Game Design Analysis - Delivering Dread 2/2

As a continuation from last week's post this week we'll be discussing the delivery of dread through subtle scenes and audio, my preferred style of horror. Unlike jump scares, creepy environments leave a much more lasting impression on players. Down the line a keyword or image can invoke a chain reaction in the mind to bring that scary scenario back to the players. Jump Scares leave players with: "A thing jumped out at me. I flinched." While carefully crafted scenes leave players with: "So there was this creepy [location]. In it was [monster] who [did nasty things]. It was awesome. I had chills." The difference clearly being that scenarios and environment leave the players with a story to accompany those scares. I'm not saying that jump scare games can't have stories, it's just that jump scares games have to rely on a different mechanic or story telling style to get across the same effect.
The notable examples being: Slenderman vs FNaF. Slendy has no story. He's just a monster and you're some guy in a bad area. Pure jump scare game. Meanwhile FNaF has an underlying story that was carefully crafted to be hidden, making players want to search it out to try and uncover it all.

I can't say one way of doing scares is better than the other, it all comes down to what type of game is being designed. But it is a simple truth that if one relies on sound and the environment to set the tone then those scenes that creeped a player out will stick with them for much longer.

---

So how does one make a scenario scary? The two different paths one can take are: visceral environments or visceral experiences. The difference between the two is that in environments players are lead through the scares, while experiences are discovered naturally by the player. These two different paths are also not exclusive so the experiences can be combined with the environment; in fact, experiences are usually enhanced by a quality environment.

Spooky vs Not Quite as Spooky

Visceral Environments are any type of scene that is disturbing or spooky to the players. Instead of having a monster right off the bat this type of horror relies on the fear of the unknown. In this desolate decrepit castle is there vampires, a bundle of corpses sewn together or vengeful ghosts? We're literally in Hell, what will we find here; demons, sinners, a racist grandma?! The player will only know if they progress through the environment. Games that focus on a slow drawn-out environment and storyline usually take forever to actually show the monster to the players. It's always just a passing shadow or ominous rumor, only truly being revealed at the apex of the story when the tension is at its highest and the player has learned all they need to regarding the lore.
A good example of this style is the Amnesia games. The character wakes up in a castle with no memory, then must progress ever downward to find the truth, and the monster doesn't even appear until a decent way into the game. The entire time before the monster even shows up is littered with some exposition flashbacks topped with the occasional jumpscare to keep the player nervous.

Visceral Experiences are quite similar to environments except that it is more on the player to discover the horror. What that means is that there has to be aspects in the environment that keen eyed players can notice without it being directly revealed to them in a "ta-da, here's this thing" moment. The proper way to do this is with subtlety and having faith that your players will find what you want them to find. It could be as simple as corpses but something is off with them, just odd enough that the player knows that something weird happened. The player should always feel that there's something else going on underneath the surface.
The example I use for this one is from SOMA (another Frictional Games game, huh... I promise this isn't sponsored) and it is also one of my favorites. So you're walking along all alone through this strange facility, you've seen a couple spooky monsters and had your fair share of this environment, then you start coming across headless corpses. Odd, right? Well time to explore and find out why there is some headless corpses. After a bit you come back and... One of the corpses has been moved. Not far, but it has definitely been moved. The problem is that you were gone from this room for maybe thirty seconds and there was no way a monster got past you to do that. Were you hallucinating, was it actually always there? Did the headless corpse move on its own? Or even worse, is there actually a monster that somehow did this and are they still nearby?

Happy Spookin' Gamers!

Game Design Analysis - Delivering Dread 1/2

Before we begin; yes, this is a obligatory spooky post for October.

Oooooh, so spooky!

This will be part one of a two part analysis on the sense of fear and dread in video games. This post will focus on delivering dread through frightening visages and 'jump scares'; with the following post focusing more on the dread caused by subtle scenarios and audio.

Both posts will talk about scares that happen in popular video games, so [Scare Spoilers Ahead]? However no story will be discussed, so you're safe there.

---

So the first thing that comes to most people's minds when you begin discussing scary games is horrifying sights, usually accompanied by sudden loud noises. These are affectionately(?) referred to as 'Jump Scares".

Jump Scare Simulator... Now please flinch.

The most notable games that use jump scares is the Slenderman Games and the Five Nights at Freddy's franchise; both of which are games that all gamers probably know about, willingly or not, and both of which are/were pretty popular. The main draw of these jump scare type games is the sudden shock each player experiences (usually when they die...). Every time those monsters jumps out of the darkness the players experience a rush, that shock and brief moment of panic. Those moments are what most players want to feel, and what most player want to overcome to succeed. It is akin to a right of passage. You came, you saw, you flinched and you finally succeeded in overcoming the shock to win the game. To be a successful mechanic jump scares have to be spread out or unpredictable enough that the player can never expect when the next one will come. In Five Nights at Freddy's this is the moment when players check on the doors and peer out into the darkness. While staring out into the darkness the players have to pause and make a sudden decision that will decide if they live or die and the wrong choice ends with a, sometimes adorable, animatronic ripping you to pieces.

