the level 2 antenna and went for a 2 spots route, but I didn't even know that a thing like "no gates spawn in this place" existed, I spent a good portion of 19 hours always doing the same stuff and ending the same way, teleporting back, I didn't even think about why you can't drive back, but I didn't care, I could always teleport back anyway.

Now I went for a run into later areas, got basically all energy orbs and a lot of useful stuff all the way.

Only to end on a map that was "Dead end", I needed to die? Why did I need to die and lose my stuff?
I lost 2 all-terrain wheels, that I could've used to just drive back lmao, why was this even implemented in the first place? Who even thought this was close to being a good idea?
After this fail I went to the map to see where I missed, and it was a "No stable exits" text. I didn't even know what that meant, and I'm am baffled at why would the game let me spend 50 minutes to die for free, lose my ♥♥♥♥ and say "well, too bad you lost your stuff"

If that happened in any other roguelite, I wouldn't enjoy that roguelite, I don't like losing all my stuff + extra stuff you take for granted that you don't lose easily, just because of a unexplained bit of text, 3 words. "No stable exits", this should be a warning message at least.

These dead ends may make some sense in the game lore and narrative, but game design wise, this is ♥♥♥♥, I just died after a 1 hour run and it wasn't even because of anomalies and stuff, it was because I clicked on the menu to die. And I lost a whole lot of ♥♥♥♥ because of it.

[Takalol]

Messaggio originale di Donovan Zanz:

Messaggio originale di Takalol:

I don't even know what to say about the guy defending dead ends.
I got out of the dead end worse than when I got in, I lost gear and car parts + loot
why would anyone do this? who thought this is a good idea? I spent 50 minutes to not only lose my loot, but lose the crafted stuff too, and what made me lose the loot was the text:
"No Stable exits"

They explained a lot of ♥♥♥♥, usually the most important, and I like figuring out stuff by myself, it's neat to know how close you can get to tourists, how you can throw flares at some anomalies, what's dangerous or not, by rewarding or damaging me as needed.
Now making me lose all my ♥♥♥♥ in a 50 minute run because of 3 words is not on the "NoT EvErYtHinG NeEdS tO bE SpOoNfEd ToOh ThE PlayEr" usual thing. If it's THAT important, then it needs to be spoonfed.

I mean, it DOES say "DEAD END" ... do you really need it to spell it out to you further? You know what those words mean ...

I want you to show me on this picture where does it say "dead end".

https://imgur.com/a/ABr9sJq

[SR212787]

Messaggio originale di Takalol:

So... I was really close to 20 hours, but still a bit confused about how routing works since it's not that clear how anything works and stuff is not really explained. I prefer staying far from guides and other peoples gameplays for games like this one and I could figure pretty much most of the most imprtant stuff, or so I thought.

I got the level 2 antenna and went for a 2 spots route, but I didn't even know that a thing like "no gates spawn in this place" existed, I spent a good portion of 19 hours always doing the same stuff and ending the same way, teleporting back, I didn't even think about why you can't drive back, but I didn't care, I could always teleport back anyway.

Now I went for a run into later areas, got basically all energy orbs and a lot of useful stuff all the way.

Only to end on a map that was "Dead end", I needed to die? Why did I need to die and lose my stuff?
I lost 2 all-terrain wheels, that I could've used to just drive back lmao, why was this even implemented in the first place? Who even thought this was close to being a good idea?
After this fail I went to the map to see where I missed, and it was a "No stable exits" text. I didn't even know what that meant, and I'm am baffled at why would the game let me spend 50 minutes to die for free, lose my ♥♥♥♥ and say "well, too bad you lost your stuff"

If that happened in any other roguelite, I wouldn't enjoy that roguelite, I don't like losing all my stuff + extra stuff you take for granted that you don't lose easily, just because of a unexplained bit of text, 3 words. "No stable exits", this should be a warning message at least.

These dead ends may make some sense in the game lore and narrative, but game design wise, this is ♥♥♥♥, I just died after a 1 hour run and it wasn't even because of anomalies and stuff, it was because I clicked on the menu to die. And I lost a whole lot of ♥♥♥♥ because of it.

Later on in the game you can craft a portal maker to open anywhere and get you back to the garage. Also, dead ends are marked on the map so maybe pay attention?

[Honorable_D]

It doesn't show there, it shows when you can actually plot a course to that junction. You can't directly plot a course to that junction you've moused over.

[Mattrex]

Messaggio originale di Takalol:

Messaggio originale di Donovan Zanz:

I mean, it DOES say "DEAD END" ... do you really need it to spell it out to you further? You know what those words mean ...

