Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account


Lack of creativity in so many games - endless killing


Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.

  • You cannot reply to this topic
18 replies to this topic

#1 creeper   Members   -  Reputation: 132

Like
6Likes
Like

Posted 13 March 2013 - 07:16 PM

MW3 you manage to shoot down half the Russian army pretty much by yourself (and they almost  line up to let you do so)

 

Bioshock where you slaughter hundreds of opponents pretty much the same way and literally murder children to get further in the game. 

 

Bullet Sponge player characters in all these games when a single bullet in reallife usually takes you out of the action.

 

 

You would think they could come up with alternatives to make the games less a slaughterhouse and more varied ("you kill one russian soldier/splicer youv'e killed them all".)

 

You can still spectacularly blow things up in various creative ways.  The guns can still go bang bang and things kaboom with glitzy special effects. 

 

Wouldnt making your enemy take to their heels and not stop running be a similar ego boost for the player?  Still count as 'beaten' ?

 

How about clever distractions/blocking an enemy to nullify them?

 

More wounding and disabling instead of an obvious "he's dead jim" ?

 

 

Or is it just 'too hard' for these game companies who use nealy the same game logic as 10-15 years ago on the same old trigger box choreographed terrain situations.  Too much budget for fancy scenery/special effects/cutscenes,  when the behaviors (and game mechanics of possible actions)  are left in their 'good enuf' stagnation?

 

 

SO  what else can we have the players/game do ?

 

More capturing enemies (get points for that)  and Incompacitation is what counts.

More enemies that run away/surrender  (with a few that might come back so you better keep your eyes open)

More effects of wounds on YOU to shift the way you have to fight (ditto for enemy)

More actions to cause distractions/obscuration/blockage of the enemy to handle them (and they do the same to you making you use the terrain on-the-fly more)

More obvious wounding (instead of death) that you know they are out of the fight

More emphasis on the objective rather than bodycout for scoring

More interesting results that can suprise the player (quality over quantity of deathdealing)

More tactics/actions  to handle situations (may have to have player fed directions from 'sarge' to clue them in to what they can do for a situation instead of 'scream and charge' like they were bulletproof.)

 

 

 

Things that stand in the way of improvements:

 

Players who dont want to have to think

Costly programming/assets that eat into the profits when the suckers keep buying the same old thing anyway

Steeper learning curve for more options/actions to use them right

Chronic mentality of Ego and Insta-gratification

 

Harder to make a game free flowing (well short of a stealth game)



Sponsor:

#2 Hexis   Members   -  Reputation: 113

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 14 March 2013 - 12:28 AM

Things that stand in the way of improvements:

 

Players who dont want to have to think

 

Steeper learning curve for more options/actions to use them right


This is pretty much why these types of games don't exist. Nobody seems to have the patience to actually learn a game anymore. It's just "lets kill more russians/afghans - beacuse our favourite game labels them as terrorists."

 

It's a shame, really sad.png


Edited by Hexis, 14 March 2013 - 12:29 AM.


#3 Milcho   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 1175

Like
2Likes
Like

Posted 14 March 2013 - 05:44 AM

Things that stand in the way of improvements:

 

Players who dont want to have to think

 

Steeper learning curve for more options/actions to use them right


This is pretty much why these types of games don't exist. Nobody seems to have the patience to actually learn a game anymore. It's just "lets kill more russians/afghans - beacuse our favourite game labels them as terrorists."

 

It's a shame, really sad.png

 

I have to disagree - that particular point stands in the way of games with massive budgets from improving. If a game has a massive budget, it has to do something to appeal to as many people as possible, while often not introducing that much. Still, even AAA titles take steps in making changes to this extent, though not as many.

 

But if we're talking about just pure improvement, niche games and generally indie studios can make games targeted towards people who are interested in figuring out games, or just putting in more thought whilst playing a game. So technically that one point doesn't really stand in the way of improvement.

