Occupation! (how would you make a civilian shooter?)

Kron_the_mad in another thread:

I'd like to see a war game in which you have to play as an unarmed civillian, and the goal is to stay alive ina contested territory while trigger happy nutjobs blow the crap out of your home.

This is actually a really interesting idea with a lot of potential for powerful storytelling. Anyways I'm really keen to hear how you guys would implement something like this and what kind of story you'd want to tell. Thoughts?

Some ideas:
- Gameplay reflects your choices. To take a page out of GTA's book, so long as you're unarmed it would play more like a stealth/sandbox game, but picking up a weapon is the equivalent of GTA's four stars - which turns whatever mission you're on into an incredibly brutal fps. It'd need really, really good level design though or noone will ever touch the concept again.

- No single protagonist. I don't know how feasible it would be (I'm thinking of Assassin's Creed's NPC generation), but if your character dies, they stay dead. Of course you'll start the mission again, but the game randomly generates a new character for you - male or female, young or old. Obviously you'd want to test this with a focus group, but I think they'd play a lot more cautiously/empathically if they knew their protagonist's life is literally at stake. Hopefully it'd break young male players out of their usual Big Beardy Marine mindset too.

Well, it's not exactly a civilian, but it's the closest I know. World War 1 medic, a game where you play as an unarmed medic in the trenches of WW1. Created by the fellow who made Dwarf Fortress. Very bleak.

http://www.bay12games.com/ww1medic/

It's an interesting take on war without the protagonist doing the fighting.

This sounds like it would be GTA without that overkill of an arsenal they give you and the power of resurrection being stripped away.

The Procrastinated End:
This sounds like it would be GTA without that overkill of an arsenal they give you and the power of resurrection being stripped away.

That was pretty much how I saw it, but maybe with an overall goal of escaping the country with your family rather than the old "disregard females, acquire currency". Perhaps you could pay smugglers to stow you all on a boat and escape via the harbour, but the money's got to come from somewhere - and what if they decide to dump you all overboard? Or you could join a militia, or collaborate with the occupiers as a guide/translator - no doubt they'll provide you with food/medicine/squadmates, but at what cost to your family's safety and reputation?

Red Dead Redemption has shown that those kind of sandbox missions are a lot more compelling when third parties - family especially - are involved the risk/reward dilemma. What do you guys think; is that feasible? Or can you think of a better narrative?

EDIT: I hasten to add, for the love of God NO ESCORT MISSIONS.

What would be sweet is have a game where you start riots in the beginning of each level in said contested territory or in a totolitarian regime.

Like Assassin's creed your way into a march or protest and you've got a single molotov cocktail, grenade, handgun gun with one clip, or just a rock, and when the civil unrest hits the crescendo at a certain point, you let it rip at the perverbial filth (by filth I mean authority) in some way befitting your current equipment, and have the rest of the level be hauling ass away from the machine-gun fire and finding proper places to hide until stuff cools down (your stealth/evasion mechanic).

ya could also have a camera mechanic a la beyond good & evil and have an unarmed journalist take photos and leak atrocities onto the internet.

All this stuff might be too soon though with the modern shit that's in trouble.

I don't know about the riots, dude - it's an interesting idea but I think it would run really contrary to the concept if you railroaded the player into instigating violence. The appeal to me at least would be using the medium of action games to tell human stories; not an ideological struggle (for what it's worth I don't think the player should be able to "win" by driving out the occupiers either - or not out of the whole country anyway).

I wrote something like that on youtube.... I got a lot of hell for that.... I don't post on youtube anymore :D

I would have a single protaganist, who spends the first three missions running from another country who is attempting to take over America, then on the third mission, is captured put in line and when they are about to execute him, a van crashes threw the wall and saves them, you and your brother (an ex-marine) helps train you to fight in the resistance to save the country, they raid a gun store in nevada, and take all the amazing weapons they can, then hold off the terrorists (preferable North Korea) untill the US milatary arrives.

