How To Immerse Victorious

My favorite games are adventure games. That’s not to say that I’ve played very many of them, nor that I am particularly good at them (at best I am slightly above average). The strange thing about adventure games is that, more than any other genre; they are capable of making me feel like I am truly in another place, using real solutions. In fact, it is only when solutions to problems become incomprehensible that I would deem an adventure game truly bad.

First Person Shooters have often been hailed as very immersive experiences, and often times they are. The problem is that there is an inherent suspension of disbelief involved in an FPS. The solution to a problem is usually “Kill everything”. This can ruin experiences which would otherwise make you forget about the controller/mouse in your hand, the chair you are sitting in, the monitor you are staring at.

Let me use Call of Duty 4 as an example (though by and large this applies to the whole series). The game features immersive set pieces and action sequences, fantastic voice acting, realistic characters, a gripping plot…but the whole construct falls apart for a reason that I have touched upon earlier: the health pack paradigm. Actually, the game itself features regenerative health, not health packs (which I consider to be a good move, though some would disagree) but there is a second part of the health-pack paradigm which is far more destructive than unrealistic healing. I call this “Commando Design”.

Commando design is part of all action games I can think of. It consists of 2 elements. The first is copious enemies. Call of Duty 4 would feel extremely realistic, were it not for the number of enemies that must be fought through. The screen seems to be crawling with them at all times, with far more enemies dying than is even remotely plausible.

The second element is the player’s ability to singlehandedly defeats these enemies. In CoD4 the player rarely has more than 4 allies. Yet they are undefeatable, destroying the absurd number of enemies with nary a scratch. In some games this makes sense (such as Metroid, Halo or Crysis). But in CoD it doesn’t just prevent suspension of disbelief; it turns disbelief into a black hole which the games merits are helplessly sucked into.

In video games there is nothing more important than immersion. There are actually 2 strategies to take when trying to immerse the character in a world. The first is to adhere strictly to the rules of reality. The best example I can think of that adheres to this principle is Ghost Recon (forgive me; I have limited experience with tactical shooters). True, there are still a lot of enemies in that game, but the player is so realistically limited in potential actions (and potential bullets in the chest) that you cannot help but feel immersed in the game world. Assuming you don’t have to load so many times that you explode.

The alternative to hyper-realism is acceptable abstraction. This can be seen in many sci-fi games, such as half-life. As much as Gordon Freeman fights an awful lot of people, he is equipped with the legendary HEV suit. This suit is defined enough for us to accept its otherwise ridiculous nature (such as an infinite ability to repair itself, and its ability to provide oxygen when it’s user’s head is exposed).

The general idea to take away from this is that one of the secrets to immersion is keeping the game world consistent, but not so close to reality that differences become impossible to ignore.

"Your Magic Is Now Loading"

Regenerating health bars are a great idea. They allow players to take more risks while still discouraging strings of mistakes. I’ve already talked about this in detail, but there is a flip side that has come to my attention: regenerating energy.

Let’s take Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion as an example. There is a health meter, a stamina meter and a magical energy meter (of course, all of these meters really just represent numbers, but that isn’t important in this context). The Health bar is static, while the other 2 fill at a constant rate. This makes reasonable sense, since stamina just represents the need to sit down every few minutes and magic can behave however the developers want it to. The system also works very well in the context of normal action gameplay. It requires players to manage their resources during combat without demanding long term planning. The problem comes when combat ends and the player is free to do whatever they want.

Regenerative health bars usually fill quickly, requiring only a few seconds to work. This is NOT true of energy meters. So, in the Oblivion example, once combat ends the player is encouraged to stand around waiting for their stamina and magic to replenish. This can sometimes take upwards of 30 seconds and a game should NEVER encourage doing nothing for 30 seconds. The problem is actually compounded by healing spells. Players not only have to wait for their magic to replenish, but they also have to use that same energy to replenish their health. This can extend the waiting time well beyond a minute and it’s all terribly frustrating for the player.

