More realistic war-based games aren't all about Call Of Duty.
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/youll-struggle-to-survive-in-this-war-of-mine-571731e1a624 (https://medium.com/war-is-boring/youll-struggle-to-survive-in-this-war-of-mine-571731e1a624)
QuoteBruno creeps into the supermarket. It's night. Wind whistles through the holes in the walls. He hears the crack of rifles in the distance, but he doesn't think it's coming from inside.
Not that he really cares. He hasn't eaten in two days.
Last night's journey to an abandoned apartment complex earned Bruno some wood, but no food. His friend, Pavle, was dead when he came home. Pavle used to be the scavenger—the guy in charge of the nighttime supply runs ... until he ran into a group of looters with guns.
He bled out while Bruno was raiding the apartment. Their group didn't have the supplies to save his life.
Bruno picks through the ruined aisles, collecting tins of tuna and rotting vegetables. He hears whispers in the back room. He moves slowly toward the sound, remembering what happened to Pavle.
He kneels down and peers through a keyhole—it's a man and a woman. They're arguing. The woman is looking for food. The man promises he has food. He's willing to trade. The woman doesn't want to offer up what the man wants.
The argument gets heated. The man draws a gun.
Bruno bolts. He knows what's about to happen and he can't stop it. He's hungry and the man has a gun. Bruno is unarmed and his backpack is now full of food.
Welcome to This War of Mine—the most tense, engaging and depressing video game ever.
There's an absolute glut of games about war. Most—like the billion-dollar Call of Duty franchise—are pure fantasy.
In those games, players run around city streets firing round after round of digital ammo. Blood splatters, explosions tear baddies to pieces. You die and come right back. They're about power.
11 Bit Studios' This War of Mine is about powerlessness.
This War of Mine puts the player in charge of a random assortment of characters in the middle of a city destroyed by civil war. Each character comes with a brief back story and a special skill.
My first time through, I play with former football star Pavle, former TV chef Bruno and a plucky young man named Marko.
The three guys inhabit a run-down, bombed-out building in the middle of town. It's up to me to help them find food and make their shelter livable. The game's on a time limit—each day lasts 10 minutes and every second of that time is priceless.
Should I build a heater or a bed? Should Pavle stand guard through the night even though he's sick? Can Marko still scavenge while wounded? The gameplay is all about managing resources and making decisions. Imagine The Sims set in wartime.
Get food, build a little more and survive the night. The game, however, is good at parsing out the supplies in such a way that there's never quite enough.
If you've got plenty of food, then one of the survivors is sick and you don't have bandages. If you've got plenty of medicine, then you're out of water. If you've got plenty of water, then you don't have enough food.
If you've got enough of everything, then other survivors will break into your house and take it.
I was always scrambling to keep my survivors alive. But even then, This War of Mine never lets up. For physically surviving isn't enough. The game also forces the player to make soul-crushing moral choices.
Some of those moral choices are straightforward. A neighbor knocks on the door and asks the characters to help him board up his windows. Click yes to help one of your survivors takes off to assist. The survivor is gone for the rest of the game day, limiting the amount you can improve your hovel, but good deeds boost morale.
Contentment from good deeds has in-game effects. The survivors walk a little faster and aren't as bothered by hunger and exhaustion. It's an easy trade-off to make, but it's not the only way the game tests the player's character.
The game presents the harder moral choices organically. I never see them coming. The situation with Bruno in the supermarket just happens. No cutscene appears, no dialogue box pops up. I don't click a yes or a no button.
I don't realize I'm' making a choice. I force Bruno to flee and leave the woman behind. I could have stayed, but Bruno is my last survivor. I don't want him to die.
My snap decision has lasting consequences. Witnessing the rape breaks Bruno's spirit.
He's depressed through the rest of the playthrough ... literally. The word "depressed" floats on his status bar right next to "hungry" and "tired." He talks about the woman constantly.
Halfway through preparing a meal or crafting some furniture, he'll just stop, racked with guilt and unable to go on.
These moments are the heart of the game. There's nothing else quite like it. In This War of Mine, the player's choices have real consequences.
