[quote name='truant' timestamp='1325956093' post='4900373']
To illustrate the problem I'm having: in a SH game, the emphasis is placed on restricting the player, confining his movements, and chipping away at him gradually as supplies become more scarce. In a RPG, the emphasis is placed on providing the player with more and more freedom and confidence. If I allow a character in a SH game to improve themselves by increasing stats, the tension dissipates. In a RPG, if I don't allow the character to improve themselves by increasing stats...well, it's not a RPG.

You might give your character increased power and a feeling of "freedom and confidence" only relative to some specific kind of adventurous things to do, while at the same time threatening him and "chipping away" from another side.
For example, imagine Dracula with a more prepared Jonathan Harker who has something to steal from the vampire (maybe deeds and treasures from his vault or secret books and diaries from his library): as successful and competent as he might be on this RPG front, his chances of escaping his host and returning home alive on the SH front remain very small.

In general, if you add constraints (two different "feelings" at the same time), feeling constrained (complex and careful compromises are unavoidable) should be expected.
[/quote]
Actually, that's a pretty good example. I used almost the same argument in the Skyrim forum for people who think that improving things like pickpocketing and lockpicking shouldn't count toward character progression (and make enemies stronger) because they didn't make the player character stronger (in a combat sense). My argument was that if these things gave the character more confidence and greater ability to complete these stealth-oriented tasks, you have to up the ante (in terms of enemy strength) in order to keep these activities interesting and exciting. Stealing from peasants is fine on level 1, but boring on level 20. Now, stealing from powerful vampires is another matter all together.

Thanks, that's given me something to think about.

Okay, I think you guys all have me beat in the ambition department.

I'm finding even combining these two genres (survival horror and RPG) very difficult. Dead Island does this, of course, but it doesn't have the kind of feel I'm going for. It definitely leans toward the action genre and away from horror.

To illustrate the problem I'm having: in a SH game, the emphasis is placed on restricting the player, confining his movements, and chipping away at him gradually as supplies become more scarce. In a RPG, the emphasis is placed on providing the player with more and more freedom and confidence. If I allow a character in a SH game to improve themselves by increasing stats, the tension dissipates. In a RPG, if I don't allow the character to improve themselves by increasing stats...well, it's not a RPG.

Don't you find any of the elements in these different genres just fundamentally incompatible? Do you ever have to change your initial goal to accommodate these kinds of design challenges? Do you ever have to drop features, not because you're out of time, but because it just can't be adapted?

Maybe the issue isn't mechanical incompatibility, but just incompatible moods or tones. Maybe all the mechanics will work together just fine but they will then define the tone of the game for you, sort of taking it out of your hands.

I can definitely see the problem. What type of game are we speaking? Linear or Open world? If you make it linear then it's naturally more like an adventure game. Adding stats and dialouges, adds rpg elements, but I believe that a true rpg needs a fair degree of freedom (my own use of the term rpg which I belive is more true to the word "roleplaying").
How to combine them? I would not have constant horror.

Imagine a medieval world. You start of as a nobody, and also a very weak and frail person. Even a farmer's wife or a teenage bully would beat you. On the other end of the scala you have knights. Rich, influential, nearly impenetrable armor, extremely good fighters and popular with women. They are demigods among commoners. They could have slightly supernatural abilities (lean, yet stronger than the most bulky of guys, faster reaction, superior vision, etc).
Paralell to this, there is another danger. Something that can take any man just as easy. A knight is no more safe than any other man. The game would focus on your rise to power as you eventually gain knight like abilities. Less frail against other men, yet just as frail against this danger. Because you are so strong, you will feel even weaker when faced with this supernatural danger.

What this "danger" is, I dunno. Key thing is that you have the normal world where you can advance. This normal world is plagued by something else, which takes life regardless of what armor you're wearing. You need to feel weak in the face of this. Who will feel weakest against this? The knight or the farmer?

To illustrate the problem I'm having: in a SH game, the emphasis is placed on restricting the player, confining his movements, and chipping away at him gradually as supplies become more scarce. In a RPG, the emphasis is placed on providing the player with more and more freedom and confidence. If I allow a character in a SH game to improve themselves by increasing stats, the tension dissipates. In a RPG, if I don't allow the character to improve themselves by increasing stats...well, it's not a RPG.

Don't you find any of the elements in these different genres just fundamentally incompatible? Do you ever have to change your initial goal to accommodate these kinds of design challenges? Do you ever have to drop features, not because you're out of time, but because it just can't be adapted?

