25
votes
Games where the campaign serves as the tutorial?
Recently I just finished Hitman: World of Assassination's campaign, where the main campaign is basically a tutorial for the main "meat" of the game, i.e. contracts, Freelancer, and pushing down your assassination time for the story missions.
I really like that style of game, on this site famously I'm always talking about Monster Hunter which functions similarly (main campaign into grinding out for materials and decos), and was wondering if anyone else had any similar games.
I think roguelikes fit this a bit too, but for the sake of this topic not devolving into "what's your favorite roguelike", hopefully there are different suggestions! (Backpack Hero does something like this lol)
Titanfall 2. Not only does it fit your description, it is also one of the best singleplayer experiences ever. Even if you don't want to play multiplayer, I recommend grabbing TF|2 on sale if you can.
Although I have to say I disagree with you about Hitman. I would say the campaign is the main part (or "meat") of the game. The extra modes are additional things for people like you and I to provide some variety. Definitely cool things to have, but not central to the game experience. However I will say Freelancer mode feels more like a sequel game instead of addon content, so your argument may hold true for freelancer.
Ooh Titanfall 2 is a good one for sure, I've played through the main campaign a couple of times, but the 50 gig download is always offputting for it. That's a good answer though, because Titanfall 2 is probably my favorite multiplayer experience in general.
Hmm maybe because I got into Hitman through watching speedruns but I always felt like the campaign is something to just "get through" to unlock all the tools to use in contracts and later runs.
May I ask what your aversion to a 50 gig download is? These days many modern games are easily twice or three times that download size.
Mostly that I have slow internet, not a lot of space, and it takes an hour(ish) or more to play through a 6 hour campaign and maybe a couple of hours of multiplayer before I have to delete it again to play another modern game that takes up more than 50 gigs.
Ah yeah slow connection can be a big issue. If you're on PC I would recommend getting another hard drive just to dedicate to storing your games, but if you're on console not a lot of options. They do sell external hard drives you can plug into the consoles by it they are a lot more expensive than ones for PC.
lol I'm using a SFF case and already filled my 3TB since I'm a bit of a hoarder, and it's annoying to get into the case to upgrade anything. It's just laziness more than anything and I just don't feel like a (very good) 6 hour campaign is enough justification to keep 50 gigs in my hard drive.
You know you can use an external HDD/SSD for that, right? There’s no reason to “get into the case to upgrade anything,” you can just connect an external drive via USB. I used to be really into small form-factor cases and making my gaming PCs small and tidy, so I’ve had my fair share of external drives. Even now that I’ve gotten over my SFF obsession and have full-sized cases I still use a 2TB external drive for storing some games. They run just as well as they would from an internal drive, so you don’t even have to move them back and forth. Ideally it’d be connected via USB 3.0 or USB-C, though, which your machine should have unless it’s fairly old (and in that case storage probably isn’t the first thing that needs an upgrade).
You can buy external HDD and SSD enclosures for extremely cheap and just pop in a drive you already have lying around or buy a bare drive for cheap and pop that in. There’s quite a high markup on external drives so it’s just much cheaper to buy an enclosure and drive separately, plus that allows you to change the drive at-will whereas most off-the-shelf external drives are sealed in their enclosures. The drive just slides in, so it’s not like it requires know-how or effort and you can find enclosures for less than ten bucks and 1 or 2TB 2.5” HDDs for absurdly cheap prices these days.
That’s your best bet for getting a bit more storage. It’s handy for more than just games, too, so you’d definitely benefit from having one even if you did want to add another internal drive. It’s as easy as plugging into a USB port, so if you’re a ‘hoarder,’ as you say, they’re pretty much tailor-made for you.
I'm aware. I have a couple, I'm just lazy. I don't really understand why a throwaway line has gotten so much attention, but I figured the "I'm lazy" line covers everything.
Titanfall 2 is also a great example of one game that is a tutorial of another (Apex Legends). For me I tried Apex when it was first released and was terrible.
Only after playing Titanfall 2 did something click for me and I was able to return to Apex and start getting better.
The original StarCraft was exactly this. Many of the RTS of the era were. You had to play through the (enjoyable!) story missions completely to get a full handle on the units available in PvP. It's an aspect I quite enjoyed!
Oooh interesting! My only experience with RTS's was my friends just dropping me into AoE3 and expecting to just kinda get it which definitely wasn't the best experience. I'll have to take a look at them again, might be a new skill to learn!
I played SC2 for a couple years in college before switching to LoL - it's a lot of fun but it can be a hard game to play casually, once you start it becomes clear pretty quickly how many things you can practice to improve on, and I mean really practice, like run drills on your build order and different micro maneuvers (splitting stimmed marines omg) etc. The only thing that got me out of it was switching to a game I played even more seriously haha
Ya.... that's just not a good experience with an RTS.
