Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Can you lose at Wordle if you tried?

dontwordle.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 245 posts

Re: Show HN: Can you lose at Wordle if you tried?

#141

Post by golergka »

tablespoon wrote: post #61
ghaff wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the reasons I suspect that Wordle is popular is that it's "calibrated" (word length, number of guesses, don't have to play on hard mode) to almost always be winnable if you have some semblance of a decent English vocabulary and some sense for letter combinations.

> One of the reasons I suspect that Wordle is popular is that it's "calibrated" (word length, number of guesses, don't have to play on hard mode) to almost always be winnable if you have some semblance of a decent English vocabulary and some sense for letter combinations. Seems like the perfect popular game: be easy enough for most everyone to get, but just hard enough to give a feeling of mastery. I had a similar fe…

Easy to learn, impossible to master is actually one of the classic tenets of game design. I'm genuinely curious, did you hear this or variant somewhere before, or did you come up with this on your own?

Re: Show HN: Can you lose at Wordle if you tried?

#142

Post by qrian »

Got it first try without undoing! Key was guessing the answer at like step 4 and reverse engineering it from the back.

Don't Wordle 8 - SURVIVED Hooray! I didn't Wordle today! ⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜6438 ⬜⬜⬜⬜470 ⬜⬜⬜⬜132 ⬜⬜⬜⬜15 ⬜⬜⬜⬜4 ⬜1 Undos used: 0

Re: Show HN: Can you lose at Wordle if you tried?

#143

Post by rubyist5eva »

azemetre wrote: post #58
LZ_Khan wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Um.. elden ring?

Literally spent 50 hours mucking around exploring everything I could before realizing that you have to fight Margit to progress the story. I honestly thought it was a game like Shadow of the Colossus where you freely explore and just fight bosses. Fun game but some very terrible UX decisions that seem spiteful at times.

You don’t have to fight Margit, he is completely optional and so is the entirety of Stormveil and the boss there.

Re: Show HN: Can you lose at Wordle if you tried?

#144

Post by rubyist5eva »

spywaregorilla wrote: post #136
wfleming wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From Soft games are, I think, popular with a particular niche precisely because they swim against the tide here. Even their games, though, although they are famously and genuinely difficult, do try and guide the player to success. They just do it in somewhat subtle ways by trying to kill you a lot. I’ve been watching a let’s play series on YouTube of Dark Souls I & III for a while (“Souls Academy”), and one of things…

I thought Elden Ring was a bit weird in this regard. Margit is likely the first boss people fight. And he does introduce a lot of concepts that seem pertinent. He's classic souls boss with a few touches of the game's unique concepts. He hits very fast, sometimes without telegraphing. If you're competent at Margit then Godrey is likely to be mechanically simpler. But then for some reason every single other major boss…

I found the biggest challenge with Margit was that he telegraphs too much. Hell raise his weapon and then just hold it much longer than you think he will, you roll early and then he punishes you.

Re: Show HN: Can you lose at Wordle if you tried?

#145

Post by rubyist5eva »

ar_lan wrote: post #115
azemetre wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Literally spent 50 hours mucking around exploring everything I could before realizing that you have to fight Margit to progress the story. I honestly thought it was a game like Shadow of the Colossus where you freely explore and just fight bosses. Fun game but some very terrible UX decisions that seem spiteful at times.

I did the same exact thing. In fact, the whole rest of lakes of Niurnia I had found far earlier than I found Margit because I accidentally found the shortcut and thought - well, he was blocking this path, so I guess he's not necessary.

I didn’t find the shortcut around Stormveil until my second character. After a while I realized that Margit-Stormveil-Godrick are all completely optional.

Re: Show HN: Can you lose at Wordle if you tried?

#146

Post by FatalLogic »

dontwordle wrote: post #124
FatalLogic wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great game. Doesn't it push players towards a strategy of working out the solution 'offline', though? I mean, you start by playing almost the same as standard Wordle, just to guess the answer, without entering it. Then undo everything. Next, figure out a solution which avoids that word. Finally, type in your entire solution. This could be a bit grindy, and not in the spirit of the game, but it seems like almost assur…

I agree with your take. It's definitely a problem with the current game format. I have thought through some different alternatives, but not a fan of any of them up to this point.

Reducing the Undos to about 3 could be enough to make that strategy less of a certain win

But you're smart to be generous with the Undos while introducing the game, because it helps users get familiar with it

Re: Show HN: Can you lose at Wordle if you tried?

#147

Post by ki_ »

fun game, i tried, i got to the last row, but there was only 1 word left, so i lost. My strategy was to use words that use many of the same letters. e.g. "rotor". I might be able to beat it, but, at row 4, finding words is really really difficult.

Re: Show HN: Can you lose at Wordle if you tried?

#149

Post by TimTheTinker »

FatalLogic wrote: post #146
dontwordle wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with your take. It's definitely a problem with the current game format. I have thought through some different alternatives, but not a fan of any of them up to this point.

Reducing the Undos to about 3 could be enough to make that strategy less of a certain win But you're smart to be generous with the Undos while introducing the game, because it helps users get familiar with it

Maybe add a "hard mode" that reduces undos to 2-3

... as if it isn't hard enough already :-D

Post reply on HN