This War of Mine isn't anti-war, per se. The politics of the conflict rarely factor. None of the characters complain about this or that dictator or rebel leader. There's no propaganda on the radio.
In This War of Mine, armed conflict is a force of nature. There's no stopping it. The characters just want to survive. I use the radio to get information. Like the weather. And which parts of the city to avoid.
The radio tells me that crime is on the rise and the price of coffee has doubled. Now I know to post more guards at night and look out for coffee beans to trade.
The player can't win the war or escape the city. There are no win conditions beyond surviving one more day.
How one survives matters. This War of Mine forces the player to choose which pieces of the soul to ration off.
Update 11/20/14—It turns out a win condition does exist. Players just discovered that it's possible to survive 45 days and see a cease fire.
Watched some "Let's Plays" and reviews on this and it's likely something I'll pick up at some point.
It's a similar concept to Zafehouse Diaries (though that game is much more lo-fi and deals with Zombies and instead of point and click 2D it's mostly text based).
Apparently it's based on the siege of Sarajevo. Video trailer here.
http://store.steampowered.com/app/282070/ (http://store.steampowered.com/app/282070/)
It'd be no good for me, eve The Sims made me cry.
http://www.pcgamer.com/this-war-of-mine-review/ (http://www.pcgamer.com/this-war-of-mine-review/)
Just reading the review made me depressed.
But it looks interesting.
Quote from: Brazen on November 21, 2014, 03:57:20 AM
Update 11/20/14—It turns out a win condition does exist. Players just discovered that it's possible to survive 45 days and see a cease fire.
From the comments under the PC Gamer article it seems that the length is - aptly - random. People seem to have seen a cease fire after a period ranging from 30 days to 6 months.
Sweet War of Mine. :mmm:
Looks interesting, challenging, but not entertaining. Pass.
Quote from: derspiess on November 21, 2014, 09:47:59 AM
Looks interesting, challenging, but not entertaining. Pass.
Yeah, it's more in the vein of video games as art making a statement, not as light entertainment.
Perfectly valid, perfectly interesting, totally not what I look for in a game. But neat, and good luck to them.
Are you not entertained?
Quote from: Jacob on November 21, 2014, 12:32:32 PM
Quote from: derspiess on November 21, 2014, 09:47:59 AM
Looks interesting, challenging, but not entertaining. Pass.
Yeah, it's more in the vein of video games as art making a statement, not as light entertainment.
Perfectly valid, perfectly interesting, totally not what I look for in a game. But neat, and good luck to them.
Looks incredibly entertaining.
Quote from: 11B4V on November 21, 2014, 03:09:25 PM
Looks incredibly entertaining.
Maybe post an AAR in the gaming subforum once you've played it?
I think if I play this game I will spend the next week with "Depressed" hanging over my head.
I'm going to wait for This War is Mine II: Homeless Wino.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on November 21, 2014, 03:43:40 PM
I'm going to wait for This War is Mine II: Homeless Wino.
Do you: dig through dumpster --or-- shit in the alley?? Every action will have consequences!!
Quote from: Jacob on November 21, 2014, 12:32:32 PM
Quote from: derspiess on November 21, 2014, 09:47:59 AM
Looks interesting, challenging, but not entertaining. Pass.
Yeah, it's more in the vein of video games as art making a statement, not as light entertainment.
Perfectly valid, perfectly interesting, totally not what I look for in a game. But neat, and good luck to them.
I've found the idea of games as art problematic for similar reasons.
Quote from: Razgovory on November 21, 2014, 05:19:47 PM
I've found the idea of games as art problematic for similar reasons.
I don't see what is problematic about games designed as art; I merely tend to not find them appealing to play.
When I applied for art school, I did a board game as art as part of my application process. It was a you-can't-win-as-a-struggling-artist kind of thing; valid enough as a (somewhat pedestrian) statement, but not something that'd be a whole lot of fun to play more than once (at most)
In this game, can you go for "evil" as a winning strategy? Say, become a psychopathic cannibal, and reverse what is normally found "depressing"? :hmm:
Quote from: Jacob on November 21, 2014, 05:43:03 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on November 21, 2014, 05:19:47 PM
I've found the idea of games as art problematic for similar reasons.
