Ultra Realism Possibilities?

[obscurus]

I did enjoy the Shalebridge Cradle level, probalby the most tense Thief mission IMO - that and the Haunted Cathedral in T:1... I like games that have good replay value, and ones that make it very hard to take in the whole thing in one sitting have that... I'm still finding new things in Deus Ex..

 

As much as I like realism and immersion, it is still a computer game, and I don't really wan't to die or get arrested for burglary, that is why I play games like thief instead of actually going out and robbing someone's house in RL... I wan't it to be very realistic and challenging, but in spite of that, save games are a necessary evil, provided they are not abused, and do not provide an avenue for players to play half-arsedly.

 

I wouldn't mind if there was only one Quicksave, it at least means you can't go back five saves ago because you used one to many water arrows....

I saved fairly infrequently during Thief1/2 mainly because I sometimesy got stuck in geometry, and in T:3 because it crashed occasionally, not because I died (although that did happen on occasion :lol: ). Other than that, I saved whenever I completed an objective, and that is about it... I have played it a couple of times without saving, and it is certainly doable, provided you have enough time on your hands.

 

As much as you might not want it to be, saves are part of the game - immersive or not they have an effect on how you play the game... While save games might be an abstract concept to the universe within the game, they are part of the game itself, and the reason I am for limited, author defined saves has little to do with immersion or realism, it is because it is part of the challenge of the game, to see how far you can get without needing to reload.

 

Just for the Record, I am Pro Savegames, provided there aren't to many of them, but I am Anti unlimited saves

[Domarius]

And no more "make it format your hard drive when you die" polarised examples please guys. They are funny the first 8 times, and prove nothing.

[SneaksieDave]

In a sense, it's true, and none of the points raised by either side mean squat. It's subjective. In the end, after all the crap is cut away, the only thing that really matters is "I do/don't like it that way."

[Springheel]

And no more "make it format your hard drive when you die" polarised examples please guys.

 

That's no more polarized than the "player quicksaves every time they take a step or fire an arrow" examples, no?

[Domarius]

No but obviously I didn't make it clear that I'm not using that as my argument - I'm against the player (myself) unwittingly controling the difficulty level to a random degree by being able to save at any time, without the author having a say in it.

 

And yes it is subjective. The main point of this thread for me (and that one that happened to start up at TTLG, coincidently), was to show that there are a decent amount of people interested in save limiting to make some sort of save limiting option available worthwhile implementing.

Edited June 16, 2005 by Domarius

[sparhawk]

The main point of this thread for me (and that one that happened to start up at TTLG, coincidently), was to show that there are a decent amount of people interested in save limiting to make some sort of save limiting option available worthwhile implementing.

:lol:

[FishFace]

Groovy.

 

But there are many who disagree with it being forced on the player. If savepoints is an option, then all the weirdos can turn it on, and have their jollies. If unlimited is an option, then the purists can switch it off and have theirs. Picture.got = true.

[sparhawk]

:lol:

[Zaccheus]

the only thing that really matters is "I do/don't like it that way."

Which is why I like to make things optional.

 

And if people don't like certain things being optional, then let's make the optionality optional !!

 

The only way I know how to do that is to let the FM author decide certain things, such that they are only mandatory in some of the FMs.

[Domarius]

The way I proposed it is that the FM author can put the support for such a thing if he or she wants. If the support isn't there, and you go to enable the option, it will be greyed out, showing that there is no support for it in this mission.

[Guhndahb]

This has certainly been an interesting thread to read. I got through all 13 pages, although I had to skim a few of the longer posts. Most if not all of the arguments regarding savegames that I personally have, one way or another, have already been discussed. So all I can do is give a "what I'd like" comment and hope it's of use to the devs.

