Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Death animations/Death moans/Blood loss/Gore in general.


  • Please log in to reply
51 replies to this topic

#1 lazerBAR

lazerBAR

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 72 posts

Posted 20 April 2013 - 02:32 AM

One of my favorite things in HoS was that it finally added blood loss(which is a pretty realistic feature than getting shot and moving in slow motion), as well as the ability to bandage up(which did make sense to do it the way they did, since you wont really be able to have medics in the middle of a battlefield). The animation for bleeding out was nice too(inb4"omgbutdeyshootyouwhilebleedinunrealistic!!" no, because you do have control of your body while you are bleeding, you aren't incapacitated right away). Though there's a lot that can be improved from this as well. Death moans really helped immerse myself into the game, shooting a Russian in the stomach and hearing him scream and grabbing his stomach on the floor, or a hall filled with Russians that just got mowed down by a mg-34 crying in a horrific choir. The gore should also be horrific and realistic. For example, getting shot in the head should(depending by what weapon was used on you) should be blown open or face shot off(eyes hanging out,torn face,burn mark,everything above jaw blown off, again depending on which angle and by what you are hit by). Of course limbs should be able to be blown off like in most games, but again this can be improved, for example, make it so a rifle bullet if it hits you in the hand might blow off one of your fingers and your gun out your hands.(maybe even let limbs be half severed by certain weapons like rifle rounds shooting your elbow off.) I think guts would be possible but hard to implement, seeing how they would need physics to pour out the stomach. The gore for grenades should be as in RO1, bullets and bombs and grenades can affect corpses. Just my suggestion to help the game be more immersive. Though I should tell everyone, gore isn't the only thing that can immerse, but it sure as hell helps! I think it helps make the game a lot less glorifying war too. Discuss.

#2 Masterson

Masterson

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 374 posts

Posted 20 April 2013 - 06:07 PM

It was unrealistic mainly not because you could patch yourself up due to a small grazing shot (which should still be incapacitating), it was unrealistic because you could take a burst of MP44 or PPSH to the chest and bandage yourself quicker than the other guy can reload before you pop him in the face.
Posted Image

#3 lazerBAR

lazerBAR

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 72 posts

Posted 20 April 2013 - 10:02 PM

Dont know how long it was since you played, but they lengthened the time it takes to bandage yourself, also whenever I take shots to the chest I usually bleed out immediately or just die. Im just saying it can be improved even more in FE. Yes I agree being shot by a rifle round in the leg should kill you (which it does in RO2). But I don't think getting grazed by smg rounds should make you incapacitated, unless your the kind of person that cant take any pain at all. Heres how I see it should be, Rifle round/smg round+stomach or waist=incapacitated/death, Rifle/smg round+direct leg hit or arm=death ingame(aka incapacitated), etc. Another nice thing to see is if you are grazed in the leg or hurt badly, to go immediately to prone like in DH.

#4 Father Ted

Father Ted

    Veteran

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 526 posts

Posted 20 April 2013 - 11:23 PM

The bandaging thing in RO2 is just too gamey for me. You get the chance to bandage a wound before you bleed out. If the wound is that severe, then slapping a bandage on it is not going to fix you so that you can carry on as if nothing had happened. Conversely, if the wound is a graze - which could conceivably be treated in such a fashion - then there wouldn't be the need to get the bandage on quick before you bleed out. So it's just something which adds to the tension in gameplay

Any sort of "health regeneration" does not really have a place in any game which strives for realism. If your wound is bad enough to affect your movement, then, in most cases, you're out of the fight. If it is not that severe, then you don't need medical intervention, so why bother putting it in the game?
  • Petroskoijari likes this

#5 jefaus

jefaus

    Senior Member

  • Sponsor
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 263 posts

Posted 21 April 2013 - 12:18 AM

I still think that wounded troops add a significant tactical aspect to the game. Returning wounded soldiers to secure positions should add to the reinforcement pool for the Side
and give another reason why a section/squad would want to withdraw from an engagement and regroup.

