Shacknews Spotlight: The Rights and Wrongs of Survival Games

-WHAT WE THINK-

Joshua Hawkins: Survival games have grown in popularity over the recent years, with things like the DayZ mod for Arma 2, and eventually the Standalone version, helping to pave the way. But with more developers picking up on this trend, and games like The Forest and H1Z1 showing promise, it really begs the question - What are these games doing right? And, of course, if we're going to discuss one end of the spectrum we might as well discuss them both.

The first thing that I feel these games are doing right, especially DayZ, is not simply focusing on a single way for the player to live. Sure you can hunt for food, or loot locations throughout town, but overall you aren't limited to one singular way to keep your character eating and drinking. That makes all the difference in a game that's as large scale as DayZ is. If you so choose... you can even hunt other players and eat the meat from their bones after you've murdered them. Mmm, tasty.

The bad thing with these games though, is the lack of environmental danger. I mean in DayZ we're supposed to be locked on a massive piece of land with zombies and wildlife, yet the only wildlife you ever run into isn't hostile. This makes hunting and fishing far too easy, as you don't have to worry about predator animals coming up to claim your catch. Even with the Forest you run into the problem of the cannibalistic tribes people being angry at you for nothing, and wanting to kill you just to kill you. Which leads you to have to fend them off day in and day out as you struggle to chop down the 83 logs you need to make your house. God forbid you turn on "Veggie mode" which disables the cannibals/mutants in place of a calm and quiet non violent island paradise. It basically becomes Minecraft Creative mode. I think if more emphasis could be put into the environment and less on some "strange force" that threatens players lives, games like DayZ, The Forest, and even the upcoming H1Z1 could pull in more survival nuts looking for a good time.

Ozzie Mejia: I actually like the way these types of games have evolved from what they were originally supposed to be. Games like DayZ were originally supposed to be mankind trying to survive a zombie outbreak. While that's still a major component of games like DayZ and H1Z1, it's quickly turned into more of mankind trying to survive each other. That's probably the way it should be. While zombies are a major component of comics/TV shows like The Walking Dead, the most dangerous part of that world is other humans, because disasters bring out the worst in people. Rust understood that and that's why that team took the zombies out of their game entirely.

To go into your point, Josh, I think focusing less on the zombies does open up room for creativity and different kinds of dangers. I love that H1Z1 is focusing a lot on wildlife. When I tried the game a few days ago, the most dangerous part of the game wasn't the zombies. It was the bears! I think a lot of the creativity for these games will start to emerge from the dev teams, but also from regular folks that create their own custom servers. Look at the gentleman that created the Battle Royale mod. It's unique, it's fun, and it's something that helps these experiences stand out. That's part of the reason that SOE personally reached out to him for H1Z1.

JH: I must admit, I was shocked at first when Rust removed Zombies, however, I was intrigued at the same time. It's wonderful that Garry and his team are willing to break away from what they were and jet into unexplored territory, I think it's probably one of the greatest things that has happened to Rust in a long time, being as Zombies were never a large part of the game anyway. And yes, Ozzie, you are more than correct on the state of DayZ, it has become more of a mankind survival game. Zombies are there, sure, but they're really not much of a threat (aside from the glitches and bugs). 

I'm happy (and sad at the same time) to hear that H1Z1 doesn't focus on the Zombies as much as it seems in trailers. That's great, I think that for a zombie survival game to really reach optimal levels though it will need to properly balance both together evenly. Zombie hordes should be just as dangerous. Yes, comics and shows like The Walking Dead focus on it more, but that's realistic in a sense. More people would have perished to the viruses/whatever than would have survived, turning the 6 or 7 billion living people of the world into maybe what? 100,000? If that. That would make Zombies, roving hordes at least, dangerous and unpredictable. Sure they may be slow and stupid, but you still never know what they're going to do when you run into them.

--------------------------

After logging a little time into H1Z1 I'd like to report that zombies are a pretty big threat in large groups, but mostly dying of starvation seems to be the biggest threat to the game so far. Good thing we've got Blackberries to sustain us.

-WHAT CHATTY THINKS-

Welcome to the newest section of our spotlights, where we focus on you guys and share your opinions on the matter at hand. This week we decided to focus on just two of the several comments we received concerning this topic.

MercFox1: 

Right 

These games are great for their harsh consequences for failure, elation in victory, and for triggering amplified emotional and mental states between the two former situations. Nothing has quickened my heart rate quite like the feeling of being hunted in a game like DayZ or Breaking Point. I can feel my pulse become more intense right when I identify that item I am looking for, or when spotting a guy cresting a hill behind me and continuing in my direction. Pulling the trigger is an event, not a footnote in your latest FPS killing spree. 