Hmmm, lets see here...

Im having a hard time thinking of a concept that would work, as I dont see many people liking the idea of being an average civilian. I cant stop going to the thought of Red Dawn; basically you go from average Joe/Jane to resistance fighter. So that how I will go forth...

Plot: You are a non-combatant in a Eastern-European country, said country is fictional. Some international incident happens, either involving or not involving your country, and Russia invades your country to either take it over, or reach said country they are going to actually invade (so basically they occupy your country... so really could be the same thing.) Eventually it gets to the point that Russia decides (or is already happening) to declare martial law and eventually the citizens of your country starts to fight back.

Premise: You can either join the resistance that forming near your hometown, try and stay out of it and keep your family safe, or make a run for the border to a non-military zone setup by the U.N.

Gameplay: Unlike other games where you are skilled with any weapon, all weapons have a experience bar. When you start off, you have no experience with said weapon, but the more you use a weapon, the more experience the bar will have, and the better you will be at that weapon. Also, the more you exercise, the stronger and faster you become. So if you fight in the resistance, or even if you choose to run, you can better survive. Another important feature is that you need to eat, drink, and sleep as well as your family, so if you do run, you would have to carry supplies, and may even have to steal from other people and rob their houses for supplies.

This is just a off the top of my head, it really needs to be flushed out. But I think there has been nothing like this yet (as far as I know), so it could be a big hit.

this is a fascinating idea, and on second thought, I'm very surprised nobody has done it before.

If I were to do something like this though, I would probably have this built around an existing FPS. That is, you would have players who are soldiers, and players who aren't. So basically, we're looking at two sides of soldiers, and maybe 1 or 2 sides of civilians, depending upon the map.

In all cases though, I would implement a couple things to make this work

1. the goal for soldiers will be a lot more absolute. Instead of just kill the other soldiers, it would be kill everyone on the other side, or prevent any non-friendlies from entering a certain zone.
2. normally, civilians would look different from the soldiers.
3. however, there is another mechanical catch. Civilians can, at certain points, ditch their civilian status and become a combatant. At this point, they have effectively quit their primary objective. These players simply follow the normal course of play. What is the distinction? Civilians cannot use weapons at all. The only weapon they might have to be the low grade melee equivalent. (i.e. their fists) Of course, in this particular scenario, we need to tightly control how a civvy and switch. Or maybe for certain maps, they can't switch at all.
4. soldiers can, once they've met the right conditions, assume the Skin of a civvie, which makes for an interesting game of guerilla warfare.
5. scoring and mission success for the soldiers will depending upon what I'll call the "lawful combatant flag". Sides with the lawful combatant flag on will be punished by score when they shoot civilians who are in fact civilians. soldier teams without the flag on will have no problems killing random civilians. However, teams with no lawful combatant flag on will other factors stacked against them to balance out the advantage. i.e. their team size might be smaller, or their equipment choices are a lot more limited.

mission types for civvies
1. protect the group: survive as long as possible. players who can get their protectees to survive to the end of the match gets a huge bonus. (and pretty much you get a bonus for each survivor in your group)
2. escort: slightly different from the above in that in this case, you need to get your civvie group to the extraction point so they can escape to safety
3. single survival: this is basically #1 but with nobody left in your group.

Civvie types:
1. gender/race: will not matter. This will be randomly chosen for the group and for the players. There might be some local map settings to govern this (i.e. if the map is based in Cambodia, the civvies can't be from say, African)
2. Parents: for these groups, there will be an inherent mission for keeping their child/children alive. failure to do so results in an automatic failure for these players
3. children: they are slower, and can take far less damage. They also cannot use weapons. But soldiers from other groups cannot choose to look like a child civvie, so the chance of being shot on account of mistaken identity is lower. They will also have a guardian player who pretty much act as a human shield.
4. elderly: just like children, they are slower and can take less damage. Again, soldiers cannot imitate this group. Unlike children though, they CAN use limited number of "light" weapons.
5. doctor: this is a subtype of the normal civvie. These are basically like a crappier medic from the normal game class in that they can heal far less and less often.