Without some sort of advantage for looking after the wounded, tending to the wounded, we give less importance to "staying alive". We have to give players pretty strong reasoning,
or players will continue the usual unrealistic behaviour of fighting while wounded, and for Sections and Squads to keep on fighting beyond their logical organizational and psychological
abilities to withstand.
--- The Killer of Threads! ---

For whoever habitually suppresses the truth in the interests of tact will produce a deformity from the womb of his thought. - B.H. Liddell Hart

#6 lazerBAR

lazerBAR

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 72 posts

Posted 21 April 2013 - 01:34 AM

The bandaging thing in RO2 is just too gamey for me. You get the chance to bandage a wound before you bleed out. If the wound is that severe, then slapping a bandage on it is not going to fix you so that you can carry on as if nothing had happened. Conversely, if the wound is a graze - which could conceivably be treated in such a fashion - then there wouldn't be the need to get the bandage on quick before you bleed out. So it's just something which adds to the tension in gameplay Any sort of "health regeneration" does not really have a place in any game which strives for realism. If your wound is bad enough to affect your movement, then, in most cases, you're out of the fight. If it is not that severe, then you don't need medical intervention, so why bother putting it in the game?

How is it health regeneration? You never regain any health after bandaging, you simply stop the bleeding and you are even weaker actually. I think FE can improve upon this aspect pretty well, I mean if bandaging isn't realistic during battle, why do I see it most of the time in Arma(a mil sim). I think its better than having medics running around who'd just be shot by some dick sniper whenever they are trying to help, and besides no one would want to play that class really(unless you are trying to think this game will be a super complicated mil sim like Arma). Adding features like making your aim turn all f'd after you had one of your fingers shot off, or maybe even making it so even if you are bandaged you must be careful and not put stress on it or it might bleed again even more. This makes players value their lives much more by showing them how fragile they really are, along with long respawn times and large maps where you will probably be walking a lot, would help so much in immersion.

#7 Kashash

Kashash

    Senior Member

  • Festung Europa Tester
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 362 posts

Posted 21 April 2013 - 09:50 AM

I don't think any of the regeneration and quick return to battle has a place in FE. But, maybe something of jefaus idea though, as long as the troops that have been wounded they're not capable to fight anymore but all they can do is exit to the spawn zone and thus increase team's reinforcements pool so therefore, the opposing team will have a higher interest in preventing your troops from exiting battle to gain reinforcement points. It would make players wanting to stay alive more as well as adding some tactical element to the game. As long as they can't come back to combat but only can contribute to reinforcements pool by exiting off map edge it might be considered, but any of the RO2 where you bandage yourself and continue to fight is sooo gamey. It reminds me almost of Wolfenstein:Enemy Territory goofiness.

#8 lazerBAR

lazerBAR

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 72 posts

Posted 21 April 2013 - 08:11 PM

I hear you man, I do think srsly wounded/just wounded soldiers should be outta the fight, but I don't think that system will work well after a while. You'll have the enemy shooting twice all the time to make sure they are all dead. This would be against the Geneva convention wouldn't it? Can it work for gameplay? Relying on one of those medics that actually cares to take care of wounded teammates can really suck too, especially if they leave the match, it would make things very tedious as well.

#9 The_Walrus

The_Walrus

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 50 posts

Posted 21 April 2013 - 09:32 PM

It's against the Geneva convention but it happened anyway.

#10 lazerBAR

lazerBAR

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 72 posts

Posted 22 April 2013 - 02:17 AM

I'm aware, I was just joking.

#11 Father Ted

Father Ted

    Veteran

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 526 posts

Posted 22 April 2013 - 09:14 PM

I still think that wounded troops add a significant tactical aspect to the game. Returning wounded soldiers to secure positions should add to the reinforcement pool for the Side
and give another reason why a section/squad would want to withdraw from an engagement and regroup.

Without some sort of advantage for looking after the wounded, tending to the wounded, we give less importance to "staying alive". We have to give players pretty strong reasoning,
or players will continue the usual unrealistic behaviour of fighting while wounded, and for Sections and Squads to keep on fighting beyond their logical organizational and psychological
abilities to withstand.


