I think just getting through a game shouldn't be too hard, I think for extra more erotic content it's fine to add difficulty. In games like these i would rather just be making choices and affecting the narrative than thinking about which option the designer wants me to pick.

I enjoyed the system you used in Getting to Know Christine. It was just difficult enough to be challenging but not too difficult that I became frustrated. There are some games out there where the player is supposed to be able to tell something is the wrong choice based on some very subtle facial expression changes. With the points listed underneath, it allows you to get a better idea of what you've done right.

When we're talking about score I think you can come up with arguments both in favour and against showing the score. On the one hand you want the player to know when he's done something right or wrong. On the other hand I think it doesn't help with suspension of disbelief. Without the score visible you can still believe that the game mechanics are more complicated than a simple 1-dimensional score.
And even with the score visible I do find myself cheating a bit by looking at the source, to find out optimal paths (usually the best ending requires an optimal playthrough, score-wise). Especially in branching conversations with multiple points where score is added or removed it's hard to know whether you are playing optimally, without resorting to trial-and-error (you never know whether getting points right now is better than not getting points in the hope you get points later).

For me personally Muze's scoring system works quite well. If you're not familiar with it, he gives a summary of factors contributing to good and bad score at the end of a playthrough (for example you could get points for "being assertive"). But during the playthrough you don't get to see your score. So the feedback is indirect, so despite fairly insightful comments in the score you still need to think about where this happened and what you did (or did not) do to cause it. However, if the descriptions of the score are too specific you might just be giving away the solution to the game. I do think it would be better than showing the score directly, it allows you to play the game without thinking you're just racking up points to get to the sex scene, and secondly when you finally get the feedback you still need to think about what you did wrong and right and where.

As for the difficulty of a game, I tend to prefer relatively easy games where the difficulty comes from making certain situations happen (generally different endings). For example in Masq it's not too hard to get a "good" ending, but getting to a specific scene can be devilishly hard (especially when knowing certain things CAN happen, through the teaser images you get).
On the other hand I don't mind more complicated puzzles, as long as they're real puzzles and not obfuscated trial and error problems. In other words, you need to be able to think your way through a problem, and you need to have all the information to get to the solution without resorting to trial and error.

The thing that I find most frustrating about adventure games (text driven rather than option driven) is the allowed vocabulary. Trying to guess the word in the author's mind without having any strong clues in the dialogue often means I don't know whether to pursue something using every possible synonym can get quite annoying especially if involved in a complex puzzle. Complex puzzles are fine so long as they make some logical sense and there is maybe a hint about components. Also I have been saved many times by walkthroughs, not the whole thing as the game would be rendered pretty pointless but a quick search through one can make you feel better so keep those puzzzles complex

ZaphodB wrote:The thing that I find most frustrating about adventure games (text driven rather than option driven) is the allowed vocabulary. Trying to guess the word in the author's mind without having any strong clues in the dialogue often means I don't know whether to pursue something using every possible synonym can get quite annoying especially if involved in a complex puzzle. Complex puzzles are fine so long as they make some logical sense and there is maybe a hint about components. Also I have been saved many times by walkthroughs, not the whole thing as the game would be rendered pretty pointless but a quick search through one can make you feel better so keep those puzzzles complex

This is getting a bit off topic, but if you want a good discussion of puzzle design, I'd recommend "Making Better Puzzles" by Stephen Granade (or possibly even "A puzzling development" by yours truly).

However, puzzle design with a system that provides the player with a list of options (such as RAGS or HTML games) is a very different kettle of fish. The fact that the player is aware of all the options available to them at any one time makes it difficult to implement traditional 'text adventure' style puzzles. In a text game it requires a flash of inspiration (although not a very big one) to work out that you have to spike the soda with alcohol to lower a girl's inhibitions, but if you're playing an option-based game and that's one of the options you're provided with then no inspiration is required at all (unless the author tries to hide it in a forest of other options, but even then the player can just laboriously click through them one by one). For that reason, puzzles in option-based games tend to be more about choices, which is why branching storylines are much more common in such games. The option-based version of "Guess the verb" is "Guess the option" where the player is given three or four options, but is not given any means of distinguishing between them, but Tlaero and phreaky's games have been blessedly free of that.

So I got a question that more or less has to do with difficulty. Msotly to tlaero/phreaky, but I guess other people can answer too. Basically, in the Virtual Date genre of games (or whatever) how do you keep the score and gameplay make sense? For isntance, do you just write the gameplay and choices and make the scores based off of that? Do you decide a correct walkthrough of all the correct choices before you begin, or what? As it stands now, I'm just writing what I think makes sense, but I went through and formulated all of the possible scores of an early part of the game as the current scores stands... which didn't really help, probably due in part to the fact that we have three separate variables... Anyway, how do you go about this process? If it helps, it's kind of a mix of Christine's linea story with some more variations and secret scenes...

I guess the easy questions are:
Do you write a game plan (offering the choices a player may make)?
Do you have some programming background? That may not be necessary but might assist with an explanation to you.

Any program that I'd write [in a different context however] would be drafted against a plan.
I'm sure Tlaero's Adventure Creator would accommodate you, but first understand the game plan, the sequence of intended events, and have them mapped in some way, flowchart?

Here's how I write these games. (I say "I" a lot below, but there's a lot of "we" since I bounce ideas off of phreaky.)

First I work out who the characters are, their backgrounds, drives, motivations, etc. That lets me understand how they'll react in different situations.

Then I work out the motivation and goal for the main/player character. This is important to me because it has to make sense. The goal for a first date can be "have sex with the girl," but that can't work for a sequel, because you've already had sex. This is why Life With Keeley isn't about convincing Keeley to sleep with you again.

Then I write an outline of the major scenes. Using Christine as an example, here's the level of detail I use.
Scene1:Intro. Watching her undress through the window. She leaves before you see anything.
Scene2:Bar. Conversation with dialog trees and points. No nudity. Another guy hits on her, player gets knocked out, and she knocks out the other guy. Check to continue.
Scene3:Workout. Workout, Sauna, Shower. Sandy in sauna. Conversation with dialog trees and points. Sandy joins in shower. Player can resist. Christine angry or happy depending on choice. Check to continue.
Etc.

Then I start working on a scene making a list of the images we'll need. "Outside the bar happy, angry, neutral. Inside the bar, range of emotions. Banana. Etc. I send that list to Phreaky.

I don't start writing the actual dialog words until I have the first set of pictures. In writing the scene, I often come up with new picture requests.

I add scoreable points in the dialog as I'm writing it, but I don't really pay too much attention to how many I add. Whatever flows well with the dialog. Then, when I'm done with a scene, I use the gameview to add up the possible points. Then I pick what I think are reasonable requirements for the different difficulty levels.

Then I play through a bunch of times tweaking things. When I'm comfortable enough with one scene, I move on to the next.

Tlaero

Based on my experience making a game with tlaero, I guess the most important thing is the main idea, goals, and plot of the game. Like tlaero explained, usually we spent quite some time to brainstorm, and eventually comes up with the main plot (or steps) of the game. After that, the rest should come automatically

Sometimes tlaero request specific additional scenes or images, sometimes I also request specific additional dialogs or scenes. Sometimes we even changed the main plot, tweak it a bit, to have a better result or to insert some additional scenes which is usually new ideas
Tlaero usually deals with the scores, but I guess it's more a 'go with the flow' type than a structured, calculated, 'flow diagram' type

When making analogy with playing music, I guess our style is more like 'jazz or rock' than 'classical'. We improvised a lot and stick to the main plot only for guidance

But the main plot (or milestones) is very important, because that will give you an idea about how good (or bad) the result will be