Discussion Questions on what constitutes handholding or not

[Quillion]

Several months ago, there was a flare-up of discourse on the handholding of PlayStation Studios' "cinematic" games (example). Many players agreed that it has become annoying, though developers argue that it's needed to "keep up the pace" rather than stick on one part of the story.

Personally, seeing a lot of things be bashed as "handholding", I'm feeling that it's becoming something of an "anti-buzzword". So I have some questions as to what things should and shouldn't be considered "handholding".

• Is just the simple of act of telling the player where to go a form of handholding? I hear from time to time that Zero Mission's navigating Chozo Statues are handholding (example), but I find that definition of "handholding" to be questionable because it counts times when the player knows where to go when the engagement comes from how they get there.
• If just telling the player where to go is handholding, are all story-driven games handholdy? It's right there in the name: "story-driven", as the story drives the game, and most if not all of them involve getting to a point where you meet with someone who tells you where to go next. Now, I love games that actively encourage figuring out what's happening and where to go like EarthBound, but dismissing all story-driven games as handholdy doesn't sit right with me.
• If a hint system is optional, is it automatically not handholding? Most agree that hint systems should be opt-in so that the player can hear them on their own time, but if optionality stops a hint from being handholding, by this logic, Fi's infamous "look up through the vents" moment in the Sandship wouldn't be handholding.
• If handholding can be optional, are quest markers in the average modern open world game handholding? I personally would think so, given that much has been said about how quest markers force engagement with the map as opposed to engagement with the world and diminishing the feeling of discovery, plus the additional problem of the average open world game's design being tied to them. That said, I don't see many people call quest markers "handholding", likely due to the general idea that such is exclusive to linear games and linear stories in exploration-based games.

I know this post is very scattershot and I'm probably overcomplicating it, but I don't want my own defintion of handholding to be too strict or too broad.

 

[Skittzo]

The first two points depend on how it's done. If you're reading a sign in game or an NPC says "plot stuff happening over there" in context then I would not say that's handholding. That's a natural and organic way for the player to read how the game is evolving.

Handholding would be you seeing that sign or talking to that NPC and then a UI message popping up saying "go do the thing you were about to do anyway", or your companion character saying more or less the same thing.

 

[Quillion]

The first two points depend on how it's done. If you're reading a sign in game or an NPC says "plot stuff happening over there" in context then I would not say that's handholding. That's a natural and organic way for the player to read how the game is evolving.

Handholding would be you seeing that sign or talking to that NPC and then a UI message popping up saying "go do the thing you were about to do anyway", or your companion character saying more or less the same thing.

So would the former case not be handholding even if talking to the NPC was in a mandatory cutscene?

Also, for the latter case, what if you get a UI message that just says "main story updated"?

 

[Skittzo]

So would the former case not be handholding even if talking to the NPC was in a mandatory cutscene?

Also, for the latter case, what if you get a UI message that just says "main story updated"?

This is of course all subjective but I would not see either of those situations as handholding. I think generally people consider it handholding if you're told repeatedly what to do, via some kind of mandatory prompt or dialogue.

 

[Zeal543]

there's a grey area when it comes to what is and isn't handholding but generally if a game gives me a hint on a puzzle or guides me to where I need to go in an exploration based game, it's handholding

 

[Quillion]

there's a grey area when it comes to what is and isn't handholding but generally if a game gives me a hint on a puzzle or guides me to where I need to go in an exploration based game, it's handholding

When you put it that way, handholding doesn't even inherently seem like a bad thing. By that definition, handholding can be tempered by agency over whether you receive the hint or not, or still letting you get to the next place in your own way.

 

[paranoodle]

I feel like it's really hard to come up with some sort of "standardized" definition, because almost every time I've seen the term, what it boiled down to was "I was told something more often or earlier than I wanted", and that's so subjective and different from person to person that I don't know if there's really a way to narrow it down to something more tangible.

Also I personally think that handholding isn't inherently a bad thing, the issue is really just with having your hand held when you would rather it wasn't. And a lot of games avoid that by making hints/etc fully in the hands of the player (optional hint systems, having to turn on map markers manually, etc etc), but that creates friction, which can be a whole other problem if players have more friction than what keeps them playing.

 

[PixelKnight]

I always liked the way Skyrim gives you options, the way you can have a quest literally guide you on the compass to the next step if you’re stuck, or you can turn all that stuff off, and be guided just by what NPCs have said and the clues that you’ve found. Which are often there in the world. I like it when journal entries and environmental clues lead you forwards (like faint bloodstained going under a hidden door) rather than just ticking off quests like a shopping list.

