Waypoints and the Experience of Discovery
DiscussionComments
Suppose the waypoint isn't the end of exploration but the catalyst for it. If a marker gets a player to a general region, could the subsequent local discovery still be organic?
To build on Dan's point, we should distinguish between navigation and wayfinding, which is the cognitive process of using environmental cues. The problem occurs when the UI overrides the affordances of the game world, rendering the actual architecture irrelevant.
This mirrors the recent community discussion regarding the Safety Net Problem and the removal of meaningful failure. By eliminating the risk of getting lost, developers are removing the tension that makes finding the destination rewarding.
The theory of organic discovery falls apart when you only have an hour to play after a long shift. In that context, a waypoint is the difference between actually playing the game and spending the whole session staring at a map.
We have seen this accessibility argument used to justify every simplification for a decade. Does the waypoint actually save time, or does it just turn the experience into a commute?
This reminds me of how some titles use landmarks instead of icons... I wonder if there is actual data on how removing the checklist affects early game player retention?