The scenario is simple. They are 30 minutes in and have 50 minutes of puzzles to solve. They'll probably be stuck in the same spot for 25 more minutes. Do you go in and offer a clue? Send one even though they didn't ask? Do you have a policy that you send in a clue if you know they are getting behind? Any tricks or ideas to make this easier for a team that is horribly stuck?
Posted Feb 25, 2017, 3:49 AM UTC
First of all, I tell them at the beginning that if a simple majority want a clue, I'll give it to them. That prevents a couple of die-hard players from ruining everyone else's fun.
But what happens more often is that the players kind of even forget they have the option of clues. I'll send in a simple "how's it going?" message if I see them struggling for a long while. This can prompt them pretty softly. Though some people don't like it, I imagine they'd like wasting their time and money even less.
We let them dangle. We stress at the beginning of the game that they have X clues and we are watching and listening. If they don't ask for the clue it's their own fault.
This is currently what I'm doing, but I fear too many people leave having a bad experience which doesn't help word of mouth, so it makes me nervous.
We practically beat it into their heads that we have a hint system built into the game and if they need help all they have to do is ask. This is a game with a victory condition. The hints are there for them, if they choose not to use them that is on them. I have never received a bad review because of not delivering a hint when not asked.
If people are stubborn, and ive talked to make people afterward that just didnt realize they were so far behind, i might post a simple 'Hint?' and see what they do, a lot of times they should "yes!" because for some reason it just doesnt occur to them, or they just need an excuse to ask for one.
I'm not an owner, but an enthusiast. My GF and I do rooms together, and our preference would be to not receive a hint without asking for it. It really cheapens the experience to be given the answers.
As long as we're trying things and working productively towards an answer, we're having fun. And the satisfaction of solving something particularly hard is great.
I've found that couples who play without bringing friends often want to work this way. It's how they like to spend time together and difficult challenges are what they are looking for. Even when it's just two of them in one of our harder rooms, I ask if they want me to interject if they've been stuck for too long, usually it's a no.
I think you need to take step back and analyse when and why people are asking for clues.
I've done 5 escape rooms now and every single time I've gotten a clue (asked for or not) it's made me really lower my perceived value of the experience. Why? Because the clue was a sign of how bad the puzzle was designed. Every single time it's made me go 'what the hell, how was I possibly supposed to know you wanted me to do that?'
examples:
If you've followed good design practices the 'what' needs to be done should be crystal clear, the 'how' is the part that's fun to figure out. As a veteran game designer, the concept of needing clues infuriates me - it's a sign of bad design - and often needed because users don't know what they're being asked to do. (In most 'game' experiences, the designer doesn't come with the game to give you clues when you get stuck, so why is that escape rooms seem to always be willing to give them out?)
Users should be able to figure out puzzles because:
Here's another way to think about it. The fun of a room is making progress, not outsmarting the designer's weird internal logic. So, if you look at a simple 4 digit combo lock with 10 digits per pin, that gives you 10^4 (10,000) possible combinations. Just by putting pressure on the lock and spinning the tumblers in a systematic way you can pop that lock in under 2 mins ... if people consider that more reasonable/easier than solving your complex puzzle, the puzzle has failed to engage.
Edit: You mentioned in another post:
This is currently what I'm doing, but I fear too many people leave having a bad experience which doesn't help word of mouth, so it makes me nervous.
Well, if they don't finish because they couldn't figure it out they're going to have a bad experience, that's a given.
But telling users their 'mistake' (really a design mistake) in a clue or telling them in a debrief, that they couldn't figure out the 'strange logic', isn't going to change that - it's only going to change the timing of it. Instead of being upset at the end, they'll mostly be upset in the middle, which causes increased distraction and frustration for the rest of the experience.
Just a thought.
Interesting post. I agree some puzzles/clues are way too complicated for their own good. One thing that I really don't like in some rooms is the "double clue." For example, you have solved/opened 98% of the room and all you have is one clue left. The clue is actually for 2 different things or you have to backtrack to use an old clue you thought was complete.
However, I disagree with all clues given detracting from the experience. For example, one time I did a room with 3 of my friends who are all pretty good but the room was massive, made for up to 12 people, had a total of 6 different rooms/secret areas you could go in and out of. No way we could have finished without the clues we got, still had a blast.
I just opened a small room myself and some people just don't look hard enough for a clue/hint/key that's hidden or tucked away. It's not from poor puzzle design, it's from some people not being meticulous enough.
Also, if you are spinning a 4 digit combo lock for 2 minutes in an escape room, you are doing it wrong :)
Just saw this reply, so figured I'd shoot back and give you some of the best advice you'll ever get as a new designer.
It's not from poor puzzle design, it's from some people not being meticulous enough
Wrong. I repeat - WRONG. They failed because YOU failed to give them enough knowledge to hunt more.
What you're saying is essentially amounts to 'I put an obvious door in front of my users, but my users couldn't open a door because they're dumb'. When what this really means is that as a designer you haven't shown them how to use the door properly - there wasn't enough information.