I want you to show me on this picture where does it say "dead end".

https://imgur.com/a/ABr9sJq

That's "NO STABLE EXITS", which, as someone pointed out previously, is different from "DEAD END".

"NO STABLE EXITS" means that once you enter the junction, you can only leave it through a stabilized road that appears on the map. These appear in locations where there are no gateways to bring you back to the garage, but there ARE further junctions available to be driven to on the map after that one.

"DEAD END" happens mostly early in the game, and represents the above situation, but where there would normally be stabilized roads to drive further, they cannot spawn because you have not progressed far enough in the story to have crossed into the mid-zone.

Until you complete the wall crossing mission, you are confined to the outer zone, even though many of those junctions will have connections into the mid-zone afterward. You can see this on your map in your screenshot. After you complete the wall crossing mission, what would have previously been "DEAD END" turns into "NO STABLE EXITS" because you are now capable of driving onward.

I no longer see "DEAD END" pop up much, if at all, because I'm capable of exploring into the deep zone, and presently most of those deep zone junctions are unexplored, meaning there will always be a gateway back from them. Maybe once you have every single zone explored they will make a comeback for the deepest parts of the zone, or maybe the deepest part of the zone will always have a gateway, but that remains to be seen.

This also, incidentally, answers the question for why "DEAD END" exists in the first place: it's a placeholder text for people who have not yet progressed far enough in the game to be able to cross the zone walls. The game isn't trying to ha-ha-gotcha you. It's not trying to make your life hard. It's an unavoidable consequence of the fact that junction randomization produces some zones with gateways and some without. It just happens that in early game, the zones without gateways can't let you drive through either, so the game gives you a big fat warning not to go there.

[Boralis]

Also if you scan you target distination, it shows you all stable routes you can take without dead ends. The map is mostly red junction until you scan your destination and junctions turn white indicating they are stable and have stable exits

[Aesyle]

Messaggio originale di Takalol:

I want you to show me on this picture where does it say "dead end".

https://imgur.com/a/ABr9sJq

Upper rightmost junction (just right from F2) is a Dead End, since it doesn't have gateway to teleport out and it doesn't have any roads leading out of it, only one road leading into it. So, hover over that junction and look what it says.

Btw, you have more than one Dead End on the map of yours (i counted 4).

[FakeFalcon]

I also had the same experience as the topic owner.
My car was smashed and many of the items I had collected were lost. As I looked at my battered car in the garage, I realized that I didn't have the energy to rebuild it again, so I should step away from this game for a while and give it some time.

[larry_walsh]

I think probably everyone who plays this video game has, at some point in their life, probably played another video game. And some games put up notices like 'DO NOT ENTER' in zones that are harder to traverse but have better loot. Do you think it's unreasonable for a person to see that notice in this game and not wonder what the actual design intent is? Of course not.

I've played a lot of video games in my life, and one thing games have taught me about playing them is it's frequently worth exploring, even if an area is dangerous. What is bad game design is to put in a notice that will pique the interest of players who have learned that same lesson from other games, only to have them discover that yes, the game developers put that in as a deliberate trap, the only purpose of a dead end in this game is to allow the players to enter there so they will lose.

This does not, in any way, enhance the player's game experience.

[♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥]

Messaggio originale di larry_walsh:

the game developers put that in as a deliberate trap, the only purpose of a dead end in this game is to allow the players to enter there so they will lose.

I mean, that's a theoretical possibility. Bit of cynical assumption. I think it's more likely that dead ends are the result of how the junctions and their randomness function in this game. You need to explore junctions to stabilize access roads to the next junction, and since junctions have a random amount of stable exits (which allow you to summon the portal), that means some unexplored junctions will have no access roads OR exits, becoming dead ends.

The game doesn't say "this might be dangerous", it says "dead end, do not enter". The developers have no say over your impulse control..

[Chilsner]

Messaggio originale di larry_walsh:

I think probably everyone who plays this video game has, at some point in their life, probably played another video game. And some games put up notices like 'DO NOT ENTER' in zones that are harder to traverse but have better loot. Do you think it's unreasonable for a person to see that notice in this game and not wonder what the actual design intent is? Of course not.

I've played a lot of video games in my life, and one thing games have taught me about playing them is it's frequently worth exploring, even if an area is dangerous. What is bad game design is to put in a notice that will pique the interest of players who have learned that same lesson from other games, only to have them discover that yes, the game developers put that in as a deliberate trap, the only purpose of a dead end in this game is to allow the players to enter there so they will lose.

