While most RPG games, including RP games, use HP as their main indicator for health, would anybody actually play a game that was based off of blood and body trauma? For example, instead of dying when your HP reaches zero, you could only die if you bleed to much, were poisoned, your head got knocked off, or your body was simply damaged too much.
Because while HP is a quick and easy alternative to designing a full out battle system, would the RP effect gained by a different battle system based off blood and damage attract players?
*Off-handed comments and suggestions welcome*
ID:151850
 Dec 31 2008, 7:47 pm
|
|
|
Dec 31 2008, 9:04 pm
|
|
Gen40
 |
It would make an original game indeed, of that I am certain.
|
Sounds really cool to me.
| |
Kind of like Call of Duty, where you eventually die when getting shot frequently over a short period of time, and can recover by waiting a bit behind cover? And of course, being blown up by RPGs and grenades.
I think it would be pretty interesting to see in a BYOND game. Too bad BYOND isn't designed for fast-paced shooters, or FPSs. | |
I think he's going for a more "RPG-action"ish setting, so I don't see why it wouldn't work, and I think it would be quite neat to do.
Though, making it intuitive && easy to play is going to be the difficult part, I think. | |
DivineTraveller wrote:
Though, making it intuitive && easy to play is going to be the difficult part, I think. I agree. It's something that would be nice, but it may not be worth the effort needed to get it properly implemented with that difficulty. You'd also have to think about in-game implications, and if it would actually be worthwhile to add for a reason other than mere realism. Will players actually put it to good use? Will it improve the game? That does quite depend on the game really, but if players for example have a choice in which body-part to hit when attacking, they could simply choose the one which does the most fatal damage constantly, thus beating the purpose of the system in a sense. Also, as others have said, it's not too intuitive to implement such a system in a 2D RPGs, I think it's more suited to 3D games. | |
Kaioken wrote:
(...)if players for example have a choice in which body-part to hit when attacking, they could simply choose the one which does the most fatal damage constantly, thus beating the purpose of the system in a sense. Actually, in a 2D RPG, you can avoid that hazel by adding an additional layer of realism. Depending on size and location of an aim, there might be different modifiers to a "dice throw", making it a very tricky task for a fencer to aim for the left eye, while trying to hit the right shoulder requires considerably less skill. Managing to balance each weapon/aims combination would certainly take some time, but grants the game/player an additional flair of choice and strategy. | |
You could do the same in a 3D game; the point was, in a 3D game you can manage aiming intuitively and more naturally than in a 2D game. The latter would probably even involve some sort of setting to choose where to hit, instead of actually aiming there.
| |
Just so you know... HP is suppose to represent "blood loss and body trauma" in applicable games. It exists for one simple reason, it is an easy to understand graphical representation so players know if/when they are going to die.
Even games that do not use "HP" always have something similar, an easy to understand graphical representation of how close to death the player is. Most FPS games for example display some sort of effect on the screen, it becomes redder as you die, blood splatters on the screen with death being when the screen is mostly full with blood, some sort of symbol representing death (a skull being a common one) appears on screen, becoming more and more noticable as you near death. These games still use Hp, they just don't show you the numbers. Anyway, if you ask me, using things like blood loss or body damage as a measure of how much Hp you have left wouldn't work that well. Simply because it does not make things clear enough. In RPGs it would just make things very annoying, if I get hit and lose a medium sized splatter of blood, and get 1 major cut and 3 minor scratches... How close am I to dying? Do I need to worry about dying? When do I need to use a healing item? RPGs don't rely on skill, I cannot avoid attacks, and I will invariably get hit a countless number of times, and I will have to be healed a countless number of times. If I cannot even discern basic information such as how close I am to death then you're not adding anything to the game, you're just making it stupid, and fairly annoying too. (Oh lord, just imagine how useless this system would make a healer class) My advice is simple. Don't bother doing this. Unless you're going to add an alternative and simple method of displaying Hp (such as "Hp: 85/100") it's not going to add anything to the game, and in most cases will just make the game worse than it could have been. | |
That is actually a matter of interface.
