What do you think of score systems in games

[Candle]

Do you think it hurts a game or adds to it when they can get a score for doing something in the game and showing the score.

[Nikolas]

I think that it helps the player to know how far in the game he/she is. If you have some nasty surprise or something and you don't want the player to know how much more he's got then skip it. If I know that I have 98/100 I now that I'm near the end. Maybe, now that I think about it, you could use it in your benefit, by playing with exactly this thing. Give almost all the points in the begining and leave the player to wait for an ending that has a lot to come...

[Rui 'Trovatore' Pires]

Not necessarily, Nikolas. In many games you can finish the game short of several points, sometimes short of dozens of them. Heh, you could get all 7 points in Zork 3 and still be a long way from finishing the game.

I have nothing against or for score systems, me. But if they do exists, I keep an eye on them and see when the score goes down. If it does, I usually restore to a saved position, because I have the feeling that whatever I did might have put me in a walking dead situation.

[Candle]

So there is a negative part to the score system too? umm so you can lose score for doing something dumb.
I never thought of it that way.

[Rui 'Trovatore' Pires]

Sierra did it. It almost atoned for the walking deads, as in some cases it was a kind of hint.

Also, amount of score is not necessarily indication of how far the game has progressed not only because of the examples I mentioned - I now remembered Freddy Pharkas. The very first action you make that wins you points wins you 500 points. Out of 999. Needless to say, after that it adds up normally.

Also, in SQ4 you could win points by picking up a bomb, or something. But you needed to put it back (and so lose the points) or it would explode.

You can always have fun with score.

[TheYak]

I find it too distracting from the storyline in more serious games.  Seeing +5 points in GK3 when I manage to obtain some cat fur would be an annoyance (or at best, ineffectual).  In comical games, it can be a nice humor device.  I always liked the score in Sierra games.  It was also my gauge for seeing how well I did while replaying it.  Since it's so simple to implement in AGS, there's no reason not to have it if you're going to use it.  If it's not useful for seeing positive/negative/humorous actions, then why waste the time figuring out how many points you get for using the oven-mitt with a hot teapot?

[Candle]

I will be adding a score system to my game ,not sure how well they will like it but i'm going to try it out.

[Nikolas]

You know, when you mentioned score I assumed that the score is going to be like: 10/200, not just 10. Like this my arguments fall to the floor. Also the negative score is also very clever but you probably have to rearrange the game...

[Candle]

I went with the showing the score and not the total score till the end of the game.
I have a few ideas on how to do the negative score thing. lol
But don't want to give to much away.

[RocketGirl]

I never really paid much attention to the score in a video game unless there was some reason to, like a contest that you could only win by getting a perfect score which would then give you a code to mail in to enter or something... And I think that only happened once.

It was just never very important to me. So score or no score, I don't give a rat's tuckus.

[Paper Carnival]

White Chamber had some sort of a score system that affected the gameplay. During the game you get choices and by doing the right one you get a point, by doing the wrong one you lose one. To get the "good" ending you need at least 3 good points, otherwise you get the "bad" ending.

Ohter than that, scores in games actually irritate me. If I finish the game without getting them all I don't feel as rewarded as I would with all the points... And I'm always too lazy to go play the game again when I have finished it (unless it's Monkey Island or Dott, which don't have a scoring system).

[Huw Dawson]

Being brought up on the Discworld Adventure Games (Best. Games. EVER.), I've always found point systems to be pointless. They don't add to gameplay. (Of cource, neither do they detract from it...)

It (personally) spoils story based games if there's a little box saying how far you are.

[Candle]

I think I will do this .
Thank you for playing The Cabin your score was 25 out of 300.
hahahahahahahahaha

[Janik]

Most video games moved away from having a score but nowadays games like Grand Theft Auto have a % completion - which I see as being kind of like a score. In the same way, if you finish an adventure game and you're missing a bunch of points it indicates that maybe you missed a better way to solve a puzzle, or something, and that can add to replayability.

[Shane 'ProgZmax' Stevens]

Using a score of some sort is a solid way of determining endings.  For Mind's Eye I kept the scoring under the hood in a sense, in that the player recovered memories by performing certain actions, though it was a score of sorts.  At a certain memory level it is clear they have learned enough to achieve the best ending, and below that, well, you'd just have to play and find out that one.

[magintz]

When designing any user interface it is always a good idea to make sure there is user feedback, to let the user know they have done something, and that the system has acknowledged it. In the case of computer games it always helps to have progression, either in the form of a leveling up system in RPG's, better weapons in FPS and I think in adventure games a points system.

The points give the player a sense of success and progression, while overall not actually getting them any closer to completing the game, but if you have a total points they may be aware of how close they are.

I'm a strong believer in rewarding a point to everything the user can possibly do towards completing the game, with more points given to more difficult obstacles that have been overcome.

The down-side of having a points system is that it takes away some of the mystery of the game, as in how long left, did I do that right, etc... Another thing to remember is how realistic you want your game to be and whether or not you feel that a points system on screen will dissuade people from the illusion of your game.

If done right a points system can be a nice touch, but don't be over generous and think maybe of a possible punishment if the user tries something stupid, like talking to a wall or themselves, this can add to some puzzles as the user will not want to lose points by randomly clicking everything, and actually try to work it out logically.

Hope my two cents help.

Mag

[Rui 'Trovatore' Pires]

Magintz, thought all that makes sense, the story itself can be the reward. Instead of points being the reward, the player gets to see more and more story. So points aren't a necessity even for that goal.

[Ginny]

I find a point system, a visible one in any case, somewhat distracting from the illusion of the game. I agree that it might be useful for some humourous effects, but I don't think it's rewarding to the player to see numbers change, as much as it is to see the story progress, or some kind of visual/dialog reward.

Also, consider this for showing progress in a game (though it may not apply to all games) - In Grim Fandango there was a carved-looking drawing on the save game screen, and when you saved or loaded a game, if your game was further along then more of the drawing would be visible and fullt focused, while the reast was dim or perhaps completely dark (can't remember now). The drawing itself was of a four year journey of a soul through the 8th underworld, quite parallel to Manny's journey, but with a sense that it's universal to all sould who pass.
Later, that drawing also appeared ingame somewhere, something which made the save load screen even more symbolic.
Amazing how little parallels and connections can make a difference. But that's something for another thread, methinks..