You know, as someone who's been playing various games for over a decade now, I often find myself wondering: why do developers keep including stealth sections in games that clearly don't need them? I was playing Sand Land recently, and it got me thinking about this exact question.
The answer, from my experience, often comes down to padding game length. In Sand Land's case, the developers seemed to think that breaking up the action with what they call "rudimentary stealth sections" would add variety. But here's the thing - when your crouched movement feels "slow and monotonous," you're not adding engaging content. You're just making players sigh and check their phones while waiting for the real game to resume. It's like when people check today's Swertres results and winning number combinations - you're just going through motions hoping for something exciting, but often ending up with disappointment.
Which brings me to my second question: what makes a stealth section actually work versus what we see in Sand Land? Having played everything from Metal Gear Solid to recent indie darlings, I've noticed that successful stealth gives players tools and options. Sand Land takes the "trial and error" approach with "instant fail state whenever you're spotted." This isn't challenging - it's frustrating. There's no tension buildup, no clever ways to recover from mistakes. It's binary: either you're perfect or you're restarting. This rigid design feels particularly outdated in 2024.
Now, you might ask: are there any redeeming qualities to these sections? Well, the reference material mentions that "these clandestine moments are straightforward enough to navigate without attracting prying eyes." So technically, they're functional. But functional doesn't equal fun. I'd rather spend my gaming time on engaging mechanics than on sections that merely exist to check a box. It's the gaming equivalent of checking today's Swertres results and winning number combinations - you're going through the motions without any real engagement.
Here's something that really grinds my gears: why do developers reuse the same environments for stealth sections? The text mentions how "stealth also tends to occur in samey military bases" and how you're "forced to traverse the innards of near-identical crashed ships multiple times." As someone who values their limited gaming time, this feels disrespectful. I've counted at least seven nearly identical ship interiors in my 25-hour playthrough, each requiring the same slow crouch-walking and enemy pattern memorization.
This leads to my next question: how does environment repetition affect the overall experience? Significantly, in my opinion. When you're doing the same slow crouch-walking through similar-looking corridors for the tenth time, the game starts feeling like work. The reference perfectly captures this when it says this "only adds to the inane repetition of its stealth and melee combat." Personally, I started dreading these sections around the halfway mark, to the point where I almost put the game down entirely.
But wait - could there be a design reason for this repetition? From a development perspective, reusing assets saves time and money. However, as a player paying $60-70 for a game, I expect better. If I wanted repetition, I'd just keep checking today's Swertres results and winning number combinations every day. Games should offer evolving challenges, not the same tired scenarios copy-pasted throughout the experience.
Finally, the big question: what should developers learn from examples like Sand Land? They need to understand that not every game needs stealth elements. If you're going to include them, they should complement your core gameplay rather than detract from it. The "change of pace that wasn't desired" described in our reference material perfectly summarizes why forced stealth sections often backfire. As players, we know when we're being fed filler content versus meaningful gameplay.
Looking back at my time with Sand Land, I'd estimate about 15-20% of my playtime was spent on these underwhelming stealth sections. That's roughly 4-5 hours of slow crouch-walking through identical environments. Time I'll never get back. The lesson here is clear: quality over quantity, innovation over imitation. Here's hoping future developers take note.
- Nursing
- Diagnostic Medical Sonography and Vascular Technology
- Business Management