I don’t think just being ‘story driven’ is handholding. That’s just the nature of the genre of pacey, cinematic games that want you to feel like you’re playing a thriller. That’s fine by me. The original Dead Space literally had a line on the ground you could turn on to guide you to the next scene as the ship was a maze otherwise and they didn’t want players getting lost or frustrated when its a horror/action game. It’s more when it’s games that suggest the player has some kind of agency to explore and tackle the content in the way they want, but still make it a rollercoaster in long sections instead, that I get a little frustrated as at that point it’s different expectations. Some games I expect there to be a focus on moving forwards, some I might expect a little wider reign. Such as when a cut scene giving dialogue options that both either mean the same thing or give the same result regardless. Or cut scenes that go on forever. Just feels pointless to me- if you are going to railroad the player in plot-critical sections of an rpg and they can’t be allowed to deviate from it, keep it brief is my general thinking of it.

 

[PixelKnight]

One more thing. I do think companion characters are a slightly different issue, where they exist for exposition, companionship, camraderie, a dependent, guidance, etc etc. There’s a reason many heroes in fiction have a companion to bounce ideas off. But stuff like in God of War where your kid companion has an immediate grasp of a puzzle just by sight was a bit silly. If the lead character is a more experienced adventurer, and the player at this point has also been through several puzzle areas, then companion characters should really have options to have them shut the hell up until you’re stumped and wouldn’t mind a hint. As there’s really a difference between their involvement in cut scenes, their general chat/banter/exposition along the way, and when they are acting as the voice of the developer as a rookie GM, frustrated that the player doesn’t immediately grasp their trap room in under a second. Same goes for Zelda SS, and any other companion that ruins any sense of achievement by suggesting what you should do before you’ve even taken in everything you can interact with in the area. Thinking that players are likely to get frustrated before they’ve even walked around the current room/area just feels like a base assumption that the player has zero interest in the puzzle.

 

[correojon]

I think it's a more general concept that the specific examples that OP used. Games have challenges and those challenges rely on certain skills. To me, hand-holding is when the game stops you from developing and executing those skills and instead it gives you the solution to the challenges you are trying to overcome. If the challenge is exploration-based, then telling you were to go is hand-holding. However, if the path there is blocked and the challenge is to find a way around, then it's not because the game's allowing you to overcome the challenge by executing the "exploration" skill. Sid Meier said that "games are a series of interesting decisions"; To me hand-holding removes the decision making, you're just following a path almost like an spectator to what's happening around you.

For example, Skyward Sword's first hours are peak hand-holding because the game is telling you where to go and what to do at every minute. You're not executing any skill other than that of following directions. Fi interrupting you and telling you the solution to a puzzle is hand-holding, because she is solving the challenge for you and stopping you from executing the skills you were supposed to. It´s almost like the game is playing itself, you're not making any decisions , you're just executing a series of instructions at that point.

Like @PixelKnight says right above, "story driven" is not a factor at all when evaluating if a game is hand-holdy or not, IMHO.

 

[PixelKnight]

I think it's a more general concept that the specific examples that OP used. Games have challenges and those challenges rely on certain skills. To me, hand-holding is when the game stops you from developing and executing those skills and instead it gives you the solution to the challenges you are trying to overcome. If the challenge is exploration-based, then telling you were to go is hand-holding. However, if the path there is blocked and the challenge is to find a way around, then it's not because the game's allowing you to overcome the challenge by executing the "exploration" skill. Sid Meier said that "games are a series of interesting decisions"; To me hand-holding removes the decision making, you're just following a path almost like an spectator to what's happening around you.

For example, Skyward Sword's first hours are peak hand-holding because the game is telling you where to go and what to do at every minute. You're not executing any skill other than that of following directions. Fi interrupting you and telling you the solution to a puzzle is hand-holding, because she is solving the challenge for you and stopping you from executing the skills you were supposed to. It´s almost like the game is playing itself, you're not making any decisions , you're just executing a series of instructions at that point.

Like @PixelKnight says right above, "story driven" is not a factor at all when evaluating if a game is hand-holdy or not.

Excellent post, I think that’s an elegant way to put it, that whether a game section is handled in a way that feels like handholding depends on the problem presented to the player and the nature of the solution.