I think you're absolutely right in that videogames do not model being wounded at all realistically, either from a personal point of view, or a team point of view. If you've ever seen one of those "helmet cam" documentaries about troops in Afghanistan, you'll know that when someone gets hit, all the squad's effort goes into getting them safe. It may not have been the same in WW2, but there must have been some level of helping comrades. It has been said that the most effective weapons injure rather than kill opponents, since an injured man takes two or three able ones back with him to the aid station, whereas the dead one is dealt with later.

This is a major feature of warfare (like surrendering) which never features in videogames. Why? Because it's boring to play. No one really wants to be a medic, and certainly no one wants to spend their gaming time lying around waiting to be carried off the battlefield, so that they can be respawned - better to die straightaway. Also, unfortunately, I don't think that there is enough team spirit in casual play to rely on players rescuing the wounded so that the team benefits.

If we want to make being wounded a bigger part of the game, I would give those who help a buddy a personal bonus, like an extra life. Everyone starts with, say, five lives, and gains extras for bandaging. Meanwhile, the "injured" guy is actually "dead" and respawns.

So it works like this: you're running across a street when a round from a 30 cal slams into your thigh. You're spun round and knocked to the floor behind a pile of rubble. The world greys out and you "die". Across the street, your teammate witnesses this but he sees you writhing in agony and hears cries for help (although you are no longer there - he's watching an animation). He judges that he can get to you without being hit himself and sprints over, goes prone and uses the "action" key to apply morphine and a bandage. This takes 20s or so (not realistic, I know, but 20s is a long time to be doing nothing in game). Once he is successful, he gets a - kerrr-ching - extra life.

Effectively the player has saved a life (actually his own) for the team from this action, but the player is doing it for his own benefit, so, IMHO, he is more likely to do it. I'm hoping that what you would see would be people stopping to help buddies (you could even make it like capping, so that if three people did it, it would only take 6 secs). If you incorporated this in to a general "lives for deeds scheme" (bonus lives for capping, resupplying and so on), then we'd get people having to decide whether to push for the cap or stop to help a buddy.

Edited by Father Ted, 22 April 2013 - 09:22 PM.


#12 FuriousBystander

FuriousBystander

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 924 posts

Posted 22 April 2013 - 10:27 PM

Really great thread guys. Father Ted, I like your idea quite a bit. I'm always going on about risk vs reward in the game. If you want people to behave in a somewhat realistic fashion, especially in pub type games, you have to incentivise that behaviour. The only word of caution, I think is that you have to use reasonable levels of reinforcements on the levels. Far too often in DH, we saw these huge reinforcement pools that made dying rather meaningless, which incentivises ridiculous run and gun, and rambo type behaviour (suicide grenaders, etc). The round more often than not ended due to a timer running out or objectives being capped - almost NEVER by depleting the other side's strength. I hope that changes in FE.


Posted Image


#13 Hans Ludwig

Hans Ludwig

    Elite Veteran

  • Jackboot Games
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,844 posts

Posted 22 April 2013 - 11:02 PM

No one really wants to be a medic, and certainly no one wants to spend their gaming time lying around waiting to be carried off the battlefield, so that they can be respawned - better to die straightaway. Also, unfortunately, I don't think that there is enough team spirit in casual play to rely on players rescuing the wounded so that the team benefits.


I don't know about that. The medic class is the most asked about class in just about every game. If it were boring to play, then why do so many people play that class in PS2? Why do some gamers drive a repair/ammo truck for an entire hour in WWIIONLINE? Why do gamers fly helos for an entire mission doing nothing but moving troops to landing zone to landing zone in Arma2? Why would anyone walk around for hours in Day Z looking for a can of beans?

I don't know about others, but I like supplying ammo in PS2. It makes me feel that I'm doing an important task to help move us forward and liberate the universe from the scourge known as the Terrain Republic.