 

What about something drastically different from combat? What if enemies didn't shoot on sight? What if you could approach and try to nagotiate, bribe, persuade, lie to them - all based on completely different player abilities/stats and all having their own separate chance of success?

What if enemies gave warnings to player if player does not seem to pose a direct threat? What if you didn't have to walk with your weapon out all the time, as if you're just out to kill people.

 

I think the main problem is that these things aren't as straight forward to implement or even conceptualize as 'shoot enemy -> make enemy's red bar go down -> if red bar == 0, enemy is dead

 

Not that there aren't systems to do this sort of thing, but it seems like often games split the social interactions and combat interactions completely. When was the last time you had the option to try and reason with an enemy while fighting them? Or ask him to surrender and you'll spare his life? At best what I've seen is a situation where you talk with a neutral npc, who then says something akin to "and now I have to kill you" and the game then defaults to its fighting mechanics. 

 

I'd be interested in trying to design a system like that to see if it's fun.



#4 creeper   Members   -  Reputation: 132

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 14 March 2013 - 06:41 AM

"What about something drastically different from combat?"

 

I actually have a longer blob of text in progress that talked about that  - take a 'thought experiment'  about how Bioshock could be turned into an MMORPG (I agree wont happen),  but with the motivation to capture rather than kill Splicers to cure them and rebuild the City.   As a MMORP it would be  more a campaign with long term results and more time to 'figure things out'.   I was trying to compose ways such a game would have alot more varied situations and outcomes for the player in the world.  There would be alot less fatality and many more ways of dealing with inhabitants in the still 'uncivilized' parts of Rapture..

 

Lots more traps and tricks and coersions and reasoning even.

 

But as observed, it would take a major programming project to create the behavior logic for that  (something companies general think gets in the way of the profits...  and IMO most couldnt do if they tried).

 

Thinking about it - how well can these games present you a situation to discern and you can largely do it intuitively and not have to read 6 pargraphs to get across an opponents intent/motivations/etc so you can chose the right tactic/actions to get done what you need.   I suppose you can make the indicators overt (telegraph it so a syphilitic rhesus mokey 'gets it') and alot of the time it could be, but other times the player should have to piece things together and even  make small moves that bring out the information (without it being unsubtle and precipitating an unwanted  bloodbath)  -- in other words players actions would need subtleties as would the opponent NPCs..

 

 

How many players could sit still for a game that was even a little like that  ??

 

Maybe there would be a whole nuther group of players to be attacted to that kind of game who are turned off from the violence whoremongering so many computer games are today.


Edited by creeper, 14 March 2013 - 06:55 AM.


#5 Milcho   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 1175

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 14 March 2013 - 06:49 AM

But as observed, it would take a major programming project to create the behavior logic for that 

 

Nah, I think you could potentially prototype this with something as simple as a command prompt application (no visuals necessary, unless of course you must incorporate some animations as a visual queue, and even then those could be textually expressed)

The question is how to make it challenging, fair, not dull (i.e. requiring some thought), AND keep it fun all at the same time.



#6 creeper   Members   -  Reputation: 132

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 14 March 2013 - 07:01 AM

But as observed, it would take a major programming project to create the behavior logic for that 

 

Nah, I think you could potentially prototype this with something as simple as a command prompt application (no visuals necessary, unless of course you must incorporate some animations as a visual queue, and even then those could be textually expressed)

The question is how to make it challenging, fair, not dull (i.e. requiring some thought), AND keep it fun all at the same time.

 

 

I meant to make the whole thing work 'the whole enchilada'  (the logic needed to operate in the whole game with the plethora of sitations) because there would need to be many other aspects of the game that would have to warp to support it  (internal states and behaviors (AI) for the NPCs .to get tehm to act out appropriately)

 

But yes you could prototype pieces of it just to see if there is anything in it - limit it to a few chosen situational scenarios.   Something like 20 questions to classify the situation and then use different logic trees  (tree customized, varying with the  perp involved who has varying inclinations and motivations).

