Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

'Put the guns away!' - combat and gaming

  • 27-04-2012 3:33pm
    #1
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 29,030 CMod ✭✭✭✭johnny_ultimate


    Right, just to try and start a discussion that's more related to game design...

    Combat is obviously something that has crafted some of the finest gameplay systems ever made: from the inspired weaponary of Half-Life, the frentic ammo search in Resi 4, the time-sink simulators like ARMA2, to the frantic battlefields of Gears of War and the poetic ass-kicking of Bayonetta or Street Fighter. This is not a thread about the games that do violence and do it well, or to deny that a medium that is primarily based on competition and binary win/fail states is going to be dominated by combat systems. But rather it's asking the question if we've got too obsessed with maiming and killing stuff, and whether it's actually negatively impacting upon the diversity of games available. Some examples...

    Uncharted: a series that has struggled to create a wholly successful combat system, even if it's at least passable in the sequels. Most importantly, though, the need for lengthy gunplay sequences amongst the setpieces and jungle exploration negatively impact upon the consistency of the protagonist himself. Nathan Drake is heard bemoaning the need to use weaponary at the start of Uncharted 2, yet is more than happy to commit something bordering on genocide later on. Now obviously the odd moment of tense confrontation is to be expected - the bar brawl at the start of U3 suggests an interesting approach that never really goes anywhere - but do we need so much of it? If Uncharted as a game was shorter but poured its resources into more compelling non-combat situations, would that really be a bad thing? See also: Tomb Raider.

    Alien - Colonial Office Worker: Imagine you and your crewmates are alone on a ship, with only a single flame thrower to protect you as a single xenomorph systematically breaks you off from your soon to be dead teammates. It's survival horror redefined, where the player is forced to be inventive as they react to a constantly dangerous and volatile situation. The environment - dripping with the deadly trail of acidic xenomorph blood, ripping apart the ship - is as dangerous as the creature that occupies it. Imagine the possibilities! But instead we get Aliens - Colonial Marines, which so far (not ruling out the possibility of a sudden reversal) is looking like just another space marine simulator with aliens. The developers promise high levels of fatalities, but what if the player was the real canon fodder here? It, unfortunately, is looking like a question Gearbox are unwilling to address. Shoot **** instead!

    Mass Effect, Skyrim, etc...: Combat and RPGs go hand-in-hand, and the games have always handled this well. But what if developers changed the rules somewhat, and allowed you to truly play your role? Every situation has various outcomes instead of ones that inevitably send you down shooting corridors or dungeon crawls. That's still a possibility, but you can choose to be an expert pacifist if you so wish, brilliantly negotiating your way through situations that would otherwise have resulted in bloodshed. Vitally, it's your choice and your character. Deus Ex made some amazing progress towards it a decade ago. What has changed since?

    Alas, such lofty dreams are perhaps outside the capabilities of developers and current technology. But is it possible to imagine games that truly break outside the formulaic and traditional boundaries? Fez and Journey are two games recently that have absolutely nothing in the way of combat systems. Should we have more, or are guns and brawling destined to be an intrinsic part of gaming DNA for many years hence? And, the big question: are the games worse because of it?


Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,896 ✭✭✭penev10


    Wholeheartedly agree with almost all the points you're making.

    Lengthy gun fights can become a real chore and threaten to ruin games like Uncharted 2, Tomb Raider 2 and Dead Space 2 (pattern there?). The need for almost all games to be combat based is fairly damning alright. Nice article on it here:
    http://www.edge-online.com/features/why-we-kill


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,556 ✭✭✭✭Sir Digby Chicken Caesar


    deus ex didnt really make huge strides towards it you were always meant to kill one or two of the bosses, there was just some exploitable bugs that meant you could get away without killingthem

    actually maybe it was just one guy.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators Posts: 50,700 CMod ✭✭✭✭Retr0gamer


    Games without guns are gay.


  • Registered Users Posts: 22,929 ✭✭✭✭ShadowHearth


    well problems is that all these non combat games will become interactive movies.


    i know where you going with this, but the main point for me in gaming is to be challanged. I love that my imput makes difference in game. If i am in game just for story, then might aswell it can be a movie and cut the controller out, so i can use drink and popcorn. :)

    games like amnesia has almost no combat and works great, wasnt there some game on ps1 named "clock tower"? it was horror survival game where you had to run and outsmart, not fight.


