
Design Is Why 2048 Sucks, and Threes Is a Masterpiece - garycomtois
http://www.wired.com/2014/05/threes-game-design/
======
bryanlarsen
It's a nice narrative to think that the innovative product where they spent
1.5 years agonizing over the details is obviously superior to the derivative
product banged out in a weekend, but that's not the case, in my opinion.

I much prefer 2048. The $2 I spent on threes was $2 well spent, but 2048 is
the game I pick up when I want to play something. (although the game should
have been called 4096).

~~~
jaegerpicker
2048 is a far worse game, there is literally no challenge to it. Granted I'm a
big fan of threes but I can literally beat 2048 every single time I play it. I
did a simple test one weekend and played 2048 to measure how many times in a
row I could beat it. I got 15 and stopped out of boredom. I find it
dumbfounding how anyone can compare the two and not find 2048 an extremely
poor clone.

~~~
bryanlarsen
If you're winning 15 times in a row, you're not moving fast enough. The appeal
of 2048 is that you move so quickly, it feels cathartic. If you're not moving
fast enough to make the occasional mistake, then of course you're going to get
bored. If you're not making mistakes, you're also missing out on the fun of
digging yourself out of a hole.

And as I mentioned in my original post, the goal for me to get 4096 or over
50,000 points. 2048 is easy, 50,000 points isn't.

~~~
Tyrannosaurs
But isn't that you having to add a level of challenge to the game that it
doesn't have?

House ruling is fine but shouldn't that level of challenge (either through an
enforced time limit or some other means) exist in the vanilla game?

~~~
bryanlarsen
2048 is a very accessible game, which is a large part of it's appeal. Rather
than adding levels of difficulty, the better variants use achievements (like
my 4096 and 50,000 goals, and your time limits) to keep it fun once you've got
the basics mastered.

~~~
Tyrannosaurs
But the point is these aren't parts of 2048, they're just things you're
putting on it.

It may be, in effect, a customisable game but that feels accidental rather
than anything the designer intended. I could make any game harder by drinking
heavily before playing it but that external factor making the game more
difficult hasn't really improved it as a game.

Worth saying, I'm not wild about either game. For me they're simply not
rewarding and I found myself resenting rather than enjoying the time I spent
on them.

------
metaphorm
The success of 2048 is some good evidence that minimalism in design and
minimalism in aesthetics are both good ideas.

Simply put, 2048 is more elegant than Threes. It might have flaws that the
developers of Threes have solved. It turns out that those flaws don't really
matter.

~~~
jaegerpicker
How do you figure this at all? Threes has been incredibly successful, top 5 in
the Apple app store, currently 21st, and an Apple design award. This thread
assumes 2048 is more popular but we have no real proof of that. Beyond that
2048 was available as an App in the store and it has not even close to the
kind of sales/buzz as Threes on iOS or Android. In fact right now Threes is
28th on Android paid games list and the top 2048 clone is 83rd in free. On iOS
it's similar with Threes at 21 in paid and the top 2048 at 57th on the free
list. I know 2048 is primarily a web app but the best comparison we have shows
Threes in a pretty positive light.

~~~
judk
The free web app has loads of players that haven't bought a native app

------
blakerson
Just because Wired is reblogging Threes' own piece on 2048[1] doesn't make it
any more legit.

[1]
[http://asherv.com/threes/threemails/#letter](http://asherv.com/threes/threemails/#letter)

~~~
theg2
I remember reading this when 2048 came out and it came out as a huge whine
from the developers. It completely turned me off of Threes.

Someone succeeded using a similar idea, and in many people's opinions, they
did it better and it was free. The next step shouldn't be to write a smug blog
post about how the other product is crap and people should be paying you
instead.

~~~
judk
Did you read the threemail post? It wasn't how you describe.

------
lnanek2
Considering Threes! is a failure compared to 2048's usage amounts, it would be
more interesting to hear what they did wrong. E.g. wasted over a year working
on something they should have pushed out immediately. Spent money on design
that wasn't needed. Etc..

~~~
jaegerpicker
How does Threes! get considered as a failure though? There are a lot of
assumptions in this thread but little actual proof. What we can say for sure:
\- Threes is currently higher on the paid app store lists than 2048 is on the
free lists, and as best as I can tell it's hight in the combined free and paid
lists. \- Threes won an Apple design award \- Threes continues to sell fairly
well (top 30 on iOS and Android)

We have no real numbers on 2048 and if you view it via the HN echo chamber I'm
sure it looks like 2048 is a more popular game but I'm not sure that's true in
the larger outside market.