The most immediate solution to this problem is to have the player’s stats regenerate when there are no enemies nearby. This is functional, but it removes the player from the experience of the game. The problem is confounded in Sci-Fi games where plausibility becomes more of a factor. Many futuristic weapons rely on recharging instead of reloading and standing around for your gun to reload is just boring. Half-Life is notable for featuring a weapon like this in the “hornet gun” which reloaded its 8 shots very quickly.

Another solution lies in actual level design. By either lowering the need to use energy, or adding ways to replenish it, developers can do away with regenerating energy altogether. This has its own drawbacks in that it places a lot of constraints on level design and can also cause patterns (such as: we need to have an energy pack for every 10 enemies). It could also remove the layer of difference between energy and ammo based weapons. That said, there are some interesting scenarios to implement in this way (such as a solar based weapon that instantly recharges in sunlight).

There is one other solution that I can think of. It requires a lot of integration and may not be suitable for all situations, but it also isn’t frustrating or unrealistic. Imagine the player didn’t sit idly by while their energy replenished, but could instead interact in order to achieve the same effect. That would solve the problem while adding an extra layer of game mechanics. So, let’s imagine that we have a laser with a rechargeable battery which requires a hand crank (In the future we have very efficient lasers). A minigame could be implemented that involves recharging the gun. During downtime, it provides something to speed up the process while giving the player something to do. During combat, the player is suddenly presented with strategic decisions about when to recharge. It also follows in the trail of Gears Of War’s “active reloading” mechanic, since it gives the player the ability to influence how fast the reloading occurs. On top of that, the player can decide to only recharge a few shots instead of the maximum capacity. The only drawback of this mechanic is that it has to be implemented differently for every application.

Seeing the Myst Through the Trees

Myst is an enigma. On the rare occasion that a game is remembered more than 10 years after its release gaming public en masse will generally have chosen an extreme stance regarding its quality, whether it be reverence or derision. Myst is the exception to this tradition in that it still tends to invoke strong opinions on both sides of the fence. I thoroughly enjoying the game (Which I just finished playing yesterday). Yet, I can see why the game’s quality is in contention.

Myst is only enjoyable, (and in fact comprehensible) if it approached with the proper mindset. Most games are intended to be played with meta-game thinking. This term, coined to describe bad players in Pen and Paper RPGs, refers to a type of puzzle-solving which differentiates between figuring something out in real life and in an intelligently designed world. For example, there is a physics puzzle in Half-Life 2 that requires the player to raise a ramp in order to jump off of it. The Ramp is lifted by a counterweight that appears not to have been used in ages, as the mechanism holding it breaks upon attempted use. This is already fairly convoluted, and in real life this would almost certainly be an insurmountable obstacle. However, there is a ladder leading up to the top of some large pipes, which have a tight-rope attached to them which in turn leads to a platform which, fortunately, has a very heavy washing machine resting on it. This Maytag happens to be able the correct weight to raise the jump-ramp just enough for use, when it is coaxed onto the counter-weight. The odds of encountering this precise situation in real life approaches zero and few people, should they face this conundrum, would find this particularly obscure solution.

Myst requires a fundamentally different approach. All of the machines in the game were designed in order to be used by people. Of course, the people operating them before the player arrived were the same people who built them, thus instruction manuals are not forthcoming. Fortunately these inventors don’t want to forget important codes or keys, so they have taken note of the more archaic aspects of their machines much to the benefit of the player. Can you figure out what mindset is needed to play Myst? I’ve given you all the clues that you should need. Don’t go to the next paragraph till you have a guess.

The correct answer is this: Meta-Machine thinking. If the player meta-games than the possible solutions to any puzzle will be near infinite. However, if the player assumes that all of the MACHINES were designed than they will have enough clues to figure out how they work. For example (note: I’m about to spoil part of a “puzzle”) There is one “age”, or area as most people call them, which has a number of elevators, but electrical generators. The only other landmark in this area is a windmill. In meta-game terms there could be any number of solutions to this puzzle. However, obviously somebody wanted to use these elevators, there is no sign of a place where a generator might have been and the windmill has no other apparent purpose. Further, the journal about this age made no mention of any power supply. Thereby it is quite evident that the windmill would be used to power the elevators. The means to achieving this is also apparent; the age is predominantly water. Once the player turns on the pipes the waters path is easily followed by listening for its passage through the pipes. Anyone not having noticed the pipes running along the walkways will at this point. This will also lead to the switches that reroute the water wherever it is needed.