  • Hosted Moderators Posts: 18,115 ✭✭✭✭ShiverinEskimo


    Retr0gamer wrote: »
    Games without guns are gay.

    Presume this is an ironic joke from the guy with the Mario avatar.


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,556 ✭✭✭✭Sir Digby Chicken Caesar


    flower power was kind of a gun


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators Posts: 50,700 CMod ✭✭✭✭Retr0gamer


    I find some games are really negatively affected by the inclusion of combat. Deadly Premonition and Rule of Rose are two exceptional games with dreadful combat that really drags the experience down. These games would have been much better without combat and it was publisher pressure that made SWERY and his dev team put combat in because it was thought it wouldn't sell.

    Violence sells unfortunately, or at least the publishers see it that way.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,723 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Worth mentioning that even the franchises previously known for lacking any form of shooting have themselves embraced the way of the gun; Resident Evil & Silent Hill's most recent incarnations have both featured more prominent shooting mechanics than would have been considered appropriate. Survival Horror as a genre is now pretty much dead, replaced instead with Action Horror

    I think the mainstream gaming industry is in a serious self-perpetuating rut, where a fear of failure is forcing companies to make their games as appealing to the perceived core demographic as possible (18-35 male douchebags), which in itself almost guarantees mediocrity and financial failure. Part of creative plateau is of course the idea that a game must have some form of shooting to appeal to these people.

    Aliens for me a particular bug-bear, as expressed in its own thread, because it seems like a unique and original franchise - as suggested in the OP - that is instead being reduced to a standard, cookie-cutter piece of FPS douchebaggery.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,547 ✭✭✭Agricola


    This thread reminds me of the shooting fatigue I got after completing Mass Effect 2. After 25/30 hours of cover/shoot, cover/shoot I was actually worn out!

    Great topic this. Ive often wondered is there any substitute for moving a game along from scene to scene / chapter to chapter, other than by firing weapons.

    Taking Mass Effect for example, you could give the player a choice to play a diplomatic Commander Sheppard. A bit like Capt Picard, he only results to violence as a very last resort. So you spend your game time, talking to people, lots of talking, cajoling, persuading, threatening violence, empathising etc etc. TBH, I think I would find that more tiring than combat. I like the idea of it, more than the practicality. The addition of dialogue trees and roleplaying adds enormously to a game, but there comes a time when you want to DO something and bar combat, I don't know what that can be.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators Posts: 50,700 CMod ✭✭✭✭Retr0gamer


    It's a pity the people that made the new silent hill didn't look back at the excellent SH Shattered Memories, a horror game that worked brilliantly despite featuring no combat.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 189 ✭✭Ryan451


    tl;dr.
    Gonna play more CoD!!!


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 29,030 CMod ✭✭✭✭johnny_ultimate


    well problems is that all these non combat games will become interactive movies.

    i know where you going with this, but the main point for me in gaming is to be challanged. I love that my imput makes difference in game. If i am in game just for story, then might aswell it can be a movie and cut the controller out, so i can use drink and popcorn. :)

    I don't think a lack of combat is in any way a hindrance to a lack of challenge, actually. Taking Fez as an example, it was actually a really pleasant realisation to figure out I hadn't killed anything at a late point in the game. But it's not an easy game: indeed, the game's second half features some of the most complex, involving puzzles I've ever seen. Seriously: they've devised their own alphabet and cryptic codex system! Similarly, a good puzzle game or adventure one like Myst: hugely demanding games, and quite removed from interactive movies like Uncharted.

    The closest in mainstream terms I've seen to a AAA game approaching something new and exciting was Mirror's Edge: where, alas, the combat ultimately let it down. But it was still a game where, apart from a single misjudged sniping bit, I was able to play through without firing a weapon. I did beat people up, but that was unavoidable due to failings of the level design. It was one that came tantalisingly close to being something extraordinary, with the parkour system a well considered mix between developer design and player skill: but the developer's just couldn't keep up with their ideas in a few respects.
    Agricola wrote: »
    This thread reminds me of the shooting fatigue I got after completing Mass Effect 2. After 25/30 hours of cover/shoot, cover/shoot I was actually worn out!