If you ever go back to AoE, Microsoft did a "Definitive Edition" of AoE2 that's really good. I can't say how it compares to StarCraft though.
Original StarCraft is... Wonky. I don't recommend starting with it if you are thinking about giving RTS' another try. It is very much a game of its era and you're fighting the game as much as other players.
StarCraft 2 is much more user friendly, the campaigns are free to play now and teach you the game/units pretty well. Then if you like it you can always buy it to get into the multiplayer, co-op and custom maps.
I was gonna be mildly snarky and say 'pretty much all games before 2008 or so.'
Day9 just did a Blizzard month, and played Classic WoW for the first time. He commented on just this phenomenon, and playing Retail WoW later really hammered home how old games really used to just dump you in the game, say "here's the buttons" and mostly let you figure out the gameplay mechanics, rather than having prolonged spoonfeeding tutorials.
I remember how much I enjoyed Valve's in-game commentary in HL 2: Lost Coast and the main game. It was a masterclass in game design at the time, talking about how each new element of gameplay was introduced in-universe, with a simple puzzle, a more complex puzzle, then finally a put-everything-you've-just-learned-together puzzle. And yet it never felt like you being led like that in-game, it just played smoothly! Even today it's well worth experiencing if you're interested in game design.
No Man's Sky. The "campaign" is essentially a series of missions to familiarize yourself with the various mechanics in the game. Ones not covered in the main campaign also get introduced as missions, leaving you free to play the game as you wish afterwards.
And many expeditions are tutorials for new mechanics and are designed to immerse you in them for familiarity. They're also often as long as many other games.
I've been waiting to pull the trigger on No Man's Sky for so long, maybe it's time.
As someone who played on launch, again 5 years ago, and now itching to give it another go... Do it. It's really one of the greatest turnaround stories in gaming, the difference between launch product and what I played 5 years ago is astounding, and from what I've read it's only gotten better.
Same here. It's been on my wishlist for a long time and all I hear anymore is how great it is.
Tony Hawk's American Wasteland does this. It's 18 years old, but the game is largely a tutorial for the mechanics. After you complete the story you skate/bike around with reckess abandon.
Interesting! I feel like even the Pro Skater series is probably similar to this, maybe "arcade-like" games is a catch all for this.
THUG 1 and 2 are silimar, in that they reveal mechanics in career, but they don't unlock at the tutorial. THAW starts you out barebones until missions reveal things. From 1-4 they just gave you the mechanics and you accrued skill points in various ways.
Oh definitely. I think it just depends what your definition of a story/campaign is.
Some have an overarching story that you slowly uncover (Dead Cells, Hades, Against the Storm)
Others have more of a flimsy story where you really don't need to actually pay attention to it at all (Slay the Spire, Monster Train)
And then others barely even have a story in the first place and are just focused on gameplay (Balatro, Brotato, Vampire Survivors)
Backpack Hero seems to be different in that regard since it has an actual campaign mode (if I'm not mistaken, only played the demo).
Yeah, I'm working on the Backpack Hero campaign mode right now, it definitely kinda inspired this post lol
It's not exactly what you asked, but beating Noita's final boss is often called "the tutorial" by seasoned players.
The Division and The Division 2.
The story mode is all lore, learning game mechanics and teaching you how to build gear sets with mods (as long as you pay attention).
The end game turns into a looter shooter which you can while away endless hours doing PvE, PvP, etc. The idea being that you try to obtain the best gear, create clans, beat your times, crack in game puzzles, collect masks, and the list continues. I've gone something like 3000 hours of play time, I'm no where near done but I am starting to get bored. I've definitely gotten my £6 worth (bought on offer).
I tried getting into the Division but there's something about Ubisoft Third Person shooter games that feel way too clunky for me. (ironically because I've been liking the Hitman game).
Devil May Cry (particularly DMC3 onwards) is more or less designed like this. Your first playthrough consists of you unlocking new abilities and weapons, sometimes near the end of the game. One character in DMC5 doesn't even unlock a huge portion of their kit until the very last fight of the entire campaign. The 'purpose' of the series is honestly similar to a game like Tony Hawk, like another commenter said. Learn the ropes on your first playthrough, and then your subsequent ones enable you to use your full scope of abilities to go nuts on increasingly powerful/numerous enemies.
What's funny is I really loved DMC (The one that everyone hated with the edgy Dante), so I picked up 5 and got about 10 hours in before getting too distracted. I should get back into that, I'll have to redownload that soon.
As a former hater, I have to admit when DMC5 was announced my disdain for the reboot practically evaporated. Hell, I even played it again the other year (in the Spanish dub) and it held up alright--I think a lot of us just got upset with the notion that the reboot was the final DMC. At this point? I'd be happy with even an alternating release schedule of a main DMC game and a reboot sequel/some re-imagining done by an outside studio. 'More options can't hurt' is my mantra.
