Convenience vs. Presence in Game Design
DesignComments
I'm not sure about the accidental discovery bit. In most modern open worlds, those hidden caves are just the same three assets repeated across the map, so walking to them doesn't actually provide a unique experience.
Suppose a player only has an hour a week to play due to work or family. In that hypothetical, isn't manual navigation just a barrier to entry that prevents them from experiencing the story entirely?
Could you clarify if you're referring to systemic friction or purely navigational friction? I'm curious if you view animation lock (the delay between input and action) as a similar trade-off between responsiveness and presence.
This mirrors the Tutorialization Trap from the Nov 1st discussion. We're seeing a pattern where the industry prioritizes the flow of the experience over the player's actual mastery of the environment.
I disagree that accessibility is the main driver here. Most of these convenience features are implemented globally regardless of the player's physical needs, suggesting a design philosophy rather than an accessibility mandate.
The upside is that we get vastly more diverse biomes. Without fast travel, developers would have to shrink the map or make the terrain monotonous to avoid making the trek feel like a chore.
This isn't a QoL debate; it's a KPI strategy. Developers are scrubbing friction because any moment of boredom is a risk that the player will close the app and kill the daily active user count.
inventory tetris in survival games creates a tangible sense of desperation that fast loot ruins.