**end spoiler**

Myst flows so well that I could continue using that line of logic until the end of the age. Nearly every puzzle in the game can be solved in this way, and those 1 or 2 that cannot are still possible to figure out (and they make perfect sense afterwards). In fact, I am hesitant to even refer to the challenges as puzzles, since each machine really brackets other machines and every portion of the game leads into another.

Myst is intended to be played in a very existential way. Rather than constantly obsessing on how to move forward, it is absolutely vital that the player immerse themselves into the world and think purely in terms of what they have read and seen on the island of Myst. Otherwise the game will quite simply make no sense. This is a rather fortunate trait because the atmosphere of the game is such that it can only really be enjoyed to its full extent if the player is properly engaged with the world. In fact, I urge anyone who plays the game to avoid using guides as much as possible, since Myst is not at all enriched by outside influences, nor does it require them.

As a post-script, I would like to relate an account of the most archaic puzzles I have ever encountered (the game shall remain nameless since I’m quite fond of its sequel). The challenge requires the player to open an electric panel. Why this needs to be done is, in itself absurd, but we have to start somewhere. In order to open the panel the player needs a key which, for no discernable reason, is lodged in the subway train track in another part of town. In order to get the key the player must first take their clothesline off the hook. This causes a blow-up pool ring to fall into the water below. In order to free it, the player feeds the seagulls which help to release the pool ring where it becomes trapped. The player then has to go and find the pool ring next to the café. They also have to release the pressure from a broken valve in order to remove the clamp holding it together. These 3 pieces form a fishing rod. Once a hole is opened in the pool-ring the clamp will slowly close around the key. Then another incomprehensible puzzle begins.

And don’t get me started on Starship Titanic.

Green + Red + Yellow games

(Note: this post will make the most sense if you have actually played Resident Evil 4, though it certainly has value if you have not. I should also mention that I have played through both the Wii and GCN versions on both Normal and Hard difficulty multiple times, with several arbitrary criteria in order to mix the game up. This has culminated in the unlocking of the Hand Cannon in the Wii version. I think you will agree that this gives me some authority on the gameplay and its curiosities.)

Resident Evil 4 is an enigma. It is usually referred to as survival horror, but that hardly describes the intense action that the game puts the player through. However, ResE 4 is only an action game in the broadest terms. It is real time, and the player takes direct control of Leon Kennedy, but the tense and methodical gameplay is a far cry from a typical action game. If I were forced to put Resident Evil 4 into a genre, it would be real time strategy. Ludicrous you say? Please, hear me out.

Most real time strategy games rely heavily on decisions about troop allocations and placement. Similarly, ResE 4 rewards those who are in the right place at the right time and using the right gun, not just those who have the best aim. This is reflected in the relatively small change in difficulty between the Wii and console versions. In a game that requires precise aiming above all else, the controller of the PS2 and Game cube would pale in comparison to the intuitive Wiimote. In fact, aiming can become virtually impossible for several seconds if you make a mistake in either version of the game. Yet neither is punishingly difficult, so long as the player continues to outmaneuver the hoards of infected. A good ResE4 player will spend more time running than shooting. For this reason, one could easily argue that Resident Evil 4 has stayed true to its roots as a survival horror game.

Survival horror games place most of their emphasis on careful use of ammunition and constant motion. These are very important elements of ResE 4. As previously discussed, running from enemies to gain a better vantage point is vital to beating the game. Ammo conservation is altered from a problem of limited supplies to that of the sheer number of targets. It is important to choose shots carefully, taking into account the weapon in use. For example, the Pistol is useful when surrounded so long as the player never fires off more than a few shots, while shotgun ammo should usually be expended only when a large number of enemies have moved together. Of course, unless the player aims correctly they could easily spend the entire game searching for ammo and health. It is vital that players are able to aim effectively and fairly quickly and so it is quite apparent that ResE4 should qualify as an action game.