You could open a window with grids representing the points you can aim at for an opponent you attack (depending on the opponent!). Since we all want a nice UI, you'd grant the player the possibility to automatically battle and have that predefined, allowing more advanced players to choose manual aiming and thus add depth and strategy. (You might, for example, be able to disarm an humanoid opponent, avoiding to kill it [opening a new branch in a quest]. You could as well decide that, instead of a certain death while fighting four enemies at a time, betting all your luck on a tricky, but deadly "one hit kill". And so on and so forth.) | |
I do not see why you're so eager to discard the idea instantly TMM. Sure, a game applying it isn't going to be created as easy as a game using a "normal" approach, but that fact only means the developer has to put additional creative thought in the project.
Yes, it might not be as easy to determine your state of health, but than again, it ain't easy to do so in "real life" either, is it? Even though people run around without little health bars over their heads, there is still medical care applied to those in need, it is just less easy than using a spell and seeing the patient instantly cured. While I would not apply such a system for the average anime fangame, I think that there are still diverse groups of users out there who might enjoy giving an innovative idea a try. As for your concern based on healing. Some RPGs do base on skill and you can avoid attacks. Even if someone is attacked, you might display a critical wound to viewers() and allow for detailed information upon examining another player. You might find that a healer is even more important in such an environment, because someone who suffered severe injuries might not cast ultimate healing on himself, but would be helpless on the battlefield until restored by a healer. All in all, yes, it would be a tricky system to apply and the success would greatly depend on the creative work put into the system, but if someone is willing to try, I wouldn't see reason it mustn't work out. | |
Schnitzelnagler wrote:
I do not see why you're so eager to discard the idea instantly TMM. Sure, a game applying it isn't going to be created as easy as a game using a "normal" approach, but that fact only means the developer has to put additional creative thought in the project. It is not about "creative thought", it is about practicality. I'd much rather have a generic game that works well, than some "innovashun" game that has a bunch of horrible design issues due to this innovation. Yes, it might not be as easy to determine your state of health, but than again, it ain't easy to do so in "real life" either, is it? This is a game we are talking about, not real life. You'd be pretty crazy to expect healers in your game to be real life, qualified doctors just to effectively determine how injured someone is. Also, you are forgetting, this is a BYOND game we are potentially talking about. Likely to use a 32x32 sprite. These sprites don't even include things like full facial details, so what makes you think they will effectively display things like injury levels? Even though people run around without little health bars over their heads, there is still medical care applied to those in need, it is just less easy than using a spell and seeing the patient instantly cured. And what does this add to the game? Nothing positive from what I can see. Obscuring vital information from players rarely, if ever actually adds anything positive to a gaming experience just so you know. While I would not apply such a system for the average anime fangame, I think that there are still diverse groups of users out there who might enjoy giving an innovative idea a try. It's not innovative. As for your concern based on healing. No RPG is ever based on skill. They are based on number crunching. RPGs that allow you to duck, dodge and block attacks are usually action RPGs, that is they are action games, with RPG elements. (A genre that does not translate into BYOND at all) In typical turn based/semi-turn based RPGs, there simply is no level of skill needed. If you cannot do something you simply require more leveling up and/or better items. Even if someone is attacked, you might display a critical wound to viewers() and allow for detailed information upon examining another player. So basically, you hide Hp from plain view, but instead force players to take extra actions to view "Injuries: 45/100%" (in one form or another)... Hmm... How exactly is this any different than simply adding a Hp bar or Hp numbers? (Hint: It's not) You might find that a healer is even more important in such an environment, because someone who suffered severe injuries might not cast ultimate healing on himself, but would be helpless on the battlefield until restored by a healer. That is a system totally seperate from this. It could just as easily be implamented in a RPG that does give a visual display of Hp. All in all, yes, it would be a tricky system to apply and the success would greatly depend on the creative work put into the system, but if someone is willing to try, I wouldn't see reason it mustn't work out. It wont work because you are obscuring vital information from the player. In a game where HP is the single most important stat in the game, not letting players see it is kind of silly if you ask me. | |
Dear The Magic Man,