This makes me wonder what kind of RPG you are thinking of. Lots of RPGs have horror elements - Parasite Eve is the first one that springs to mind, just because I dislike horror so I will normally avoid playing games that are clearly going to have a horror feel. So I don't actually know how much of an RPG things like Silent Hill are, or how much horror atmosphere games like Persona generate. But even the Final Fantasy series has plenty of horror-ish mini segments within each game. But basically, single player RPGs in general have plenty of tension because the monsters' stats go up as fast as yours do. You also often can't control the rate at which monsters come out, and there may be an endurance challange as you try to make it to the next save spot without runnin out of health or mp or other resources.

I can definitely see the problem. What type of game are we speaking? Linear or Open world? If you make it linear then it's naturally more like an adventure game. Adding stats and dialouges, adds rpg elements, but I believe that a true rpg needs a fair degree of freedom (my own use of the term rpg which I belive is more true to the word "roleplaying").
How to combine them? I would not have constant horror...

This makes me wonder what kind of RPG you are thinking of. Lots of RPGs have horror elements...

Actually the linear/open world issue highlights another one of these conflicting areas. Most SH games are very linear. Most RPGs are open. Having your movement constricted increases tension; you can feel yourself being funneled toward something you don't want to face. In an open world RPG, you can usually just turn around and walk away if you're not ready for a challenge.

The design that inspired this thread is based on a modern setting. (Or, alternately, an early 20th century setting a la Lovecraft.) I have another project that is a fantasy/horror RPG, though. In the case of this latter project, it's essentially just a fantasy RPG with a lot of horror elements. For the modern horror RPG, I'm trying to capture the mood of SH titles like Silent Hill and Siren where the player always feels vulnerable and isolated, just an ordinary man in an extremely dangerous environment. Think 28 Days Later. In a way, it's also a kind of stealth game with puzzles. Most of the enemies can't be defeated directly, but the player can figure out strategies to deal with them, either by sneaking around them, creating distractions, getting enemies to fight each other, setting up environmental traps, improvising weapons, barricading doors behind them, etc. There would be safe places the player could stay, but eventually supplies will run out and the player will be forced to move again.

Isn't everyone making "game of genre X with influences of genre Y"? Genre mixing is so cliche right now that not doing it would make you stand out more .

I'm not sure how cliche it is, however, I predict that Future Games will provide game worlds in which several genres co-exist with multiple client interfaces (that caters to a particular genre). Role-Players will play Game X as a 3rd Person RPG. Strategist will play Game X as a Top Down RTS. People who enjoy blowing things effing up with BFGs will play Game X as a FPS.

Click Me

I've certainly played lots of linear RPGs. I believe the western ones descended from tabletoppers like D&D are more commonly non-linear, but the japanese ones influenced by visual novels and platformers are more commonly linear. I'm a jRPG fan because I think the linear story-heavy format provides a superior gameplay experience, but that's just a matter of personal taste.

I'm not sure how cliche it is, however, I predict that Future Games will provide game worlds in which several genres co-exist with multiple client interfaces (that caters to a particular genre). Role-Players will play Game X as a 3rd Person RPG. Strategist will play Game X as a Top Down RTS. People who enjoy blowing things effing up with BFGs will play Game X as a FPS.

Click Me

I think genre mixing is pretty common ("includes RPG elements!") but not the way you've described your own design. Your design is more like genre stacking than genre mixing. I don't think that's cliche. There are games that have done this to a limited extent, but it's not common. Action mechanics and conventions have been so thoroughly grafted onto the SH genre that many gamers don't understand the distinction.

I've certainly played lots of linear RPGs. I believe the western ones descended from tabletoppers like D&D are more commonly non-linear, but the japanese ones influenced by visual novels and platformers are more commonly linear. I'm a jRPG fan because I think the linear story-heavy format provides a superior gameplay experience, but that's just a matter of personal taste.

They definitely appeal to different tastes. I prefer sandbox games myself. I can forgive a weak story as long as the game gives me a lot of freedom. A lot of the controversy over what constitutes an RPG revolves around these different bases. JRPGs start with the story and then add combat and other elements. The games are more linear because they adhere to the narrative. Sandbox RPGs start with the combat and other elements and then add a story. The games are more open because the point is to explore and try different things. The end result is usually very different.

Okay, I think you guys all have me beat in the ambition department.

I'm finding even combining these two genres (survival horror and RPG) very difficult. Dead Island does this, of course, but it doesn't have the kind of feel I'm going for. It definitely leans toward the action genre and away from horror.

