How can we design our single player game for retention?

Hi there! Just a 2 cents. TL DR: What are designs that increase retention in single player games?

These days, it is difficult to retain players/to keep on playing a single player game; because, for many it is a 'one and done' thing, just like watching a film; you (only) watch it once, then done/saw it...'seen it' already; you may see it again - Later, much later...because it was good and want to 'resee it again - for old times sake/is an old classic you did not forget/you remember and want to resee (later)'; since, it is (more or less/but more likely less..) 'replayable'; I mean it can be replayed (for single player games) but you start 'from the start' once again (like starting a new game/new quest...again; you already finished the game - to its end (you may played many sessions/loaded 'saved games' and advanced/progressed...to the end/finished it); now, you're starting all over again, from the start; like a story game, from the debut; even if you already done/finished the game/know already everything about it, to its end.); because, once done, the surprise is lost and then, they see no point to doing it again (or little, besides it's great/fun, wanna play it again?...); since, it is a 'long time' investment, to finish the story/single player game. It is not a (easy) 'pick up&play' 'play 5 minutes on the go and done' 'infinite replayability' 'multiplayer' game.

That's what it is; multiplayer games have this element going for them; this infinite replayability and it makes for 'infinite retention'...sort of; since, multiplayer games depend of the audience (being there in large numbers..and in the first place, to play 'online/in multiplayer..against others (online))). It's why MMPORG games are so great because combining multiplayer + 'open world' (lots of stuff to do/see...infinite map size/land size to cover)...

How can we design our single player games to keep players playing them (replayability), Longer, than these multiplayer games.

Besides the obvious; 'excellent game', excellent graphics, excellent polish, huge scope, huge budget, a theme that they want, 'hooky gameplay/hooked', immersive/interactive world/experience, senses triggered (eye, ear, mind..), great story/characters --like a film, filmic/cinematic/cinematographic presentation, AAA, truly memorable...

What (else) is memorable? What makes a games stick in their mind and last (besides, AAA quality)?

Since, today, players have limited time, money and resources to allow/allocate to games...so they keep the best of the best at most affordable (F2P Free 2 Play -- AAA); not just that, they often don't want to invest the time because 'churn'...'next game releasing Tomorrow...oh boy...I have 3000 games in my Steam backlog I have not Even played it...and There's More...games coming...pheww...I guess I will be playing games...for 5 minutes Top - on the chrono/watch clock...because I can't...give more than 5 minutes..'per game'..1 million other games are asking me my time''. (It's like women on online dating websites...the prettiest get the pick of the litter in types/numbers of men fawning at them/writing them; they have abotu 100,000 suitors at the click of a button; UltraSelection in the making; cherrypicking the cherry on the miracle sundae).

So it becomes a tug of the player's time/money/resources with so many games vying for them...
who gets them?

OBviously, the AAAs, MMPORGs and other F2P games that free, polished and infinitely replayable...
and oftenly, multiplayer. Indies get chosen too, but, they need to be special/unique (enough) and show high polish; I would like to think that indie games Can make single player games that find player retention high..but the more I read reviews/people's say...the more I realize they want different experiences (which indies can offer instead of same ol' same ol'..) but, clearly, they want extreme quality too and oftenly, very high replayability, so, high retention (to continue/keep on playing...whether game was done/finished..or not).

It's important, because now that's the Other battle/competition between games...which games 'Retain' the player...

If the player has just 4 minutes to allocate per game (caus' running out of time..just give me a quick game..play and done..in 5 minutes...Next Game)...that's really bad for single player games 'Asking' 'more time' of the player; he/She does not have this time to give anymore (since so many games to play/pick&choose)...people invest Time Only in the Best of the Best of The Best...they have no time anymore (to give...or waste (depending on who you ask)?) on certain lesser games.

It's the same thing...at a Gigamonumental Library...one Dzillion books..there..you think people read them all...impossible; people pick & choose the books to read...among the gazilliions of books...MANY off these books Sleep and were Never read; some of these Medieval Books....have been sleeping for centuries on the shelf...

So how can we 'Pop' and they choose us...to read our book; I know the easy answer is; MARKETING...market to as many eyeballs...like AAA games do; put 75% of budget on marketing...
to have your game been seen at planet-wide and Universe-Wide...

Some have said : ''certain single player element do keep/seem to retaain players...
like for example, in Doom, there were 'secrets', 'secret passages/doors/hideouts'...things 'to uncover'...and 'Easter Eggs'...things that made you 'Come Back'..for more...you thought you 'had figured it all out/figure out this game in entirety...but you were wrong, there's More to discover/uncover about it...it is the 'Gift of the Gab'..'this game Keeps on Giving...long afther you completed it/finished it'; so you come back to replay it, story game or not/single player or not''..

I do think that hidden gems/treats/secrets...etc...really do increase 'wanting to find them/unlock the 'locked content' in the game...so you Have to keep on replaying it - to Complete Everything of it...

I guess the 'content', adding more content, (as easy answer) is why these single player games would last much longer; kind of like giga Open World games...that have infinite content (albeit..it may be 'same content repeated over and over...becomes stale/too repetetive/gigagame with nothing in it/empty space

''a game the size of an ocean, and deep as a puddle''..hence, is why use procedural randomness; you can't make Infinite Unique content...it's impossible; unless you randomize it/ and even it shows 'too samey' after a while; because it's the same assets repeated over and over..); it's also why I don't like this 'infinite content making' after you release the game; it'S ok to make more New Content/Downloadable DLCs ..long after the released game...but like...can't do this forever...need to move on, at some point/it costs time/Money to make 'Extra -Content' after teh game is done. Now, next game...moving on/moving resources to it.