you expressed some bold statements, yet lack a source to support your theory. I am more than willing to argue on the topic, when there is a reasonable discussion, but when it comes down to blunt objective statements, at least I consider it getting less productive than it could and should be. You often state that you would want something or prefer another attempt at game design, which I do not doubt. I doubt however that you represent the full amount of gamers to be found world wide. Yes, you might even be with the average gamer and represent the vast majority, yet, who said that the original poster was going to carter for that group? Can't he plan to aim at a niche, a group of people that like different kind of games or design ideas? Now, to your arguments. Creative thought, as I see it, does automatically consider and take great care of practical implementation. I agree however that some people see creative input as something that can be abstract, so I excuse for using the wrong word here. I am well aware that we are talking about a game, yet, games tend to base on our real life to some extend, because humans tend to make use of empiric information to comprehend visual input (which is the cause for many an "illusion"). I never claimed a healer in game should have to be a "qualified doctor" in real life, I claimed that it might be an interesting (read as in "for some people") aspect of a game and open up a lot of strategic decisions when you can not instantly see and know an opponents state of health. Furthermore, I never claimed that you should have to visually determine the health by a players avatar. Given the vast amount of false diagnose by first aid medical care, I think it is valid to claim that the first visual impression often misleads. So, while I think that a slight visual indication is in order (eg. colour indication), I think that a skill might help to figure the real condition. You're asking what this adds to a game. Well, it adds thrill. It adds a personal experience factor. I might see another player running around, yet I can not be sure that when I invoke mighty special attack A, she is dead for sure, as she had been heavily wounded before! I can not tell that I need x more "levels/skill" to defeat that dragon. Actually, obscuring information is often a nice beneficial way to add content, when there are ways to reveal this information. Secret passages, invisible monsters/players, hidden traps/mechanism, secret spells, ... these are all examples where a player is thrilled to find out information the game formerly obscured. While I would claim that an "action RPG" translates well into BYOND (hub://SilkWizard/Proelium), I disagree that RPGs have to be turn based, as you seem to suggest. There are a lot of non turn based games, that are commonly refereed to as RPG (Ultima Series, World of Warcraft, ...). I would claim that hub://Lavarion/StolenLands is one of the best RPG within BYOND and while you may choose to play solely with a build that needs few player interaction, you can create other characters that rely on fast decisions to avoid damage. | |
Schnitzelnagler wrote:
Dear The Magic Man, I don't need sources, I am stating what should be common sense, nothing more. You often state that you would want something or prefer another attempt at game design, which I do not doubt. Fair enough. But in such a case, it is fair to assume that you shouldn't expect your game to be popular in any way, shape or form. Creative thought, as I see it, does automatically consider and take great care of practical implementation. No it does not. Just because something is creative, does not mean it is good or useful. The DS and Wii, both use innovative methods of user input. There is still not a game on the DS that makes good use of it's touch screen function (I should know, I have over 3200 DS ROMS). And there is simply no good games on the Wii, and any decent game doesn't even make much, if any use of it's motion sensing controller. Sure these are creative ideas, but they are simply not that practical for making many types of game. I am well aware that we are talking about a game, yet, games tend to base on our real life to some extend, because humans tend to make use of empiric information to comprehend visual input (which is the cause for many an "illusion"). The majority of RPGs do not let you see the enemies Hp. Most of the time you can see your own and your allies, and that is all. RPGs that do let you see your enemies health either have requirements for viewing it (such as you must defeat the enemy first, or use a skill on it), and they are fairly uncommon. Furthermore, I never claimed that you should have to visually determine the health by a players avatar. So basically, you are suggestion do not use a health bar, or a visual number to display health, but use another method instead? For example, the redder your character/screen gets the closer you are to death, or maybe you have a wounded rating, and when it is full you are dead... Oh wait. This is just the same thing as a health bar. The information is displayed in a slightly different way, but it is still displayed and serves the exact same purpose. In which case, this idea is invalid, since hp is still being displayed. You're asking what this adds to a game. But there is a difference here. Obscuring Hp is obscuring vital information. By extension you are also obscuring the effectiveness of all numeric effects in the game, or making them redundant. By doing this you are in effect removing any of the strategic elements a video game may have. How do I know which attacks are more effective against an enemy? How do I know how much healing I need? Should I use my strongest, but most expensive method of healing, or should I use a cheaper method to conserve myself? Or even more annoying would be discerning just how dangerous an enemy is. How much damage is it doing per hit? Even if a damage number is displayed, how much damage is 100? Is it a lot, or