To illustrate the problem I'm having: in a SH game, the emphasis is placed on restricting the player, confining his movements, and chipping away at him gradually as supplies become more scarce. In a RPG, the emphasis is placed on providing the player with more and more freedom and confidence. If I allow a character in a SH game to improve themselves by increasing stats, the tension dissipates. In a RPG, if I don't allow the character to improve themselves by increasing stats...well, it's not a RPG.

Don't you find any of the elements in these different genres just fundamentally incompatible? Do you ever have to change your initial goal to accommodate these kinds of design challenges? Do you ever have to drop features, not because you're out of time, but because it just can't be adapted?

Maybe the issue isn't mechanical incompatibility, but just incompatible moods or tones. Maybe all the mechanics will work together just fine but they will then define the tone of the game for you, sort of taking it out of your hands.

Hi truant,

A possible solution to your dilemma is to simply place more emphasis on the `role-playing`, not stat-building. There is a difference and many modern RPGs sacrifice role-playing to appease the masses. Incorporate more puzzle solving. Imagine having a limited time to figure out an escape in what appears to be a room with only one door and no windows. An infinite horde of zombies are piled up at the door (which is wooden and hollow). They're pounding, clawing, biting, in an attempt to break through and eat your organs. Eventually, they will break thru, and you're thru.

More Role Playing...

A Plumber has a unique set of sets skills that has already been developed. The player who is `Role Playing` a Plumber should study up on Plumbing to learn to select (use) the appropriate skill available to solve problems. This can provide an emergence within the mechanics as the Players actually learns more about the Plumbing Career Field, finding ways to apply that skill-set to solve various problems that may not be related, but, have plumbing involved (what are the similarities between pipes in a house and a car?)

More Narrative...

A Story is told. Tell the Story with lots of words in print and audio. With words you can invoke sensations that you cannot get from Graphics and Sound FX alone. You can suggest to the player what they're smelling, touching, and tasting . Compliment these suggestions with A/V and you no longer have a game, you have an experience!

Hi truant,

A possible solution to your dilemma is to simply place more emphasis on the `role-playing`, not stat-building. There is a difference and many modern RPGs sacrifice role-playing to appease the masses. Incorporate more puzzle solving. Imagine having a limited time to figure out an escape in what appears to be a room with only one door and no windows. An infinite horde of zombies are piled up at the door (which is wooden and hollow). They're pounding, clawing, biting, in an attempt to break through and eat your organs. Eventually, they will break thru, and you're thru.

More Role Playing...

A Plumber has a unique set of sets skills that has already been developed. The player who is `Role Playing` a Plumber should study up on Plumbing to learn to select (use) the appropriate skill available to solve problems. This can provide an emergence within the mechanics as the Players actually learns more about the Plumbing Career Field, finding ways to apply that skill-set to solve various problems that may not be related, but, have plumbing involved (what are the similarities between pipes in a house and a car?)

More Narrative...

A Story is told. Tell the Story with lots of words in print and audio. With words you can invoke sensations that you cannot get from Graphics and Sound FX alone. You can suggest to the player what they're smelling, touching, and tasting . Compliment these suggestions with A/V and you no longer have a game, you have an experience!

Your plumber example is actually fairly close to how I have it at the moment: different character builds with different strengths and weaknesses who will be able to approach different game objectives in different ways. For example, a kid who's good at hiding and sneaking, a doctor who can heal her own wounds and NPC injuries, a burly construction worker with a sledgehammer, etc. Depending on your build, you're going to approach the game very differently. You'll also be able to get better over time so you'll be able to tackle more dangerous objectives later in the game. If you don't start a game with a skill, you can pick up the basics from an NPC if they like you.

The point of the game is two-fold: to survive, and to find a lost loved one. In order to complete the second objective, you have to look for clues about where they might be--which will always be in a very dangerous location, but different every time you play. Once you find them, your new objective is to get them to safety. I've been thinking about the design a bit more, and I think this shift midway through the game (when you find your lost loved one) helps to restore the tension. By the time you find them, you should be fairly competent at the game (RPG aspects) but now you also have someone you have to protect, and figuring out how to manage that aspect of the game adds a new kind of challenge (restoring some of the fear, only in this case, about someone else).

The narratives that go along with the characters will be determined by player choices at the start of the game when they're designing their character's back-story.

My combination Tetris and FPS didnt work too well....

I'll let you know later if my Web-based Fighting Game SIM hybrid works.