While the shock tactics of jump scares are common place and most known by gamers they are also leave little impact overall. After the initial flinch and a second or two to collect oneself there isn't a lasting feeling of dread. One spike in adrenaline and then that's it. If jump scares are too common place in a game then they also become a nuisance more than a frightening mechanic. So there is a fine line that one must ride when crafting a shocking experience.

State Machine AI

State machines are the easiest of all AI's to program. They are simple but that also makes their 'intelligence' simple. In a sense they are just glorified switch statements that get told what type of responses they have and then check versus whatever input they receive.

Now lets talk about state machines in a much less abstract form!
What you need to begin is a variable that keeps track of what state the AI is currently in. I prefer an Enum since you can name each state with a unique title, but you could also simply use an Int so long as you can keep track of which state is which number.
Next you have to set up a hierarchy or tree that your AI will check against to tell it what state it should be in. This hierarchy is one way to help define how 'smart' your AI is and how complex its actions are. For ease of an example lets say we're building an AI for capture the flag.

Something like this. Or something much, much bigger. Your choice.

Finally you need to simply set up a switch statement in the AI's update that checks against whichever state it is in and then provide the adequate response.
And that's it. State machine AI's are pretty simple and fun to make (at least I think so).
---
Now for some example code!

void AIUpdate()
{
    CurrentAIState = CheckDemStates();
    
    switch(CurrentAIState)
    {
        case AIState.Attacker:
            //Seek out the flag
            break;
        case AIState.Defender:
            //Cover our flag
            break;
        case AIState.Rescuer:
            //ZOMG, get our flag back!
            break;
    }
}
 
AIState CheckDemStates()
{
    if(//they got the flag)
    {
        if(//Rescuers > X)
        {
            return AIState.Attacker;
        }
        else
        {
            if(//Other teammates are closer)
            {
                return AIState.Attacker;
            }
            else
            {
                return AIState.Rescuer;
            }
        }
    }
    else
    {
        if(//Defenders > X)
        {
            return AIState.Attacker;
        }
        else
        {
            return AIState.Defender;
        }
    }
}

Game Design Analysis - Dungeons and Dragon's Concentration Mechanic

To begin, allow me to give a proper explanation of how Concentration works in DnD. I'll be talking about it in from a 5th Edition standpoint but older editions that have Concentration work much the same, the only real difference is that Concentration used to be a Skill where it is now just a Constitution Saving Throw (ergo, the heartier you are the more damage you can take while focusing on your spells).

Muscle Wizards are actually kind of a thing...

So imagine Concentration Spells as if they are tagged with a "Unique" modifier. What that means in game terms is that there can only be one instance of a Concentration spell at a time. So for example say you cast one spell that required Concentration, in order to cast another spell that had Concentration you'd have to cancel/abandon your first Concentration spell.

*Mana not always located in the knees*

If a player also takes damage while Concentrating on a spell then they must make a Constitution Save versus 10 or half the damage you take (whichever is higher). If they fail that save then they lose the spell they're concentrating on. That means if a player is flying high up and they take an arrow to the face they'd better hope they pass that save.

Avoid having this happen

There are some other cases that a DM might require a Constitution Save to maintain spells, however that depends on how 'hardcore' your specific DM wishes to play. Some may only call for it on receiving damage while others may call for it during any stressful/difficult situation, such as while riding on a crazy uncontrolled careening cart or during a oceanic adventure and your character is sea-sick.

---

Mechanical Analysis:
I believe this 'Unique' Concentration system was implemented due to the previous editions' buff mode. What I mean by that is previous editions didn't require Concentration for most buff spells (+AC, +Ability Score, etc) so most fights would start with the Wizard and Cleric buffing everyone to god status and fights would turn into a game of rocket tag (read as: everyone so crazy buffed that the first one to land an attack usually OH-KO's the other). Therefore Concentration was revised to make it so only one of the very useful buff/utility spells can be used at a time.
This change to Concentration makes it so casters can offer up a more unique answer to situations. Certain scenarios may call for Ability Score buffs or maybe something as simple as the ability to fly. With these scenarios smart players can feel like they always have an answer or a mechanic to add to the fight that will tilt things in their favor, but there-in also lies a drawback.