Making the environment an integral part of the gameplay experience without needing interactivity and other mechanical systems. Bushes, shrubs, rock outcroppings, unique towns; even with a map available, rudimentary navigational and survival skills are important. 
Close teamwork and coordination is a must. Strangely, I haven't felt as reliant on my companions since America's Army was a thing. 

Wrong 

These games haven't made it easy enough for people to factionalize themselves, IMO. They're too reliant on something like zombies or other gimmicks to add a "tension floor" when something emergent like a Blowout (a la STALKER) or inclement weather or phenomena-based effects could give players a reason to stay on their toes while simultaneously deepening the atmosphere.

Calipsoll:

Right 

I'll hold Don't Starve up as my gold standard of survival games done right. I love Don't Starve. Way too many hours played so far. What has it done right? 

- It's punishing. Too damn punishing sometimes. It rewards lack of preparation with failure. It rewards preparation with failure. The game doesn't care how many days you've survived or how pretty your base is or anything like that. It waits until you make that one dangerous mistake, like heading out into the night without enough torches or stockpiling mats to build an advanced item when you should have built a basic one, then it rewards you with permanent death. 
- The developer has passion and it shows. Klei has done a fantastic job with the game itself, but they've also taken the time to build up the lore around it and that's half of the fun. The game has a backstory you'll never even experience in-game, things that have only been revealed through ARG's and their website. Don't Starve (the Game) feels like a small window that you peer through into Don't Starve (the Universe) and I love it. 
- I could wax eloquently about how the sound design is amazing (just a bit of music once in a while is such a treat!) or the mythos is well done (Deerclops and Beardger and the enigmatic Maxwell?!) or that it simultaneously manages to scratch my crafting itch (huge tree of recipes) and my exploration itch (multiple levels /w various challenges) and my art itch (each patch comes with a full-color poster playfully explaining what it brings) but I'll just say that this game is my favorite in a long time and definitely my favorite survival game. All others should strive to be this good. 

Wrong 

I think I'm going to tentatively put The Long Dark forward for this prestigious title. I want so hard to love this game and it certainly does a few things right, but ultimately it fumbles and I worry it's not going to recover. 

- I love that I'm Canadian and it's a Canadian developer and set in Canada. WHOO 
- I like the idea of it, I really do. Just you vs. nature. No zombies, no army squadrons, just the howling wind and the howling wolves. 
- $30+ dollars for Early Access is pretty steep. They sold a huge number of copies in the winter steam sale so I assume that turned a nice profit for Hinterland studios. Updates were fast and furious there for a bit, but they've petered off into non-existence now. I really wonder how much drive and motivation there is to finish when you've already taken in a pretty good sum of your total final sales. 
- As a survival game, it's less "arcadey" than other first-person games. The majority of the game doesn't require twitch aiming and fast reloads. It's a slow, plodding pace and the controls can reflect that. I feel like if any game could experiment a little with the "Trespasser arm" - this would be it. Don't just make me pretty 'E' to skin a deer, select some menu items and click "Go". That's corny. Make me hold the blade. Make me drag it along with my mouse and move it back and forth. When I'm chopping trees, put the axe in my hand and make me swing it into the same spot every time. Make these menial little tasks I have to do every day feel like the menial little tasks they are. Add a skill system where over time I get faster and more accurate with my mouse swings. Menu-driven interaction with the world is how I expect a 3rd-person survival game to work, but a 1st person game with no hud (like Metro 2033 Ranger mode) and a Trespasser arm gives me good goosebumps. 
- The sandbox is shallow and I don't know that it's going to feel anything other than that way even when finished. There are a few hours of exploration and crafting, but you're not really working towards anything. You can't build structures. You don't really progress in a storyline. It lacks content in Early Access, but even if the sandbox had 10x the content it would feel like a slow treadmill toward boredom. The game either needs to get progressively harder like Don't Starve, to the point where a single mistake means I'm doomed, or it needs to give me a goal to work towards. Right now it does neither - beating sandbox mode means achieving perfect boredom. 
- Overall I'm worried. I'm worried that they have this amazing idea on their hands. I'm worried that it did amazing in the Steam sale (indicating a ton of interest) but also meaning they've already raked in a ton of money. The game is definitely not done. It's definitely beta quality. Do they still have the drive and motivation to finish this thing or will it just quietly fade away? I'm taking a break from it for a few months and will check back later to see how it is. I hope Hinterland Games will be able to deliver on the kind of experience that I can see they have built up in their minds.

Shack Staff

Shack Staff stories are a collective effort with multiple staff members contributing. Many of our lists often involve entires from several editors, and our weekly Shack Chat is something we all contribute to as a group.