Choose Your Weapon!

[Wilbefast]

A while ago I did a post about The Trouble with Randomised Loot Drops. About the same time, in the Inventory System thread, the consensus was that elaborate inventory screens were a no-go - if you want to argue about this particular point, please head over there instead.
For now though, I'd like to look at ways of implementing Phat Lewt without using any in-game menus. The basic idea is one Jeff proposed on the aforementioned inventory thread:

How about having a bad ass inventory system between levels when available (simulating carrying a travel pack) so you can acquire a variety of weapons, but in the actual gameplay you have a Lugaru style inventory?

It may seems like I keep coming back toSplinter Cell, Hitman and other Thief clones - basically because I am. These games make for rather interesting examples of 3rd person stealth-action games though, so I reckon it's justified. In particular they allow you to customise your armament in between missions, which is more or less what Jeff is suggesting. Bit of a case study then.




LOAD-OUT

Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory allows the player choose one of 3 equipment kits (assault, stealth or balanced) at the start of each mission, each with their own strengths and weaknesses. Because you can't find any new weapons throughout the level, this starting "load out" very much dictates how you play:



There is a degree of forethought required (what equipment would post suit this mission?) but mostly it's a matter of preference (I don't like killing people, so I'll take non-lethal weaponry...). It does make restarting a mission more interesting though, as you can try again with a different set of equipment.
The degree of customisation isn't great however, with little variation between the kits. Also, as mentioned in my over-long blog-post, the game gives you a score based on how stealthy you are: it offers you an assault kit and then punishes you for using it. Bad move.



COLLECTION

Hitman 2 allows the player to not only choose their starting weapons, but also to pick up any new weapons they might find in-game. The player thus gradually accumulates an arsenal of different weapons:



What made this more interesting was the distinct between small and large weapons: you can carry as many small weapons as you want, but only one large one. What's more large weapons slowed you down, and were impossible to hide: you either have to carry them in plain sight or hide them somewhere and come back to them later.
Interesting to note: a result of this is that you can only salvage one rifle from a level at a time. Also any weapons you leave behind are removed from your stash. Hitman allowed you to replay levels to acquire new weapons - re-playability in Overgrowth discussed here.



SHOP

Thief provides an amalgam of these two ideas (unsurprising - it was basically the first 3D stealth game ever): items stolen during levels can be sold and the profit can be used to buy equipment:



Naturally depending on the equipment you'd taken with you, how you played would vary greatly. Funny that Thief, the very first of this generation of stealth games, actually has more customisation than any of the others. The trouble with the shop, as with all these ideas, is that the less well you do, the harder subsequent missions are, because you have less resources. It's a vicious cycle!



CONCULSION

I'd really like to see some degree of equipment-selection at the start of each level, especially if various types of armour and weaponry have different strengths and weaknesses. For example: every piece of equipment could have a weight value attached to it, which would slow you down and stop you from jumping so high. Some clothing might provide better camouflage, in other words reduce the distance you could be see from, while heavy armour would restrict your agility and be less quiet to move around in.

Players would thus be able to plan out their strategy and customise their gameplay mechanics to suit their preference, weighing up the various pros and cons. Meanwhile the "challenge" game mode (if there is one) could use fixed equipment sets to make the levels more... well, challenging!

For my part, I'm not too keen on shops, and I'd like to be able to collect weapons throughout the levels. But hey, that's just my opinion, what's yours?

[Endoperez]

Collection gives the biggest amount of fulfillment. "I defeated the wolf-boss, and I have this awesome new weapon to prove it!" Plus custom reactions specific to a certain weapon and certain NPC or NPC groups. "My name is Usagi Montoya! You killed my father and took his sword! Prepare to die!"

[Freshbite]

I voted before I read your post, and I didn't really get what Accumulate meant by then!
I want to re-vote D:

But yeah, that's what I would choose.

[tokage]

As always, excellent thoughts.

One aspect you didn't mention, but seems important to me is story. Your three examples all are mission based story progressions with a kind of base to go back to between levels/missions. You always get assigned a new mission (or the player character plans them himself) at a single distinct location, but there is no continuous travel through several locations to reach a goal, so the story is told kind of episodically and often even in between the levels. That is a restriction imposed through the inventory system on the story. The question is, do we want that kind of story with OG?
The two viable options with this kind of inventory system are a base or the travel pack (maybe cart w/e) mentioned by Jeff.
With a base you usually get distinct locationaly unconnected missions, I analysed above.
When only a mobile inventory like a cart or a travel pack is used, it gets more difficult to have ambushes and flight scenes in the story. You will have to trade those with logical gaps of varying size.
I don't say, I don't want the inventory because of this and I never would say you can't have a good story with those restrictions, but it surely is worth thinking over.

Last but not least, an example game that used a mobile inventory integrated into the story, in my opinion done exceedingly well: Mechwarrior 3

The inventory is a mobile repair base that you will have to take along with team mate orders and protect. Makes sense in the story and once the waypoint system was patched didn't give you too much headache, because most of the time you could do the mission and pull it up to you afterwards.