I don't see what is problematic about games designed as art; I merely tend to not find them appealing to play.
:hmm:
I don't mind playing depressing games, it's an interesting break from the usual fantasy wish fulfillment.
For the people who said that this is not what they look for in games, I'm curious: does this only extend to games? Or also other media, like TV shows or movies? If not, why is your approach different when it comes to games?
More people should play Limbo.
In light of tonight's dominant thread, and that we should make love and not war...where is the "This Porn of Mine" game?
I think that there'd be mileage in a game about running a porn actor's/actress's career, especially if you add moral questions and the darker side of the business (abuse, drug use, risk of diseases ...), and you can add poignancy e.g. when a performer's star starts to sink: what are they willing to do to themselves and on camera when the big offers stop coming in? Or when you're a young hopeful and want to impress the producers. How will your personal relationships react? Etc.
Actually sounds kind of interesting.
Though I really hope there isn't an artificial no fighting rule.
Quote from: Syt on November 21, 2014, 04:02:52 AM
Watched some "Let's Plays" and reviews on this and it's likely something I'll pick up at some point.
It's a similar concept to Zafehouse Diaries (though that game is much more lo-fi and deals with Zombies and instead of point and click 2D it's mostly text based).
How is Zafehouse Diaries? I've been looking at that one.
QuoteI think that there'd be mileage in a game about running a porn actor's/actress's career, especially if you add moral questions and the darker side of the business (abuse, drug use, risk of diseases ...), and you can add poignancy e.g. when a performer's star starts to sink: what are they willing to do to themselves and on camera when the big offers stop coming in? Or when you're a young hopeful and want to impress the producers. How will your personal relationships react? Etc.
Make it.
Sounds like something that can be done with little more than text boxes and the occasional photo.
Copyright on the photos would be the problem :hmm:
Quote from: Syt on November 22, 2014, 01:28:05 AM
I don't mind playing depressing games, it's an interesting break from the usual fantasy wish fulfillment.
For the people who said that this is not what they look for in games, I'm curious: does this only extend to games? Or also other media, like TV shows or movies? If not, why is your approach different when it comes to games?
For me, generally, yes. The older I get, the less willing I am to watch movies and read books that are depressing etc. (that is why I didn't really enjoy "Brokeback Mountain" or "Philadelphia" and do not really enjoy that trope in gay-themed cinema). My choice of fiction tends towards escapism these days - so suspense/dark fantasy (but not full horror), sci fi and comedies.
For example, the only "darker" shows I could get into recently were the likes of Game of Thrones, American Horror Story, Penny Dreadful, Gotham, Constantine or Shameless (i.e. where the element of "darkness" is rendered less real by fantastic elements or - in the case of Shameless - dark comedy). I did not enjoy Breaking Bad or Walking Dead (the latter obviously being more fantasy but too bleak for my tastes).
Quote from: Tyr on November 22, 2014, 06:31:52 AM
How is Zafehouse Diaries? I've been looking at that one.
I found it "meh."
Quote from: Martinus on November 22, 2014, 06:35:36 AM
For me, generally, yes. The older I get, the less willing I am to watch movies and read books that are depressing etc. (that is why I didn't really enjoy "Brokeback Mountain" or "Philadelphia" and do not really enjoy that trope in gay-themed cinema).
Philadelphia was over 20 years ago. :mellow: Oh, that's right. Poland.
What, the only trope left in " gay-themed cinema" is variations of
La Cage aux folles? :P
QuoteI did not enjoy Breaking Bad or Walking Dead (the latter obviously being more fantasy but too bleak for my tastes).
Too bleak? :mellow: For Poland?
Quote from: Jacob on November 21, 2014, 05:43:03 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on November 21, 2014, 05:19:47 PM
I've found the idea of games as art problematic for similar reasons.
I don't see what is problematic about games designed as art; I merely tend to not find them appealing to play.
