Game Play Thoughts: 1st person shooters

UPDATE: Check out RED FACTION: GUERILLA - some cool distruction multiplayer action... destructive environments. However, in this game, everything can explode (which is awesome) but it should be designed a bit more so that the elements you can distroy can still lead to balanced, gameplay

(below from 08/06/09)

(ideally, multiplayer/deathmatch/CTF stuff, but could work for campaigns as well.)

Basically the idea came from thinking about how to balance a character with a flame thrower, who was pretty weak compared to some of the other characters in the game. range issues, speed etc. The main idea is that, what if the guy could light parts of the level on fire? Let something burn to the point where it can either remain burning for the entire session (damaging players who walk through) - or even to the point where it could destroy pathways. For instance, if there was a bridge that most players use to get to a specific area, weapon, or sniping point. The "pyro" guy goes and lights it up, and eventually, it would burn down. This would totally change the way the map is played from this point forward.
So, the theory is about exploring how we as players interact with more aspects of the game itself, thus allowing more possibilities. In most cases our involvement is with the players and the predetermined (and meticulously designed) maps. The element that keeps us coming back for more is, how will these players find and exploit strategies based on where people usually go to on the map (especially in CTF scenarios). But if we can give this area of the design more depth, the games would benefit from it greatly. Imagine the situation where a demo guy could dig a whole through a wall, to connect two rooms, or other underground passage way - mechanics who could rebuild or repair - pyros affecting only wooden objects, etc. Thinking about the character creation more balanced between weapon and skill, as opposed to weapon and weaker weapon that games tend to gravitate toward.
It would really start to evolve the way we'd look at these types of game play scenarios, and hopefully give a somewhat tired genre some new life. Granted it seems like a huge task... dynamic environments, but hey, here's hopin'.

Game Play Thoughts: Side Quests

Side quests in games used to feel more connected to the "main" quest, where something else to do would have something to do with either the town you were trying to save, or how the story was affecting other people whom needed your help. In recent games, side quests seem to be filler - a padding that allows the game to have a longer stay in your console disc drive. Personally, I like side quests, but in the wrong hands, they can be dangerous. The last two titles I've had time with that had side quests are inFAMOUS and Prototype. Both have examples of good and bad side quests.
In Prototype, there were a few different kinds you can choose from while traversing the city. They ranged from racing around the city through check points, killing a certain amount of enemies, finding specific people on the streets that played a part in the story, and collecting orbs at random places around the game world. Of these 4 I can remember off the top of my head, 1 of them actually has something to do with the game itself. The quests where you track down people who know something about the story works the best because you actually get to see other sides of the story. I actually thought this was a really cool way to tell a story. I wished they would have pushed this further, and had more useful info in the videos you watched as you absorbed their thoughts. Maybe even leading you to clues as to what to do next, and who you could help etc. But challenging yourself to jump up a building and back down as fast as you can, or killing a multitude of enemies while restricted to a specific weapon type, really doesn't have much to do with the story, but can at least improve your skills in how good you are at moving your character around, which obviously makes you better at playing the game. The worst type, is the random collection of some sort of item. Thankfully, games rarely punish you for not collecting all of these, but then why really put them in? They usually help you out in some fashion (usually exp of some sort) making us want to collect them all to improve the character, but what does collecting items really have to do with improving a character in this way? These types of decisions that stray away from actual story/character relevance, turn the game into something that seems to have less purpose... Is it to get you to move around the city? Your story should compel the gamer to go from place to place. To increase the time it takes to complete the game? Odds are it will most-likely serve as a distraction to the main story line, and can totally affect the pacing on your game as a whole. And overall left me asking, what is this story about anyway?
In inFamous, the side missions have good/evil/neutral tasks, and also a collection based one. The side missions in this seemed to be somewhat related to what is happening in the story. At least they have to do with people living in the city that are affected by the global problem, which is cool. One thing bad about them, is some are pretty repetitive in what you need to do, leaving you with an " oh another one of these" type of feeling when you realize what your next task is. The completion of these quests also "clears" a section of the map, effectively leaving that area in turmoil or peace, which helps give you a sense of accomplishment in your reign, be it good or evil. The collection quest where you get electrified pieces from the explosion that occurred at the start of the game, is at least semi linked to the game, but it treads close to being too much of a time sink when you find yourself just collecting these pieces when you really should feel the urgency of finding your friend and figuring out what's happened to you.
In general, I think we should keep side missions alive, of course, but if they are filler, get them out of there. There are creative ways to add other elements to your game that can keep it full of content, and going to the simple "collect this, I'll give you experience points" should be left off the table. It takes us away from what you really want us thinking about when we play the game.

one suggestions: Why not have more choices between side quests, and main quests, and add an element of suspence or urgency? Where if you spend too much time on side quests, more bad things would happen. Currently in games, I could do side quests all day long, and nothing really that bad happens to the characters in the story, it would tie you into the game way more, and give you a senes of accountability for your actions, and the added affect that what we do matters.