 

Extra credit would be generalizing the 'solver'  more  (more AI than narrowly choreographed)


Edited by creeper, 14 March 2013 - 07:04 AM.


#7 Heath   Members   -  Reputation: 344

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 15 March 2013 - 01:24 AM

I'd just like to point out what this thread touches on. Players demand violence. The OP and others are upset by the violence they get, and want it dressed up a little bit. Maybe reason with the enemy on the battlefield. But a lot of money gets invested in this game, and it needs to reach a mass market to make it back and get a sequel, which will repeat the process. The game becomes a brand, the brand becomes a promise, and it's a promise of violence, if dressed up a little bit.

Whatever your views or goals or commitments are, that's fine. I think I'd rather make a game about something else altogether and not make this promise at all.

#8 sunandshadow   Moderators   -  Reputation: 4820

Like
3Likes
Like

Posted 15 March 2013 - 05:21 AM

Some players may demand violence, but certainly not all do.  There are many non-violent sim games that sell to a big market.  There are also non-violent puzzle, adventure, and time management (aka combatless RTS) games which sell to loyal and eager niche markets.

 

Some of these non-violent games have quite a similar mechanic, though.  Is "kill everything", whether by shooting, whacking with a sword, or chomping with a monster, really different from "roll up everything" (with a katamari) or "eat everything" (in games from Pac-Man to EVO to Spore) or "match all the symbols into 3s" or "whack all the moles" or "be first on all the race tracks" or "complete all the missions" or "achieve a gold score on all the levels"?  Is this kind of play a problem in those kind of games?  Perhaps it only becomes a problem when the particular game takes more hours to play than the player remains interested?

 

Certainly it is expensive to develop complex gameplay, as well as more prone to bugs once it is developed.  Simplistic gameplay is easy to get bored of and may seem unsatisfying, but complex gameplay is difficult to balance and may fail to be fun.  I think there are places in the ecosystem for both extremely simple and extremely complex games.  People who prefer the complex ones are somewhat out of luck because they will always be a smaller percentage of what's produced, but protesting a lack of one's preferred type of game rarely accomplishes anything, unless you're making it yourself or putting your money where your mouth is with kickstarter or similar donations.


Phone game idea available free to someone who will develop it (Alphadoku game - the only existing phone game of this type is both for windows phone only and awful. PM for details.)


I want to help design a "sandpark" MMO. Optional interactive story with quests and deeply characterized NPCs, plus sandbox elements like player-craftable housing and lots of other crafting. If you are starting a design of this type, please PM me. I also love pet-breeding games.


#9 wodinoneeye   Members   -  Reputation: 752

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 16 March 2013 - 04:47 PM

I think there could still be plenty of violence.  maybe more varieties (hmm bring back 'gibs' as an option) and more ways for the players to bring them about.   Creative violence.    Does it always have to result in death or can things like morale now player abigger part and you frighten your enemies into running/surrender/negotiation

 

Unfortunately :  more variation == more complexity == mosr costly

 

Somehow they (game companies) have to greatly improve their production methods to make creating more good stuff alot cheaper or we are stuck with any imagination they do have being hampered by production limitations.

 

Something like that might also allow more niche games that might explore more gaming themes/mechanics with requiring 10-50 million dollar budgets (and give us alot more choice than a few dedicated indies can produce).


Edited by wodinoneeye, 17 March 2013 - 04:59 AM.

--------------------------------------------Ratings are Opinion, not Fact

#10 Unduli   Members   -  Reputation: 897

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 17 March 2013 - 04:43 AM

I perfectly agree about AAA games having massive budgets , therefore tend to be no-brainer, actually I believe most games can be played by chimpanzees as well.

 

When it comes to FPS , pity I didn't see such elements of infiltration and so like at Medal of Honor : Allied Assault Submarine mission as in this video.

 

 

It was quite fun in comparison to get in and kill on sight.



