Splatterhouse in Australia?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT
 

Yahtzee notes that "Enemies should also appear moist and weighty rather than dry and bony. Bloated with muscle and fat, glistening with greasy sweat" I can get behind this.

Looking back over all the different enemies I've slaughtered in violent video games, I was instantly reminded of the heavy-set shirtless enemies from House of the Dead 2. Remember when they slowly ambled towards you with their guts jiggling like pudding? You immediately wanted to go to work shooting up their bellies rather going for the more effective head shot, simply because it was so much fun to hollow out their insides.

His point about using "washed out, neutral colours" also comes into play here - The zombies all came in dark black/browns/greens and grays to contrast the oozing green blood that spurted forth. Of course this was just a rails shooter, but in my opinion they have a tendency to produce some of the most interesting enemies in games.

Finally there is one point I really want to stress - Different weaponry should mean a variety of different corpses and death animations. Remember when you finally got your hands on the rocket launcher or BFG in the original Doom? Enemies weren't just collapsing in bullet-ridden piles on the ground anymore, they were being transformed into a pile of slimy red matter. Watching enemies responding differently to different weapons is a ton of fun.

One of the things I found lacking in Star Wars: The Force Unleashed is that, as a space warrior the equal to a platoon of space nazis with lasers, there's a lack of numerous enemies. It's like there was a shortage of graduates from Redshirt Academy or something.

A game that is supposed to be about destruction and touts the reaction of its game engines lets me down.

I bring it up mostly because I thought of TFU when reading the suggestion of a large number of enemies. The thought was specifically that a solid AI reaction would help sell the visceral nature of the game in question, especially in conjunction with a large number of modular enemiesnwith potential persistent wounds.

Impalement.

I think what's interesting about gore gaming is - the concept of sadism.

If video games are this magical invention that frees you to "do anything you can think of," then why are you perpetrating all this gore?
Make the game focus on this. If you ignore this aspect of the experience (by making the game about a stylish world travelling treasure hunter, for example) then you're robbing the gore of it's punch. You're making a different genre of game that happens to have some gore in it. which strikes me as lame/irresponsible.

It often seems gore in most games is hidden behind a shiny veneer of heroism and world saving. so you don't feel bad about it.
but this's the key to how any goregame leaves you feeling about gameplay when you finally put the controller down.
I think context must be established, so it will trickle down to affecting how you feel about each attack you perpetrate against each enemy.

1) Have the enemies (victims?) notice all the violence you're perpetrating against them: and react somehow.

running away in fear. crying over wounds. or going nuts themselves and also killing off enemies. It weirds me out that in all these recent games where you enter an area and have to kill off x number of baddies - the baddies never seem afraid. or even remotely aware of what they're getting into. it's like bad guys shooting guns at Superman. don't they fucking know they have no chance? what the hell?
anywho.
even in Splatterhouse2010, this bothered me. You're basically killing wild animals that do nothing but froth and wait in turn for their chance to slowly attack you. If one of them didn't fight, and just crawled into a corner and started crying - I would have thought more about the violence.

2) Have things you aren't supposed to hurt.
Innocent bystanders you're not supposed to touch, mixed in with the baddies (as in every light gun game ever?).
Or maybe offer rewards for not breaking all the furniture.
You could still destroy these things, but if it's clear you aren't supposed, it'll feel more like a dramatic moment when you just lost it and killed everything.

3) Replace dry wooden crates with something fleshy.
In the ultimate gore game, you'd probably want animals (rats?) corpses, or innocent bystanders to stand in for crates. ie. those things that draw you to explore a room and briefly attack them for small powerups.
I think there's nothing satisfying about breaking some barrels/crates/vases in games anymore. borrrrring. Maybe the repetition is addictive? I don't know why

4) Might be interesting to play with your "control of the character".
ie, after you kill the 11th baddie in a row, maybe your character is no longer interested in doing what you tell him. He vomits, or screams, or cries.
Or turns to face you, and personally chews your ass about what you're doing.
I thought this relationship between you and the character was the most interesting thing about the Manhunt games - you're character is walking this weird line between being forced to do things he wouldn't normally - and trying to break free of control.

I just think there's something to this idea of control that is a worthy spin on the usual video game "power fantasy" cliche.

5) call it "The Borrer". heh. ok, no. ... Call it : "Bored With Horror"

If you want to make a horror game, with grappling hooks, i'd recommend going to Hellraiser town.

Also, I think it'd be ideal to make a game where you are controlling a "remote robot probe". like the little robot they send through the portal in Stargate. Or one of the deep sea robots they use to explore rooms of the sunken Titanic ship. Because this would play up issue of control.

