I like the S.T.A.L.K.E.R series. You're powerful, for if you plan correctly, and are in favorable circumstances, you can fight a small army. But even with the best gear, a fight in poor circumstances against an enemy with poor gear isn't without risk. Against two it can be suicide. As a result your greatest power is the quick save (which you'll also need since the games tends to crash a lot)
How can you make the player feel underpowered but not weak?
- Thread starter G-Force
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Yeah, the FOV one was always going to be contentious one in my post wasn't it?thatonedude11 said:
Maybe not reducing it, but instead having it stuck to the standard one so you can't set a ridiculously wide field of view (like 160 degrees or similar) and thus spot people creeping up on you. The other thing with wider FOVs in general is that you generally have to boost player character movement speed to stop it looking weird, which is OP in it's own right.
Not sure about control restriction - but then I am a self-entitled PC gamer who's used to getting his own way when it comes to mapping controls! I'd completely agree when it comes to things like increasing the time it takes to ADS, or go into sprint, recover accuracy after movement, change equipment, that kind of thing. Good example; the Operation Flashpoint series.
And damn it, I forgot resource restriction. That's another really important one. Maybe not go quite as extreme as Metro or Stalker, but even something like the rather tame restriction on heavy weapons in the original F.E.A.R would be an improvement on most current games.
It's even more gratuitous because of the way you can do it at any time that you're vaguely pointing at them and moving towards them. I wouldn't so much mind if you could do it when you were right behind someone and it took a few seconds (maybe a bit like Hitman Absolution did with the non-lethal takedowns where you have to hold the button to complete the move). You could then upgrade the skill to take less time, to be able to do it from a little bit further away, or something.SpunkeyMonkey said:
But the kind of wild lunging attack that you could do in about 1/3 of a second was downright ridiculous. I'm not even that devastating when playing as a transhuman supersoldier in Crysis.
Well, TLoU made every encounter feel like a puzzle. All the levels were carefully constructed in such a way that you had to use your mind to win a fight, or else avoid an enemy. Fighting got you killed. The character doesn't win because they can chew through bullets, or because their tougher, but because they are actually more experienced fighters. Arkham Asylum was similar. If you charged an assault rifle then the assault rifle typically won. This is difficult to pull off in an open world game, where the levels are not as tightly constructed, forcing you to typically rely on force more than tactics.
This!rutger5000 said:
The STALKER NPC AI is quite decent and will attempt to flank you based on where they think you were last. They also get increasingly better at murdering you even though the scrub bandits in the first map can already do so quite handily. STALKER punishes brute force and hasty combat as virtually every NPC can kill you in a few hits (even the environment can kill you easily) but if you go slow & steady and know how to properly fight the AI you can beat it.
I think one of the main differences between weak and underpowered is choice, and knowledge. Take Demon/Dark Souls. You start out fairly unequiped and underpowered compared to what you can become.
But (especially in Dark Souls) you can go where ever you want. You won't survive most of the paths to begin with, no matter how skilled a player you are. But, you choose. Weakness is only frustrating when it feels artificial. When it limits your options with false blocks (like poor gun sway, nerfed controls).
You can't fight how or whatever you want to fight, you can't go where you want to go. You feel constricted by the game. Take away artificial constrictions and you might be in the same situation but you are allowed to test those limits. Like a child you have to learn the world and what you are capable of. As you grow stronger, become better equiped, learn how things work, you can then go back and test yourself against tougher and tougher situations. So you may feel both weak and underpowered but it fits the context, it feels natural and intuitive.
What you're talking about is bad game design. Jason(?) in Far Cry 3 gets over his squeamishness WAAAAY to quickly in my opinion. What they could have done is made it harder for him to stealth at the beginning, meaning enemies came at him more aggressively. Teach the player to be more cautious. You could also subtley shift their down-iron-sights view from less zoomed in, to more zoomed in, making accuracy harder to begin with. I've seen other games where recoil and reloading get naturally quicker the more you use a particular weapon. You can do these things so subtley a player may not even notice.
Of course that gives the issue of making the game harder to play to begin with but that's where world/level building needs to be carefully balanced so there's context and the progression feels intuitive. In most cases where people complain about games, it's nearly always cases of poor context, illogical balancing, non-intuitive pathways. It's just like movies. You can make people believe there are zombies running around and dragons are a real threat if you give clear, consistent rules to the universe. Games that try to sell you on an idea they haven't earned make for cognitive dissonance.
But (especially in Dark Souls) you can go where ever you want. You won't survive most of the paths to begin with, no matter how skilled a player you are. But, you choose. Weakness is only frustrating when it feels artificial. When it limits your options with false blocks (like poor gun sway, nerfed controls).