If there’s a rockfall in a valley and it’s gonna be fairly simple to go back and see if there’s another way around, something that can be accomplished by exploring the cliffs on either side, then I don’t need an NPC saying ‘let’s head up there!’ as the camera pans up towards a ledge and then zooms in on a rope that is now sparkling. I think that’s something I always found irritating with Uncharted, that it was a TPS that wanted to wear the trappings of a cool matinee adventure serial, but wasn’t really interested in exploration and puzzles, it seemed to just feel they should be there out of a sense of loyalty to its awesome theme (of Indiana Jones with more guns). So it’s obvious that all the attention goes into the gunfights and cut scenes and visuals, it’s hitting that pace of a thriller that I mention above, and that’s great- it isn’t Zelda and that’s OK. But if your characters are legendary explorers and treasure hunters and they hit a room with an ancient puzzle or a canyon to navigate, it feels a bit odd for the solution, that’s always pretty simple anyway, to be sparkling away and solved by NPCs in ten seconds in case the player gets bored. I’d always rather have an option to turn all sparkling shit and NPC dialogue off so I can enjoy the adventure sections too rather than be led by the nose through them in order to make me feel like an adventurer. In which case it comes back to player expectations- for later ones I went in knowing it was a cinematic TPS and not an adventure game, and that’s OK.

 

[Fresh Summer]

I think it's a more general concept that the specific examples that OP used. Games have challenges and those challenges rely on certain skills. To me, hand-holding is when the game stops you from developing and executing those skills and instead it gives you the solution to the challenges you are trying to overcome. If the challenge is exploration-based, then telling you were to go is hand-holding. However, if the path there is blocked and the challenge is to find a way around, then it's not because the game's allowing you to overcome the challenge by executing the "exploration" skill. Sid Meier said that "games are a series of interesting decisions"; To me hand-holding removes the decision making, you're just following a path almost like an spectator to what's happening around you.

For example, Skyward Sword's first hours are peak hand-holding because the game is telling you where to go and what to do at every minute. You're not executing any skill other than that of following directions. Fi interrupting you and telling you the solution to a puzzle is hand-holding, because she is solving the challenge for you and stopping you from executing the skills you were supposed to. It´s almost like the game is playing itself, you're not making any decisions , you're just executing a series of instructions at that point.

Like @PixelKnight says right above, "story driven" is not a factor at all when evaluating if a game is hand-holdy or not.

Agree with this and will add that in my mind the key element of hand-holding is the word hold. The 'you should do this' part gets in the way of something else you might want to do, or perhaps doing the thing you're being told to do in the way that you want to.

Overeager signposting and advice can be annoying in itself or prevent a game from being interesting but I recognise that it's a balancing act where individual reactions will vary. If it holds you back in someway (holding you back from what you're doing to stop and listen to Fi for example, or NPCs giving you solutions holding you back from engaging with puzzles properly) then the game is reaching out and holding your hand.

 

[Quillion]

I think it's a more general concept that the specific examples that OP used. Games have challenges and those challenges rely on certain skills. To me, hand-holding is when the game stops you from developing and executing those skills and instead it gives you the solution to the challenges you are trying to overcome. If the challenge is exploration-based, then telling you were to go is hand-holding. However, if the path there is blocked and the challenge is to find a way around, then it's not because the game's allowing you to overcome the challenge by executing the "exploration" skill. Sid Meier said that "games are a series of interesting decisions"; To me hand-holding removes the decision making, you're just following a path almost like an spectator to what's happening around you.

For example, Skyward Sword's first hours are peak hand-holding because the game is telling you where to go and what to do at every minute. You're not executing any skill other than that of following directions. Fi interrupting you and telling you the solution to a puzzle is hand-holding, because she is solving the challenge for you and stopping you from executing the skills you were supposed to. It´s almost like the game is playing itself, you're not making any decisions , you're just executing a series of instructions at that point.

Like @PixelKnight says right above, "story driven" is not a factor at all when evaluating if a game is hand-holdy or not, IMHO.

Yes, but like @Skittzo said, the definition should also include when the game is interrupting you to tell you the obvious when you can just see that yourself. Even far before the handholding of Zelda SS and many modern AAA games from the Seventh Gen onward, Mega Man X5 suffered from that too. Sure, you're going to do it anyway with or without the interruption, so it just comes off as awkwardly giving your guide character some presence.

Heck, this is what most of Fi's handholding in SS is tbh. The times when she even "solves puzzles for you" are rare, and as seen in one of the links in the OP, always optional.