#11 Mratthew   Members   -  Reputation: 1516

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 17 March 2013 - 10:51 AM

Killing in games is just conflict resolution at it's simplest. An obstacle stands in the way of a achieving an objective, so superior force is used to remove it. However if you know "The art of war" Sun Tsu you understand that these victories are not a superior strategy. Ideal strategy "Takes whole" or achieves its victory not in conflict with its obstacles but using them as advantages.

 

This thread seems focused on where combat games can go to escape the mindless killing. This is my suggestion. Look to the art of war to make war games a little higher art. Many seem to blame players for the difficulty of designing war games more creatively, but the success of creativity doesn't demand the audience be different. It teaches the audience how to look at the art of creative game design differently. You don't need creative game ideas you need creative ways of introducing the ideas to the gamers.

 

If the objective of the game is to, move from point A to point B without enemy X stopping you. The player needs to know first the basics, moving between A and B. The threat, how enemy X stops the player. The conflict resolution, the methods reaching point B using X to you advantage. The variety of options for the player to discover on their own (to achieve this objective with more efficiency) are the achievements that make the game fun. Don't blame the player for not being able to expand on this structure, look to be creative and innovative in introducing these new structures to best entertain your gamers.



#12 SuperG   Members   -  Reputation: 503

Like
1Likes
Like

Posted 29 March 2013 - 12:22 PM

My opinion, it more seams like you people just want to change a type of game within a genre that just is not your thing. Al those options are features that move away from the basic formula. Lot of gamers like.
FPS is often mostly about dealing death in a cool way as possible. Competing with skillz in simple set of rulez. You can still go the other way. Much more gore more dismemberment. Wich I miss.

If you want this less violent aprouch, the theme must support this. A police FPS like SWAT there you have huge ROE limitation. And there is some rule set to minimize voilence. And get the bad guy alive if posible. That give such game much more depth wich make sense and fit the theme.

In military disipline you don't need to kill, severly wound can be enough but its not crusial. It give more design and content constains that complicate things. So is avoided. While with the police theme it could be key point of police work. In some sitution you need instant kill, brain stam. Wich is sniping within 100 yards. Or un arm a bad guy by snipe his weapon. A guy with a knife atacking shoot him in the leg from 3 yards. Nonlethal weapons. Beanbag shotgun.

The free America amy game had medic training in it. Altho ver limited, but it makes it more authentic. Also wenn hit you leak so need to be treated or bleed to death. Also team survival is of some importance. ROE is also into the mix.

But lots of gamers want to shoot online and have fun competing. If that not your thing go Nintendo.

Me want more gore. Soldiers of fortune is more my thing.

I guess most of the gamers are into those kind of games, and with that, these games are most produced. So I think its more a problem that FPS hater don't have that much titels to fulfill there game needs.

Like I miss the high quality triple A space shooters. Well we still have the indies small and big.

Also CoD online is like quake or unreal tournament with a modern warfare theme on it. Fake unrealistic gameplay with realistic looks but not feel. Then on top of it some rpg like leveling and unlocks, and score streaks.

But heavy rain and the walkingdeath from telltale are totaly not my thing. Blasting zombies in a cool shotgun way is.

#13 MichaelNIII   Members   -  Reputation: 195

Like
1Likes
Like

Posted 29 March 2013 - 06:42 PM

How has no one mentioned the hitman series as afairly good example as to what I believe you are talking about? It is however pretty complex and often involves either reading the answers online or getting lucky in order to find out the possible ways to win a level without getting detected at all.

#14 Legendre   Members   -  Reputation: 966

Like
1Likes
Like

Posted 29 March 2013 - 06:53 PM

Best selling games of all time - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_video_games

PC - The Sims, The Sims 2

PS3 - Gran Turismo 5, Gran Turismo 5 Prologue 

Mobile Paid Downloads - Tetris, Angry Bird, Pacman.

 

Maybe endless killing and violence isn't as dominant as we thought...