Game Play Thoughts: Good vs. Evil

so... good vs. evil games. and you - well, me actually... anyway.

I want to take a second and think through this gameplay type. Currently, people consider it a big draw to be able to make choices as they are playing a game, to see their character become evil, or good. Choosing to either give someone the food, or kill him and steal his money. Each giving the character some sort of experience type points in the direction his life is headed. At the surface, this seems pretty cool, more choices usually equals, more fun [ it can be if done right!]. But I think at times it ends up doing the opposite, instead of letting the player actually roam free doing whatever he wants, he feels limited because if he wants to be on a specific path, he better stay on target. Sure persistence is key to getting anywhere in life, but that's just it, LIFE, these are games, and games that want to tell really good stories should probably stick to one 'unique' path. Usually i find these types of games leave you with a middle ground story that doesn't really push either good nor evil far enough.... Unless the two sides were REALLY different, but I'm sure there are tons of reasons not to spend that much extra time and money on a portion of the game people might not even get to enjoy. The point being, make the game different enough. Not only on the surface to where it seems like they replaced the words "good" for "evil", and the color of his hair, and called it a day.

The same goes for upgrading weapons/powers etc. Most games these days seem to throw a hundred different weapons at you throughout the game, and you never really have time to hang on to one, or improve on it. Or an upgrade screen full of choices that pretty much overwhelms you, leaving you wondering if you are going to pick the right power, or if your character is going to suck. The point here is to have the right amount, not too many to where it's no longer unique. One thing that sucks about all this customizing, is that it means that the gameplay can't be as tailored to the specific actions your character can actually preform at a given time in the story. Finding yourself at times, either too over powered, or too weak, which leads you to a game that gets boring quick, or frustrating to the point you feel like turning it off. Rarely does a player ever pick the combination that will keep him in check with the games current difficulty settings. Which leads us to making all the powers relatively similar in strength, just different in visual, and yet again, taking the uniqueness out of the game/power. Then we sit there, hands full of exp points, ready to buy, I usually find myself pining over which power to develop instead of enjoying the gameplay experience. Of course i could farm for exp to get all my stats to their max, but than it seems too forced, and the fun has gone and where was I in the story?

Developers usually try and sell you this idea as reasons to extend the life of a game. Play through the first time, being good, see what the game is like, and than do all the bad stuff you wanted to do, and see how the game pans out. This in theory also seems cool, but I haven't really found any game unique enough to actually make me want to play through it twice, choosing different sides each time. I usually end up starting out being good, than getting bored of not getting the cooler weapons or skills, and switch mid game to a life of crime, and thereby leaving my character at a middle ground.

The main idea behind adding this element to the game play is choices. Choices make us feel like we are creating a character that is ours. I think however, the choices the character MAKES in his decisions in the story, are far more important than the stats he posesses. I think that if more attention was paid to the game changing based on what you actually have done, [and i mean really changing] it would round out the character and create a tighter connection between player and hero. Games do currently do this to a degree, but I feel like it could be taken further. I know this would talk a massive amount of programing to create all the different scenarios, but even a small amount, done well would be great!

Game Play Thoughts: Whip weapons

Just a quick thought for weapon based fighting and hit detection. Back in the day (while playing the FPS, Soldier of Fortune) I was amazed by the hit detection system and it's influence on the enemy. Basically you could hit the body in about 28 different spots, and the character would react to it accordingly. Usually resulting in shooting their arm off or leg. Pretty rewarding. Basically, I'd like to see more of this ;)
Let's look at the awesomeness that could come from a character with a whip. You'd have regular attacks that would do damage, but maybe a secondary attack could hit specific body parts. For instance, as you would perform this action, the whip could wrap around the enemies arm, (you pull on the whip) and that arm comes flying off, and now the guy's left to fight armless. Heck, maybe he'd run away? Maybe it would scare others off? Maybe a throw could be initiated by something like this as well. What if you caught him around the neck? or around his waste? around his weapon? more awesomeness. I think it should be random as well,[at least at the start] because the pacing and complication of aiming can take the fun out of specific types of game genres. In Eternal Darkness: Sanity's Requiem for the Game Cube, you could aim your attacks, and it was pretty successful, yet a little too cumbersome when lots of enemies attach you, as you struggle with selecting the right body part rather than reacting to the instincts of wanting to slay the beast!!! - plus i think that it would add a layer of randomness to the outcome of the fight. If the game design allows... maybe your character would progress and your overall aim would be better and that would result in more devastating wounds?