You as a player are sort of sending part of yourself into this game, to see what happens. So make a game about sending a robot probe into hell. or something.

It has to protect it's cable (or else, the signal is lost, and you'd need to send a new probe).
falling down pits wouldn't be such a big deal (as it was with the instant death in Splatterhouse2010), because you could just retract the cable.

I've never seen a game like that.

How about an organic gun that launches parasites on to enemies, who fall to the ground clawing, and screaming, at the critter as it burrows through whatever limb it struck.

Launching several of the paarasites onto one enemy should be entertaining to watch as he thrashes wildly as he is slowly devoured.

And there should be an upgrade for an explosive version. Not only does the critter tear into your skin, it also explodes shortly there after.

Sounds like good times to me.

Hey, at least you don't live in Iran. Their rating system goes all the way to age 25!

I'm too lazy to read the whole comments thread, so this may have been mentioned... but didn't he just thought-design a good version of madworld without the artsy bullshit-o-vision?

Kyoh:
How about an organic gun that launches parasites on to enemies, who fall to the ground clawing, and screaming, at the critter as it burrows through whatever limb it struck.

Launching several of the paarasites onto one enemy should be entertaining to watch as he thrashes wildly as he is slowly devoured.

And there should be an upgrade for an explosive version. Not only does the critter tear into your skin, it also explodes shortly there after.

"Oddworld: Stranger's Wrath" had living ammo. It worked differently though.

wc alligator:
You can kick enemies in the genitals and when you do they start screaming "Augh, my genitals!".

That's a very good point. Enemies should be *reactive*, and the sound and animations should vary (or, yes, randomly not be applied at all).

If I set someone on fire, damne it, they should be screaming bloody murder. Bioshock did that pretty well (the bees were a nice touch, too)

I was also reminded of the V.A.T.S system employed in Fallout 3 & NV. Sure, it makes the game too easy at times, but, yow, I was sold on the game when the first time I saw a skull fly apart in slomo :)

Two words: Cerebral Bore

Don't try to physically model and account for every permutation of a sword slash through someone's guts (and how those guts flop around and permanently stain other complex 3D models) - just do the game in 2D instead. Or 2D with multiple planes like Little Big Planet (should be some interaction between planes, tho). Voila, you save tons of space and processing power, and you can fill the game up with a bajillion lush, gory animations, all interacting with and domino-ing off each other. Problem is you couldn't get your face all up in someone's guts, first-person-style, so I guess you wouldn't "feel" like a murderer as much. Meh, that'd be fine with me. I appreciate some good gore, but I don't need to feel particularly immersed in it.

Go to a Melbourne inner city nightclub and look a few strangers in the eye. I guarantee someone will lose a few pints of blood. When the Mana Bar opens here next year, you should use this to your advantage. "Hey look everyone! Gamers enjoying their harmless hobby and drinking responsibly! This Mana Bar must surely be the cleanest, safest and most fun drinking venue in Victoria! How bad can violence in video games truly be if this is how the average gamer behaves in a licensed venue?" Hell if all goes well, The Herald-Sun may even publish a positive article (maybe)

...And therefore I declare Painkiller and Postal 2 two of the most satisfactory gore-y games ever. True by the way. Talking about Serios Sam is just cheating.

Yahtzee:
offers some suggestions on how to maximize blood and gore.

Use the same system that you use on monster on the Players. When a monster hit the players, make sure that the character does a convincing pain animation and gush out blood until he heal himself. It's not much but you can make the monster a more reliable threat, the player an even bigger badass and almost double the amount of blood. Tho it only work when you don't use the fake looking damage decal and put it on the character's skin like X-Men Origin - Wolverine. That's just lazy.

Dracosage:
- All gore physics should have exaggerated sound effects

Definitely read that as "Al Gore Physics."

Someone needs to make this game. It would change the world.

OT:You would need to be fast, and able to hit more than one thing at a time. I always get annoyed with characters whose attacks take forever, especially if they can be interrupted by little swarmy creatures. I want to charge forward and kill some things, dang it! Not wait for my sword to finish glowing!

warrenEBB:
I think what's interesting about gore gaming is - the concept of sadism.

If video games are this magical invention that frees you to "do anything you can think of," then why are you perpetrating all this gore?
Make the game focus on this. If you ignore this aspect of the experience (by making the game about a stylish world travelling treasure hunter, for example) then you're robbing the gore of it's punch. You're making a different genre of game that happens to have some gore in it. which strikes me as lame/irresponsible.

