![]() Skimming through the materials section of the manual opened that up to me which was cool but that slight tweak to how the game directs you to useful information would have made a difference.Īt this point in my playthrough of the campaign the one thing I feel like I'm missing is an option that tells me a bit more about forces acting on the bridge. I'd been struggling with a particular construction - Overpass - for a while and it was because how I thought particular elements would behave were a little different in practice than intuition. A reminder that it existed after I'd failed one bridge a few times would have been a handy prompt, I think. By the time it would have been useful I'd forgotten it was there as it doesn't "pop" on the menu sidebar. What happened with me is that I didn't need to peek at the manual for a while because the first few levels are straightforward. But I don't understand why that tip would be several optional clicks away rather than information you give as you launch the player into the campaign. The info about the stress toggle and the speeds of the replays is actually contained in the manual if you scroll right to the bottom of the tips and tricks chapter. It does tell you that there's a manual nestled in the side bar. That lets you see how particular bits of the bridge are performing under pressure and adjust your design accordingly. But it felt like a few bits of important information had been missed that point out where you go to start digging into those ideas.įor example, I don't get why the tutorial itself didn't tell the player that if you're having trouble with a bridge you can use the options to slow down the part where you watch how it works in practice in conjunction with the button that toggles the ability to see how much stress is on each element. ![]() So I understand the approach where you explain the basics and then let the player feel out more complex ideas out as they go. You can see why a game might prefer to keep the equations under the hood where possible. Obviously it's about the idea of making things approachable and people's responses to mathematical notation rather than a specific measurable fact (otherwise my A-level textbooks would probably have had readership of a fraction of a person). I mean there's that advice mentioned by Hawking in relation to A Brief History Of Time that each equation you include halves readership. I get that you don't want a player to be overwhelmed or that bombarding them with physics might be a misstep if you want your game to be approachable so I understand why you don't get that stuff by default. I figured it out slowly but it occurred to me that the tutorial left a couple of things out (unless the man at the door trying to sell me a new fascia meant I missed something crucial). It's called Overpass and you can use wood, steel and rope to get two cars over a stretch of water but leave enough room for a boat to pass through the middle. Or were pulling too much weight and weren't attached to enough triangles. Some was trial and error but largely I got the idea of what I was building and then it was a case of working out which bits weren't pulling their weight. I've gone through the whole tutorial and was gradually working my way through the campaign levels, figuring out how to build a workable solution and then, often, refining it to reduce the budget or make it more efficient. But I've started to see the parts where I've not quite got the hang of how the physics works and where the game is better and worse at helping me figure out why that might be. I feel like it's the sort of game you can sink into and tinker with while binge watching something on another screen or maybe listening to a podcast. So I've been having fun playing Poly Bridge this morning.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |