Cam Lee Inquisition
Dragon Age: Inquisition producer Cameron Lee has become a fixture here at AusGamers. The Aussie ex-pat took tie out of his Gamescom duties to chat with us again. Check it out!
Wrestling Time
We take a look at 2K Games' latest WWE contender and find out just what the game has in store for fans of the wrestling series. Click here for our full preview!
Resident Evil Within
The Evil Within is creeping up just around the release corner, so we decided to take a look back at Shinji Mikami's incredible Resident Evil 4. Click here for more!
fella!
Wrapping up a tour in Australia and with Summerslam dominating August, we had a chance to chat with the Great White himself, Sheamus! Check it out right here!
The Far Cry Condition: Exploring Open-Worlds, Developer Hand-Holding and Dynamism
Post by Steve Farrelly @ 11:32am 21/01/13 | Comments
We explore what it means to play within an open-world game today, player conditioning, developer hand-holding and the need for true dynamism

My time off over the Festivus break gave me a chance to do something I’ve had little success doing lately -- play some bloody games.

It might sound strange given I’m a games journalist, and certainly I dabble throughout the year with code, but beyond the odd review here and there I wrote in 2012, I was largely left with a big pile of games screaming at me to play them. And so I picked one and ran with it.

That particular venture was Far Cry 3, and though I’d read a lot of fence-sitting on the game, my short time with it ahead of release, as well as many of its coveted concepts on shooting and killing, made me want to lose myself in its dense foliage, crystal clear waters and rough, hilly terrain.

In simply walking, driving, boating, gliding or wing-suiting through the game-world, I felt Ubisoft had nailed one of the most important parts of the game -- ever-rewarding exploration and discovery. I never felt like one particular area of jungle was the same as another, and the way the team split up the island’s zones, wildlife, humans et al, was a thing of beauty. Its equally rich and diverse caves, temples and hidden innards (a component I really don’t want to spoil for those of you who haven’t played the game yet) ticked all the right eye-candy, jaw-dropping vista moments an open-world game like this needs. Despite its abundance of green, I’d argue there hasn’t been so visually a rich environment crafted for a game in recent times than this, even over the likes of Red Dead Redemption, Skyrim and beyond.

But it’s in this visual richness the first pitfall of the game becomes frustratingly apparent. Where Skyrim’s inviting nooks and crannies lead players to more game-world lore, interesting, relevant loot or, most importantly, new quests, Far Cry 3’s diverse world is largely non-interactive. At least on a dynamic level.



In fact it’s in the game’s exterior systems that an antithesis to its organic-looking world rears its head, and in binary fashion no less. Loot being one of the biggest let-downs, is nothing more than an arbitrary bridge to making arbitrary money, while weapons are far too easy to come by, or simply organise for free. There’s a mild progression system in place to getting better gear, but I largely found it just as redundant as cash or loot. The skill-tree and abilities system, coupled with the emergent opportunities when taking on an Outpost, Wanted Dead or Path of the Hunter quest, however, re-balanced the game in favour of player-choice leaving my overall experience with Far Cry 3 a mixed one. The fact I couldn’t really put the game down in my down time though, should speak volumes about what its more solid components offer.

But I’m not here to pick the game apart, rather playing through it gave me an idea about where this type of game needs to head in the future, and also had me questioning the motives of designers when it comes to assuming we, as gamers, don’t know what we’re doing.

Conditioning is a powerful tool of growth. In videogames, especially, it’s our reactionary motor skill, in that we rely on game conditioning to be able to function in a game-world. First-person shooters, for example, rely very heavily on a basic understanding of controlling the player-character (or camera) with either a mouse and keyboard or a controller, and that understanding translates to an ability to interact with the world. There are tricks developers use though, such as glowing objects against a more realistic backdrop to peak one’s attention, or invisible walls to guide you through their maze of level-design, but by and large, it’d be a safe bet that anyone who has played games in a more enthusiastic fashion over the past five to 10 years, can not only confidently navigate most game-worlds, but do so without too much in-game prompting.

Far Cry 3 annoyed me in this respect. I played the game through on the hardest difficulty setting, and yet every time I completed a new mission and went off to explore the world at large, I was constantly reminded about my next mission or told I could explore the island. It never realised I was already doing the latter, and the persistent phone calls from Dennis every time I finished a side-mission just made the constant badgering more of a grind. The more the game told me what to do, the less I wanted to do it.



Don’t get me wrong, I realise there are people out there who would likely defy all sense of logical understanding and still need in-game tutorials to tell them how to run, crouch, jump, aim, shoot and interact, but that should just be an option. By default, I’d like to see a studio take a massive gamble in gamer conditioning and actually give us nothing. Like George and Jerry’s pitch to NBC, I want to see a game about nothing.