underscore_b:

EDIT: I hasten to add, for the love of God NO ESCORT MISSIONS.

what about a reverse escort mission? you play as a civilian who is being escorted by the soldiers, and your job is to pay attention to what they tell you to do in order to not get killed.

of course, the problem is that any game that takes this concept will inevitably make the AI Escorters as stupid as the Escortees are in your normal escort mission.

bookboy:

underscore_b:

EDIT: I hasten to add, for the love of God NO ESCORT MISSIONS.

what about a reverse escort mission? you play as a civilian who is being escorted by the soldiers, and your job is to pay attention to what they tell you to do in order to not get killed.

of course, the problem is that any game that takes this concept will inevitably make the AI Escorters as stupid as the Escortees are in your normal escort mission.

Actually that sounds like a really good idea, at least for the tutorial level. It'd also make for a lot more tension and variety insofar as in some contexts the occupiers will protect you as a civilian and in others they'll indiscriminately open fire... It also ties in with this recurring idea I have that the protagonist is basically faceless - unlike Gordon Freeman or Master Chief or whoever, noone really gives a shit who you are and can't even determine whether you're friend or foe half the time.

underscore_b:

bookboy:

underscore_b:

EDIT: I hasten to add, for the love of God NO ESCORT MISSIONS.

what about a reverse escort mission? you play as a civilian who is being escorted by the soldiers, and your job is to pay attention to what they tell you to do in order to not get killed.

of course, the problem is that any game that takes this concept will inevitably make the AI Escorters as stupid as the Escortees are in your normal escort mission.

Actually that sounds like a really good idea, at least for the tutorial level. It'd also make for a lot more tension and variety insofar as in some contexts the occupiers will protect you as a civilian and in others they'll indiscriminately open fire... It also ties in with this recurring idea I have that the protagonist is basically faceless - unlike Gordon Freeman or Master Chief or whoever, noone really gives a shit who you are and can't even determine whether you're friend or foe half the time.

If we use this with a model where the soldiers are human players who in addition to this objective have other COMPETING objectives, it can create an interesting dynamic.

gamer_parent:

If we use this with a model where the soldiers are human players who in addition to this objective have other COMPETING objectives, it can create an interesting dynamic.

Agreed, just want to say your earlier post is really interesting and I want to mull it over for a bit before I reply :)

the core of my post is about creating conflict of interests between the different parties, and thus generate dynamicism.

This is also to prevent people from just allying blindly with the civvies and basically end up using the civvies as purely human shields.

bookboy:

underscore_b:

EDIT: I hasten to add, for the love of God NO ESCORT MISSIONS.

what about a reverse escort mission? you play as a civilian who is being escorted by the soldiers, and your job is to pay attention to what they tell you to do in order to not get killed.

of course, the problem is that any game that takes this concept will inevitably make the AI Escorters as stupid as the Escortees are in your normal escort mission.

You mean like Oblivion's tutorial level?

something just came to me.

For the civvie missioons to really be any fun to play, the players need to be able to do more than just run away and get shot at. One of the main premises is that a civvie would be less well armed and have more limiting options for combat. This means that anyone playing as a civvie will inevitably be short changed in terms of things to do.

we need to come up with more ways to make the civvie play more fun.

Some more ideas:

*In the beginning, you are given a choice (whether explicit or implicit) whether to join the resistance or not. If you do, you are immediately put into an extremely difficult situation, say, facing down a platoon of heavily armed and armored soldiers while holding a baseball bat, are killed, and have to start the game over (which won't be frustrating because you're only one or two minutes in). You then, depending on how quickly you learn, either do the same thing over again looking for the soldiers' glowing red vulnerable point (which of course does not exist), or choose to save your hide and then begin some sort of survival phase.