 

I generally believe strongly in giving the FM author the control over the player's experience. For example, I thought the idea of squeaking boards with no visual indicator was perfectly sensible, although it would be dangerous due to misuse. In fact I liked most of obscurus' thread-initiating ideas as usable tools for the FM devs. I have a few ideas with regards to the squeaky boards implementation, but I'd rather not dilute the core issue of my post regarding savegame restrictions.

 

With regards to saving, though, I really have to urge the devs to err on the side of caution. Implement whatever save restrictions you wish, but please make them optional as well as completely separate from any other difficulty settings. One of the (many) great things about the original System Shock was that there were a number of different difficulty options, not just one slider like so many non-simulators have today. I liked maxing them all except for the time limit one because I liked, even back then, to play the game as a FP sneaker.

 

I agree that over-saving is cheating, to me it clearly is, but I do argue that if a player chooses to cheat then let them, so long as there is no form of MP or competitive rankings involved. I personally would do everything in my power to circumvent any forced save restrictions, not because I like to cheat, but simply to maximize my enjoyment of the game. There are two primary reasons for this.

 

First, for me, if there are restrictions other than those I impose on myself, I think about them...constantly. You may well argue that is my flaw as a player, and I'd agree, but unlimited saves allow me to not think about saving at all. I can think of a number of reasons for my having this "flaw", primarily years and years of gaming which allowed it, but that's not really important.

 

More important to me is my second reason. When I was young I was perfectly content to play the same (sometimes very long) sequence over and over, until I did things the way the devs expected me to. But I'm no longer all that young. Every minute of my playing time is now precious to me because, as an adult, I find very little free time available to me. So, indeed, I prefer to save all I want and then strive very hard to load as infrequently as possible. But I like to be able to choose. Sometimes, I'll even reload from an older save (not just relying on quicksave) to replay an area that I felt I played poorly, because I really care about earning my progress. But, if I just died after a particularly unenjoyable session, I'd rather take my most recent save. I never want to suffer when I'm supposed to be enjoying myself. There's enough suffering in real life. In pure single-player gaming, it's rarely a mistake to let the player choose their own preferred method of play.

 

Do I have any right to play this way and then either complain a game is too easy or gloat about my prowess? Hell no! But an intelligent and experienced gamer is not going to do this.

 

obscurus' save on exit, die forever, option is actually quite reasonable, perhaps the most realistic of all options, but I'd be miserable playing such a game. My gameplay stress would be so high I couldn't really enjoy myself. Indeed, that system is used in several of my all-time favorite games, such as the magificent classic Nethack and Origin's Autoduel. Indeed, it would be a great additional option for the truly hardcore and should be reasonably easy to implement.

 

The arguments in favor of savepoints make sense, but I think savecount limiting is more sensible, although only if optional. That's purely opinion and I can't really back it up with anything other than it seems to make more sense to me in a game with such flexibility.

 

So, just as a gamer, I'd like to vote, with whatever small voice I have, in favor of optional save restrictions. I think an ideal (both for giving the most options to players and for ease of development) would be to give players all three of the following options, without otherwise affecting anything else in gameplay:

1) Completely unlimited saves

2) Limited savecount

3) Hardcore-obscurus-mode

 

Additionally, for "2) Limited savecount" I feel the best option is user-assigned but with a FM author recommended default. Purely FM author assigned isn't really taking into account the out-of-game issues players have to deal with.

 

Sorry for the length of the post, I just had really strong feelings on this and wanted to give some substance to my opinion. I hope I didn't step on any toes, as I have a lot of respect for this project and its developers.

[Domarius]

Additionally, for "2) Limited savecount" I feel the best option is user-assigned but with a FM author recommended default. Purely FM author assigned isn't really taking into account the out-of-game issues players have to deal with.