It often seems gore in most games is hidden behind a shiny veneer of heroism and world saving. so you don't feel bad about it.
but this's the key to how any goregame leaves you feeling about gameplay when you finally put the controller down.
I think context must be established, so it will trickle down to affecting how you feel about each attack you perpetrate against each enemy.

1) Have the enemies (victims?) notice all the violence you're perpetrating against them: and react somehow.

running away in fear. crying over wounds. or going nuts themselves and also killing off enemies. It weirds me out that in all these recent games where you enter an area and have to kill off x number of baddies - the baddies never seem afraid. or even remotely aware of what they're getting into. it's like bad guys shooting guns at Superman. don't they fucking know they have no chance? what the hell?
anywho.
even in Splatterhouse2010, this bothered me. You're basically killing wild animals that do nothing but froth and wait in turn for their chance to slowly attack you. If one of them didn't fight, and just crawled into a corner and started crying - I would have thought more about the violence.

...

4) Might be interesting to play with your "control of the character".
ie, after you kill the 11th baddie in a row, maybe your character is no longer interested in doing what you tell him. He vomits, or screams, or cries.
Or turns to face you, and personally chews your ass about what you're doing.
I thought this relationship between you and the character was the most interesting thing about the Manhunt games - you're character is walking this weird line between being forced to do things he wouldn't normally - and trying to break free of control.

I just think there's something to this idea of control that is a worthy spin on the usual video game "power fantasy" cliche.

These two are the most interesting I think. I know that the first one has been done to a certain extent. Assassin's creed guards, for instance, will run away if you kill a bunch of them in an impressive manner. On the other hand, they also all act like douche bags, so the player (and here I mean me) feels absolutely no remorse if they decide to chase them down and back stab them. For the idea to truly be effective, the player would need at least a little empathy for the enemies, which is something gore intensive games avoid for obvious reasons.

Idea four is also unusual (at least as far as I know) because everything about it deliberately breaks immersion, unless the game developer somehow managed to make the player feel equally sickened by the violence. Unfortunately, the type of player who purchases a violent video game is unlikely to feel as sickened by violence as the developer would like, so the game would run the risk of just seeming preachy, or punishing the player for enjoying it. The only example of something like this that I can think of is in the original Deus Ex. If you killed anyone during a mission, including enemies, the morally upright characters would lecture you on finding another way. One, the guncage manager, rewards you with assault rifle ammo for not using deadly weapons. I saw what they were trying to do, but it kind of fell flat.

Overall, cool ideas. Have you seen them actually used in anything you've played? Did it work well?

Why not rip a guys head off and throw it at another enemy. Also the character should retain blood splatter too, if only to make mandatory conversations with npc's more comical.

I have to say, part of the fun from games like these comes from the ability to design your own violence, and by that I mean the ability to build your weaponry and/or method of distributing slaughter.

As such, I would recommend a system by which the player can stick pieces of spike/stick/stuff together to form their own weapon of body-mass destruction.

Naturally, community is another thing that powers all games, and so should not be overlooked.

In this case, I would recommend the ability to share your weapons, and/or share short video clips of them in action.

Perhaps a trophy-stand-esque selection of your choicest murder moments might be in order.

That's all I can say in the short time I can be bothered to devote to this, and I'm not a fan of this genre, so what do I know? But still, hope some of this is at least worth a cursory glance.

As a side note, do these posts actually get read? If they do it might be worth making time for this each week.

Dwarf Fortress keeps track of anatomy. When your military dwarf lops off a goblin hand you see the part fly off an leave a trail of blood. The goblin tries to fight with one hand but usually passes out from the pain and then you cleave his skull.

Your dwarf's boots keep track of every enemy's blood they tromped through unless you wash them off.

The pieces are stored in a abattoir stockpile decomposing from full piece to rotten to skeletal, but they never go away.

Course Dwarf Fortress is a 10 year old game with ascii graphics and has a learning curve that defines "hardcore".

Well, if you want a violent game, you should try Shank for Xbox 360 and PC. Bloody, violent and satisfying as all hell.

I see that the ability to use/continue to dismember corpses has already been mentioned.

Let me also add that explosions need to launch the bad guys (and their constituent limbs) flying like gravity' just been disabled. It's always satisfying to see grunt bits get tossed 30 feet into the air by a grenade.

hmm, good article, and if we take violence to its max, people won't have much to complain about, and violence in games will be more for primal enjoyment instead of a feature. Sick and twisted, yet surprisingly sounding like a lot of fun!