*There is some sort of survival phase. This phase consists neither of you fighting enemy soldiers as part of the resistance nor of you desperately trying to escape a live fire zone. Instead, it consists of you trying to survive in an occupied region with a high level of ongoing violence - trying to find food, supplies, work, and so on. I don't see the work as being implemented with minigames, though... Perhaps you are some sort of artisan, and need to procure supplies in order to produce your wares. This means going to the store, dodging patrols along the way (since those sometimes result in crossfire situations that can very easily get you killed, and since there's also the danger of you being misidentified and fired upon), but after one or two trips, you find that the store is running out of supplies, and need to either get in contact with the black market, or find some other sort of work, perhaps with the occupiers, perhaps with the resistance, or perhaps with nobody, choosing instead a life of crime. From there, the plot would thicken, and would also branch, with multiple very different storylines that depend on the choices you make. It would however still be possible to change careers. Perhaps you help to arm the resistance but also engage in petty theft; perhaps you start out working with one faction but then grow disgusted at their methods and attempt to switch, (hopefully) overcoming the other faction's suspicions (depending on how much they know), and earning the other's enmity (again, depending on how much they know).

*There is a larger plot, involving the machinations of superpowers, leaders of the resistance, and so on and so forth, but it is shadowy, distant, and imperfectly understood by Joe Schmuck the protagonist. Getting news - particularly reliable news - would be extremely difficult following the general breakdown of communications that accompanied the invasion, but from time to time distant events would make their influences felt in very immediate ways, such as dramatic increases (or decreases) in the number of patrols, changes in their behavior and demeanor, cities falling into insurgent hands, offensives being launched, etc. Rumors would fly, and news would frequently be contradictory. The news media, of course, would have no idea what things were actually like on the ground.

*There is moral ambiguity, and lots of it. No side, be it the occupiers, the resistance, organized crime, whatever, is monolithic. Most of the occupiers truly believe that their cause is just, and most of them bear no ill will towards the populace, at least at first. However, their tactics still result in large numbers of civilian casualties (though this may change depending on the larger plot, of which the player will be partially unaware, though they may be filled in after the fact). Because of the high casualties, and outrage at the loss of sovereignty, a popular insurgency arises, then, because of anger over their fallen comrades, the occupiers' attitude towards the populace hardens. This leads to more civilian casualties and infringements on civil liberties, which strengthens the resistance. As the resistance grows, though, factionalism increases; some insurgents care about civilian casualties more than others, and enmities develop (though the player might not know about them). As the plot progresses, the country slips towards civil war, the occupation's hold on areas slips, those areas experience more crime and fighting between rival groups, and the occupation increasingly brings in heavy weapons. Everyone has the potential to be an enemy, yet no one (or almost no one) is overtly evil.

*There is a sophisticated system for conversations, perhaps based on Alpha Protocol's (which I really liked, even though the rest of the game was problematic), and all conversations are connected with both each other and the looming specter of the plot. You can't talk directly to occupying soldiers (who don't speak the local language), but you can talk to collaborators to find out what they're thinking. You must be careful, though, not to arouse too much suspicion; this can partly be averted by talking to multiple collaborators, but they might speak to each other when you're not there, and word of your inquisitiveness might spread. None of this is heavy handed, though; instead it is all handled smoothly and organically. Every character is voice acted, and voice acted well. Characters are memorable and compelling, without seeming contrived. Trumpets sound from heaven, and cheerful servants bring me cheesecake.

*Death for the player is not permanent. Death for their family and friends is. There's no "your daughter got killed, you lose." Instead, it's "your daughter got killed, now what?"

*Health packs are not conveniently scattered all over the landscape, and your character is not secretly Wolverine. Instead, if your character gets injured, they stay injured for quite some time, perhaps permanently, and must deal with the injury as appropriate. This is important because injuries are an important part of occupations, but implementing it would be very difficult.