That's what I said

 

You spent a large amount of your post giving reasons why it should be an option, and not mandatory, but I think that is the general concensus anyway

[Ishtvan]

I like that option also

[obscurus]

Sounds fair enough... I personaly would be happy with that, provided that at least some FM authors include auto-save or objective-save points in their maps for those that don't want to use the other save options. I know a lot of players find not being able to save whenever and wherever they want too stressful, though for me that stress is something I enjoy... each to their own I guess:)

[Domarius]

The idea behind making it optional is that hopefully it will gain popularity. Judging from that thread at ttlg, it seems there is a "market" for this

[Guest KoHaN69]

We are implementing a system like this for our AI.  They will sit on chairs, warm themselves by the fire, visit the latrine, stop to look out a window, etc.  I think it will make our AI more believable than any stealth game yet.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

-omfg, I think I shit my pants.

I wonder again, that in the wonders of the pc world, modders make retail games evolve, and progress (ex. : Valve-quake2 modders, made half-life, then a mod for HL was CS, that made valve and hl huge)

 

 

On the other note,

 

"Ultra Realism Possibilities?"

 

Last time I checked, there are more things in the world then wooden floors!

 

How about, if a guard is holding somthing (cup, sword, dagger)

and you knok them out, it drops with noise and u hav 2 pik it up.

 

and guards -differnt types is good, with differnt weapons and heights/body size.

 

another realistic idea is replacing a guards route, for example, if there are 2 guards walking in parelel hallways, and they hear each other.

if u knok one out, the other will chek it out if he stops hearing his buddies steps, HOWEVER, you can as well, walk at the same pace as the guard u knocked out did, so the others will take you (audibly) for another guard (if u r in the guards patrole route.

 

 

 

another things, i strongly support the random factor, but instead of florbards, it should mean AI, not random routes alltogether, but conversations with others, daydreaming, looking at surroundings (Springheel had good examples)

 

and another factor (for those still reading) pets-

I think there was a parot in one of the thief games, but there could be dogs (track smell -hint -hint, cats, rats)

 

and blood - shoot water,, its gone? no..... no.

water needs time to evaporate, however, i dont have a concrete idea to elaborate on this, but kill, shootwater, move on, is a bit easy.

 

 

door, objects and physics- this was promised in HL2 and dissapointed untrue in the final game -blckoing doors.

by bloking a door with a heavy object, some guard may randomy try to open it and think its closed, and move on, if its not completly blcoked off (door opens slightly)

they should ghet curious, and if they kno ur there, they would try to ram it open, and call for backup.

 

poisen- (in TENCHU for ps1 u could poisen dogs with poisened rice) but if guards eat and drink, then u could slip sleeping potion or poisen in their food/bavergae)

 

arrows- arrows shouldnt "disaperar" after shot (water arrows will be needed to be picked up, in case a guard sees it later on, broadhead arrows shot in stone break, but are still there)

 

as for items/custumasation -thief should have a house (more like an apartment/closet in thief3) and have numerous items, which he can take before a mission, and players choses what to take according to mission (as in hitman2)

the goods may include weapons, clothes and cloaks, which leads to next idea

 

comoflage (no as simple as metalgear3)- lets say, black is the best color, but green would do better for more outside/par/forest based location and you could be detected harder in more light if u are wearing green next to a s bushy are, than black

no? ok, im ready for the bashing.

 

 

thats all thats on my mind for now, please respond honestly.

[Springheel]

How about, if a guard is holding somthing (cup, sword, dagger)

and you knok them out, it drops with noise and u hav 2 pik it up.

 

This will happen. The body will make noise too if you just let it fall.

 

and guards -differnt types is good, with differnt weapons and heights/body size.

 

Yes.

 

another realistic idea is replacing a guards route, for example, if there are 2 guards walking in parelel hallways, and they hear each other.

if u knok one out, the other will chek it out if he stops hearing his buddies steps, HOWEVER, you can as well, walk at the same pace as the guard u knocked out did, so the others will take you (audibly) for another guard (if u r in the guards patrole route

 

Not likely, though we have discussed it.