Action game is a very broad category. However, the general aspects that define an action game are some form of combat, gameplay that requires control of both character movement and a weapon. They are always set in real time and almost universally require the player to repeatedly use their reflexes, think on their feet and recognize patterns in enemy behavior. All of these features are present in ResE 4, with a constant emphasis on quick reflexes, aiming and pattern abuse.

Resident Evil 4 is an enigma. It is in fact a blending of the best elements of action, survival horror and strategy. Many (if not most) modern classics either combine elements in a flowing way or create entirely gameplay. GTA, MGS, God of War, Half-Life: these all combine several genres to the point where it is not immediately apparent that no single genre can really do them justice. This is the main reason that the genre “action game” exists. It is a repository for those games which do not conform to any real standard. It is a shame that we have been wedged into the mentality that games can be fit into categories. This probably isn’t good for creativity, at least the term “Doom Clone” contained the admition of borrowed ideas.

That said, one cannot help but love Duke Nukem and Sonic, among other games which have rather obvious roots.

Homeopothy For Headwounds

It is a curious factor of any combat-oriented video game that, universally, the player is forced to endure the most absurd odds and yet still survives to defeat whichever force it is that drives the game. How does one person survive 20 hours of constant combat, alone against a planet of enemies? How does one person succeed in destroying machines which are clearly designed with the ability of destroying armies, let alone a single person? How does a small squad of people fight an entire world of monsters, which attack relentlessly whenever the comforts of home are abandoned? The answer lies in the most absurd of all gaming conventions. Not the magic bag, nor the ridiculous accuracy of the crosshair. No, the reason that players always beat the computer at its own game is that ultimate concession to mistakes.

The health pack.

Call it a med kit, a healing spell, a regenerative shield or an energy orb if you like; they all provide the same basic service of compensating for player errors. The central idea is identical to that of endless arcade games, in the sense that the player is allowed to make a number of mistakes equal to the number of quarters they have with them. In fact, if someone had infallible ability than they could play through any video game without needing any health packs. In the same way a player could play Missile Command for months without needing more than a single quarter. In the real world there is no physical law that prevents a single person from killing thousands of trained and armed soldiers, it’s just absurdly unlikely that someone would do this without making a mistake (which would, of course, mean death).

The recent popularity of regenerative health bars has shifted the emphasis slightly. Regenerative health only punishes strings of errors, whereas a single misstep is quickly rendered irrelevant. This has certainly led to smoother transitions between areas, since there is no longer a need for the added distraction of finding an actual health pack. However, most game designers still seemed attached to standard health meters and they can hardly be blamed for it. After all, health pack game design has served us quite well until now. I personally do hope that we see more regenerative health bars, but that doesn’t mean that it should wholly replace the old standby.

The philosophy of game design through forgiveness may be considered “wussy” by someone who has played through Ikaruga, but in reality it is absolutely necessary component of the video game’s acceptance into popular culture. Take as an example Street Fighter 2; this arcade game was absurdly popular for a few years, but once the veterans asserted themselves it was virtually impossible for any newcomer to properly learn how to play. For a modern example we can use Counter-Strike. It takes a substantial amount of dedication to even approach the skill level of the average CS player, simply because they have been playing for so many years. The advantage that online games have is that it is always possible to find a “n00b server” which is more amenable to inexperienced players.

If single player games were always as hard to progress in as Street Fighter 2, then very few people would play them. Imagine if Half-Life was as difficult as Contra. That would be a horrible loss, since a fantastic experience would become un-available to most people. Further, all of the effort put in by the game designers would have gone to waste as only the most dedicated would be able to see their work.

I have spent my entire time here essentially praising health pack mentality, but I do want to say that it is unusual that alternatives have not arisen. For example, there is no FPS that provides a realistic but low level of difficulty. True, games such as Condemned: Criminal Origins provide realistic damage but, of course, Condemned contains health packs. It is strange that game designers are so hesitant to make single encounters more intimate and detailed rather than throwing oh so many enemies at us.