------
JetSpiegel
This article shows how mobile gaming may be profitable on the short term, but
in the end of the day, AAA games aren't going anywhere. It takes so much few
time and expertise to clone mobile games, investing on a obile company is just
insanity.

Comparing this to Tetris is just hubris. I bet there won't be anyone people
playing Threes in 30 years instead of the latest fad.

~~~
jaegerpicker
Mobile games have been around for 6 years ( and that's really pushing it, I'd
argue that we only have 4-5 years of actual mobile game history to look at )
compared to 30+ years of AAA studio type of game dev. We are still learning
what works and how to build games. More and more indie devs are figuring it
out. Those are the people that are worth investing in. One of the underlining
points of the article (granted it's not pointed out) is that a lot of the same
people are finding repeated success in mobile games (Ridiculous fishing,
canabalt, Threes!), both devs involved in Threes! and all of the advisors
mentioned in the article had already succeeded in the App Store.

The comparison to Tetris is also valid. It's a very popular, simple to play,
hard to master game on a wildly successful platform. A game that draws in
large numbers of non traditional gamers.

~~~
Kurtz79
30 years ago it was 1984, and at the time game development was probably more
akin to embedded software engineering today, having to program at a very low
level of abstraction (if any) from the hardware.

It doesn't really seems right comparing game development now and then (or even
15/20 years ago), the amount of advanced tools, public knowledge, step-by-step
tutorials available today is something developers of the time could never
dream of, and had to learn/build for themselves.

~~~
jaegerpicker
My point was less about the difference between now and then and more about the
built up knowledge base that exists from that much collective experience.
Especially about game UI design. Super Mario Brothers (or Quake/Doom or
warcraft etc...) has more in common with a more modern AAA game than a touch
screen based app when it comes to Player controls and design of the Player
interaction. We are only lately really starting to figure out how to make
really good serious touch first games. Leo's Fortune, Fates Forever, Thress!,
Monument Valley, and Wayword Souls are all great examples of this process. In
game play none of them are completely revolutionary but when you combine the
touch controls and player interaction with the type of game play they offer,
then IMO each of those is a major step forward in game design for touch
devices.

~~~
Kurtz79
Yes I got it and I agree with you, my point was that Mobile Game Development,
regardless of its relative youth, is evolving at a much faster pace that
traditional games have, so comparing them in terms of years is kind of
pointless.

Genres like real-time strategy, first person shooters, MMOs took years to be
"invented", while we see new (and successful) concepts of mobile games
basically every month.

~~~
JetSpiegel
> while we see new (and successful) concepts of mobile games basically every
> month.

With the rise of Free2Pay, and the blight of IAP, I would argue otherwise.

~~~
jaegerpicker
The app store is certainly starting to move in a different direction. A lot of
new games with new models are finding success in the App Store recently. See
Fates Forever, wayword souls, leo's fortune, Threes!, Civ Rev 2, Monster
Hunter 4, and monument valley. All are either paid apps or an "ethical" Free
to play model. Vainglory and Revolution 60 are example's of games in the
pipeline also.

------
moron4hire
The designers wailed and gnashed their teeth, "but the _design!_ " while the
rest of the population went back to drinking their coffee.

~~~
Zikes
-went back to drinking their coffee and playing 2048, the free and open source game available on almost any platform.

~~~
jaegerpicker
Right, and the designers/developers of threes! are making a living, even a
pretty good living off of Threes! and no one is making anything off of 2048.

Threes! is a better experience across the board and it is cross platform in
it's intended form factors, it's available for iOS and Android.

~~~
Zikes
My point is, 2048 took off like wildfire because it's free and the majority of
clones were forked from it.

The last time the Threes vs 2048 debate was posted here, half the comments
were "I never heard of Threes. I didn't even realize 2048 was based on another
game."

~~~
jaegerpicker
Threes is a wildly successful game in it's own right, an Apple design award
winner, currently 21 on the top paid Overall app store list, and at one point
was in the top 5 in the top paid list. A lot of those users that half bought
likely have never heard of 2048. This a good example of selection basis in
affect. 2048 was wildly popular on HN but I have rarely seen it mentioned on
other media sites, even mobile gaming focused outlets.

~~~
brazzy
For yet another possibly biased data point just like your own: some weeks ago
I found myself sitting between two strangers playing 2048 in the subway.

------
goatforce5
FWIW, Threes is(/was) the App of the Week at Starbucks Canada last week. Go
pick up a card if you want to get Threes for free (no purchase necessary, I
guess. Just grab one off the counter and go).

------
waterfowl
I for one feel like this hasn't been discussed enough on hn.