My Brute!

this site is pretty bad ass. Select a character, pick an opponent, and then fight! Win or lose you get experience points and level up as you use your 3 allotted fights per day. Your brute will randomly use/throw his weapon, allow the pet to attack, dodge, etc... all through the stat system they have set up. It's pretty great fun, actually, and a great break in the middle of your work day.
Basically, when your character is created all their stats are random. (pray you get a pet early on) Then it's fightin' time!!! Actually, it's pretty much "watch a fight" time, but a fight to the DEATH nonetheless! actually, til one of you kneels down... but in absolute PAIN!!! hmm, maybe just out of breath... but you can tell he's sad, on the inside at least...

Oh, one more awesome thing, you are all my pupils now... obey!!!
http://speedsimmons.mybrute.com

inFamous:: First Impression

My first impression of inFamous is that it's pretty addictive and the lightning combat pays off. So far the story seems to be off to a slow start, the cut scene animation is pretty mediocre and moving through the city is a bit sluggish and nowhere near as fluid as Prototype. But the biggest mystery is still, what's in my backpack, and why does it sounds like broken glass every time I take a step....

Final Fantasy VII

Playing through this gem again, and it’s pretty great honestly, I still love leveling these characters and remembering the good ‘ole days when graphics like these were awesome. Maybe now, since there’s a landslide of games that all look identical [hyper-real over exaggerated normal maps, I’m looking in your direction] more developers will quit thinking that over detailed graphics look good, and work on something innovative with the gameplay structure before they release another title, and focus on colors, depth of field rather than realistic something...
test

Silent Hill: Homecoming

Playing this game off and on [it's amazing how playing at night really affects the mood] Mood is the most successful element to this game actually - crying babies, swings that creek in the night, and creatures whom seem to have watched “The Ring” one too many times. Other than that and a few decent visuals, this game falls pretty flat and stands to end the series. The combat systems seems as though I'm fighting against the air, as there is hardly any feeling of impact in the character. One major thing though, is that I am actually surprised at how poorly this game plays. Not just the spotty game play, but even the fact that the game is actually buggy to the point where the models don’t load in, leaving your character standing in the ‘matrix’ where you are forced to run around hoping the stage will load as you get nailed by a needler.
SH:H seems to be more of the same from the previous games in the series thus far…. Run around, check doors. I got it… they’re locked. Maybe I should be looking for the person who had time to lock all the damn doors before the entire town was filled with ash…. Again.

Prototype

...even though this game gets a lot of flack for not being as good as inFamous [I've heard the story in infamous seems to be more solid than in prototype]. Now, I think the story is the lifeblood of anything worth making, but some times you get in the mood for a certain by of gamePLAY. So, in comparing the two, they actually seem like two different games, but only in how play. Prototype plays more like an action RPG where you are right in the middle of the action, jumping in and out of tanks and helicoptors. Although it would have been nice if you didn't get pwned by bullets as you wait for the cut scene animation to play as you make your way into a tank! So, think of it more like GTA in a different skin, and a one dimensional story. Where InFamous actually plays more like Gears of War [minus the duck 'n cover aspects] as they both act as 3rd person shooters for the most part, with even less close combat since there doesn't seem to be a chainsaw gun in the game. So, if you are having a tough time deciding between games, let that guide you, because usually people don’t spend time comparing ‘hack-n-slashers’ to 3rd person shooters … but I digress….

At its core, it’s actually a really fun open city action hack and slash, where you can kill both good guys and bad in ways most horror films would like to replicate. There is something also to be said about the effortless mobility your character has as he moves throughout the city. It's pretty awesome to watch him stiff arm and push his way through a crowd, somersault over an oncoming car, or bust through trees and light posts. Essentially taking out the computer AI glitchy feel most games have. Refining subtle details like this in games definitely helps the character come to life and keeps the game feeling organic. It keeps you immersed in the game when you don't have to deal with the frustration of getting stuck on a pedestrian as you spin and walk in place trying to break free so you can get to your destination... but enough about what the game isn't!.... You can also run up buildings!!! Who doesn't want to do that?!?!?

ComicCon '09

Not at it, but it seems cool. Besides the regular stuff, nothing’s better than this cosplay image [courtesy of www.gamespot.com ]

"Proud Parent Award 2009"