 

and another factor (for those still reading) pets-

I think there was a parot in one of the thief games, but there could be dogs (track smell -hint -hint, cats, rats)

 

Rats, yes. Birds, yes. Cats and dogs? Not likely, other than perhaps scripted events.

 

and blood - shoot water,, its gone? no..... no.

water needs time to evaporate, however, i dont have a concrete idea to elaborate on this, but kill, shootwater, move on, is a bit easy.

 

There will be lots of blood if you kill someone, but we haven't talked much about how easy it should be to clean up.

 

poisen- (in TENCHU for ps1 u could poisen dogs with poisened rice) but if guards eat and drink, then u could slip sleeping potion or poisen in their food/bavergae)

 

Don't think there's much use for this...how often does a player see guards eating or drinking?

 

arrows- arrows shouldnt "disaperar" after shot (water arrows will be needed to be picked up, in case a guard sees it later on, broadhead arrows shot in stone break, but are still there)

 

This is true, though that level of realism may not be good for gameplay, or framerate.

[Guest KoHaN69]

damn that was a fast reponse

 

I want to bring up the eye

in thief2 u could throw it like a spycam, and in thief3 it was a useless binocular.

 

what are the ideas for darkmod?

 

===

flamable things - i dont know how good is doom 3 with fire, but if a guard drops a torch on carpet that is on a wooden floor no?

not even on a dual-cpu althon64 with 2 6800s?

no?

ok, maybe in 5 years we can add fire

===

 

peeking though lockholes?

 

===

proning?

i like hiding under the bed!

===

hiding in furniture in general?

===

 

 

*thinking of mroe ideas*

[FishFace]

(Sidenote: please try to add some capital letters in your posts... It's harder to read without them)

 

flamable things - i dont know how good is doom 3 with fire, but if a guard drops a torch on carpet that is

 

Even as a non-dev, I can say that's highly unlikely, unfortunately. If you start playing with fire, then what happens in real life if you drop a burning torch on a carpet? The carpet burns, the wallpaper goes up, the curtains go woomph, ceiling paper goes, the floorboards catch light, ceiling timbers split and the whole house is destroyed unless it is made substantially of stone. If it were possible, I'm sure we'd all like it, but it would probably be awful for gameplay and impossible graphically. On that note, though, the burning oil patches in TDS looked CRAP, and the fire arrow explosions were less than spectacular.

 

proning?

i like hiding under the bed!

===

hiding in furniture in general?

 

You mean "going prone?" From discussions, I think the devs already have this on the agenda.

[Guest KoHaN69]

AI climbing latters

[New Horizon]

AI climbing latters

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

At this stage in development, we have pretty much discussed everything but the kitchen sink. As for AI climbing ladders, we don't expect to try and put that in before the initial toolset release and for some very good reasons. Essentially, having AI climbing ladders seems like a very simple thing to do but you have to contend with a lot of serious gameplay issues. AI on ladders can be easily exploited. AI on ladders are pretty helpless and could easily be attacked without much hope of defense on their part. It essentially opens up a whole new set of gameplay rules that haven't been attempted in a Thief style game yet. Will it negatively affect the style of play and turn it into something more action oriented? We have to consider that the FM author can plan ahead for this and have access points where AI can try to logically head the player off from another direction, while still giving the player an opportunity to hide. At its most basic, Thief style gameplay is like Steal, Hide and Seek. It would be neat to have AI climb ladders but not if it will negatively affect gameplay.

[Gildoran]

BTW, speaking of guards going about their daily lives, has anybody ever played No One Lives Forever II? It's a great game that does a good job combining humor, action and stealth, and it already implements guards going about their daily lives. I thought the AI was great. Also, it has an interesting method for dealing with bodies in areas with infinite enemies... (in Soviet Russia, a guard spots the corpse of another guard) "Sorry ol' pal... there's less paper-work this way." *squirts corrosive liquid on the corpse, which then sizzles and dissapears*

 

On the other hand, guards going about their daily lives poses some possible weaknesses... In NOLF2, I had fun waiting in a darkened restroom... each guard would eventually get a full bladder and make a trip to the restroom, and I'd KO/kill them before they could turn the lights on. One by one, every single guard would come to me so I could KO/kill them. Eventually I realized that they dealt with this problem by having an infinite number of enemies in the base. But on the bright side, it actually forced me to be stealthy rather than disable every enemy and waltz about without fear of being seen.