This does not, in any way, enhance the player's game experience.

This person gets it. Any game with signposting like this should take the ideas explored in The Stanley Parable (or any Big Red Button scenario, really) into consideration.

If the game heavily advises against doing a certain action (ex. DO NOT ENTER), you can be sure that many players will do that action. Not every game needs to reward this curiosity like The Stanley Parable, but the design could at least account for it by implementing a “back door” that places the player back on the intended path after it is clear there is no gold at the end of a particular rainbow.

Forcing the curious player to die/reload, regardless of what game genie options are available in the settings, is a pretty old school, and unimaginative, way of implementing this back door. The rest of this game shows creativity in abundance, so I think the devs could have done a better job here.

[Mattrex]

Messaggio originale di Dogbeard:

Messaggio originale di larry_walsh:

I think probably everyone who plays this video game has, at some point in their life, probably played another video game. And some games put up notices like 'DO NOT ENTER' in zones that are harder to traverse but have better loot. Do you think it's unreasonable for a person to see that notice in this game and not wonder what the actual design intent is? Of course not.

I've played a lot of video games in my life, and one thing games have taught me about playing them is it's frequently worth exploring, even if an area is dangerous. What is bad game design is to put in a notice that will pique the interest of players who have learned that same lesson from other games, only to have them discover that yes, the game developers put that in as a deliberate trap, the only purpose of a dead end in this game is to allow the players to enter there so they will lose.

This does not, in any way, enhance the player's game experience.

This person gets it. Any game with signposting like this should take the ideas explored in The Stanley Parable (or any Big Red Button scenario, really) into consideration.

If the game heavily advises against doing a certain action (ex. DO NOT ENTER), you can be sure that many players will do that action. Not every game needs to reward this curiosity like The Stanley Parable, but the design could at least account for it by implementing a “back door” that places the player back on the intended path after it is clear there is no gold at the end of a particular rainbow.

Forcing the curious player to die/reload, regardless of what game genie options are available in the settings, is a pretty old school, and unimaginative, way of implementing this back door. The rest of this game shows creativity in abundance, so I think the devs could have done a better job here.

Given that The Stanley Parable was a satire of manipulative game design, I'm not sure taking unironic lessons from it is the best way to go.

I have come to deeply appreciate game design in which developers mean what they say - when "do not enter" is not some kind of 4D chess reverse psychology gambit but a straightforward "do not enter".

In Sunless Sea, a game full of potentially bad decisions, one decision stood out as among the baddest of them all. Before making this decision, the game tells you, straightforwardly, in non-narrative text, "Do not do this." And of course it still lets you do it, because one of the themes of the game is how unchecked curiosity drives men to madness and ruin. Sure enough, the decision is a terrible one with no payoff. Your character is irrevocably ruined. This, I thought, was a wonderful example of someone saying something and meaning it, no mind games - the only mind game is that *you* thought they might be lying.

I recognize the irony of saying "no mind games" in a game like Pacific Drive, which is otherwise full of mind games, but I think that the important part is that I never felt like the game (as a game) was lying to me, or trying to make me second-guess its intentions.

Ultimately, though, I think there can be no real reconciliation between these two positions. Some people simply don't want a game to contain the possibility of making the wrong decision and being punished for it. They want those decisions not to exist at all, or for there to be some sort of back door exit, or for the punishment not to be much of a punishment at all.

[SMJSMOK]

Messaggio originale di larry_walsh:

the only purpose of a dead end in this game is to allow the players to enter there so they will lose.

This does not, in any way, enhance the player's game experience.

If I were to rework this into something that makes sense, I would do the following: Yes, the "dead end" junctions are one way only - you go in and you aren't getting out of there alive. But they contain some special device or information that can't be accessed anywhere else. So the player would plan the route with not coming back alive in mind - they would be motivated to only bring the worst parts etc. It would basically be a challenge of "how bad can I make the car so it still functions somewhat to get me to the destination?" I guess it would probably be an optional challenge to get you some addition insight into the world-building, maybe some special cosmetic or something similar.

[Silvermink]

Dead Ends are temporary. Go do another map then check back, or use the node respawn to randomize it and try again. Exploration isn't a excuse for not planning ahead. There are plenty of zones to explore that you don't have to do the dead end zones. Not planning ahead is also a good way to end up in an unstable zone that is out to kill you. The route planner is quite simple to use, if you don't over think it or try to outsmart it.