Non-violent gameplay?

Started by
29 comments, last by Iron Chef Carnage 18 years, 9 months ago
Quote:There are "violence" in the game but no violence that has emarged from the player(like in a standard fps)

you might be on to something here...

anyways. Dynamite is pretty violent, and a gun is gun to me, if it's a tranquilizer gun it's just an underpowered gun (at least, game-wise.)

Scary type game I like.. pretty violent though. But i've always wondered what a game about running away would be like, if done properly. maybe make you figure out who the killer is while he takes out NPCs. you know the drill.

But the explorer dealio... boy i'd like that. In fact, inspired by what you said and earlier posts, I see a four-tiered game (those who played MDK will see a resemblance here):

-Discover
-Deploy
-Explore
-Retrieve

Discover: in a BIG or series of smaller interconnected maps that you travel freely in, are a series of clues for hidden treasures/artifacts. You might have to rummage here and there, pick this or that book, or just look at the overly shiny thing on your desk. Some clues will be really obvious (as starter missions) and some really hidden (say, a map hidden inside a book that's in a library....). Some clues might lead to other clues for extra detective brownie points. NPCs should point you in the clue's general direction should you become desperate. The clues should contain general directions to find the treasure/artifact in the world and then inside the Explore stage.
Obviously the worse thing that could happen here is that you don't find anything and get bored.

Deploy: you deploy croft-style (or xXx, whatever) into wherever this artifact/treasure is. This could mean parachuting into a deep crater that's not accesible in any other way (except rappeling which isn't as exciting in a game... there's a place like that but I can't remember right now), could mean rafting in a river that goes into some underground caves, etc. Any exciting way of getting near the thing. Maybe even race the competing explorers.
You could die here, as an accident, but you can't harm others. You could also fail deployment in a way that doesn't kill you but means you must be extracted and will have to try again.

Explore: you SEARCH for the exact entry point. This would mean finding your way with a compass in a jungle(GPS are boring.. you could set it in 1980 or something), navigating an underground maze, talk with the locals and maybe request guidance or some other explorey type things. You could fail finding the dealio and request extraction at any time (and maybe go get more detailed clues).
Worst case scenario: you don't find it. You request extraction and go back to Discover mode. Maybe you'll need to Deploy again if you want to get back to Explore, maybe not... I'd say yes.

Retrieve: this is where you unadvertedly (and unavoidably) trigger this or that trap before or after nabbing the artifact/treasure and you must run and dodge. If you have yet to get the artifact you gotta dodge and make your way to it, then manage to get out.
Here either you escape or die trying. Still, you can't harm others (but others might harm themselves... they shouldn't be worried about harming you tho, things should be pretty hairy already).

As you see, the odd stages are the brainy type and the even stages are the exciting action type. Maybe you could choose to always skip one of these pairs at startup, as if to play the complete, the thinker's or the action game.

This is an idea I've been mulling over for a long time, but as y'all should know, game ideas are worthless, it's implementation what does it :)
Might give it a shot someday.

anyways, this post was long. Hope someone reads it XD
Working on a fully self-funded project
Advertisement
(I do not have a user name, and its a good idea not to have one with my computer having worms and trojan virii... but all my data is safely backed up)

My opinion is that in games you need conflict and violence shows up when you have alot of conflict.
Quote:Original post by Anonymous Poster
I've always thought it would be nice to see a game similar to X-Wing but instead of combat, have it be course racing. Such as flying from point a-b in a asteroid field or flying though a canyon where you loose points if you pop out of the canyon.


Sky Odyssey is what you're looking for. A first generation PS2 title that has sucked up many hours of my time, and deservedly so. The graphics are a bit crude but the flight model is just right, realistic, without being nerdy and thoroughly approachable. Highly recommended and I'd love to see a sequel take things further.



hi, i am new here, but it seems to me that there are 6 types of games:

governing games ex: sim city ex2: the tycoon games
driving/racing games ex: crazy taxi ex2: driver
adventure games ex: sid meier's Pirates
shooting games ex: renegade ex2: delta force
mystry games ex: mist
roleplaying games ex: neverwinter nights ex2:
arcade games ex: tetris ex2: pinball
real time statagy ex: age of empires ex2: generals
sports games ex: fifa soccer ex2: madden football

note: i may have missed some catigoreys, or you may split games into different groups, but theese are the main groups as i see them

there are already plenty of nonviolent governing, driving, mystery, sports, and arcade games and its imposible to make a non violent shooter game that is still fun so I think the challange is to make a non violent adventure, roleplaying, or realtime stratigy game.

