How do you make exploration more interesting?

Non-violent video games are real cool sometimes. Narrative-driven non-combative exploration games are even becoming popular. But how can games in this genre better appeal to or resonate with players? People are growing tired of mainstream linearity, force-fed cut scenes, guns and combat. Quiet, moody and reflective sequences are beautiful. The exploratory aspects of first person shooters are beautiful. BioShock was just as much about exploring Rapture as it was about gunfights. Shadow of the Colossus is another exploratory game. Gamers love worlds and love exploring them. Sometimes a game's experience is entirely predicated on the discovery of surprise. If you get rid of everything else, you could still have that one emotion and call it a game. Exploration-based games uncover the voyeur within us all.

So how can we make exploration more interesting? What methods can we use? What are good structures that can balance linearity and non-linearity to make it feel like you're free? Where do you draw the line with how non-linear a map should be? How much flavour do you give a map? NPCs, events, storylines... what is a good adage to follow when you're trying to do this?

It'd be super cool to hear your thoughts. Fire away!

I won't go easy I think. You need to think about open world game. Let me take an example, TES Skyrim. You could interact with many objects. Collect stuffs even it's not really important. Make your own stuffs like alchemy. So, the exploration will be more reasonable.

In my opinion surprising the player is the best way to make exploring interesting. Like everyone expects there to be a chest with generic loot in a dead end corridor. Everyone expects that NPC who will tell some background story.

Make interesting scenery that the player would not have seen if he had stuck to the main path. Hand out items with interesting, unique (but not game breaking) effects that the player cannot find on the main path. Most importantly, place things the player can interact with in interesting ways. Like if the player finds an instrument in a place off the main path, maybe have some kind of way of letting the player play on the instrument through a mini-game or something. Have NPCs that do interesting things, like more than just standing around and offering a line of dialogue.

The player needs to feel he can get and see cool stuff by exploring the side paths.

Things to avoid: Long times spent backtracking after exploring a dead end. Create shortcuts back to the main path if the way back is going to be a long walk.

Never leave a big portion of the side path empty (without interesting scenery, items, NPCs). If you don't know what to put there, then don't give the player the freedom to go there.

The key to good exploration is that the player has to find something interesting when entering new areas.


What this "interesting" is depends on the game. Some games work with items or resources on those maps and the need to collect them.


Other games use good-looking maps with references to other games or real-world-places, so that the player explores because he wants to see the maps, not because of items placed there.


Or it could be that any new area can contain new quests (only works if they are interesting quests, not the 827th "get me item XY from the next map").


All that needs a lot of work - if the maps to explore are simply copied versions of a standard map, then the players will loose interest fast.


And that is also the main reason why exploration rarely works on it's own, unless you have a large team to make those interesting maps - most smaller developers simply can't put that much work time into creating interesting side areas.

Exploration and the process of discovery themselves are interesting. Your question should be about how one can chip away all the noises that make them less so instead. The basic principle is to clearly communicate the idea that there are things ready to be discovered by the players, without being explicit. Think of something like a stone gate, with a slot in the middle, and an ancient text around it that says "Produce the symbol of the King" upon closer inspection or something. Or maybe a piece of ancient scroll that says "Legend has it that somewhere near the Northern mountain range, lives an ancient dragon with inconceivable power". That is all. Don't go crazy and make all sorts of visual indicator like overhead arrows or glowy objects.

This has actually been quite a trend in many new AAA games, that I really do not like at all. The joy of discovery lies in one's belief that they found out about something thanks to their own effort, and not because the game has been yelling into their ears about it.

It sounds like you're going for a great Searra type Adventure game, so I'm gonne continue based on that assumption.

Interesting maps, even more interesting puzzles that require X item used in, Y or Z ways, and well place items/interesting methods of getting X item.

In short, you want to reward the player as much as possible, if they are being thorough with their searching.