[Wilbefast]

I remember MechWarrior... vaguely. Think I only ever watched over my older brother's shoulder. I do remember that you could customize your Mech though - games like this are always good. Spectre too, and Impossible Creatures had... novelty value.



Actually it was an aright game, except for "the critters are under attack..."

You're right that it makes sense to be lugging around an arsenal when you're on your own and travelling light. I was thinking of "The 7 Tasks" (favourite fan campaign - followed closely by Temple), where you have a sort of home-base you keep coming back to between mission. Coming back to somewhere familiar periodically really added something to that campaign, especially with the fewer and fewer adepts...

[tomascokis]

I think you should just be able to carry 2 weapons, ala lugaru, but get some time before leaving each level to pick up whatever you want, obviously carrying previous weapons into the next level.

[TheBigCheese]

It's completely dependent on how the campaign is setup. If it's a traveling campaign, it only makes sense to use what you can carry.

Otherwise, I see no reason why you wouldn't be able to stockpile and trade with merchants in cities.

[Flamespike]

what about an active invintory? like, you can swap weapons before you rush into battle, but no one can be aware of you while your doing it.

[Wilbefast]

what about an active inventory? You could swap weapons before you rush into battle, but no one would be aware of you while you were doing it.

I don't understand what you're trying to say - do you mean à la Lugaru or à la Diablo? If it's the latter case...

In the Inventory System thread, the consensus was that elaborate inventory screens were a no-go - if you want to argue about this particular point, please head over there instead.

I actually wasn't very clear now that I look at it - what I meant was: most people were against an RPG-style inventory, prefering instead something simple like in Lugaru, where you have only a couple of weapons, visible on your person.

[Flamespike]

Yeah now i see what you are saying. but i mean something like a simple numline selection that chooses primary/secondary weapon (hold shift to set sec or just swap.)

[BlackHole]

I've played all the games mentioned in this thread, and must say, I think sort of a combination of these and other methods will fit OG best.

Let's start of with the Hitman 2 approach to weapon collections. As the game progresses, more weapons for the player. This is fairly realistic: in real life you'd also be albe to pick up any weapon and use it / take it with you.

Now, in a world as OG, there would be no big deal to add shops like in Thief. Remember, in Thief you already own the bow, you just need the arrows. Diversity comes with the all the different arrows you're able to choose from. So, you can store some of your weapons in caches, but also buy new ones at shops (or trade with other warriors).

Since it would be kinda too easy if you was able to carry all the weapons you wanted, we need some Splinter Cell. (Note that Chaos Theory wasn't the first SC to use this loadoutsystem). Once the player has to move on, he can't take all weapons he gathered with him. So, for each mission, you'll be able to choose your load-out. Customization ^^

Now, we think OG will have quite some different cultures, especially when it comes to weapons. Keep this in mind while I mention the BioShock version of using weapons. Not only has the player two kinds of 'weapons', the guns and the plasmids, it also allowes the player to upgrade these. "Power To The People"-stations allowed the players to upgrade certain parts of their weapons. Improved versions of plasmids could be picked up and used.
Compared to OG we could have unarmed attacks (hand-to-hand combat techniques) and weapons. The player can improve on their current weapons, or learn new fighting skills.

When it comes to picking up / trading / improving weapons, we don't need to much options. Scenarios like in for example Borderlands where you could spent more time comparing the hundreds of weapons than actually playing the game shouldn't be the thing we're aiming for. A lot of options are great, but just don't overdo it.

- Black
A good friend will bail you out of jail and lecture you about how you messed up. A great friend will be sitting right next to you laughing about it saying "damn, we really screwed up!"

[Wilbefast]

I agree with most of what you're saying, except for one thing:

The player can improve on their current weapons, or learn new fighting skills.

I really don't like the RPG side of things, and games like Bioshock and Iji were undeniably aiming for it: even if it's harder to grind (no respawning enemies) and loot is much less random, it's still a case of "Character Stats Vs. Player Skill" and of "Creating the Illusion of Accomplishment".

Another potential problem, from my rather obscure blog (I'm think of renaming it "[email protected]"), "Decisions and Interactivity":

“Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic” and “Vampire: the Masquerade – Bloodlines” are two other RPGs which, aside from having obnoxiously long titles, offer the player slightly more freedom. You can, for example, sneak past enemies you might otherwise have fought, or hack or pick locks to access areas that might otherwise have been out of reach. There are two problems with these games though: first, success in the aforementioned strategies depends almost entirely on character statistics, so you effectively choose your play-style in advance (more restrictive than liberating). Second, the obligatory boss-fights can be next-to-impossible if you’ve chosen to put all your money on stealth and subterfuge. I had a similar problem in “Oblivion” and “Fallout 3”

I would like to see a choice of weapons, but it really should be a choice with no right answer, where each piece of equipment confers advantages in some situations and disadvantages in others. It should never be a non-brainer "I'll just take my best weapon and my best armour".