so yes, it is easy to make a cool non violent tetris game or racing game, but that has already been done. we need somthing new like sir gustav's adventure game.


quote:
original poast by jiia
As Iron Chef points out, you need crazy player abilities. Most people play games to do something they don't want to risk in real life. That usually comes down to capping bad guys with a 45. But it can also mean swinging on roof tops or narrowly avoiding spikes and ledges. But I think to have any type of interesting situation, there must be a serious result with failure. I think I would also consider voilence as being impaled by the spikes or splatting to death on the street. If you take away the failure, you take away the challenge. The less extreme the failure is, the less triumphant the player will feel when he wins.

i dont agree with you, i think you feel more triumphant if you got past a hard level where it was easy to lose, not having a horrible outcome if you lose. when i am playing a game, and i pass a hard level or area i feel great, weather or not i stoped myself from getting a cold or stoped the earth from exploding, i dont think the loss has anything to do with it.
this is a correction of the post i just made.
the first line should read:

hi, i am new here, but it seems to me there are 9 types of games:
Quote:Original post by Anonymous Poster
i dont agree with you, i think you feel more triumphant if you got past a hard level where it was easy to lose, not having a horrible outcome if you lose. when i am playing a game, and i pass a hard level or area i feel great, weather or not i stoped myself from getting a cold or stoped the earth from exploding, i dont think the loss has anything to do with it.

That's not what I meant. Would you be as happy saving your own butt in a game as much as preventing your death in real life?

Try playing a realistic FPS war game without ever using the save feature. Then you'll know how much better success can taste when you've got so much more to lose.

My point was that in order to have Prince of Persia or Spiderman type action, there must be some way to fail, or things get real dry, fast. That means death. And death equals violence.
sigh, got an "servel-overload" and lost my message, testing again(this time in notepad :) )

I'm glad many liked my Adventurer idea, (sadly) it was not completely mine. I based it on the previous post by Trapper Zoid (#1 and #2 in hist post).

Madster mentioned theese stuff that could be in a non-violent game:
-sports
-racing
-puzzles that rely on quick reflexes (yes, tetris.)
-exploration with time limits (hacking games for example)

I rule out sports since it may be violent(car can crash, boxing, taekwondo, american footbal) and it's basicly copying an existing game.

I also rule out racing since IMHO it can not be made cool if we aren't allowed to crash the car in a cool way. Question: Is crashing a car (like need for speed: Underground) ok in a non-violent game if the cars are R/C's?

Some basicly I got two ides last time I wrote this so here they go:

#1:
You are a geek kid and your parents are evil and do evil magic.
Since you are a geek you can make cool gadgets, and you want to study your homework (for some reason you don't already know it). Since your parents are evil they change the world to stop you from doing it. They take you to different cool places(exploration on time) like forests, ruins etc.
Optional: It is possible to do some little quests in theese worlds, like saving cats. This could be some with acrobatics/swinging/climbing. If you fall you fail the world, but doesn't get damaged since they are your parents and doesn't want you to get harmed. End Optional.
They also sometimes transform your house into different labyrints. You'll have to find your way to your room in time to do the homework. There are many exits to the labyrint that lead to your room but since it it your house, your parents are also there. You'll have to avoid them since if you are spotted by them you are forced to watch TV! You have gadgets that can cause distraction etc.
Sometimes you older brother wants to play video-games with him. You have made a gadget that will allow you to study if you win. Naturly the game are puzzles that (possible) rely on quick reflexes

#2:
You are a photographer for some newspaper. Your job is to photograph the aliens. If they see you, they zap you with their telport-and-forget-beam. Later on you have to take civilians into the area(s) (specific place where they can see them good) where the aliens are since they(civilians) don't belive you. If they get zapped your boss gets angry(for some unknown reason).
Since your mind is special(think "Fry and the brain spawn"-episode from futurama) you don't forget stuff when you are zapped.
How about something like Loderunner but in first person? Could be quite fun actually.
Throwing acid and burying(sp?) people alive doesn't seem so non-violent to me ;) or are you thinking of another game(or am I)?
Quix was an attempt to create a game which was at the same time non-violent and somewhat different from other games. It basically came from combining a platformer with a racing game and adding a chasing element.

This topic is closed to new replies.

Advertisement