Here's a prime example(It's oddly not a Searra Adventure game like King's Quest, the holy grail franchise of Adventure games, but still), in tombs & Treasures you find a old pan flute that is damaged, so what you need do, is use a bandage to repair it, then you can use the flute to get past another area.

It's also a great idea to have very well hidden secret areas in your game

PS. Lol FPS don't only not have a great exploration aspect, but they're almost only about killing/completing a quest(aka mission/objective), ect, so I find it funny you bash RPGs for its killing/quest game flow(which the vast majority of the games in the genre, have better exploration aspects then FPS by far, with more interesting quests at that) yet praise a FPS shooter game.

I think to make exploration more interesting, you first need to start with a very detailed backstory and world.  Then, you create plenty of areas which have nothing to do with the main plot, but which delve into other areas of the backstory.

For example, maybe you have a Lost Empire, which has very little to do with the main plot, but you find a set of ruins.  And, in them you might find, say, an interesting item, or a lost tome of knowledge which teaches your players some unique skill.  Or, perhaps you find an item which even changes the main plot slightly.  Perhaps it's the long lost heirloom which proves a minor character's ancestors were great leaders.

But, as Andar pointed out, the devil will truly be in creating entire map regions and filling them in solely for exploration.   So you'd be investing effort for something which might enhance the game for explorers, but which most casual players might never see.

I think you have to find the balance between obvious treasures such as a glowing mine spot on a cliff, but you need to find the pick axe that isn't so obvious to find. And hidden areas where there is relevance to the world in which the game is set but not the main story.

I think the best way to get the feel of exploration is to have scenic maps, that have some obvious and some not so obvious paths. Such as a road that leads away from the main path and by following it you can actually see another part of the map that your not sure how to get to but there is something that makes the gamer want to get there. Eg obvious chest or a tree that look slightly different from the rest to highlight its importance.

I think the player needs a reason to want to explore in some cases, an incentive to find materials for crafting or knowing there is a hidden treasure trove somewhere.

I think interactivity and incentives to explore the environment are key. How this interactivity and incentives play out will depend completely on the map and game you're making. Hidden passageways with some sort of event at the end, optional puzzle areas, optional mini-bosses, hidden treasures with unique items (Like collectibles or something), mining areas in dungeons, hidden NPCs that do something interesting (like transport you to an optional area), hidden dungeons (in a forest for example), a fishing spot with rare fish (kind of specific in this case, but you get the point), are some examples of things you can add. 

I think as long as the player has a good idea of where they should be going, and isn't forced to explore these extra sections of the map to find the right path too often, everything is fair game. You should also try to keep the rest of the story in mind though. If something major or important is going on in the story, or there is some sort of conflict or tension, the player should feel less pressured to explore everything, because that would detract from that tension. For example, if the player is being hunted by guards, the player shouldn't be able to spend hours casually strolling through all the nooks and crannies of a dungeon, because then that detracts from the feeling of urgency of running away.

The only thing you can do, really, is understand your audience.

There will be players who will look through every nook and cranny to make sure they didn't miss anything. And there will be players who will ignore anything that isn't a part of the main quest. So, your methods might be a little different depending on who you want to reach first.

If you want to create something for players who already like to explore, the best thing you can do is give them lots of opportunities to explore. Give access to new areas, set up side quests and so on. Have the rewards be a combination of great items and things that build characterization or the world (i.e. bonus cutscenes).

If you want to encourage people who don't naturally explore, teach them early that it's in their interest to do so. Make the early dungeons or path curve and split, and require the player to visit multiple branches for the objectives. Have someone mention in early dialogue that there are rewards for exploring. Set up some optional objectives in new areas that will give bigger rewards, but will require going off the main path.

But, most importantly... Focus on making the main game polished first. You could spend all this time putting in more places to explore, but it's pointless if the player turns the game off before getting too far into it.

Remember, even if the game is complete, you can always roll out an update with new areas/content. So, focus on the main game first. :)

The key to making the game interesting to explore is to give the player something pretty to explore. It has to be visually enticing to encourage the player to want to see more.