    Great topic this. Ive often wondered is there any substitute for moving a game along from scene to scene / chapter to chapter, other than by firing weapons.

    I don't think there is a crystal clear answer to what the replacement challenge is, but then again I haven't seen a developer take the risk and try something new. I could dream of a true survival horror - a successor to early titles in the genre, minus the clunky mechanics that became standard - like the hypothetical Alien one I proposed in the OP, but I don't have the means or the talent to develop it. I'd love to give it a shot, but it's completely outside my current skill set, so I have to hypothesize it online instead :pac:

    As for the 'diplomat' Shepard approach, I actually think this could ultimately prove more challenging than combat. It would require patience, but it's fun to think of a dialogue system where your choices actually matter, and your choice of words could mean success or failure on a grand scale rather than just a momentary one. Especially if the developer's were devious enough to add something like Dark Souls' auto-save system, making your decisions and/or mistakes final ;)
    Retr0gamer wrote: »
    It's a pity the people that made the new silent hill didn't look back at the excellent SH Shattered Memories, a horror game that worked brilliantly despite featuring no combat.

    It was indeed quite the advancement in a number of regards: I think it's a fairly rewarding experience all-in-all. Shame the 'running away' segments were such a pain in the arse :( Actually haven't finished the game, as I got to a bottleneck at the end with a semi-random door system that I just couldn't get a grip on.


  • Hosted Moderators Posts: 18,115 ✭✭✭✭ShiverinEskimo


    Deus Ex made some amazing progress towards it a decade ago. What has changed since?

    While still encouraging combat and making it unavoidable in 3 places (required for story) Deus Ex continues to offer this path.

    In fact there's an achievement called 'Pacifist' for doing exactly that.

    Now it is next to impossible without at least knocking enemies out with dart guns or melee but you have a choice not to kill.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 901 ✭✭✭ChunkyLover_53


    Amnesia had no weaponry & it was a great game...on the minus side I had to replace all my underwear


  • Registered Users Posts: 93 ✭✭Wintergreen


    While still encouraging combat and making it unavoidable in 3 places (required for story) Deus Ex continues to offer this path.

    In fact there's an achievement called 'Pacifist' for doing exactly that.

    Now it is next to impossible without at least knocking enemies out with dart guns or melee but you have a choice not to kill.

    In the original Deus Ex im almost sure I never had to kill anyone during one of my many play throughs. I kept running/sneaking away from Walter Simmons, I just left Bob Page in his machine and finally Gunther was dispatched with his kill code which I refuse to count as murder because I didnt lift a finger lol.

    Probably my favourite game ever, raging I still hav'nt played the new one!


  • Hosted Moderators Posts: 18,115 ✭✭✭✭ShiverinEskimo



    Probably my favourite game ever, raging I still hav'nt played the new one!

    They are quite different but have the same mood. Brilliant game and I really enjoyed it but it's a fair bit evolved from the original.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,405 ✭✭✭ gizmo


    Alien - Colonial Office Worker: Imagine you and your crewmates are alone on a ship, with only a single flame thrower to protect you as a single xenomorph systematically breaks you off from your soon to be dead teammates. It's survival horror redefined, where the player is forced to be inventive as they react to a constantly dangerous and volatile situation. The environment - dripping with the deadly trail of acidic xenomorph blood, ripping apart the ship - is as dangerous as the creature that occupies it. Imagine the possibilities!
    No need, that's pretty much what Creative Assembly are trying to accomplish with their Alien game. :)
    But instead we get Aliens - Colonial Marines, which so far (not ruling out the possibility of a sudden reversal) is looking like just another space marine simulator with aliens. The developers promise high levels of fatalities, but what if the player was the real canon fodder here? It, unfortunately, is looking like a question Gearbox are unwilling to address. Shoot **** instead!
    Which is exactly what a film based on Aliens should be. I'm especially interested to see how the co-op works. The idea of you and your squad making your way through the Alien infested corridors, watching each others backs, hoping your squadmates don't overreact and start shooting wildly at the slightest sound giving your position away or wasting valuable ammo excites me greatly. :)

    You're completely correct about Mirror's Edge though. After reading a review with the Lead Designer where he said they had originally wanted the player not to be able to use weapons at all, I decided to play through it without using a single one, sniper bit aside, and I absolutely adored it. Recommended doing it this way to a friend who had already player through it with weapons and had been a bit iffy about it and his opinion of the game changed almost overnight.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 11,835 ✭✭✭✭cloud493


    Its a matter of opinion that the gun fights in uncharted are bad, no?


