|
1 registered members (AndrewAMD),
527
guests, and 5
spiders. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Re: Bad guy wins...?
[Re: broozar]
#133772
06/07/07 19:23
06/07/07 19:23
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,815
Finland
Inestical
Rabbit Developer
|
Rabbit Developer
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,815
Finland
|
Ever finished HL2? In the end you and your teammate Alyx dies (muahahahah, she doesn't)
Happy ending? yes.
Why? It was that tyou prevented the bad, but the bad still won.
Letting the bad dude win is easy. Just one thing to take care of. The player must agree that the good guy died and lost (for whatever the reason was).
"Yesterday was once today's tomorrow."
|
|
|
Re: Bad guy wins...?
[Re: Germanunkol]
#133774
06/07/07 22:35
06/07/07 22:35
|
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 3,208
Germany
Error014
Expert
|
Expert
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 3,208
Germany
|
Quote:
You talked about a game that in which the player does everything right and still "looses". I've played a game like that, although I don't remember what it was. There was someone attacking you, and you kept on getting pushed back. But in the end, I still won, so it doesn't count... ^^
Hmm... I remember that Jedi Knight II had a sequence like this, somewhere at around the end of the first third of the game. It had a fight that you couldn't win, but of course nobody told 'ya. I spend all my hard-earned healthcontainers on that one. It was extremely frustrating, especially because I always quit when I saw that I haven't had a chance. In the end, I had to refer to a guide to see that I couldn't win that one. The situation wasn't clear enough, thus it became frustrating (at least for me). The rest of the game was cool, don't get me wrong, but that part? Cool idea, bad execution. 
Quote:
Error014, i liked what you said about stories. You're totally right. Stories aren't as good as they should be.
Hah, thanks. I seem to have missed the point of the thread, though. I still believe in what I've said. I've toyed with the idea to open a thread to discuss how to develop characters and how to present and write your story so its intruiging, fun and not too boring (right now, I'm struggling in my game to introduce a million things without it ending up as a book  ). Any interest in that?
Another interesting aspect about this is the moral dilemma you as a developer are in. Is it actually okay to have the player do something bad? Right now, its pretty much "yes" if we talk about shooting and stealing. You still have to draw a line somewhere, though. If the player stops playing because he can't accept what he does morally, then you lost. You have to find the balance between whats "bad and cool" or "bad and acceptable" as long as there is a fun gameplayexperience and maybe a storybehind it and whats "just bad". Of course, this is different for everyone, but the more extreme you do it, the smaller the targetaudience becomes. Sadly, this is also true for the reverse: If you make it too familyfriendly, self-declared, 13-year old "mature gamers" won't play the game. And thats quite a chunk of the market! That being said... please don't develop games for them.
Quote:
Or leave the decision to the player (Fable)
Sure thats possible. But for indydevelopers like us? I doubt it. We can't develop games as big as this, at least not in a reasonable timeframe. I might be all alone on this oen, but you have to take your possibilities into account. Yes, Acknex might (would) be able to power such a game - are we? It's hard enough to make a linear game!
Quote:
or have most of the NPCs think you are against them when you are actually for them...
In the right hands, maybe, but it will be a balancing issue from beginning to end. People play games to escape their boring everyday-life. They want to be a cool hero. It's fun to blow things up*, sure, but its even better if people know that you are the hero! I don`t know about you, but I make sure to visit any village in any RPG that I just saved just to hear people telling me I'm awesome. Maybe my ego is surprisingly small, but then again, everyone likes to get praise. I'd hate it if everyone I ever talked to would say "Oh, it's the guy that completely messed up my life!". Thats okay if its one person, sure, but everyone? At least include someone who knows about what the player is doing that encourages him.
GTA... well, one doesn't really feel evil. It's a giant "do-whatever-you-want". Be bad enough and the police is out to get you - until they've got you or until you escaped them. Thats it. I won't see on the news what I've done. Nobody in the city willEVER recognize me. Thats probably a good thing from a gameplay-perspective, but this way, you never really feel like the "bad guy" you are.
Quote:
All stories are told. We can only alter them and put them into a new location.