With DMC5, it's definitely one of those games that only gets better on subsequent playthroughs. Nero in particular can do some absolutely crazy things when he's got his full kit at his disposal
This could apply to the classic sort of Capcom design in general, notably the games with chapters where you get a ranking at the end of each one. A lot of their older games had this approach, including almost the entire Resident Evil series including the modern titles. It wasn't as integral to the design in all of them as it was to the DMC series but they all had some degree of it, and it made for some very replayable games especially since they let you unlock bigger and better weapons or abilities that you do not get in the first playthrough.
Guild Wars 2 is a bit like that. The common joke is that getting to max level (80) is the tutorial. (For the experienced player the game "begins" there.)
I have a couple of friends that have been trying to get me to play, I just don't know if I have the attention span for MMO's lol. It definitely has potential in my mind at least, I'll get to it eventually!
GW2 can be taken as intensely or as slowly as you like, and you don't get punished for it. There are dailies, but missing them doesn't leave you behind other players in any significant way. There are several "modes" in the game, so it can suit a broad range of player types and preferences. For example, I play mostly Structured PvP, whereas other players are almost exclusively PvE. You can do storylines solo, or you can join others and cooperate to complete a dungeon or mission. The game is so rich (over 10 years of development and story expansions), but there is no need to "finish" large portions of the game before you can have fun. The PvE parts scale down to your level, so you won't get steamrolled in combat (as long as you stay in safer areas).
GW2 is one of the best MMOs I've played. The nice thing about GW2 is that there isn't a sub, so if you lose attention, it's fine, and you don't have to remember to cancel the sub for a break. The free trial is pretty hefty too, so your initial commitment is pretty low, except the hard drive space lol.
For a MH fan, I'd say MMOs are right up your alley, GW2 especially since it has more action elements than others. Folks often joke the real end-game is fashion too.
Call of Duty 4 campaigns onwards serve as these giving you a taste of some mechanics you'll use in multiplayer. Some like Black Ops 2 and Infinite Warfare give you a choice of loadouts and gradually unlock perks to take before a mission.
Diablo II onwards have the campaign as the leveling phase before you start the endgame grind.
Co-op shooters like Left for Dead and Warhammer Vermintide have multiple campaigns that are loosely connected by discrete chapters/missions. The endgame is essentially replaying the missions over and over trying to get better numbers and times on each.
Unreal Tournament and Quake III Arena campaigns are essentially bot matches portrayed as a tournament taking you through various maps and game modes.
Diablo 2 is a good one! It's definitely kinda similar with a long endgame grind.
The new season of Diablo 4 is pretty good. Definitely worth a try if you liked earlier versions.
World of Warcraft is a prime example of this. Everyone says that the leveling is a tutorial. Which it is, just not a very good one. It's too long for a tutorial, and too short for a MMO campaign. There's even that common saying, "The game starts at level cap". Which I hate, a game should be fun at level 1. It's ridiculous but reflects the complete trivialization of leveling after years of level squishes and QOL features. I joke that one day my cat jumped on my keyboard, accidentally hit level 70, and successfully tanked a few dungeons. I don't have a cat but you get the idea.
Path of Exile, for sure. It's an immense game but mechanics are somewhat slowly presented throughout the campaign and then in endgame you specialize with your atlas into the mechanics you like doing. Even basic game functions like linked sockets can be challenging for new players to grasp right off the bat but it does some hand-holding so long as you don't skip the tutorial screens that pop up
Oooh yeah i feel like classic diablo-likes are probably best fitted for this kinda question now that I think about it.
Noita. You learn the enemies, the game systems, the world and how to interact with it properly basically until you beat the game for the first time.
Then you go and play the actual game!
I think the Grand Theft Auto games are the poster child for this school of design. The games are sandboxes, and the missions are designed to teach you how the various toys in the sandbox work.
This is Suicide Squad: Kill the Justice League. The story mode is a setup for the seasonal grind.
I've heard... not great things about that game though haha. Is it good? I loved the Arkham games
I really enjoyed it. It's nothing like Arkham but it is a fun take on a coop hero shooter. It's much more movement focused than ability focused. I've played Avengers and Gotham Knights, and Suicide Squad is easily the best of the three. That's not exactly a high bar to clear, but it clears it.
Even if you're not interested in the seasonal grind, and that grind is light on compelling reasons to grind beyond "number go up" unless you're a big Joker fan, the story mode took me about 20 hours. It's got a lot of character in those 20 hours. I laughed out loud at some of the dialogue in the first hour and I was hooked.
The first portal game.
They slowly position you to learn new tricks, first by controlling half of the portal, then by letting you do it yourself. Once you have displayed mastery of the portal gun, things go off the rails.