Frictional Games Forum (read-only)

This has been a debate I've heard several times about horror games, whether or not horror games are better with weapons to fight back with or to not have weapons at all and just run and hide.

What do you guys think? I'll leave a poll too for you guys to vote in.

I think that as long as the game with weapons builds up a great atmosphere and tension it's fine to add a bunch of weapons, but you have to make sure that player is primarily focused on the horrors around him, not on fighting off hordes of villains. Silent Hill 2 has both suspenseful horror and combat system, and yet I was freaking out when I was playing it. Heck, I can even say that the same thing goes for Penumbra Overture as well, maybe it's not THAT scary, but it's definitely creepy and has a combat system as well.

I love the idea of having no weapons in your horror game; being defenseless, having to either run around or hide in the dark. Amnesia did it right. SOMA does it right. But you can start seeing more and more games following this trend; this becomes repetitive and boring. I've already had enough of it. Why not combine the two things? Why not give the player the ability to knock out the enemies instead of killing them, and after a certain amount of time, they wake up again, and are trying to murder you. You slap an enemy, you're safe for a specific time, but not for ever. This seems even more creepy because you'd never know if the enemy you just punched would come back for you, or if he'd give up.

Well that's pretty much all I have to say about weapons in horror games.

(01-07-2016, 07:51 PM)Slanderous Wrote: [ -> ]SOMA does it right.

But seriously I agree what you say, I dont mind having weapons in a horror game at this stage of it since we have basically had hundreds of horror games that had no combat and its getting pretty tiring now. We get it, we are vulnerable to the monster with cheesegrinders as hands.

Heres an idea: A horror game that instead of the player just having guns, monsters also have gu-wait I just described a horror FPS.

i think it would be really cool if you had weapons but with ammo so rare and hard to find you just wouldnt dare to use them and would much rather prefer to bypass the monster in a different way

(01-10-2016, 11:56 AM)Nice Wrote: [ -> ]i think it would be really cool if you had weapons but with ammo so rare and hard to find you just wouldnt dare to use them and would much rather prefer to bypass the monster in a different way

this is SH3

I like Dogfood's idea. Knowing you're screwed if you used your ammo and didn't need to is bound to cause some extra tension. Either that or weapons that are supern inefficient - like improvised stuff (throwing vases/rocks). It'd slow the monster down but take an incredible amount of determination to actually kill one or drive it off.

In whole (regarding the survey) I have no strong opinion whether weapons are better. Both options change the game's mechanics in interesting ways but it's what the devs do with the mechanics that makes it good (or bad).

I'm not American, so I don't own a gun, so I can't relate to protagonists that use guns. The closer I can relate to my character, the more immersed I can be in the game. I prefer a silent protagonist too.
...but I guess I'm a dying breed.

(01-14-2016, 11:45 PM)Robosprog Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-14-2016, 06:40 PM)Cranky Old Man Wrote: [ -> ]I'm not American, so I don't own a gun, so I can't relate to protagonists that use guns. The closer I can relate to my character, the more immersed I can be in the game. I prefer a silent protagonist too.
...but I guess I'm a dying breed.

This is an interesting perspective; out of curiosity, would you consider yourself able to relate to a protagonist with something like a cricket bat or pipe for a weapon?

Well, I do own a bat to keep intruders away, but I don't have any experience with actually using it, so I can't relate to that, but it's much better than shooting guns. It's less alien to me.
...but there's also the reason that being armed in any way, means that you're much less vulnerable, and you focus on if you can fight instead of fleeing and hiding. It just isn't horror for me. Horror and fighting are on the complete opposite sides of the gaming genre spectrum.
Also, I feel that if PewDiePie can screw around with a horror game, then it just isn't dangerous ENOUGH.
I would like to see instant deaths if you miss cues. The robot banging on the door in the beginning of SOMA is a start, but even more subtle warnings should lead to death as punishment, so that these LPers need to THINK about what they're doing.
For instance,
(SOMA spoilers: )
...or if you listened carefully next to doors, you could hear faint steps of a monster on the other side, in which case you wouldn't open it.
...or maybe you would need to stay away from visibly contaminated areas, because those areas could indicate monsters. ...or stay away from door openings with blood leading into it.
If you pay attention to things that spell danger in real life, then the game would actually require SENSE from the player. It could be a new player skill, and avoiding these paths would at the same time toy with the players imagination, since he wouldn't get to see what would have lurked there if he stayed away from it.
That's a good alternative to weapons: Make these games MORE challenging - not easier.

That would be a real challenge to those players who just want to go EVERYWHERE. Exploring the entire map would be impossible without dying several times. Not saying it's a bad idea, but the game would have to be a different sub-genre from what SOMA is, and the player needs to be aware of this. Putting small parts of the story around with notes wouldn't really work that way.

But of course I'd be very interested in seeing it done well, but with careful planning of the layout. If the hints are too obscure, they might just end up being annoying, if the player feels the game is too "trial and error"-y.

(01-15-2016, 09:31 AM)Mudbill Wrote: [ -> ]That would be a real challenge to those players who just want to go EVERYWHERE. Exploring the entire map would be impossible without dying several times. Not saying it's a bad idea, but the game would have to be a different sub-genre from what SOMA is, and the player needs to be aware of this. Putting small parts of the story around with notes wouldn't really work that way.

But of course I'd be very interested in seeing it done well, but with careful planning of the layout. If the hints are too obscure, they might just end up being annoying, if the player feels the game is too "trial and error"-y.

Yes, the hints need to be sensible. As it is now, the gameplay is set up in the OPPOSITE way: All the hints of death typically indicate where you're SUPPOSED to go.
...and yes, while I love to explore, horror is pretty much the opposite of exploration. You explore because you want to feel safe with your surroundings. You want to find cosy little corners in comfort zones to flee to, and routes to escape monsters from.

ANOTHER tactic that can prevent comfort zones, is if you're being CHASED by something. I had this idea for a gameplay style where the lights started going out behind you (and the darkness spelled death to something unknown) and you had no choice but to make your way into unknown LIT areas, at some kind of pace.