When I applied for art school, I did a board game as art as part of my application process. It was a you-can't-win-as-a-struggling-artist kind of thing; valid enough as a (somewhat pedestrian) statement, but not something that'd be a whole lot of fun to play more than once (at most)
Well, I see games as being a system of mechanics and rules. You move a piece round a board, you hit a ball with a bat, you drive around a map etc. A game stands on this, it must have it. It also must be fun, or people won't play it. Artistic elements are optional. Now a computer game can have artistic elements (and usually does), things like a story and graphic design are art, but they stand on their own as well.
Now I think games and sports are a worthy human endeavor by themselves. Games can invoke feelings and teach the players or audience important stuff. They are not art, but a separate part of the human condition.
Quote from: Syt on November 22, 2014, 01:28:05 AM
I don't mind playing depressing games, it's an interesting break from the usual fantasy wish fulfillment.
For the people who said that this is not what they look for in games, I'm curious: does this only extend to games? Or also other media, like TV shows or movies? If not, why is your approach different when it comes to games?
I don't think it's the depressing element so much as the lack of control. From the description, this isn't a game where you do things, it's a game where things are done to you.
I don't necessarily want complete non-randomness in a game (when I do, I'll stick to chess), but I want some control over what happens. And yes, I understand that your decisions in the game do have consequences, but that's still not the same as having some degree of control over the situation.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 22, 2014, 09:34:33 AM
Quote from: Martinus on November 22, 2014, 06:35:36 AM
For me, generally, yes. The older I get, the less willing I am to watch movies and read books that are depressing etc. (that is why I didn't really enjoy "Brokeback Mountain" or "Philadelphia" and do not really enjoy that trope in gay-themed cinema).
Philadelphia was over 20 years ago. :mellow: Oh, that's right. Poland.
What, the only trope left in " gay-themed cinema" is variations of La Cage aux folles? :P
Yeah, well that's one gay movie I liked. Most of the others were comedies too. :P
Quote from: Razgovory on November 22, 2014, 11:58:06 AM
Well, I see games as being a system of mechanics and rules. You move a piece round a board, you hit a ball with a bat, you drive around a map etc. A game stands on this, it must have it. It also must be fun, or people won't play it. Artistic elements are optional. Now a computer game can have artistic elements (and usually does), things like a story and graphic design are art, but they stand on their own as well.
Now I think games and sports are a worthy human endeavor by themselves. Games can invoke feelings and teach the players or audience important stuff. They are not art, but a separate part of the human condition.
Ah... I see. I use the word problematic somewhat differently than you :)
I don't object to anything you say there - it makes sense. I disagree, in that I think games are a perfectly valid tool for artistic expression. I don't see them as separate from "art" - but rather that the current thrust of game production is a popular art form primarily concerned with mass appeal and unconcerned with various "high art" concerns. But to me that's down to the priorities of the makers and consumers, rather than down to the form itself. Games are a perfectly suitable medium for expressing profound truths about the human condition or whatever.
It's just that I don't tend to enjoy that stuff, preferring lighter fare aimed at popular taste. That kind of mirrors the situation in film and books as well; much of it is intellectually light-weight stuff intended for entertainment purposes, but they're still perfectly valid media for high theory style stuff. The same is true for image production, in fact - lots of people prefer stuff produced for concerns other than art theory reasons.
But yeah, games are very much about mechanics and rules, though I think the visual presentation and other "flavour bits" are just as important to the craft.
Quote from: Jacob on November 22, 2014, 02:11:28 PM
But yeah, games are very much about mechanics and rules, though I think the visual presentation and other "flavour bits" are just as important to the craft.
The "flavor bits" can be important to the "fun" of game-play, too. EU:Rome is a good example--on initial launch it was the most stable, bug-free game from Paradox (at least up to that point), but a big boor, because it had no flavor. But OTOH, the lack of flavor wasn't from poor graphic or other artistic choices; there was just something missing.