 

All in all, I thought NOLF2 did a good job of implementing everything. It might be worth looking at as a source of inspiration, and as a way to see potential pit-falls and some solutions before you implement them.

[FishFace]

To combat that, all you have to do is make sure the guards don't all go to the loo, have several, or make the bladder delay realistic. If a player wants to wait for 4+ hours just to blackjack everyone who comes in to use the facilities, then so be it!

 

I think the ladder point is an extremely serious one. The problem is both sides are extremely unbalanced, and one side is rather more realistically so... An amusing solution would be to spend so much time on the AI, in order to allow THEM to trap YOU Would be amusing if noisemaker'd them, then they hid 'round the corner until you turned your back, then put an arrow in your neck.

But, within the realms of feasibility... Hm.

[obscurus]

AI on ladders can be easily exploited.  AI on ladders are pretty helpless and could easily be attacked without much hope of defense on their part.  It essentially opens up a whole new set of gameplay rules that haven't been attempted in a Thief style game yet.  Will it negatively affect the style of play and turn it into something more action oriented?  We have to consider that the FM author can plan ahead for this and have access points where AI can try to logically head the player off from another direction, while still giving the player an opportunity to hide.  At its most basic, Thief style gameplay is like Steal, Hide and Seek.  It would be neat to have AI climb ladders but not if it will negatively affect gameplay.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

I don't think it would be bad for gameplay - it worked OK in Splinter Cell, but I can see it being abused if FM authors aren't careful about it. But having AI NOT climbing ladders gives the player a huge advantage over the AI - it is very easy in Thief to get a whole bunch of guards to chase you, and then you climb up a ladder and fire a gas arrow into a crowd of guards and knock them out from a positon of complete safety, or if you have plenty of broadheads, you can easily just shoot guards until they die... That is certainly not in the spirit of the game, but current gameplay dynamics in Thief, with AI not using ladders, makes it very easy to do, if not practically encouraging it. I think the advantage the player has if the AI can go up ladders is reduced somwhat over the present situation - a player could exploit the AI's vulnerability while climbing a ladder, but it is a reasonable, natural exploit that makes sense, and fits better with the stealth theme than climbing a ladder and shooting arrows at AI until they die. If you have a guard with a Bow, covering the Guard climbing the ladder, the player will be forced to back away from the ladder to avoid being hit, so the player would certainly not have a big advantage if more than one guard was involved.

 

I think if you implement AI climbing ladders, they AI should be able to know how close the player is to the top of the ladder, and to make a judgement about the safety of climbing the ladder accordingly. By this I mean that AI should avoid climbing the ladder if the Player is hovering near the top of the ladder in a position where they could attack the AI while the AI is climbing, but if the player has moved a certain distance away form the top of the ladder, such that the AI can take the risk of making it to the top before the player can get there to push the AI off, then the AI will climb the ladder.

 

I think if it is implemented carefully, it won't impact gameplay much one way or the other - if you are being stealthy enough, the AI should have no reason to chase you up a ladder, but from an immersion point of view, it is better if AI (and not just guards) can use ladders as well, since it is a bit strange having all these ladders which only the player can climb. Especially when you have areas which are only accessible by ladder, but guards and other AI can't use them. It just breaks the spell of immersion a little when small details like AI not using their environment in a natural way become too common.

[Guest KoHaN69]

Like said, its all about level design.

 

..and characters.

 

armored guards wont climb, may attempt (rarely at random)

 

however, pegans hop like monkeys