#15 SuperG   Members   -  Reputation: 503

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 30 March 2013 - 09:33 AM

Best selling games of all time - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_video_games
PC - The Sims, The Sims 2
PS3 - Gran Turismo 5, Gran Turismo 5 Prologue 
Mobile Paid Downloads - Tetris, Angry Bird, Pacman.
 
Maybe endless killing and violence isn't as dominant as we thought...

True if you take the what females want. Or the casuals. And go for the best selling franchise or title. Or the oh so many time killing short game session stuf on smartphones. And tablets. Huge market.

But I disagree.

So its the average male wich do go for sports cars and aktion. GT5 falls in that line to. Race game genre does well but what about game choice per platform. Wich genre dominates?


Domination is what kind of games dominates market. Like FPS is a genre that dominates not a specific title..
Not wich game sells best.

I got GT5 & prologue as only race game on my PS3. But then again I am captainslow. Just a very littlebit petrolhead.
While I got for FPS
Cod Mw2 3
Blops 1 2
Bf3
Moh
Farcry3 PC
rage PC
Crysis3
Sniper elite2
Ghost sniper warrior2
Zombi u
Masseffect wiiu pc
Assasincreed wiiu
ARMA
OFP RR
Metro2033
Stalker cop
...
...
Many many more.

Got even more fps games then i have time to play,name them all is a huge FPS list.

Now take heavy rain a game I hate. Name 20 similar big retail game titels within its niche out there now.

Now take Sims I total not interested in name 20 retail clones with there own franchize.

Recaping it. It seams more like that the best selling franchizes more fill in a market gap and are uniek on that platform. So rule due to absence of direct and on same level of competition.

Like I played the medicore Xseries space game because there isn't much competive out there yet. So limited choice.
While FPS. So much competition they split the market. Thus also the genre sales.

So domination is more about what genre is populating the shop shelfs of game boxes. Combined sales including a few sales hit titels.

#16 Lightness1024   Members   -  Reputation: 736

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 14 April 2013 - 09:55 AM

How has no one mentioned the hitman series as afairly good example as to what I believe you are talking about? It is however pretty complex and often involves either reading the answers online or getting lucky in order to find out the possible ways to win a level without getting detected at all.

Yes i was going to mention it as well. Also Project IGI in a lesser way.



#17 Drethon   Members   -  Reputation: 212

Like
1Likes
Like

Posted 15 April 2013 - 05:51 AM

The Thief series was an excellent example of alternate gameplay IMHO.


- My $0.02

#18 Orymus3   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 7656

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 15 April 2013 - 09:05 AM

More enemies that run away/surrender (with a few that might come back so you better keep your eyes open)

 

Quite strangely, this was one of the top suggestions in some "how to be a good DM" book I've read.

Having enemies leave and ambush you at the next stop is something that really adds to the narrative, and really gives you an incentive to rid yourself of him because their "so-called will to live" also inherently becomes a reccurring spine in your ***.

 

That said, your analysis is based on mainstream games only, and even so, you're skipping on obvious choices too. Deus Ex: Human Revolution, as per previous installments, allows you to just bypass the enemies, and this is extremely rewarding as well. Plus, you get points for silent takedowns.

Then again, you'd see that from pretty much any Agent 47's installments as well (read, Hitman)



#19 RealityFails   Members   -  Reputation: 155

Like
-1Likes
Like

Posted 15 April 2013 - 12:30 PM

To the first post, you make really good points and I couldn't put it any better. At the end of the day all it is and ever will be is a video game. CoD as well as others don't pride themeselves on realism.

 

I however for my survival horror video game, have made this a challenge for players dealing with monsters and and enemy human AI, if she is shot one time anywhere besides the arm, its game over as for the arm, it must be tended to or a slow bleed out will cause random death.

 

 

I think it has a lot to do with what you play. I see it this way, you play CoD and want realism thats like jumping in a pool and expecting not to get wet.






Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.



PARTNERS