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,405 ✭✭✭ gizmo


    cloud493 wrote: »
    Its a matter of opinion that the gun fights in uncharted are bad, no?
    In the first two games, perhaps, but by Uncharted 3 denial of some of the badly designed combat sections is leaning toward fan blindness.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,896 ✭✭✭penev10


    cloud493 wrote: »
    Its a matter of opinion that the gun fights in uncharted are bad, no?
    Some of the shoot-outs in 2 are fantastic, it's the lengthy cannon-fodder bits later on that drag the game down imo. Shooting for shooting's sake is never good. GTAIV is probably the best example of this where (horrible gunplay mechanics aside) you "clear" a warehouse or whatever of a about 90 goons to complete the mission. Tedious.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators Posts: 50,700 CMod ✭✭✭✭Retr0gamer


    Never found the gunplay in uncharted all that satisfying. The AI is kind of crappy, the enemies are bullet sponges and apart from the enemies taking more damage later there's not much variety. It works but it could be a lot better. It's no Gears of War.

    The main criticism is that there's way too much combat which seems jarring and affects the pace of the game.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 29,030 CMod ✭✭✭✭johnny_ultimate


    The fundamental problems with the gunplay in Uncharted run slightly deeper than the mere uninspired nature of the design and mechanics (and at least it's slightly better than Tomb Raider's attempts at the same, although that series seems to be going a promising 'survival' direction for the next game), as I said above. It so actively jars with the nature of Drake as a protagonist that it in many way negatively contradicts the good character work and storytelling on show elsewhere. Indeed, in U2 and U3 there's a few moments when it seems as if Drake is actively regretful of the thousands of dead grunts he left in his wake... doesn't stop him for a second though :pac:

    Catherine stands out as another game almost entirely devoid of combat: you could argue knocking fellow sheep over constitutes some sort of adversarial mechanic, but it would be pushing it. There are antagonists and enemies, but it's all about surviving.

    There's definitely a load of genres that exist without combat: sports, point / click and puzzle games being the most dominant. But the vast majority of AAA, big-budget games usually include it, no matter how ill-fitting it is (LA Noire's extended shoot-outs gelled poorly with the investigative nature on display elsewhere). It's as if many developers / publishers (delete as you feel is applicable) are unwilling to take the risk and let the other mechanics - often times very, very strong mechanics - speak for themselves.
    gizmo wrote:
    Which is exactly what a film based on Aliens should be. I'm especially interested to see how the co-op works. The idea of you and your squad making your way through the Alien infested corridors, watching each others backs, hoping your squadmates don't overreact and start shooting wildly at the slightest sound giving your position away or wasting valuable ammo excites me greatly.

    My problem is that since Aliens' style has been emulated so many times to various degrees - from Alien vs Predator to Dead Space - that it actually comes across as a bit tired to me watching the trailers. Gearbox have resources, so it would be fascinating to see them take the series back to its roots rather than its oft copied 'evolution'. I wasn't aware another company was making a game of that type, though: curious to see how it turns out.


  • Registered Users Posts: 413 ✭✭mrm


    gizmo wrote: »
    ...Alien infested corridors, watching each others backs, hoping your squadmates don't overreact and start shooting wildly at the slightest sound giving your position away.

    The developers promise high levels of fatalities

    Yep, wishing for a 'tense quiet downtime from the impending shoot outs moments' over a 'continual shooting fish* in a barrel**' scenario. C'mon Gearbox. * Aliens ** tight corridor

    Speaking of aliens, I think Dead Space 2 highlights the OP issue well. A horror survival game, following the tense first game, which eventually broke out into a high intensity corridor shooter, and what was the best part of the game?.....
    the return to the ishimura.
    Waiting, waiting, w a i t i n g.....then the section ends after nothing has jumped you, not one shot fired. Simply brilliant! (I'd say Daz/ surf sold well after release - no pun intended!)

