Why the UX discussion around Elden Ring is flawed
And what does “good UX” even mean?
If you follow the recent debates in the video games community, you might have come across a Tweet, Reddit thread, or YouTube video discussing FromSoftwares’s latest game Elden Ring. Usually, FromSoftwar’s games are criticized for their difficulty. But this time, it is about their user experience. As a gamer and UX designer, this discussion piqued my interest.
Unlike past FromSoftware games, Elden Ring qualifies as an open-world game. But in opposite to other AAA games, it ignores a lot of conventions. Usually, those patterns help players orientate and understand what they should do to achieve objectives. Gamers and even other games developers found the experience lacking. In their thoughts, the absence of typical features felt inconvenient. Since FromSoftware opted for something else, they concluded that the UX is bad.
Based on my experience over the past 20 years, this view is too narrow. There isn’t one experience. It is not a set of specific features that make the experience good or bad. There are many different experiences with very different intentions. I am not working in the game industry, but I thought it was worth writing an article because this sentiment goes beyond the game industry. I see very similar tendencies in product design.
Elden Rings UX isn’t bad; it is different.
First, let’s talk about the game in question. Elden Ring is an open-world game. The games take place in a vast open-world that players can explore at their leisure.
Since these games provide a tremendous amount of freedom, game developers added UI patterns to guide players. These patterns usually involve a map with markers indicating what can be done. They provide a quest log that captures the current quests and the tasks to fulfill them. And there might be an in-game appendix that helps players look up additional information. All those patterns are supposed to help players progress through the game. In addition, they have a nice side effect to show all the content and make sure nothing is missed.
And here is where Elden Ring differs. The initial map won’t show you any markers, and there is no quest log or appendix. Players have to discover and keep track of quests themselves. I understand why this lack of guidance throws some people off. But that doesn’t mean Elden Ring has a terrible user experience. The director Hidetaka Miyazaki intentionally ignored those best practices. He envisioned an experience focused on discovery and community. The map only fills with markers once places have been discovered. Players can leave vague messages for others to hint at important places or secrets. You can see remnants of other players that provide a glimpse of what others do, where others go. He used different game mechanics more in line with his experience intention. It is certainly different, but it is not bad.
What drives the user experience?
As I mentioned above, the sentiment “Good UX = convenience” isn’t unique to the case described above. I see this more than often applied as a blanket approach to products’ user experience. To extend this might stem from the famous UX honeycomb diagram, developed by Peter Morville in 2004. It showed seven facets that drive the user experience.
If you look at usable, useful, findable, and accessible, these facets suit usability and convenience. But it’s important to note that those terms are facets, not goals. They require an overarching experience intention to guide the details of the experience. And defining the intention is a creative decision that depends on the business, the context, and the user.
Compare tools like Photoshop or Instagram. Both allow users to edit photos, but their user experience is vastly different. That doesn’t mean one or the other has a bad experience. They are made for very different audiences with different goals in mind. The intended experience drives the details of what usable means.
Different application types have different UX intentions. Let me make a few examples:
- Professional tools need to be efficient.
- Online stores want to be convenient.
- Educational tools are often playful.
- Social media apps want to engage users.
- Governmental websites should be clear and straightforward.
The intention differs based on the context. Most applications have more than one intention. To judge the UX on a product is paramount to understand its intention and look at the honeycomb facets accordingly.
What does good UX mean?
UX is not only about convenience. A good user experience looks at the audience, the application’s context, and the business needs. These factors drive the experience’s intent. And the intent determines the appropriate features. Peter Morville’s honeycomb facets can be used to define further and shape the UI patterns to bring those features to life.
UX is more about more than just convenience. It is the expression of a creative intent, that can have many goals.
Defining the user experience and its intent is a creative decision. Next time you look at someone else’s user experience, try to understand its intent. Think about how did the design team what their product to be perceived.