As you've said yourself already: Thats not an excuse for not trying to make up a good story, though! Even if every story might have been told somewhere by someone, there are still concepts that are overused way too much and some that will still feel "fresh". It's easier to make a (game)story about a submarine feel fresh than it is with an abandoned spacestation. One of them was seen a million times. The other oen... not so much. The less often your general scenario and setting is used, the easier it is to create a story that will truly surprise the player. Which is always a good thing. Be honest, aren't you tired of abandoned spacestation?
Okay, I'm done. You may now go on and rip my post apart. Can't wait!
(So... is there interest in a discussion about how to write stories and how to develop characters?)
--
*This is not a subliminal message to get you to blow something up
Perhaps this post will get me points for originality at least.
Check out Dungeon Deities! It's amazing and will make you happy, successful and almost certainly more attractive! It might be true!
|
|
|
Re: Bad guy wins...?
[Re: Machinery_Frank]
#133778
06/08/07 12:35
06/08/07 12:35
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,875
broozar
Expert
|
Expert
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,875
|
--about the violence aspect-- the average shooter: kill all to achieve your goals. hitman series: you're a contract killer and earn money with the job. you even got to think a lot. the average shooter gets usk 16. hitman has been on the german index for the concept, though you kill ~50 more people per level in an average shooter. thinking about this, i feel there is something wrong. who is good and who is evil? --game concepts-- a space station is always a space station and a mage is a mage, true. but i've never seen a mage in a space station (star wars doesn't count as mages), so there are still stories to be told: the combination of elements counts. why do you think "mensch ärgere dich nicht", chess, quake3arena and poker are still played today? board and card games are abstract enough to make the player use his imagination, most of the game is running beside the actual game: it is the human opponent factor that makes them interesting. the same is for q3a, counterstrike etc: it does not count if the graphics is 10 years beyond our time, it is the conscience of playing with humans. such games never age. for cs it's unimporant who's good or evil, so is for ball games. @frank: yes, indeed. because snapping for heads was so much fun at least for me
|
|
|
Re: Bad guy wins...?
[Re: Error014]
#133779
06/08/07 16:27
06/08/07 16:27
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,177
Netherlands
PHeMoX
Senior Expert
|
Senior Expert
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,177
Netherlands
|
Quote:
Hmm... I remember that Jedi Knight II had a sequence like this, somewhere at around the end of the first third of the game. It had a fight that you couldn't win, but of course nobody told 'ya. I spend all my hard-earned healthcontainers on that one. It was extremely frustrating, especially because I always quit when I saw that I haven't had a chance. In the end, I had to refer to a guide to see that I couldn't win that one. The situation wasn't clear enough, thus it became frustrating (at least for me). The rest of the game was cool, don't get me wrong, but that part? Cool idea, bad execution.
You can't tell the player that it's okey to 'loose', because you can't win anyways. There's no real solution to your tactic in playing this game. I bet by far most people do not stop playing before they actually have been 'beaten'.
Nowadays, these kind of gameplay problems get solved by letting the player deal an x amount of damage to the opponent and thén there will be a cutscene with whatever alternate ending such a scene would have.
For example in Prince of Persia this technique is used to sort of show to the player the second round of fighting is going to start with an increased difficulty. I'd say that's fair enough without giving away anything. They could have even turned around the whole thing, which they should have done in Jedi Knight II, let the player deal up to an x amount of damage to the enemy and when that artificial limit is reached, show a cutscene in which the player get's defeated and go on from there.
Quote:
the average shooter: kill all to achieve your goals.
hitman series: you're a contract killer and earn money with the job. you even got to think a lot.
the average shooter gets usk 16. hitman has been on the german index for the concept, though you kill ~50 more people per level in an average shooter. thinking about this, i feel there is something wrong. who is good and who is evil?
In fact, ever since part 2 I believe in was, there's this 'ranking'. Only killing your targets and not any civilians or bodyguards will rate you as being 'hitman'. So you're actually encouraged to not kill much people, well unless you have no problems with the 'massmurder' rating, but I think most people will take the challenge trying to kill only their targets.
I agree that the USK rating is off there, however I think it's also the virtual social context in which the killing happens. Killing an orc or a vampire obviously is different then killing a human in a somewhat realistic environment. I think that's the USK logic, and personally I disagree with it. What makes killing an unrealistic elf different from killing an slightly less unrealistic but still 100% fake human?
Quote:
a space station is always a space station and a mage is a mage, true. but i've never seen a mage in a space station (star wars doesn't count as mages), so there are still stories to be told: the combination of elements counts.
