How Difficult Should an Escape Game Be?

Escape games tend to have a 15-30% escape rate. They aren’t good odds, and that’s what I love about them.

My favorite types of fiction usually feature a ragtag group of misfits fighting against impossible odds. In both business and pleasure, I get a kick out of the odds being stacked against me.

My personal proclivities aside, one of the most common topics of conversation when discussing room escapes is the question: “How difficult is too difficult?”

This room is too hard

We’re batting 50% on games with escape rates in the low single digits, but the more I reflect on them, the more I think that they might be missing the point.

We visited a company, they had two games, one with ~1.5% escape rate, the other with ~2.5% escape rate. From a statistical standpoint, those rooms are designed to be inescapable and have a margin of error.

A 2% escape rate is a joke. It’s an inescapable room that failed at its job.

This room is too soft

The easiest rooms I’ve played have approximately a 50% escape rate.I think this is too easy, but it’s just barely acceptable.

If there are better odds than 50%, the room is problematic, because if you lose, you will leave feeling very inferior. If a room has a 70% escape rate, and you fail… You really suck.

These games should be tough, but they shouldn’t be cruel. Making a game too easy is bizarrely cruel to those who fail.

This room is just right

I think the sweet-spot for non-beginner rooms hovers between 10% and 20%. These are respectable numbers that demonstrate a room is very challenging yet balanced.

Photo by Marc Spira
Photo by Marc Spira

If you lose to a room that 1 in ten teams makes it out of, you can leave knowing that you were defeated by a worthy yet beatable opponent.

When you get crushed by a room that 1 in fifty teams makes it out of, that is meaningless… Of course you were going to lose. You really didn’t have much of a chance.

When our team won a game with a 4% escape rate, we knew we played well, but we felt like there was a lot of luck involved. In a weird way, that made the victory less satisfying.

I think that a very challenging game is fine when a company has a series of games, and the ultra difficult one is available as a final boss level of sorts. Jumping straight to that level of difficulty comes across as a bit callous. It can also be lazy if your room is only difficult because you have a final puzzle with a goofy esoteric solution.

I like to leave a room feeling like I either won or lost to worthy opponent. When a room is designed to be difficult yet fair, the win or the loss is owned entirely by the team that played it.

5 thoughts on “How Difficult Should an Escape Game Be?

  1. I thought we were meant to think “it doesn’t matter whether we win or lose, but whether we enjoyed the experience….”.

    In the UK you generally play rooms with your own team, rather than random players, but I can’t help but feel our games must be easier as I’ve only failed at one escape room from forty, and even that was when we played with just two of us. I’ve been down to the last seconds on a couple more, but generally they seem to be very much geared towards you escaping.

    I don’t have hard stats, but looking at photos posted, I’d suggest that most places are at least 70% in the UK, and some places are close to 100%. There are a few notable exceptions that seem to take delight in people not getting out, but my experience is that they sometimes do so by having obtuse puzzles. I don’t think anywhere has low single digit success rates, and the ones who come close, do so for their most difficult games.

    So, what am I trying to say? I’m not sure. I guess, I think the chance of you escaping (if you’re experienced) is more related to the host and poor design choices than the fair difficulty of the room and that I don’t entirely trust hosts when they say “only X% escape” because most rooms seem to have far too many photos of successful escapees for that to be true.

    I don’t really approve of games that fail the players, because then they miss out on the story/journey. I’d much rather have a non-binary win condition. You survived, but you didn’t rescue the hostage. You robbed the bank, but you only stole 5.3 million pounds out of the 10 million available. You exonerated yourself, but you didn’t find the perpetrator. You found 3 of the museum’s artifacts, but not the full five. You escaped, but you needed seven clues. We’ve paid a lot of money for this entertainment, so I think you shouldn’t go away feeling like a loser.

    But maybe I’m a symptom of all that’s wrong with society🙂

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I’m with you on non-binary win conditions, and alternate endings.

      And I too no longer trust the reported win/loss ration from most companies.

      I still prefer games that are truly challenging. But I think a well designed room should have most teams failing on the final puzzle, having experienced at least 95% of the game.

      If these games are too soft, then their is nothing to aspires towards.


      1. I’m absolutely not trying to remove challenge, just add in levels of success. Half the people go home thinking “yes, I’m great, because I escaped!”, half the people go home thinking “yes, I’m great because I got an above average score” (and a few of those go away with record times, record scores, best of the week etc.)

        The thing that kills me is where they get you to pose with a loser/failure card at the end. That’s not my idea of fun. I want to move as far away from that as possible.


Allow your thoughts to escape

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s