I suggest you read 'The Design of Everyday Things' - or at least a crash course in signifies.
This is really what this whole thread is about. Clues are additional signifies on what to do, because what was in the room wasn't good enough for the task. Which, by the very definition of 'Design' is a failed design - users can not perceive how to interact correctly, so they can not take the proper action.
No matter how obvious it may seem to you, you didn't communicate effectively to your audience that same obvious vision. No big deal, this is how design works. But step 1 is admitting it's YOUR problem to fix.
If people aren't finding your extra hidden stuff it's for 1 of 3 reasons (all fixable)
** I have written off so many hidden panels because they didn't open with reasonable force, only to be told 'pull harder'. 'pull harder' is a terrible clue. If i was supposed to pull harder, there just needed to be a signifier that it could indeed open as i though - perhaps an image (like on a battery case) of it open. All it takes is pulling on a slightly stuck drawer to write it off as 'intentional' for fear of breaking property. The best version of this I ever saw done was finding a picture in a drawer of a hand pulling the safe out of the wall on a hidden hinge - bingo, instantly knew it could open when before it was a negative signifier (giant heavy safe) to be moved.
This is also why, IMHO, hidden object puzzles are both lazy and bad design in escape rooms - they're a both a psychology trick and trap. Finding the first parts is rewarding and fulfills our need to succeed, but each later part becomes harder to find with less reward each time - the final discovery is often very anti-climatic compared to the first.
** Unless I have some reference, how do I know how many things to find? If I'm building a jigsaw puzzle I know when I'm missing a piece. If I'm looking for blocks with letters on them, how do I know if I found them all after 5 or 100? How much to collect is important part to communicate to your users.
It's also just more engaging to know how much you're looking for, following on my comment above. If you know you need to find 8 things, there's an actual (like physiological) process that happens in the brain when the group hits that number - there's both a competence and social needs fulfillment. And all of that is just ignoring if you leave it up to users to decide when they're done. Of course, there might be an intentional reason to go the more frustration way - like if you're trying to create a sense of failing in the 2nd act of your theme/story.
** Lots of rooms don't have flow done very well. So people might have 7 of 8 things to find, and be looking right at a locked box and completely convinced the 8th is the box ... so the goal is open the box. But the reality is the 8th piece gets you the key to get in the box. Knowing what to work on when is an important part to communicate to your users.
I think all but 1 room I've been in has had people waste tons of time trying to solve a puzzle they can't even work on yet, because they had no information telling them to look elsewhere. The only information they had was hidden too well. For example, A room I did had a metal gate in a door frame to get out of - to open the gate, the button was on the on the exterior side of the door frame almost elbows reach away. Meaning you had to stick your hand way out of the door and feel for it - there was no possible way to see it. The only information we had in the room was 'the button is hard to see'
So you tell me - are all of these issues/problems I'm pointing out 'not poor puzzles' and just people not being meticulous enough? Or is bad design?
I know where I stand - I'm pretty much done with rooms that are just about trying to outsmart the designer. 'Can you jump through my logic loops?' just isn't engaging any more. I'm looking for more of an experience these days, something that actually impacts me.
As a parting thought exercise I'll leave you with this question nobody seems to know a good answer to at every room operation I've asked: Why is 10-30% completion rate on your room a 'good' thing
1-3 out of every 10 of your users feel like a champion, the rest go home licking their wounds - and have no reason to try again. So who is it serving? Someone at some point decided it was a good idea, but nobody seems to know why ... Just a thought.
Also, if you are spinning a 4 digit combo lock for 2 minutes in an escape room, you are doing it wrong :)
What I was saying is that I can open any lock of this type in under two minutes just by guessing. Every time I see one in a room, my first thought is to just skip any puzzle that might tell me the combo and just open it myself with systematic guessing.
Edit: One last thing:
For example, one time I did a room with 3 of my friends who are all pretty good but the room was massive, made for up to 12 people, had a total of 6 different rooms/secret areas you could go in and out of. No way we could have finished without the clues we got, still had a blast.
No doubt, being led through things can be a fun experience too. I love boot camp training!
Don't confuse the fun with good design though. There is a difference between and activity and a game; which depends on how much the user is the driving the actions to overcome challenges. Simon says is a fun game, but a good escape room it is not.
Seed the necessity for clues during your introduction. Let your group know most players take X amount of clues so they don't equate hints with admitting defeat.
I remind them of the time and that they have clues remaining, people tend to be pressured into getting a clue
I mean, the one I work for doesn't have a hint system at all. I think if you have one and they arent using it, that's their choice.
Are you sure the solution is clear enough?
We've had a lot of groups finish with zero hints and in great times, so we know it's possible, but hadn't really thought about removing hints all together. Every group is so different. Do you get groups that get completely stuck?
When I say we don't give hints, I mean the players don't have a way to ask for them, but our room is designed that we can subtlety point people in the right direction without them feeling like it's a hint per se. It's also non-linear so it's not possible to get stuck to the point you can't progress.
Oh cool, that makes sense. Both our rooms have multiple linear progressions.