A Game Worse Than Doom

This December marks the 15th anniversary of Doom. Having played a great deal of Doom recently this does actually have some meaning to me. In fact, one of the stranger experiences I have had since moving to the state of Qatar is sitting in a Coffee Shop in a Middle Eastern country blowing up demons. Of course, I am not living in the past and I have lots of experience with the remake of Doom that came out in 2004, Doom 3.

The strange thing about Doom 3, is that you wouldn't know that it was a remake unless someone told you. However, this really says less about the game and more about the way shooters have evolved since the original Doom. People often complain about shooters being too similar, but comparing Doom 1 and 3 somewhat dispels that attitude.

Both games feature the same basic plot and absolutely stunning graphical technology. Many of the enemies in Doom 3 have obvious Doom 1 counter-parts. And both games will scare small children. But this is where the similarities end.

The plot line in Doom is a simple one and can be summed up in a few sentences: Scientists mess with portal technology. They accidentally open a portal to hell. Everybody dies except for this one marine that kills all the demons. 15 years ago, this was about as much plot as you usually expected from an action game. But (partially thanks to that other great shooter, Half-Life) we now expect some kind of plot line in shooters and Doom 3 provides. The game has been criticized for the rather laborious way the plot is revealed (via reading and listening to journal entries) but really, relative to the original game ANY kind of plot explanation is slow. The method used in Doom 3 simply highlights the way that out approach to story development has changed over the years. These same exagurations are found throughout the rest of the game.

The level design for example: Doom was known for being filled with complex mazes which were as much an element of gameplay as the combat. Doom 3 is completely different in that it follows a rather straight path most of the time and the player is always expected to be moving forward in a fairly constrained way. However the secrets, bonuses and keys that were hidden by corridors in the original Doom are now buried within the texts that push the story forward. This is another key change of direction. Modern shooter designers tend to reward cleverness over persistence. This can be seen in other games such as Doom 3 contemporary Half-Life 2. In one instance an ally yells "Head for the horse". It is not immediately obvious what he means, nor is it clear what direction the player should move in once the area is clear of enemies. Dr. Freeman could wander aimlessly until he stumbles upon the correct route, but clever players will notice a small statue of a horse by a street and head that way.

While it is certainly true that game developers have moved to more clever level designs in order to avoid becoming stale, it is also true that technology has placed constraints on what designers can do. That may sound counter-intuitive, but consider this: would the source engine be able to run a graphically updated version of the original doom tolerably? Probably not. The levels in Doom are extremely large, but unlike the vast world of Half-Life 2 it is absurd to try and cut Doom into loadable chunks, thanks to the substantial amount of backtracking (imagine if you had a loading screen for every room in Metroid Prime!). That said, part of the reason that Doom was so large is that the engine it ran on could not store rooms on top of each other and so each level had far more stairs and hallways than one would see in even the most system resource friendly modern shooter.

Enemy placement is another thing that has evolved between Doom and Doom 3, and this is for precisely the same reason that level design has changed. Fighting wave upon wave of enemies is often monotonous (though not in the original doom for some reason) and within the constrained levels of Doom 3 it could very easily become infuriating to fight wave after wave of the demonic hoard. Instead, the developers have made the enemies come from predefined, unexpected places. The player now has less health and supplies are harder to come by. This is probably the biggest difference between Doom and Doom 3, but it is also the most telling. Most modern shooters are made this way (at least most of the good ones). It really does feel as though Doom 3 is what Doom would have been if it was made for the first time in 2004.

There are probably more differences between Doom and Doom 3 that are just as telling about how gaming has evolved since 1993. It is quite clear, however, that game design has changed. Doom and Doom 3 are perfect marks to show what elements have been altered and how, for better or worse. Perhaps Doom 4 will do the same? or will it be Half-Life 3? You heard it here first, Duke Nukem Forever, 2014. 10th anniversary of Doom 3.