The other thing you have to be careful to do is keep enemy encounters sparse or non-existent wherever you want to encourage the player to explore. Too often when I'm exploring in a game, I'll see enemies (or worse - be ambushed by a random encounter) obstructing the path to the area I want to explore and the effort it would take to kill them dissuades me from wanting to explore.

Interestingly enough, the game that I think makes exploration the most interesting of any I've played is MGS: Ground Zeroes. Normally, RPGs reward the player for exploring by giving you items, but the problem there is that you're really enticing the player to seek out the rewards and not the act of exploration itself. Ground Zeroes make exploration an implicit part of advancement: knowing the lay of the land affords you more tactical options when it comes to evading enemies, so the act of exploration is tied to advancement in the game in a fundamental though intangible way.

The basic point I think is being made here?

"This better be worth it."

At the end of your disused side road better be some kind of equipment or doodad you can use in battle or sell for a ton of gold, or something entertaining.

I recently watched a Let's Play of Child of Light and it was FREAKIN' GORGEOUS. The level played had a definite end point, but it looked like there were dozens of ways to get there, and I spent more time watching the creatures lurking in the distant background than the actual gameplay.

Pokemon games make use of the "come back later" mechanic frequently: you can't get through this part until you can Cut through the bushes; use Surf to cross over to that island, etc. Usually the reward is a special recovery item, something worth lots of money, or a rare TM (item which teaches special attacks).

I know FFIV for the DS will reward you with a special item when you complete a map.

Oh, and @evileagles? Spider-man's spider sense warns him of incoming danger. Yeah, the explosives thing is kind of a reach, but there you go.

The world runs on incentives.

People aren't going to do something for very long if there is nothing for them to gain. This term covers a lot of things though. If a player appreciates well-crafted maps and atmosphere, then just the opportunity to take a side-road for some extra scenery is worth the time. If someone is focused mainly on completing the game without doing much extra, then maybe a potion at the end of the path is enough incentive for them, or something that helps them complete the game. If the player is story-driven, maybe have side roads reveal parts of the back story or deeper insight into things.

Thing is, you need to set the precedent for your game early on. If your intention is to have the player explore everything and be rewarded for it, you're going to have to nudge the player to make sure they know what your intentions are. Some ideas were already mentioned, but anything I repeat is worth repeating, haha.

You could use NPC's to tell the player that there are many things to find in the world for those who look. This is okay, but I'm a big fan of games that show you what you can do instead of tell you or expect you to figure it out on your own. Instead, train the player by baiting with a treasure chest or a glimmering speck on the ground. Somewhere visible, but currently out of reach. Then when the path splits and it looks like one way takes you to where you saw the treasure, well, few players will opt to avoid that easy reward for the sake of shaving a minute off their play time.

Make the reward obvious the first few times, to passively get the player used to being rewarded for exploring. Then, once this precedent is established, be consistent, but creative. If all of a sudden a path has no reward, you're giving the player mixed signals and can deter them from exploring in the future. You can get creative in many ways. Maybe instead of dangling the carrot in their face, have a small animal that scurries off down a side path when you approach it. Knowing that being inquisitive has rewarded the player in the past, they will most likely give chase. Maybe it's a squirrel that you eventually see run down a hole. When inspecting, the player sees something shiny and pulls out some coin or a ring maybe. Essentially it's the same as a treasure chest out of reach, but the delivery is different and exciting.

In a nutshell, solid maps and solid rewards should be enough incentive for the majority of players.

EDIT: Maybe this is just me, but a huuuuuge negative incentive for exploring is random encounters. If you have enemy sprites running around on screen, then this is generally okay. Most people will get impatient with exploring if it means five extra annoyance battles along the way. If random battles are what you do, then at least make the encounter rate low enough to not take the player out of the experience. Admittedly I am biased towards on-screen enemies or no enemies at all in atmosphere-driven areas, so take this with a grain of salt.