~~~
Igglyboo
We need a couple hundred more 2048 clones before we can discuss design merits.

------
rdl
Threes is actually pretty badly designed as a mobile game, imo. It has too
many potential control points on a small screen, is audio intensive, and has a
long startup time (I mean, wtf. It takes 5-10 seconds to start up!)

Threes might be a better "game", in that there's an easy strategy to do well
in 2048, but Threes is a bad mobile game. The ideal mobile game would be
something which could be played for 30-90 seconds, paused or looked away from
without lasting negative consequence, but with timing as a key factor, and 4-8
possible touch points on the screen, IMO.

"Rez" would probably do well for mobile (the playstation vibrator game).

------
jljljl
I've played and enjoyed both games.

Threes is beautiful, but to be honest it sometimes feels so...heavy. The
animations, the sounds, the repetitive music...sometimes it grows tiresome.
Meanwhile, 2048 is something I can throw up on a browser on any device
(something I can't do with Threes) and just hash through a few games. This is
not including the time I spent on the various 2048 clones, made possible
because (again unlike Threes) the source code for 2048 is freely available
online.

It may be less challenging, but when has challenge ever been a criteria for a
game to be fun, or even a "masterpiece"?

------
bengali3
A great success by the threes team for sure.

But I have to wonder what if that final version had been banged out in the
first weekend, would it have been recognized as the winner? Would a team then
stop innovating and switch to build it (and saved 1.2 years for who knows what
else)?

From a product dev standpoint i'm torn. There's a lot to be learned through
iterating through complexities, challenging everything and ending with a
simpler solution. But there's plenty to be lost by the argyle distractions as
well.

HN, how do you do know when to stop brainstorming and ship?

~~~
oddevan
I'm not sure myself, but I'd wager it's when the brainstorming and iterations
are getting less significant. When you're changing less and less through each
iteration, then you know it's getting close to being done.

That being said, at some point someone (preferably someone wise and smart)
makes the decision to ship. And they do need to make that decision.

------
cm2012
We all know the Doge2048 is the superior game to both (I'm only half
joking...)

------
xpose2000
I think the problem with Threes is that it is slightly too hard, which leads
to too much frustration. We all love a challenge, but at least its possible to
eventually beat 2048.

~~~
tuananh
then why is it Flappy bird was a hit!?

------
cowbell
3s > 2048! But 2048 is more popular?! How did it happen? I've heard this story
before.

I think the author of 3s screwed up by going iOS first. There are millions of
hungry Android devs out there. If you release a game that's iOS only, and it
turns out to be really popular, and it has fairly simple game logic... there
will be an Android clone in under 24 hours.

It's a cautionary tale. Release on iOS first at your own risk.

~~~
acheron
Yeah, the Threes devs released iOS first and made a ton of money, and
basically no one made money on 2048. I can see why releasing on a platform
where people actually pay for apps is a mistake.

------
ychw
I disagree 2048 sucks. It's a totally different game from Threes. But I do
think a little design will make 2048 better -- that's why I created "Edge Up
3072". Try it out: [http://3072.clingmarks.com/](http://3072.clingmarks.com/)

------
pervycreeper
The article fails to explain in explicit terms what exactly makes "threes" so
much better than 2048. Time in development is irrelevant to the user, who only
ever sees the end result.

------
adamors
Is there an end to Threes? The highest tile I reached is 768 which isn't that
high (but it was quite hard to achieve).

~~~
Fuzzwah
Maybe I could interest you in my game called Thirties!

Exactly the same, but with far more impressive numbers.

------
afatc
Everyones talking about 2048, but how do Threes free clones affect the real
paid version?

~~~
kybernetikos
This is interesting, because I think the most likely effect will have been to
increase sales of Threes, especially since the author of 2048 provided a link
to Threes on the page.

------
Fuzzwah
I thought we'd all added "Threes! vs 2048" to the ever increasing list of
useless topics of argument.

Skimming over the comments here, I could easily replace Threes! and 2048 with
Mac and PC, or XBox and Playstation, or Beer and Wine......

------
higherpurpose
I don't buy it.

------
stefantalpalaru
Overdesign is why Threes sucks and 2048 is a masterpiece.