Star Wars Jedi knights and Sith knights do look and act a bit like mages. They have this 'wise-wizard' thing to them and off course their 'force' magic.
However, I agree a real space mage fantasy game hasn't been done yet, would be interesting perhaps.
Cheers
|
|
|
Re: Bad guy wins...?
[Re: Orange Brat]
#133780
06/10/07 16:05
06/10/07 16:05
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,640
Earth
Germanunkol
OP
Expert
|
OP
Expert
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,640
Earth
|
wow, lots of answers. cool, thanks! I'm back... Quote:
You have to find the balance between whats "bad and cool" or "bad and acceptable"
Yeah... I thought something that has to do with this.
I did not think of all those games all of you have mentioned, when i posted this topic. you're right. there are tons of games that make you play the bad guy. but there are none that make you feel bad.
okay. that being said, there are some. none just sounded better in that sentence.
I guess I should redefine "bad" at this point. because in gta you're "bad", and in counterstrike you're "bad". but when you play the game, you don't see yourself as being "bad". in gta, you accept what you're doing. you might not be like that in real life, but it's the way the game goes, you're fine with being the character you are, it's all good.
How about a game that makes you think about the actions you took in the end. Makes you regret that you have shot the innocent person. A game that leaves you free choice, but makes you pay or leaves you with a bad conscience. By "pay", I don't mean that you loose resources every time you kill an enemy villager, that would be nonsense, but "paying" in some other way. Like loosing the chance to get back onto the right track. Yes, I do realize I'm walking on very dangerous ground here. may be one of the reasons no one has done it yet. I mean, who wants to be confronted with a bad conscience while playing a game? How can a game developer be so annoying? It would disturb my idea of fun quite a bit. Also... if you don't do it exactly right, and get the wrong person playing it, it may look like you're promoting the killing of innocent people.
An example would be a military commander who has control over life and death. Killing may seem to be the better way. but in the end, you've killed someone who didn't deserve death, you're bad. it would make people think. Or, maybe, it would make people switch of entirely. but the first option would be intended...
Maybe this has already been done, but I'm playing the "wrong" games?
To achieve the effect, the victims would have to be much bigger characters. they would have to beg for mercy, and look realistic.
As soon as that comes in, the game may not be sold any more though, another problem, because you can't really promote the killing of innocents. that would be sick.
to wrap it all up:
winning a game in which you play the "bad" guy who would make you feel like you're bad...?
I find it an interesting concept...
Micha
P.S.
Quote:
Fighting violence with violence does not make you the same as your enemy (or whatever you want to call the adversary). Violence can be used for noble purposes, and sometimes it must be used, and out in the real world sometimes someone just needs a good beating to get the point across. Words aren't the answer, so a kick to the head is the answer.
Uh...
"No."
Any questions?
sorry. my opinion. u can come over and give me a "kick to the head". u have my permission. You'll see that it won't be the answer, cause it won't change my opinion.
and I'm not saying that I would never use violence. if I could save a life by hitting someone in the face cause he won't tell me how to, maybe I would. still it's not the answer.
Sorry... and please don't be mad at me, no offense intended.
P.P.S.
I would love such a thread, error014!!
~"I never let school interfere with my education"~
-Mark Twain
|
|
|
Re: Bad guy wins...?
[Re: PHeMoX]
#133781
06/10/07 18:11
06/10/07 18:11
|
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 3,208
Germany
Error014
Expert
|
Expert
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 3,208
Germany
|
Quote:
You can't tell the player that it's okey to 'loose', because you can't win anyways. There's no real solution to your tactic in playing this game. I bet by far most people do not stop playing before they actually have been 'beaten'.
Yes? You really think so? Let's say you're down to 10 HP up from 200HP (you know, games nowadays...!) and you haven't damaged him at all.. you would continue? Especially with quickload! Maybe I'm the minority here, but I'd get pretty frustrated and either start again or stop playing and never play again (sorry, game, you lost). It somehow has to be obvious that it's "okay to lose", yet you can't kill the suspension entirely. Maybe one could say that "if you were to win now, we'd be finished, but we wouldn't have lost completely if yu don't." Sure, the sentence needs a little work  but I think that might be a good thing. If even I get frustrated, then whats with "non-gamers"? Maybe they quit and won't buy any other game for three years (after all, they just wanted to try that out and it was apparently not fun - not all of them will realize that it is only the (small?) fault of one game!)