    Variety, and specifically contrast, would enable shooting/ combat to exist well in games. Its the jaded repetative bullet sponge/ pop up cardboard cutout enemy environment the lets it all down. The balance achieved in Demons Souls/ Dark Souls is very good. Portal/2 are standout games for me and yet saying all that I am really looking forward to Borderlands 2 and Dragons Dogma (please be good).


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,405 ✭✭✭ gizmo


    mrm wrote: »
    Yep, wishing for a 'tense quiet downtime from the impending shoot outs moments' over a 'continual shooting fish* in a barrel**' scenario. C'mon Gearbox. * Aliens ** tight corridor.
    Well based on what we've seen so far, they've done a great job of recreating the atmosphere from the movie so hopefully they can nail the pacing of it too. :)


  • Registered Users Posts: 933 ✭✭✭hal9000


    Just on the topic of non violent games anyone try dear esther?


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,685 ✭✭✭✭BlitzKrieg


    Few thoughts on notion on gun play and video games.

    Specifically gun play mechanics and the role of the player's perspective.

    I've found that when you look at first person shooters, especially mid 90's to early 00's PC ones. It's less the focus on actually on guns but actually on movement. Consider all the standards of FPS that have come about, circle strafing, rocket jumping and bunny hoping, they are all very much tied to how the game moves and less focused on the shooting. I know for me a big part of the original Half Life's appeal and something that even it's sequel never fully matched is that the weight and movement of Freeman is perfect in that game, the ladder climbing mechanic is smooth, the jumping and movement is accurate and has a good pace on it and I think that coupled with a very aware level design on vertical and lateral movement went a large way for making that game one of my all time favourites.

    Then when the move to console came about, Halo was much the same, the weapons play a factor, but so much of Halo is about pacing your movement, so you dont get caught out in the open with no shields, closing the gaps for shotgun/melee kills became the sign of a good player.

    I think of anything what brought the focus back to the weapon more then anything else is the huge uptake of iron sights in video games, it hasnt toppled movement being the core of an FPS but it has reigned in on a direction FPS were going in that might have ended in many more games like Mirror's Edge. Which my only complaint is they may have overcomplicated the movement in it, but it's clear that the First person shooter, despite being assumed to be dominated by guns guns guns is actually defined more by how immediate and natural it is to move.

    In contrast I've found 3rd person shooters, the genre people would think would be akin to prince of persia with much more freedom of movement, Are actually more centered on guns guns guns then their first person counterparts. From Resident Evil 4 to Gears of War the gameplay is sticky with a greater focus on delivering accurate ranged shots from an isolated position. There are few titles I can think of that deliver high movement 3rd person shooting (Vanquish being the only to jump to my mind)

    Just some case in points

    watch the devolution of movement in fps:



    to



    to





    I would use call of duty as I think it's better showcase for how movement is still a bigger factor in FPS then gunplay but every clan video on youtube I could find had some godawful rap song over it of some sort.


    Then compare to 3rd person shooters:



    and



    and



    Looking at these you can see that 3rd person shooters are much more gun oriented then first person shooters. Which is an oddity in itself.



    On the topic of imaginary games that downplay guns guns guns. I am always bemused why the battlefield series in its single player never tried to mix things up and had it that you played different roles in your squad and you had to play a medic for a few levels.

    Imagine mixing the gameplay of trauma center with the game play of a first person shooter. You got a bit of gun play but the core is pulling team mates out of the fire and stabilizing them and then covering them as they are evac out.

    Hell it would do a lot to turn around the bad press cod and bf get on glorifying war. And hell it would be a fun game mechanic imho, more interesting then clearing rooms.


    On the original topic and kind of getting to my point, it's not so much there being combat games its that too many combat games only have combat. Cod and BF single player get somewhat tedious because it's kill everything every time. Just breaking it up with your role being something more like a medic would go a long way to shifting the focus. Again the appeal of Half Life to me is it wasnt a gun game there was just as much platforming and puzzle solving in it as there were was gun play.


Advertisement