You can't fight how or whatever you want to fight, you can't go where you want to go. You feel constricted by the game. Take away artificial constrictions and you might be in the same situation but you are allowed to test those limits. Like a child you have to learn the world and what you are capable of. As you grow stronger, become better equiped, learn how things work, you can then go back and test yourself against tougher and tougher situations. So you may feel both weak and underpowered but it fits the context, it feels natural and intuitive.
What you're talking about is bad game design. Jason(?) in Far Cry 3 gets over his squeamishness WAAAAY to quickly in my opinion. What they could have done is made it harder for him to stealth at the beginning, meaning enemies came at him more aggressively. Teach the player to be more cautious. You could also subtley shift their down-iron-sights view from less zoomed in, to more zoomed in, making accuracy harder to begin with. I've seen other games where recoil and reloading get naturally quicker the more you use a particular weapon. You can do these things so subtley a player may not even notice.
Of course that gives the issue of making the game harder to play to begin with but that's where world/level building needs to be carefully balanced so there's context and the progression feels intuitive. In most cases where people complain about games, it's nearly always cases of poor context, illogical balancing, non-intuitive pathways. It's just like movies. You can make people believe there are zombies running around and dragons are a real threat if you give clear, consistent rules to the universe. Games that try to sell you on an idea they haven't earned make for cognitive dissonance.
Can't believe no one has mentioned it yet. Journey [PS3] does a fantastic job of making the player feel underpowered and vulnerable. Towards the end they reduce the effectiveness of a mechanic you've relied on throughout the rest of the game. Soon after, they remove it altogether. When you're movement, something which was previously free and easy, has been hindered you feel powerless.
Plenty of ways, none of which can be implemented post-release or even during balancing. A way needs to be built as a mechanic and convey and fit the feel and tone of the game.
Unfortunately people want power fantasies, and they want them out of the box.
Unfortunately people want power fantasies, and they want them out of the box.
Cool, did not know of that.Benni88 said:
How do your folks feel about control in games. Jason and Lara controlled very fluid and felt fun to control. Joel does control very responsive but there is a slower feedback with his actions (gun sways more, punches take time to recover after landing etc.)
Unresponsive controls and see as a major sin and a sign of artifical difficulty so is there a balance you can walk?
Unresponsive controls and see as a major sin and a sign of artifical difficulty so is there a balance you can walk?
The main issue I have with a lot of games is that they are power fantasies. They make you very powerful to deal with a situation, which puts you on an uneven footing when facing your challenge. I much prefer being on equal or even underpowered terms with the challenge, which is why I like games like overgrowth, dark souls, ArmA and DotA. When you overcome something that is more powerful than you, the experience is more worthwhile than using overpowered abilities to do the same. Although power fantasies aren't always bad, but they are better when you feel weakness enough for the power to seem more significant (arkham asylum does this very well).
As mentioned, make the enemies as strong as you. Same stats, same guns and so on.
SWAT 4 comes to mind. You needed to use your team and your fancy equipment because the enemies can have the same weapons and can be more numerous.
SWAT 4 comes to mind. You needed to use your team and your fancy equipment because the enemies can have the same weapons and can be more numerous.
A counter button. In the Smackdown vs Raw wrestling games, I prefered agile lean characters. Could not lift most characters, but was good at reversals, and so was I as a player, and was like a bar of soap. As for things like say, a horror game, I think the same thing can apply. If you feel like you cant kill whatever is chasing you, but can counter it well enough somehow, it an make you feel underpowered, but not weak.
I was thinking in terms of AI that learn, though I'm not sure how possible that is within the confines of games. A way around psychic AI might be to use scout tactics and communication between the AI NPCs, something like an AI director from L4D. If you've played any of the Batman games, at a certain point in the game you find that the vantage points that you've (most likely) come to rely on (the stone gargoyle things) are being booby trapped. The first time this happened to me I freaked out a little, because I lost the advantage for a brief moment. But of course, it's scripted (they don't start booby trapping grates and vents if you used those more) and you can adapt to it quickly.NameIsRobertPaulson said:
Dark Souls: You're just one dude(ette) with the uncanny power of immortality. You're fighting monsters that are much bigger, stronger and faster than you are in a dying world where almost everything and everyone is trying to kill you. You will get burned, stabbed, frozen, squished and petrified. You're just one human in a land of mighty gods and powerfull demons. The only way that you can survive is by knowing how, when and where you will die, by having superior equipment and sheer willpower. Enjoy!
Hotline Miami: You're a one-hitpoint wonder, just like (almost) everyone else in the game. You are alone, the enemy is in force. You. will. die. It's up to you to be fast enough, smart enough and lucky enough to shoot, crush, slash and stab your way through the game, leaving a mountain of corpses behind you. Enjoy!
Hotline Miami: You're a one-hitpoint wonder, just like (almost) everyone else in the game. You are alone, the enemy is in force. You. will. die. It's up to you to be fast enough, smart enough and lucky enough to shoot, crush, slash and stab your way through the game, leaving a mountain of corpses behind you. Enjoy!