Quote:
Nowadays, these kind of gameplay problems get solved by letting the player deal an x amount of damage to the opponent and thén there will be a cutscene with whatever alternate ending such a scene would have.
And that one's much better. Show me that I make progress, at least! But in that sequence, he'd block all my shots. Show me that I'm doing at least something correct, even though its not enough. I might even continue long enough, then
Quote:
the average shooter: kill all to achieve your goals.
hitman series: you're a contract killer and earn money with the job. you even got to think a lot.
A good point. What we have to consider is that while technically, the "standardshooter" is way more brutal, killing has a very different feeling to it. If you only see "soldier No. 342", who has no backstory and in most cases not even a name, then killing him will "feel" different than killing an established character. In one game, it might feel more like a simple mechanic and not like killing anyone whatsoever. If that is a good thing or not, I'm not so sure.
But why are shooters so stupidly popular these days? It's so unrealistic and it goes completely against anything I've ever learnt or might believe in. You see a new species? Well, kill them! I wouldn't do that in real life. Nowadays, (many) games expect you to do that. You see the weapon onscreen and you now that you probably have to shoot at most things in your view that move. The amount of games in which I solve most problems with communication is so close to zero, it's laughable. Sure, many people want to escape their boring life and become that next actionhero, but it is remarkable how different games and reallife have become. Not in the way of "how-many-bullets-before-you-die" - thats a rule in the game, nothing more - but in the way on how they expect us to think and react. Imagine you'd show such a game to your (grand)parents. Why do I have to shoot at anything and why do gamedevelopers assume us to think that way? Sure, in many games you can also sneak past them or something, but in general...
Adventure games have had a similar story. Over the years, the puzzles in many games have become so weird and unlogical that its more trial and error and most "normal" people would never be able to figure it out, as its so far out there. That was to serve the hardcore-crowd, but it might have led to their downfall, as it made it so difficult to get into it for anyone not used to that. Do FPS move in the same direction with their "weird" expections of the players' feelings, emotions and on how he`ll solve the problems provided (->shooting at them)?
Quote:
How can a game developer be so annoying? It would disturb my idea of fun quite a bit.
But isn't that an absolutely intruiging concept? Sure it's annoying and - yes, it's not fun. So what? Some of my favorite movies are "not fun". I have recommended books that are far from "being fun". Why is that not okay with games? There are some notable exceptions, but generally...
I agree though that due to the fact that it is interactive and the player might lose the feeling of being "just" an innocent bystander, we should be very, very careful as to what we are expecting the player to do. The big challenge is to not cross any moral barriers.
Quote:
An example would be a military commander who has control over life and death. Killing may seem to be the better way. but in the end, you've killed someone who didn't deserve death, you're bad. it would make people think. Or, maybe, it would make people switch of entirely. but the first option would be intended...
What you have to keep in mind is that for most people, he is "just" a soldier with no backstory, no name, no family, no anything. He doesn't have a past nor will he have a future as soon as you switch off the computer. Why should one care? That is - probably - why gamedevelopers can expect us to shoot anything after all . To make the player really think, you'd probably have to develop that character that has been killed. You have to think of a backstory for him. Where does he come from? What are his goals in life? Where does he live? How does he live? Is he happy? etc, etc. You can also tell the player only after he has made the decision (maybe that would be even more effective as far as emotional "impact" is concerned!). But many games don't even bother to do it with their main characters! What do we know about Sam Fisher? Lara croft? Although it sure isn't necessary for every game, thats something games really should change so people can take it seriously. My beloved PhoenixWright games (or Hotel Dusk, for that matter) have pretty well-developed characters. Tim Schafers games usually have (maybe always? I haven't played them all, I know, I'm a bad person  ).
Everyone, play Phoenix Wright and Hotel Dusk. RIGHT NOW. 
Did you ever thought about any character from a book or from a movie outside of the book/movie? I'm pretty sure you have. How often did that happen for a character from a videogame? Thought so.
Quote:
I would love such a thread, error014!!
Well, I don't know about the interest for the rest, but maybe I'll open such a thread. Or go ahead and do it, I'm fine with that as well
Perhaps this post will get me points for originality at least.
Check out Dungeon Deities! It's amazing and will make you happy, successful and almost certainly more attractive! It might be true!
|
|
|
|