For Arcane casters they would have to go around and gather/memorize all these utility spells and for Divine casters they have to prep their spells ahead of time, so players may fight it difficult or annoying to plan for these situations unless the DM provides them with a pretty obvious clue about what's going to happen. The players have to be creative with the spells they have.
The other main drawback that many players express when looking at Concentration is that it seems too easy to break Concentration (hell, there's even a feat for doing exactly that called Mage Slayer). While I agree that is has become significantly easier to break Concentration, I think that it is a fair balance for casters. In previous editions past level 10 or so with straight casters (like Wizards) get incredibly strong, practically gods compared to the more martial way of fighting (ergo sharp/pointy/bludgeony things).

*Just a rough example, not a perfect demonstration*

Now, with Concentration, Wizards aren't these almighty figures and it brings them down to level with the other classes. They are still powerful but they have to play around certain opponents as well as planning out their spells and that makes combat actually interesting for casters. Instead of holding a person in place magically and flying off while peppering them with fireballs they have to choose between flying or locking them in place before raining the fire.... When talking about it like that it still seems powerful but I promise you it is better to add these limitations to prevent reality warping magic gods from running amok.

Lore Analysis:
In the end Concentration offers up a level of realism that would come with casting magic (I like to think that magic is similar to programming!). Imagine with me for a moment that you're a powerful Wizard and you wish to fly you and your allies up a cliff. Each turn you must mentally keep track of where your allies are in space so your spell can keep them aloft, as well as automatically moving everyone along with the world's rotation (lest your party suddenly become a Mach-1 bullet through the nearby village). That's a lot of math and variables to keep track of. So if you were up there in the sky doing advanced mathematics and some jerk blasts you in the chest with an arrow you may slip up with some of those numbers. And all of that example is just for the spell Fly.

As a DM it is a good exercise in imaginative thinking if you put yourself into the role of a Wizard and figure out why some of these spells have the Concentration tag attached to them. The answer could be as simple as applying an equal force in the exact opposite direction to the force being used in attempting to move (Hold Person); or as complex as stimulating every cell in another adventurer's body to induce a higher state of regeneration or enhancing the spine to increase reaction time and reflexes (Enhance Ability). Simple stuff, right?

Directional Hit Detection with Dot Products

Note: Before proceeding with this article, please make sure you have a basic understanding of Dot products as I will not be covering them in this post. That may be a topic for a future article. :)

To begin lets say that you have two objects; one doing the shooting and one being shot. We'll call them Gun (Shooting) and Enemy (Being Shot).

Since all of the math will be calculated around the Enemy we'll first need to get the Vector3 from the Enemy to the Gun, which can be done by taking the Enemy's position and subtracting the Gun's position (Enemy.position - Gun.position). We'll call this variable the Direction Vector

Next we'll have to calculate the Dot product of the Direction Vector around the the Enemy's Forward and Right Vectors. Doing so we can get some values which will help determine which 'quadrant' the Direction Vector is in, which can be used as a basic direction. For convenience I usually put these values into a Vector2, the X being the "Front-Back" value and the Y being the "Left-Right" value.

Now to explain what these numbers actually mean; you may have already guessed what they stand for because of my Front-Back-Left-Right names. So if the X (Front-Back) value is positive that means it is pointing in the same direction as the Enemy's forward, thus it is being hit from in front. And if it is negative then the Enemy is being hit from behind. Similarly, the Y (Left-Right) value works the same; with Right being positive and Left being negative.
Finally just compare the absolute value of the two values (X & Y) and the bigger value is the one that is closer to the point of impact on the Enemy.

Following this article should get you to detect collisions on the cardinal directions (Front, Back, Left & Right). However this can also be taken further to provide omni-directional detection by checking the corner cases. It should be noted that this method only works on 2D collisions, as there is no code to check for shots from above or shots from below (however is some cases those could be considered your Front-Back depending on the type of game being coded).
The following will be some example code; it should be noted that I am generalizing a Dot Product and Absolute Value functions so you'll have to make those yourselves, the first parameter for the Dot Function is the Vector we want to Dot towards and the second parameter is the Vector that we're getting from the Gun (the Direction Vector).

---

Vector3 directionVec = Enemy.Position - Gun.Position;

Vector2 dotVec = new Vector2(/*Front-Back Value*/Vec3Dot(Enemy.transform.forward, directionVec),

                                /*Left-Right Value*/Vec3Dot(Enemy.transform.right, directionVec));

//Front-Back value is greater than Left-Right value

if(AbsVal(dotVec.x) > AbsVal(dotVec.y))

{

//Front

if(dotVec.x > 0)

{

//Shot from the Front

}

      //Back

else

{

//Shot from the Back

}

}

//Left-Right value is greater than Front-Back

else

{

//Right

if(dotVec.y > 0)

{

//Shot from the Right

}

//Left

else

{

//Shot from the Left

}

}