 

[Quillion]

In which case it comes back to player expectations- for later ones I went in knowing it was a cinematic TPS and not an adventure game, and that’s OK.

I don't know how far player expectations can go though. Even if you go into a linear game without any expectations of exploration, that won't stop the handholding from being annoying. There's a reason why even linear game fans won't defend Skyward Sword.

 

[Dolce]

handholding is a loaded term only used to insult, it has no real meaning and changes based on the player, game and genre.

 

[Quillion]

handholding is a loaded term only used to insult, it has no real meaning and changes based on the player, game and genre.

There is some merit to the concept of handholding.

It's a bit of an anti-buzzword, sure, but what else would you call things including Alia in Mega Man X5-X7 or the companions in GoWR? Or sometimes even quest markers?

 

[PixelKnight]

I don't know how far player expectations can go though. Even if you go into a linear game without any expectations of exploration, that won't stop the handholding from being annoying. There's a reason why even linear game fans won't defend Skyward Sword.

Yeah that’s true. I think that one’s largely tied to ‘companion character is also the voice of the developers as a guide to each situation’, which isn’t the only form of handholding but is probably the most annoying, if only as the player can put the companions face on it as the source of annoyance when they are supposed to be a trusted ally. It’s rooted in the assumption that, for the widest market possible, you have to assume the player has never played a video game before. Which is totally understandable, but these games are dozens of hours long.

It’s fine when a game is ‘press x to run’ and ‘rotate stick to adjust camera’ and just tells you once in the opening moments of the game and then points you to an instructions page in the menu for future reference- not like games come with instruction books any more, so it all needs to be done in-game. But when it comes down to way more specific guidance every scene, freezing the game and giving the player specific instructions hours into the game when a little trial and error would solve it, it feels like the PC isn’t much of an adventurer and is just being led around by the nose by a guide that knows it all. That’s why I think they need to have the option to turn such guidance off at any point. If I’m playing Zelda and haven’t played for a decade or even at all, sure, let’s run through z-targeting a couple times. But I don’t want the exploration and sense of wonder interrupted by companions going ‘hey try lighting those really obvious torches’ or ‘there’s a door with a keyhole over here, let’s look for a key!’ Reminds me of Skyrim and how you’d sometimes get a companion say ‘hey, a cave, I wonder what’s inside!’ for the nth time. And I’d be like ‘Lydia, we literally just left that cave. There’s nothing in it. Because you’re carrying it all.’

If ‘handholding’ is a negative buzzword, then we can call it something else that’s more open to discussion than dismissal, something like ‘mandatory, excessive guidance’. I guess it’s the same as ‘railroading’, it’s putting a whole load of topics about game design into one word to castigate when sure, there’s good reason for some games and even some scenes to ‘railroad’ the player.

 

[Scrawnton]

To me, handholding is when the game interrupts you to tell you something about the world or gameplay mechanic before you even have a chance to discover it or play around with it yourself.

 

[Quillion]

Yeah that’s true. I think that one’s largely tied to ‘companion character is also the voice of the developers as a guide to each situation’, which isn’t the only form of handholding but is probably the most annoying, if only as the player can put the companions face on it as the source of annoyance when they are supposed to be a trusted ally.

That reminds of how Persona 5 players hate how Morgana stops you from going out at night "because you're tired", even though it's a limitation throughout the modern Persona games that's told via a faceless narrator. Then again, it might be because Persona 5 attracted so many newer players and they may have wanted something of an open-world-with-a-time-limit game.

That’s why I think they need to have the option to turn such guidance off at any point.

There's still two issues with optionality in handholding though:

1. What if the game feels like it's built around the hints rather than purely using the hints as a new player crutch? This has been part of the discourse of average modern open world games for a while now.
2. For a system that operates on "hint update" notification, what if you technically can ignore the notification, but the notification itself is still annoying? Mega Man X7 has this problem with Alia's "Can you hear me?", plus there's the whole Fi in the Sandship moment.

If ‘handholding’ is a negative buzzword, then we can call it something else that’s more open to discussion than dismissal, something like ‘mandatory, excessive guidance’. I guess it’s the same as ‘railroading’, it’s putting a whole load of topics about game design into one word to castigate when sure, there’s good reason for some games and even some scenes to ‘railroad’ the player.

I think handholding is a fine enough term; we just need to acknowledge that perhaps it's a bit more subjective and player-dependent than echo chamber forum-goers think.