It'S important, it's why movies have to be 'brief and to the point'...they have only 2 hours to make a story...not 2 weeks...films based on 1200-page story books...are hard/extremely hard to do in 2 hours...because you skip a lot of stuff/lots of extraneous 'micro-details' in the book; you do a 'condensé/'the essence of it'/'short-résumé''...

The Challenge of a game is also said as something that can increase retention or Push away...like too hard...too easy...depending on the skills of the player...taht they must be in the 'zone' 'flow/confort zone'...

Thanks for reading, Sorry for the length.
Just a 2 cents.

PS: I should add, that today, it seems that 'fan service' or 'GAAS/Games As A Service' are what seems to determine long-term retention; because, it seems, that games have to cater, not just be something; Catering to the audience; so that means, oftenly, a 'presence' online and giving them what they want (which that is what all business do..they give what they customers want..), it's just that it has become a 'fan service/fan catering' thing; there is a difference between serving/servicing an audience Enough vs coaxing/playing to customers wims/wishes, because it seems that devs have less and less agency anymore; it's 'fan service' or nothing. Like, the middle ground has disappeared; where, the dev, had more agency..despite/whatever the audience said; I'm not saying what the audience wishes is not important; it is, I'm saying today there is Less and Less Choice of the dev to make his/her own choice; it's the People/Customers/Audience that Choose - For - the dev. And that's great; and bad at the same time. It's now purely 'Servicing/Catering' to 'desires'...because so many games, audience seeks what it wants...and ignores/avoids the rest; that means the dev must do what the audience asks; or the audience leaves.

And, I'm sorry, but that's Hard to do (can't please everybody and you wish to put Your vision in the game), sure you could do whatever they ask; but, deep down, you're not really make a game/your game, you're making a game for them/they are making it (indirectly) - by telling you what you should or not do. Pure servicing. Customer could say: ''Fetch.....go get stick.''. And you're forced to fetch stick (like dog). We are not going to just do everything they ask. It's a Blessing and a Curse. With 'fans'. There is nothing wrong to have fans, it's just today, fans are transmorphed into 'Fan - or - you don't exist.' Some ''fans'' are a bit too rabid and will Turn Against You in a heartbeat - if you don't please them in their every way. That is a culture of 'Fast Food/Consumption'; fast meal...throw it in the garbage if it's Not Perfect...Next. Fan word is charged and can be distorted; and is 2-faced. With customer feedback; You still make the game, but you have to 'take some, leave some'..it's just a worrying trend today; 'Fan Servicing' (makes me think the film, 'The Fan' with Robert de Niro and Wesley Snipes; just a 'weebit too fan')..i.e. 'crazy'). It's like, parents catering to kids' needs, that's what it is. Sometimes, the parent has to say no. Can't always say yes ('yes parents'). And, I know all business cater to their audience/customers; 'Customer is King'. ..does not change that today it is Even More Catering/Servicing. It's good and bad; no in between anymore; if you go in between/stand your ground and do what you want, they just ignore your game. Games are now 'made for Picky/Choosy/Passionate fan Audiences' or if not, 'made for no one/but you, who made it'.


cognoscence.com

 

You have alot of time on your hands, and sorry to say, you talk too much, lol. I do understand and get your point. seriously. I work on/dev MMORPGs, your honestly "over thinking" said subject. I feel that some of your post is a frustrative dig, the other half is more of a cry for help.

There are many released games that are single player, but still has "re-play" value. Every game has a certain "mechanic" to it, thats the hook.

 

From what you wrote, you already know a solution, even if slightly unethical one: design a "skinner box" experience. Preferably a looter ARPG or roguelike, with as many time gate mechanics as possible. RNG loot, RNG crafting, confusing character progression system; in case of roguelike, you can even balance the levels in a way most runs likely end in a failure. Of course, procedural generation will be a nesessity, in order to water down a scarce content as much as possible. Source: played Path of Exile for a while, as a single player game, and starting to lose my patience with it

 

Why retain players at all? Do have some sort of monetization plan? Why not just sell the game, then go on to the next game?

 

Sorry, that is a big wall of text.

Let’s start right there, don’t throw walls of text at players.

and I’m not just being snarky, that is the number one killer of retention.

Let people figure things out, but also heavily invest in nonverbal language.

 

Make the game fun.

 

Way too much text, did not read.

However, in my experience the single player games that took up the most amount of my time were:

1. Games that had a 'sandbox' element where you could at least do many different things depending on the mood.
2. Games that were skill based that didn't have any obvious ceiling

Skyrim is the one I've spent the most time in overall, because you can do so many things and explore the world endlessly, there's a lot of stuff to do but also not doing anything much is already a pleasant experience.

Age of Empires is the other one I've spent the most time in (maybe more than Skyrim) because it gives you that experience of growth and expansion over and over again, along with the sense that you can always get better.

On the other hand, some games that I expected to like, I quickly lost interest in. Prey and Deus Ex are games I wanted to like (because of the theme) but somehow they feel like too much of a narrow, claustrophobic gameplay experience (and not in a good way).

Mass Effect would have been the same way except that they added enough command & control elements (managing your team, choosing which missions to take, etc) that when I'd had enough of the shooting I could focus on other things. I've played Mass Effect 2 many times over the years. I didn't like the last game very much though, precisely because you were railroaded along a series of events that interfered with any sense of control over what and when to do things.

 

Make the game hard to play but with steady progress each try. Angband and Moria don't have any DLC and were played on text terminals but getting to the final level is really hard, though each time you can make progress and go deeper.