Also, where the shop is concerned, there's always the danger of using currency:

Give NPCs money and they become walking piggy banks to the player, so all the effort that may have gone toward having a poignant "can violence be used for good? Does it corrupt? Should we take an eye for an eye?" sort of message is blown a way by a "greed is good" minigame.

The real question is thus how money is acquired - it creates all kinds of problems like compound failure (the aforementioned "not doing well at a mission = less money = harder subsequent missions"), so ultimately I'm against the idea of a shop.

[Endoperez]

Another potential problem, from my rather obscure blog (I'm think of renaming it "[email protected]"), "Decisions and Interactivity"

I've actually read that article in your blog! I think you should have an update thread on the forums, post a link to every new article you make, and see if you get any comments on the thread.

I was also considering writing a post about a "weapon equals a new skill/style" kind of combined inventory/achievement/miniquest system, but quickly realized it'd be more fun to be able to use any weapon perfectly the moment you get it. Learning to use it should be up to player skill. In some cases it might be nice to have a limited point of specialization, so that e.g. in multiplayer team games you have to specialize for one type of weapon (swords, spears, thrown/ranged, close range/wrestling) so that players have incentive to fulfill a clear, specific role.

[Swordarm]

Time for me to give my opinion

we need a FEW weapons and not some crazy diablo-like inventory system! No stats game, loot collection, randomised stuff!

We have a rabbit the size of a man.

We should go Rune here. You have the weapons that you carry with you, not some strange magical bag. We can save ourselves the time to talk about loadouts and screens and stuff and just make it intuitive, simple and realistic. What you carry on your body, you take with you. Perfect, easy system.

If you throw your dagger, you need to get it back after the fight, otherwise it's gone. If an enemy grabs your sword, you need to look for it after the fight.

I am aware that this requires two things:
1.) No instant level end. Instead, there needs to be either some clearly defined "end level" spot on the map (I'd just flash a light when you close to said spot to let you know), so the player can choose when to leave an area. Something like that also gives the opportunity to explore an area more freely when all the enemies are down.
2.) A highlight system for your stuff. There is nothing more silly than not being able to find your uber-sword after a fight. I'd use some glow or maybe even an arrow to show you were your sword lies AFTER the fight.


Nothing of this rules out shops in towns and blabla but I strongly urge the team to implement my system, because I am absolutely convinced it is the most fitting.

Lugaru did something similar more or less by just assuming what you would pick It never gave you the choice so my point here is a cheated one but the spirit was there.
Turner kills the lone raider that carries a knive. Turner takes his knive. Lugaru did not allow us to let the knive be and move along, it just assumed we would pick it up.
I say, make that assumption gameplay.

[BlackHole]

I really don't like the RPG side of things, and games like Bioshock and Iji were undeniably aiming for it: even if it's harder to grind (no respawning enemies) and loot is much less random, it's still a case of "Character Stats Vs. Player Skill" and of "Creating the Illusion of Accomplishment".

I agree on the Stats vs Skill problem. It was about 02:16 when I posted, so I figure my explanation didn't quite discuss that part of the issue.

The reason I mentioned BioShock was because there was a limit on how many upgrades you had. During the progression of the game, you get to upgrade a part of your weapons. Now, you won't find that many PttP stations around, so the number of times you're able to upgrade your weapons is limited. Meanwhile, your enemies are evolving too, making it harder to kill them.

The thing about BioShock was that you only had a few options to upgrade your weapons, which enabled you to make your weapons fit your playing style. The balance won't change much, since both your weapons and your enemies get stronger. But the way you play the game changes.
Do you like rushing, running in to large groups of enemies by surprise and taking them out? You'd upgrade the fire rate and magazine size for most of your weapons.
Do you like some more tactics and try to lay fire on your enemies from a distance? Damage and accuracy where the things you upgraded.

Since the upgrades keep the balance with the evolving enemies, the game is just as much fun if you decide to play it all over again: though your weapons ain't the strongest yet, so are your enemies. So everything still depends on skills gathered.

What I'd like to see in OG is a bit like a combination in this. A game where you're able to customize your weapons (and loadout), to a point where it enhances your skill by allowing you to use new techniques or tactics which are much harder to pull off without these things. This doesn't mean that the game is harder when you start over again, due to the lack of customized weapons. No, you just use different techniques/tactics to achieve your goal. There is no optimal solution (no optimal tactic) to complete your mission, you need skill for both approaches, and in every stage of the game you use different approaches, you actually learn more different skills.

When it comes to shops: yep, the currency problem is absolutely not what we want. I remember playing Thief over and over again, because at a certain point in the game I got stuck because I didn't have enough resources to complete my mission successfully. It took me about 3 times to get finally past that part.

I think maybe something like a marketplace would fit better. A meeting point where warriors and merchants exchange their goods. So, for example, if you'd like to try out some throwing knife, you can trade these against your longbow. Whatever you choose, you'll always have a weapon at your disposal. The question is, whether you want the longbow or the throwing knives. Both have their pro's and con's, but in each case you'll be able to kill someone who's in a medium range.

Offtopic: I really should bring some more structure in my long posts

- Black
If debugging is the process of removing bugs, then programming must be the process of putting them in.