The moral of the story (if there is one) is that what is boring to one person isn't necessarily boring to another person.

#14 Rico

Rico

    Member

  • Festung Europa Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 180 posts

Posted 22 April 2013 - 11:14 PM

If we want to make being wounded a bigger part of the game, I would give those who help a buddy a personal bonus, like an extra life. Everyone starts with, say, five lives, and gains extras for bandaging. Meanwhile, the "injured" guy is actually "dead" and respawns.

So it works like this: you're running across a street when a round from a 30 cal slams into your thigh. You're spun round and knocked to the floor behind a pile of rubble. The world greys out and you "die". Across the street, your teammate witnesses this but he sees you writhing in agony and hears cries for help (although you are no longer there - he's watching an animation). He judges that he can get to you without being hit himself and sprints over, goes prone and uses the "action" key to apply morphine and a bandage. This takes 20s or so (not realistic, I know, but 20s is a long time to be doing nothing in game). Once he is successful, he gets a - kerrr-ching - extra life.

Effectively the player has saved a life (actually his own) for the team from this action, but the player is doing it for his own benefit, so, IMHO, he is more likely to do it. I'm hoping that what you would see would be people stopping to help buddies (you could even make it like capping, so that if three people did it, it would only take 6 secs). If you incorporated this in to a general "lives for deeds scheme" (bonus lives for capping, resupplying and so on), then we'd get people having to decide whether to push for the cap or stop to help a buddy.


I personally like the general direction of this idea - group benefit for selfish actions! Lets face it, this is the most promising kind of mechanism that would promote teamwork on public servers.

Also I like the idea of bots taking over / animations playing out thus covering "menial gameplay tasks" while the actual human player has already left the scene and waits in limbo for his respawn - it adds immersion and opens possibilities for interaction. A similar idea floating around here I liked was that of injured tank crews bailing out and then dying, while the actual players already left for respawn.

#15 lazerBAR

lazerBAR

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 72 posts

Posted 22 April 2013 - 11:27 PM

Father Ted has brought the best idea to the table so far! I really like the certain amount of lives for each player system. Would definitely increase players wanting to value their lives. As for the death animations, I think they should use the same system in RO2 with the animated ragdoll grabbing their chest,stomach,neck,groin, that way when they are dying they bump against walls or chairs and actually interact with the environment around them, instead of some lame animation. It would be much more realistic to see. I'd also like to be able to shoot them or "put them outta their misery". Hans brings a good point, there are plenty of people who like helping teammates, but it would be too tedious really as I said before, they would be the main targets by every player, and I'm pretty sure irl they weren't allowed to shoot medics, that is, unless your Japanese. Not to mention most pubbies wouldn't want to wait a good while to get picked up. Another good feature to add to the game is being able to prop yourself on top of a live grenade to help your teammates. btw are the devs going to use professional voice actors?

#16 Rico

Rico

    Member

  • Festung Europa Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 180 posts

Posted 23 April 2013 - 12:17 AM

btw are the devs going to use professional voice actors?


Define professional - the guy doing the voice commands is listening.

#17 lazerBAR

lazerBAR

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 72 posts

Posted 23 April 2013 - 03:18 AM

Well, do you guys have more than 1 guy doing voice commands for the factions? Also will you have actual German people doing the German voice commands?

#18 Rico

Rico

    Member

  • Festung Europa Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 180 posts

Posted 23 April 2013 - 10:58 AM

Well, do you guys have more than 1 guy doing voice commands for the factions? Also will you have actual German people doing the German voice commands?

Yes and yes.
We plan on having several voice actors per faction for variation, native speakers only.

#19 Masterson

Masterson

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 374 posts

Posted 23 April 2013 - 06:40 PM

I don't know about that. The medic class is the most asked about class in just about every game. If it were boring to play, then why do so many people play that class in PS2? Why do some gamers drive a repair/ammo truck for an entire hour in WWIIONLINE? Why do gamers fly helos for an entire mission doing nothing but moving troops to landing zone to landing zone in Arma2? Why would anyone walk around for hours in Day Z looking for a can of beans?