Obviously Seinfeld was anything but a show about nothing, yet it was in the day-to-day ramblings and interpersonal interactions of its larger-than-life-yet-relatable characters that its myriad stories of dovetail-layered genius could manifest. By the end of each episode, George, Jerry, Elaine and Kramer had gone through incredible adventures, yet each 20-odd minute tale began with as little as a conversation over a cup of coffee.

While playing Ubisoft Montreal’s leafy opus, I began to imagine the sort of game I actually wanted to experience, and it all stemmed from nothing. Not “nothing” in the absolute, but rather not knowing what was going on. Conjure in your brain, if you will, an island paradise not at all unlike that of Far Cry 3, except instead of playing as some rich white boy whose only recourse for exploration and progression is to exact revenge for his brother’s death, you’re playing as an empty vessel; a blank slate of an avatar with no sense of purpose other than “where the fuck am I, and what am I doing here?” (which is more a projection from the player, too).

Through the aforementioned conditioning, players would have an immediate understanding of how to move in this mysterious island paradise, yet this game would feature no glowing loot boxes and no magical GPS-capable maps. Every component of player exploration would lead to discovery and further conditioning. Trial and error would be your only guide through this experience, and the deeper you look into your surroundings, the sooner a player-driven narrative would appear.

It might sound utopian in design, but it concerns me nothing like this has even been attempted yet. In my imagined experience, the game would feature layered stories ready to be uncovered, how these rise to the interactive surface would depend wholly on the player’s interaction with the game-world. Let’s assume this island has a handful of interest points for perusal: ancient temples, markets and villages, seedy sea ports and an ominous, modern structure as starting points. Now, depending on what type of player you are and the way you interact with NPCs, puzzles, environments etc, would lead you down your own rabbit hole.



Perhaps you like discovery and puzzles which could lead you to the temples to eventually uncover some ancient power through an archaeological narrative. Or maybe you’re a trader, which could see you hunting and skinning animals to sell in the markets which could lead to an action-packed tale about poachers and rare beasts. You might want to explore islands off in the distance which would lead you to the port and potentially open up a dark and jarring tale of modern pirates or, maybe, just maybe, you’re not sure about that strange, out-of-place structure where your curiosity sees you infiltrating its tight security to uncover a government-run facility performing all kinds of sci-fi type experiments. It could even have aliens.

Again, none of this would be clear to the player, and the only driving force would be conditioning. One of my favourite moments from Far Cry 3 came when I was stalking an Outpost to clear it for the Rakyat. This particular enemy stronghold was positioned alongside a crystal clear river that was coated in beautiful green lilies and flowers closer to the bank. At one point I was noticed by one of the pirates in the encampment and so dove into the water to swim to the other side and break his line-of-sight, only when I’d done so and jumped back into the water to begin my stealthy approach again a crocodile attacked me and started to deathroll. I didn’t know there were crocs in the game, so this was a particularly jarring moment for me. Suffice to say, I survived the ordeal because I expected a “mash this button” prompt and sure enough it came, but I walked away from the experience with two enthusiastic points: I fricking love the unpredictable nature of a game-world with fully fleshed systems like ecology and, I love that I knew how to handle the situation because, as a gamer, I’d been in many like it.

As game-worlds become more and more sophisticated and open, designers should be relying less and less on hand-holding. By all means, allow for the tutorial or hint option, but take gamers seriously for a change and drop us in the proverbial deep-end. Games are about discovery and empowering the player and I couldn’t imagine a more empowering tool than the self-discovery of a narrative and sub-world on an already interactive and inviting hub (maintaining my whole imaginary videogame on an island concept). But even beyond my own exampled pitch, this could become the norm for games not even of the open-world variety (Super Meat Boy is a game that told you very little about how to utilise its control system and was all the better for it).

I realise there are players out there who only want to follow a single, main quest line (to which I scream “Why!?”), but I’d argue there are millions who played The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim, Fallout 3 (or New Vegas), Red Dead Redemption, any Grand Theft Auto or a myriad other open-world games, who like to dabble in the richness of what “open-world” means. It would be an absolute risk for a studio to take any such plunge as I’m suggesting, to be sure, but in my mind the dividends would be worth it. At the end of the day, there’s no point in crafting such a dynamic playground if all you’re doing is locking down the play equipment to be toyed with in a binary way. Systems need to be exploited and experimented with in these environments, players need to feel responsible for their own interactive discovery, and the environments and their multiple parts need to be meaningful in a dynamic way.



We bitch and moan about the games industry being all “grown-up” and “mature”, but when you look at the blueprint by which we play, and interact, with games, it’s a design for amateurs. I’m not belittling design intent or gaming content, I’m vilifying the way in which we’re told to handle it, and you’d think after 20-odd years as a sophisticated medium this component would have matured by now.