Don't forget having the enemies make loud blood lust roaring noises to add to the excitement, or possibly if its first-person, have the blood effects also effect the player?

Dracosage:
- All gore physics should have exaggerated sound effects

Definitely read that as "Al Gore Physics."

This calls for a celebration...

rda_Highlander:
...And therefore I declare Painkiller and Postal 2 two of the most satisfactory gore-y games ever. True by the way. Talking about Serios Sam is just cheating.

Postal 2 is a favourite of mine because of two things.

1. You could set a man on fire, piss on him to put the flames out and watch him crawl around without skin. Also tase people 'till they piss themselves or piss on them till they puke.

2. The game never asks you to perform any violent acts, it can be completed as if you were freaking Mahatma Gandhi, it provided fuel for puritanical crusaders that can be taken from them with one easy sentence and also gives us a little insight into just what we find 'fun'.

Multiple ways of murderizing enemies is something to have on any list for games of violence. Blowing up or ripping off pieces can be quick and to the point, but any kind of one trick pony gets old pretty quick when it becomes clear that you've seen all there is to see and still have another half hour of show left.

Burning with fire, dissolving with acid, and watching a mass of mooks dance around as electricity gets pumped through their bodies has an interesting touch that doesn't have to be too complicated. It definitely will help break up the copy/paste feel of meeting a big bad something and hitting the same button combo until it stops moving, and using the same set of moves every time. With more ways to make something die, that gives more variety for strengths and weaknesses as well as a sense of "What could possibly work best?" if it isn't all that obvious.

Also, leaving an actual mess that persists for more than a minute is a great way to reward players by letting them see just how much destruction they brought to an area. It's almost depressing to turn a corner and find myself staring at a corridor packed with enemies, barely make it through the fight, and then turn around and see only the last few bodies just in time for them to fade away. There's nothing to boast about; no sense of achievement or glory, and nobody would believe it happened since the area is as clean and tidy as it was when I turned that corner.

so, i guess there's no extra punctuation this week?

No extra Punctuation? Looks like Yahtzee accidentally the whole article. I'm am disappoint.

Delusibeta:

The_root_of_all_evil:

Yahtzee Croshaw:

Yahtzee offers some suggestions on how to maximize blood and gore.

I know you don't like MMOs, but Requiem: Memento Mori already does a lot of what you're talking about. Limbs get splattered everywhere, including yours.

Likewise, I was thinking of a less stylised (and less bloody difficult) Toribash when I read that list.

I'm with you on this

allthough it seems the toribash gaming model without weaponry would seem most apropriate making toribash dudes walk and programming everything about that should do a lot

redisforever:
So...Rune mixed with Serious Sam?

Exactly my thought. Best part about Rune: the prospect of beating down other baddies with the severed limb/head of the first baddie you take down. (Side note: PS2 version the better of the two. While the PC version felt like it had more content, that feeling was marred by the impossible learning curve of some of the puzzles.)

beefpelican:

warrenEBB:

1) Have the enemies (victims?) notice all the violence you're perpetrating against them: and react somehow.
...
4) Might be interesting to play with your "control of the character".

...
Have you seen them actually used in anything you've played? Did it work well?

- I dimly remember some click-adventure game from the Loom era where you could click to jump off a cliff (or into fire?), and the character would refuse. i thought it was hilarious, and kept trying.

- I've played several games where the creatures start running away, and you find them stuck in a corner. (still running, maybe a glitch). but. still weirdly enjoyable to waste them.

- early in Manhunt 2, after your first or second kill, your character bends over and vomits. I thought this was genius. And thought it very interesting how I thought he was a wimpy victim at first, but the whole storyline of the game is revealing what a twisted psycho he is. I never finished this title, but made it pretty far. And had definitely changed how I felt about the character. he turned into something gross that I was not proud to be playing, going into weird sick places I would not have chosen to enter. which is kinda damned interesting design.

really loved the first manhunt by the way. Think it's a wildly underrated franchise. First game was all about (Spoiler warning?) being controlled by a sick rich person, who demands you perform the goriest kills you can - so he can record them on video. You do this for quite a while. But eventually you break free and the game becomes about tracking down the rich guy. the "controlling force" that forced "you" to kill. also, very interesting when you finally discover guns in the game - because the whole game changes from frustrating stealthy mechanics to boldly running around blasting everyone to kibble. So it changes from terror to thrill. thought that was a really fascinating and rewarding twist on core gameplay/experience.