I don't know about others, but I like supplying ammo in PS2. It makes me feel that I'm doing an important task to help move us forward and liberate the universe from the scourge known as the Terrain Republic.

The moral of the story (if there is one) is that what is boring to one person isn't necessarily boring to another person.


It is the most talked about because it is really easy to farm whatever experience points the game offers. In Battlefield and Planetside the medic can also heal themselves...so if you are one of the million players who does not bother joining a clan and cannot rely on a teammate to heal you, you can do it yourself. Reviving someone in those games is also incredibly easy. Most players are either oblivious or don't know how to heal or give ammo. Plenty of times in Battlefield 2 I would jump in circles around a Support mashing the 'need ammo request' key and player wouldn't notice. However, we are talking about a realistic interpretation, not a gamey 'front line medics carry around defibrillators which instantly cure you of a .50 caliber round to the face' kind of medic.

Games like Battlefield and Planetside try and simulate large combat by making logistical complications like getting ammo, healing, and which territory to capture very simple so players can get right into the action. Need a resupply in PS2? go to one of those large ammo towers and wait 5 seconds. Need a heal? Find a medic for a 5-second fix. Not sure of a strategic location to attack? Look at the map and see which letter in which hexagon is covered in sparkling colors to indicating enemies. The price of all this is that the action is very gamey; attacks are generally done by massive head-on tank and air rushes without thinking twice about tactics or strategy (simply overwhelm your enemy), and combat usually bogs down to a few key points (Bio/Tech/Amp Plants) which turn into "Call of Duty"-like grindfests.
Posted Image

#20 Father Ted

Father Ted

    Veteran

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 526 posts

Posted 23 April 2013 - 10:25 PM

It is the most talked about because it is really easy to farm whatever experience points the game offers. In Battlefield and Planetside the medic can also heal themselves...so if you are one of the million players who does not bother joining a clan and cannot rely on a teammate to heal you, you can do it yourself. Reviving someone in those games is also incredibly easy. Most players are either oblivious or don't know how to heal or give ammo. Plenty of times in Battlefield 2 I would jump in circles around a Support mashing the 'need ammo request' key and player wouldn't notice. However, we are talking about a realistic interpretation, not a gamey 'front line medics carry around defibrillators which instantly cure you of a .50 caliber round to the face' kind of medic.

Games like Battlefield and Planetside try and simulate large combat by making logistical complications like getting ammo, healing, and which territory to capture very simple so players can get right into the action. Need a resupply in PS2? go to one of those large ammo towers and wait 5 seconds. Need a heal? Find a medic for a 5-second fix. Not sure of a strategic location to attack? Look at the map and see which letter in which hexagon is covered in sparkling colors to indicating enemies. The price of all this is that the action is very gamey; attacks are generally done by massive head-on tank and air rushes without thinking twice about tactics or strategy (simply overwhelm your enemy), and combat usually bogs down to a few key points (Bio/Tech/Amp Plants) which turn into "Call of Duty"-like grindfests.


I actually enjoy a bit of PS2, but it can get away with a lot of those gameplay smoothing features that Masterson mentions because it's science fiction. You can justify the presence of teleports, insta-healing and repairing and so on, because it doesn't have to try to be real. Of course we will have sci-fi elements in FE, but we want them dressed up so that if we squint a bit it could be WW2. Each of us will have a limit as to how far that envelope can be pushed. For instance I'm happy to accept MDVs (aka Sunderer) as a non-realistic aid to gameplay in FE, but not instant recovery and/or slight incapacity from serious wounds.

Also the thing about the support classes in PS2 (I've not played BF), and people wanting to play them is that they can take part in shooting people as well supporting. As I understand it (from BoB at least), medics were generally non-combatants in WW2, which is why I didn't think they'd get played much beyond a go out of curiosity in this setting. I'm also quite confident that we won't see XP and leveling-up in FE, which, as Masterson says, is one of the things which drive people on to do anything other than shoot other people in PS2.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users