It saddened me that Far Cry 3 didn’t capitalise on what made the game so worth my time, but I’d suggest we’re on the precipice of something big based on my experience with it anyway. All we need is a big developer willing to take a big risk with big rewards. My idea is just one that sprung to mind while playing Far Cry 3, but the possibilities are, ultimately, endless. If it’s multiplayer the publisher is screaming for, then use that as a tool for the base of this feature and come up with something even more dynamic (if Minecraft and DayZ have taught us anything, it’s that the above is possible beyond a single-player experience), if it’s co-op, well that’s doable too. Tacking on these features is not conducive to anyone’s vision or productivity, but they can be worked with in meaningful ways, as long as players are treated like adults with more than half a brain and developers are willing to take risks.

If you haven’t played Far Cry 3 yet, do so. It’s one of the most enjoyable games of 2012 and its game-world is one of the most compelling to trounce through I’ve come across in a while. It definitely fails to realise its true potential, but as a stepping stone in the right direction, provided we head that way, it will be long-remembered. Buck up devs and take some risks -- we both deserve it.



Latest Comments
parabol
Posted 12:41pm 21/1/13
Nice write-up. I've played the game for about 50 hours and am only 2/3 of the way through it (20 or so outposts liberated so far, ALL by stealth for +1500XP). Still not bored.

The exploration part of the game I think is one of the best. Some of the tunnels and ruins are blended very well with the vegetation and geological features - I can't get over how good and natural the game looks and feels, especially when the rain kicks in. However there really isn't much to finding the artifacts. In most cases you just look around the map for the closest tunnel entrance and follow it to the prize. Occasionally you have to do some minor climbing. I would have liked some extra challenge/exploration with it.

Very happy with this game so far. Will be interested to see what they do with their next title.
eski
Posted 01:55pm 21/1/13
Yeah, nice read, it makes me realise why I enjoyed Miasmata, and why that game felt so much like Far Cry 3.
Nick
Posted 02:49pm 21/1/13
I was thinking about this a while back, and I understand gaming is changing.. Working in retail most people who buy games today don't want to have to think too much but complain when the game last 10 hours. I was thinking back to Shadowman (as I was playing it on my pc at the time) and how you really had to think about where to go next. There really isnt much info or tips, you had to explore and be rewarded for it. Even some FPS's of old did not have a radar like todays game. Perfect examples are call of duty or even resident evil 6. I mean why is there an icon showing you where to go next? I know most games you can turn this off but I would like to see some more old school gaming come back, platformers etc. which don't hold cuddle you throughout your gaming adventure.
TufNuT
Posted 03:04pm 21/1/13
yeah I too have put quite a few hours in to the game, have finished the main story and captured all the towers and about 1/2 the outposts.

I really enjoy the exploration and the hunting missions / lost expedition missions.

though I do have some issues with the game:

1- its too easy
2- whats the point of money in the game? all the weapons can be obtained for free, ammo is recoverable off dead pirates.
3- this whole idea of forcing us to go up every tower. If i want to explore the map with out going up the towers and getting the benefits it should be able to, but not revealing the map even though I have gone through the area just pissed me off. they force us to use an unnecessary gimmick.
4- all the guns shoot the same, there's no recoil.
5- the inventory system has to be one of the s***est I have seen in a while.

apart from that, it is a fun game.
Dan
Posted 03:05pm 21/1/13
I tend to feel that making the game you describe would be retail suicide for a AAA game, or at the very least incredibly high risk that any major publisher would steer well clear of. Definitely not the right fit for Ubi and Far Cry 3, and I think that despite the obvious areas like loot, progression and narrative that they could have done better, they by and large went the right way about making a commercially successful game.

IMO, the game you're talking about, if possible, is something that's not going to be created initially as a whole product with a single release date like FC3, but rather as a more basic proof of concept, that if successful on a small scale, would get built out over time in an iterative development process like Minecraft Most likely by an indie studio, because that's not how the majors roll.
Steve Farrelly
Posted 03:17pm 21/1/13
Oh yeah, I know. But a man can dream can't he?
Bah
Posted 05:28pm 21/1/13
There was one mission which really highlighted the handholdiness of FC3,I was given some magic compass which points to your destination, the character puts the compass away and i followed the way point marker on my map thinking i would go somewhere and use the compass... nope apparently i was following the compass to my waypoint, this happened about 3 times in that mission.

That said i cbf playing games that dont do that kind of stuff to some degree these days, maybe 10 years ago i would have put up with it, but not now, far cry 3 was too far one way though.