is it a little? What you are suggestion is basically removing all strategic elements for a game, and replacing them by luck and chance. Great idea man... no really.. it is! While I would claim that an "action RPG" translates well into BYOND (hub://SilkWizard/Proelium), I disagree that RPGs have to be turn based, as you seem to suggest. I would not consider Proelium a good action game. It suffers from some issues that can totally break an action game. Lag and a low FPS (both are more issues with BYOND than with Proelium). It feels slow and clunky to play, and the controls are generally not responsive enough for an average Humans reaction time (at least for mine). These simple issues can totally ruin even the best of action games. Also, I wouldn't consider Proelium an RPG in any way, shape or form. It is an action game and that is all. It lacks anything that would make it a RPG. Also, I never said a RPG had to be turn based. I said RPGs are based on number crunching, not player skill. WoW is a good example of that. There is no element of skill involved in playing it, you simply need high enough stats to win. Go and play the Monster Hunter games for an example of what skill is. They are action RPGs, you do get stronger (through better equipment and items). But despite that, if 2 people players, one a skilled player, and the other a novice, both with the same items/equipment. The skilled player could probably kill a boss in 2 minutes, without taking damage, the novice would stand little, if any chance of killing the boss, and even if the novice did not die, they would run out of time before killing said boss. (I have watched a friend fight against a boss for 50 minutes straight and not kill it, he didn't die, he just could not kill the boss. Yet with inferior equipment I managed to kill the same boss in less than 2 minutes). That is a game based on skill, not numbers (the numbers do help, but they are useless without skill). That does not translate at all into RPGs because they are so reliant on numbers. | |
That is a really good idea, i never would have thought of that, all you would have to do is reasearch by how much percent of blood in the body a person could have before they die, add a little thing on the side of the game (or use a skin) that shows where the dammage is for example:
--------------- | | Head | | Neck | | Chest/upper right and left arm | | Chest/mid right and left arm | | Belly/lower right and left arm | | |_______________| | /\__/\ _____ | heart rate |/ \/ | --------------- and inside the box would be icons of the body and say it would show a percentage of how much blood is in the area and at the body would be the heart rate, and it would show the extenct of the wound in the body. | |
But, basing it slightly off of real life (as someone previously mentioned), blood loss is only one possible method to die.
What about damage from other sources? Getting poisoned causes no blood loss, getting burned, blugeoned causes minimal blood loss (but a lot of trauma), piercing damage causes relatively low blood loss but can be easily fatal. Even if you changed it from blood loss to wounds, there is a lot of methods of dying that do not even cause wounds. Poison, freezing to death, suffocating and so on. But the point still remains. How is this a "no Hp death"? You are still using Hp, you're just using another name for it. | |
Apparently the only way to have absolutely no HP death would be falling off a ledge in a platformer game.
| |
Basically. What I meant though was obviously not a game based off no value for Health, but a game that used different methods such as blood loss, head trauma, poison, etc. Magic Man, you do have a point that doing such a system based off of blood loss and such does complicate a simple system, but that was my point. I didn't want to have a simple battle system just based off of HP, but a more complex system to try and alienate the game from other generic RPGs.
Blood will be displayed as a percentage on your screen, and on your HUD there is a small version of you that has six pieces, the arms, the legs, torso, and head. As you are damaged, the coloring of them changes from normal, yellow, red, to black. A separate figure nearby is used to select where to attack on an enemy, and while attacking a particular limb may help, some limbs are harder to hit, such as the head, or the shield arm. I was also considering making an "HP" variable that would calculate when you 'die' by checking how much trauma you're experiencing, your blood loss, and poisoned amount, and possibly if I add it, hypothermia. | |
How would you keep track of how much blood you lose?
How would you keep track of how much trauma your head has gone through? Does poison kill you instantly? You could use text, "Lost a lot of blood/some blood, some trauma/a lot of trauma, etc." Or you could use a number associated with text: mob/var/blood=100 //100% good But of course, blood is still just another way of saying HP. | |
It is, but blood only makes up part of your HP. Blood value, and body damaged are saved in a list, Body[]. I keep track of the values and constantly change them during battle and such. The system would be done in a way that as your blood, trauma, or poison (Not sure how poison will work yet) gets to a low value, it'll have a greater effect on your HP, so that theoretically, you could die from just blood loss, just poison, just trauma, or a combination thereof, making it so you have to keep from losing too much blood or taking too much damage in battle, which will keep eager players from jumping on large monsters and should encourage team play by having other players there to heal you or help support you in battle.
| |