- I keep thinking I should mention "chiller". I remember begging my mom for quarters so I could sneak off and play this in an arcade tent, while at a carnival/fair. it was a light gun game that really disturbed me as a kid. because it was basically pure sadism. I only played it that one day, then never saw it again (until I discovered THE INTERNET!). very strange/important example of gore gaming.
http://www.retrocrush.com/archive2/chiller/
hmm.
I'd like to know more about who was running the (design) show at Exidy. Crossbow and Cheyenne were probably my favorite video games as a kid. Maybe because their genre went away. but they were all about protecting virtual people. the characters just wander around, while you struggle to protect them from the hostile environment they're in. And sometimes shoot zany triggers when you have time, like any good shooting gallery. love the idea of protecting characters rather than trying to control them. maybe it ties into social psychology of seeking to help and nurture? genius?

(... seems Larry Hutcherson was the programmer responsible for all these games I love. and/or Nick Ilyin? but Larry's info has been deleted from wikipedia? wha?)

anywho. blah. I could rant on and on, but not sure I'd be making an interesting point. :\

I can see one problem immediately, though: Lag
With all that blood spraying around (and calculation of limb detachment) graphical quality would have to drop to an absolute low in order to circumvent that (Of course, that might actually help the game). I also have a couple small changes to add to the list:
Mood music: No soundtrack, a low drumming, soft violin or (quiet) ominous organ music (or other ominous but unobtrusive sounds/music) outside of combat. Metal starts the first time you hit something and fades out about 5-10 seconds after you stop hitting things. Loud music stops the blood sounds from grating on the nerves and the quietness sets the stage for it. A varied track of about 20 combat songs and 5 non-combat (they're going to be quiet and inftequent, so largely unnoticed) dodges monotony healthily.
Varied powerups: When you kill a certain amount of enemies (within a certain amount of time, say, 100 and each second not spent maiming the bar drops by 1), you will obtain a random powerup based on the level you have unlocked. Perhaps trees; there would be four ability trees each activated by a button on the D-pad. At 50 kills, you gain access to lv.1 powerups; at 100, lv.2; at 200, lv.3; at 400, lv.4, etc. The maximum level of powerup you can use from a tree can be bought with experience. This means that the problem with splatterhouse (the always-the-same-broken-powerup one) can be avoided.
No in-game collectibles for exploration: Running around takes away from the killing. If the scenery is special enough that you want players to explore it (or worse, they do) then you're not doing it right. Not for this kind of game, at least. Collectibles could be added for advancement, streches of powerup-free kills, high killstreaks and purchasing with experience.
Keep it going one way: Make sure the game can only be defined by one genre (in this case probably hack n' slash). Switching play styles can become annoying if done improperly and when people buy a game, that usually means they intend to buy one game, not two or more half-games mashed into one (exception: spore).
Customization: It shouldn't do much mechanically (with the exception of weapons), but that investment can add attechment. Starting players should have a wide range of equipment, but more can be gained through collectibles.
No death animations for the little ones: This is pretty straightforward; the time it takes to die should be directly related to the time it takes to be killed.
Less death punishment: Dieing while fighting a massive horde, only to have to run back through previous hordes in order to get to the same horde becomes frustrating. Respawn points between waves on easy, between combats on normal, between important sections on hard and between levels on extreme only.
Ixnay on the utscenecay: Lengthy cutscenes=annoying. The only reason you need them is for a game with a developed plot (and even then, cutscenes should be short, frequent and merged into gameplay), a game like this should not have a developed plot. Instead, short, infrequent sections to add humor and take a break from the endless gore can mix it up a bit.
No complex combos: wasted time and effort, especially when most enemies die in one hit.
That's really all that comes to mind right now.

awesomeClaw:
How about being able to choose and customize your weapons and (own) character design? Like in AC:B multiplayer? That´d be awesome.

If you like that kind of stuff then i guess you will like Brink, when it will be released ofc, unless it doesn't get screwd in the last moment by the devs...off topic sorry...

On topic : I couldn't stand and read all the replies so i don't know if any1 said this before but another addition could be tits...because, hey...if there is gore there has to be tits too ^^

i had a great idea. the dismemberment would look different depending on what weapon you dismembered them with, the wound from a katana would be nice and clean, while a chainsaw would also tear up the bloody stump. also, these limbs should not hesitate to come off. think, bloody mess perk being a permanent effect on some weapons like a sledgehammer.

omg, what if like you violently dismembered one enemy with a chainsaw, the other enemies around him would run into a corner unarmed, so you would choose whether to kill them or not. in fact, an entire game mode could be based around not killing enemies, but just killing a couple in the most overly gross way possible so all the others surrender

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here