Agree with the points about the bulls*** collectibles and stuff in it though, Assassins creed 3 was the same, they have an open world so they have to fill it with pointless bulls*** to pad out the game.
fpot
Posted 06:03pm 21/1/13
Something that I think has contributed to the increased level of hand-holding in games is the increased use of voice-acting. Once upon a time you were able to glean large amounts of information from NPCs. Receiving information via the characters in the game was a very natural kind of way to learn things. I remember in Morrowind you'd have no quest compass and you'd be forced to rely on the directions of NPCs to find your next mission location. Although having a quest compass is damn convenient, I look back fondly on having a conversation with a townsperson and using my own wits to follow their directions to the mine, tomb or cavern where my next mission was. It allowed me to stay 'in the game' whereas every time you look down at a magical quest compass you are being pulled out of it. Of course, sometimes the directions can be hard to follow or outright wrong... Milk anyone?

Story exposition and character back-story is something else that has been diluted down by voice-acting. Having NPCs existing solely for the purpose of being big exposition dumps on the PC is A Bad Thing, but when it is done well it is far more rich than what is done nowadays. Exposition is too cut-scene heavy these days, cut-scenes being another thing that takes you out of the game. Back-stories to me are also very important. They allow you to empathise or despise a character, and with back-stories being limited to what the voice-acting budget allows tends to weaken them a bit.

I am not saying voice-acting is a bad thing. It adds a whole boatload of realism to hear a character's voice and it should still be a prevalent feature in games. However as I said I really think it drains a bit on the aspects I discussed above. It also restricts the amount of paths a story can take. I have gushed about New Vegas on here recently, but the thing that really hooked me about that game were the branching missions and the amount of freedom you had to finish the game with a number of different factions. With a talented writing team and less reliance on voice acting you could have missions that branch dozens of ways and have numerous different endings that change according to the actions of the player. Voice-acting could of course still be used for key points of dialogue for dramatic effect.
Gloth
Posted 06:02pm 21/1/13
Its a nice dream. May I add a loose class system and Oculus Rift support?
Dazhel
Posted 06:24pm 21/1/13
I remember in Morrowind you'd have no quest compass and you'd be forced to rely on the directions of NPCs to find your next mission location. Although having a quest compass is damn convenient, I look back fondly on having a conversation with a townsperson and using my own wits to follow their directions to the mine, tomb or cavern where my next mission was.


Yeah there's something to be said for letting NPC dialog guide the player, it's definitely more immersive & it avoids the drudgery of just following the quest arrow without knowing why. The downside is that if you come back to the game after a day or two or you have a lot of concurrent quests trawling through a quest log makes it difficult to remember the next step.

Very few if any games have found a nice medium between the flashing arrow and using in-game dialog as a guide.
Darkhawk
Posted 08:39pm 21/1/13
AAA studios won't do this, but a lot of what you want is actually in Minecraft, without story progression of course!
fpot
Posted 08:56pm 21/1/13
I had a bit of a bash at Minecraft and I did quite like it. I loved just plugging away at the blocks and finding the caves and the little pleasures of finding rare materials. Also I was impressed by the overwhelming size of the world. It's a neat little sensation to feel like you are surrounded by infinity. Yes we are surrounded by infinity 24/7 but it's different when playing a game, okay? :P

However one of the most important aspects of a game to me is the story and how it progresses. I kind of like it to be movie-like except I am in control of the events that take place. Deus Ex was the first game that showed me games can have cinematic stories and plot-progression. I have been chasing the Deus Ex dragon ever since and never been quite as satisfied, though.
Steve Farrelly
Posted 11:24am 22/1/13
Quite a few people have said that I've essentially described Minecraft in my pitch, but that's not the case. The only real similarities are that you don't actually have a purpose other than exploration in a giant open-world with Minecraft. The game idea I've put forward is a far more detailed hub with layered narratives embedded in the world, and how you interact with that world will determine which of these narratives is your driving point. Moreover, Minecraft is a crafting/block-building sim, the game I'm talking about would have much more in the way of systems the player has no real control over, but can be interacted with and be exploited in various, creative ways.

Obviously it's just an idea, and I know Minecraft has opened a massive door that features a pathway to a lot of what I describe as needing to be broached in new open-world games, but Minecraft also lacks a greater sense of realism and narrative drive (at least in what I'm wishing for here :)
badfunkstripe
Posted 12:35pm 22/1/13
The reason they hold your hand is because they want to also appeal to more casual gamers.

I can't remember specifics, but the Crytek people were talking about the issues of bringing Crysis 2 to consoles and how the research into gaming attitudes for console players is different than PC. That many people simply stop playing if it's not guided enough for them. That was one of the main reasons the game was more linear than the previous PC only.

I am sure this plays a part in a lot of games. They want to appeal to the lowest, most fickle, most likely to just switch the game off the second they don't know what to do.
Commenting has been locked for this item.
14 Comments
Show
 
Log In
User:  
Pass:  

Advertise with Us | Download Media Kit | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
© Copyright 2001-2014 AusGamers™ Pty Ltd. ACN 093 772 242.
A Mammoth Media web development / Australian VPS Hosting by Mammoth Networks