Quote from: Jacob on November 22, 2014, 02:11:28 PM
But yeah, games are very much about mechanics and rules, though I think the visual presentation and other "flavour bits" are just as important to the craft.
Mechanics and rules are what you use to win or lose, the visual presentation determines how much you enjoy it. :)
Quote from: Jacob on November 22, 2014, 02:11:28 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on November 22, 2014, 11:58:06 AM
Well, I see games as being a system of mechanics and rules. You move a piece round a board, you hit a ball with a bat, you drive around a map etc. A game stands on this, it must have it. It also must be fun, or people won't play it. Artistic elements are optional. Now a computer game can have artistic elements (and usually does), things like a story and graphic design are art, but they stand on their own as well.
Now I think games and sports are a worthy human endeavor by themselves. Games can invoke feelings and teach the players or audience important stuff. They are not art, but a separate part of the human condition.
Ah... I see. I use the word problematic somewhat differently than you :)
I don't object to anything you say there - it makes sense. I disagree, in that I think games are a perfectly valid tool for artistic expression. I don't see them as separate from "art" - but rather that the current thrust of game production is a popular art form primarily concerned with mass appeal and unconcerned with various "high art" concerns. But to me that's down to the priorities of the makers and consumers, rather than down to the form itself. Games are a perfectly suitable medium for expressing profound truths about the human condition or whatever.
It's just that I don't tend to enjoy that stuff, preferring lighter fare aimed at popular taste. That kind of mirrors the situation in film and books as well; much of it is intellectually light-weight stuff intended for entertainment purposes, but they're still perfectly valid media for high theory style stuff. The same is true for image production, in fact - lots of people prefer stuff produced for concerns other than art theory reasons.
But yeah, games are very much about mechanics and rules, though I think the visual presentation and other "flavour bits" are just as important to the craft.
You are right - but I also agree with Raz that a game has to be, first and foremost, playable - and this puts certain requirements on artistic expression and storytelling. It's just an inherent element of a medium - just as film storytelling or book storytelling have their own rules.
Now I am not saying that this applies to "This War of Mine", necessarily, as I haven't played it, but if a game cannot be "won" and does not have any predictable rules (even if some of them are based on random factors), then it runs a risk of being a bad game (or perhaps not a game at all) despite an artistic value or deeper thought put into it.
It may be an extreme analogy, but imagine someone made a highly artistic and profound movie, that consists only of pages of text scrolling across the screen - the message could be very deep and meaningful, but it would make a very shitty movie, nonetheless.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 22, 2014, 04:23:57 PM
Quote from: Jacob on November 22, 2014, 02:11:28 PM
But yeah, games are very much about mechanics and rules, though I think the visual presentation and other "flavour bits" are just as important to the craft.
Mechanics and rules are what you use to win or lose, the visual presentation determines how much you enjoy it. :)
I don't think that's true, as long as the graphics are functional. Look at Master of Magic, for example--it had graphics that are frankly pretty shitty, but it had great gameplay.
Functional graphics are functional, as "Meh" is functional. Beautiful graphics are beautiful, and make one happy to wake up in the morning.
And no, I won't look at Master of Magic, because you wish it.
Quote from: dps on November 22, 2014, 06:41:34 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 22, 2014, 04:23:57 PM
Quote from: Jacob on November 22, 2014, 02:11:28 PM
But yeah, games are very much about mechanics and rules, though I think the visual presentation and other "flavour bits" are just as important to the craft.
Mechanics and rules are what you use to win or lose, the visual presentation determines how much you enjoy it. :)
I don't think that's true, as long as the graphics are functional. Look at Master of Magic, for example--it had graphics that are frankly pretty shitty, but it had great gameplay.
I think of games as slightly more broadly. Not just computer games but sports, board games etc. For instance Chess. A Chess set can be very elaborate and be an objet d'art. But that isn't actually required. In fact, Chess can be played without board or pieces, simply in the minds of the two players. In this way we strip any possible art from the game, and the game still exists.
Quote from: Martinus on November 22, 2014, 06:35:36 AMFor me, generally, yes. The older I get, the less willing I am to watch movies and read books that are depressing etc. (that is why I didn't really enjoy "Brokeback Mountain" or "Philadelphia" and do not really enjoy that trope in gay-themed cinema). My choice of fiction tends towards escapism these days - so suspense/dark fantasy (but not full horror), sci fi and comedies.
In terms of books I find I'm reading classics a lot more as I get older. But I'm also far, far more tolerant of just quitting it if I'm not enjoying it. I think both are a life's too short approach I've unconsciously adopted.
With film I'm an absolute whore.
With TV I try and be picky. I generally only watch a few series now that I either love because they bring me joy - these are accidental discoveries and guilty pleasures say. Or ones that have a really big consensus of quality behind them. I love how good and interesting TV is and I entirely get the whole novel comparison. But again life's short and I don't know how many times I want to effectively watch War and Peace. It's why I love miniseries.
Again I'm quite bad at dropping out of series from sheer inertia.
QuoteIt may be an extreme analogy, but imagine someone made a highly artistic and profound movie, that consists only of pages of text scrolling across the screen - the message could be very deep and meaningful, but it would make a very shitty movie, nonetheless.
Isn't that because of the expectations you have of a movie? You put that in a cinema, even an arty one and people would probably agree with it. You put it as an installation in an exhibition and people may sit through it and say it's deep and meaningful.
So if you go to a game expecting a game with the possibility of art (that really pretty one on the PS3 springs to mind) then you'll probably have a good experience of that type of game, if you go in thinking it's an arty game so may not work in the way you expect you may also have a good, if different, experience.
Quote from: Martinus on November 22, 2014, 04:43:56 PMNow I am not saying that this applies to "This War of Mine", necessarily, as I haven't played it, but if a game cannot be "won" and does not have any predictable rules (even if some of them are based on random factors), then it runs a risk of being a bad game (or perhaps not a game at all) despite an artistic value or deeper thought put into it.
I haven't played This War of Mine myself, but I've watched a few Let's Plays, and it seems that at its core it's a survival game, not quite unlike Project Zomboid, or Don't Starve (with different mechanics of course). From a game mechanics standpoint it seems pretty standard: gather resources and manage them to your best abilities to mitigate the game's (partially random) events it throws at you. Looking for additional resources has a typical risk/reward decision (going to a more dangerous place has a chance of better loot). There is a win condition (survive till the ceasefire), but you won't know how far off it is.
The game's randomness, while present, is not out of line with other roguelikes or roguelites from what I can see - including the possibility for a very difficult or maybe even unwinnable scenarios.
What makes This War of Mine different is setting and theme, not mechanics. Its closest relative might be Gods Will Be Watching, though I haven't played that one, either.
This game is going to suck..
It turns out the game has been developed by a Polish company. Between this, Witcher and few others, Poland seems to be carving a niche for itself in gaming.
Their games reflect the grim and bleak outlook that typified Polish culture from 1795 to 1989.
Quote from: Valmy on November 26, 2014, 10:56:13 AM
Their games reflect the grim and bleak outlook that typified Polish culture from 1795 to 1989.
Yes. Poles (and, more broadly, Eastern Europeans) were emo before everybody did it. :P
It helps that Witcher is based on best selling books by a really good author.
What about "The last of us"?
Should i buy it?
Quote from: Siege on November 26, 2014, 12:21:05 PM
What about "The last of us"?
Should i buy it?
Yes. You would like it.
Quote from: Syt on November 22, 2014, 01:38:23 AM
I think that there'd be mileage in a game about running a porn actor's/actress's career, especially if you add moral questions and the darker side of the business (abuse, drug use, risk of diseases ...), and you can add poignancy e.g. when a performer's star starts to sink: what are they willing to do to themselves and on camera when the big offers stop coming in? Or when you're a young hopeful and want to impress the producers. How will your personal relationships react? Etc.
Sounds like an excellent idea for a TC mod for that wrestling manager game you've posted AARs about.
Quote from: Siege on November 26, 2014, 12:21:05 PM
What about "The last of us"?
Should i buy it?
The Last of Us is phenomenal.