WOLVERINES!!!

Seriously though.
You have a roster of characters, let's make it a good amount say, twenty four. You all start in the same place, you have very little equipment and the characters have different traits and abilities. You have the choice to try and escape or take the fight to the enemy. fighting the enemy will lead to reprisals though, possibly including all the civilians in a map sector, including any of your characters in hidey holes. You can group the characters in squads, no size limits, although larger groups would have trouble avoiding attention. You could give input to the friendly AI with a dynamic orders system like in Ghost Recon. You take one of these characters as your avatar and can switch between the members of your current squad. There are hidey holes scattered throughout the map that you can deposit you current characters in so you can use another set of characters from the initial roster, who are back at the original start point. You have to try and scavenge medical supplies, food weapons, and other equipment, (no traders or shops). There would be some skill development dependent on characters experiences, though I'd try and discourage grinding. There are other characters out in the game you can recruit, but if any of your "guys" dies it is perma death. You can still lose the game.

Something like that, I think could still sell units, it would be a cross between Aliens on the Commodore 64, Ghost Recon, and Red Dawn.

I just realized that there is in principle no reason why I (or someone else, for that matter) shouldn't be able to make a game like this using the Aurora Toolset for Neverwinter Nights, aside of course from time and technical know-how. Its scripting capabilities are so powerful that they would probably enable you to implement most (though definitely not all) of the ideas presented thus far, and should make it pretty easy to negate the aspects of the game engine that go against the basic principle (e.g. spellcasting, importing high level characters to kill off the occupying forces, gaining XP, etc.). I may well end up doing this, or at least trying to and failing miserably.

Stealth game with shooting elements. The enemy has far more advanced weapons while you're making do with decade old stuff that has to be repaired for it to even work. Taking them on one on one would be suicide so you thin their ranks using guerilla tactics before you can engage head on.

gamer_parent:

underscore_b:

bookboy:

underscore_b:

EDIT: I hasten to add, for the love of God NO ESCORT MISSIONS.

what about a reverse escort mission? you play as a civilian who is being escorted by the soldiers, and your job is to pay attention to what they tell you to do in order to not get killed.

of course, the problem is that any game that takes this concept will inevitably make the AI Escorters as stupid as the Escortees are in your normal escort mission.

Actually that sounds like a really good idea, at least for the tutorial level. It'd also make for a lot more tension and variety insofar as in some contexts the occupiers will protect you as a civilian and in others they'll indiscriminately open fire... It also ties in with this recurring idea I have that the protagonist is basically faceless - unlike Gordon Freeman or Master Chief or whoever, noone really gives a shit who you are and can't even determine whether you're friend or foe half the time.

If we use this with a model where the soldiers are human players who in addition to this objective have other COMPETING objectives, it can create an interesting dynamic.

One way to truly capitalize on this would be to constantly create scenarios where the bodyguard/escort cannot accomplish something on his own, and must havethe civilian enter the danger zone to do something like search a house for a personal possession or better yet, climb a scaffolding while the escort protects him with fire support and instructions on when to keep moving.

Sounds like a survival horror, except instead of mutants and zombies, it's military guys trying to kill you...

sageoftruth:

One way to truly capitalize on this would be to constantly create scenarios where the bodyguard/escort cannot accomplish something on his own, and must havethe civilian enter the danger zone to do something like search a house for a personal possession or better yet, climb a scaffolding while the escort protects him with fire support and instructions on when to keep moving.

I like this idea, but I think we can push this one step further and make it the Mcguffin more than just a McGuffin.

Maybe instead of having each civvie just be a blank character with severely limited options, they simply have a different skillset. i.e. we already have a doctor role. We can probably expand upon those skills and have say, a hacker who can go through modules, open doors, etc.

brain storm list of skills appropriate for a civvie
computer security: i.e. hacking
town leader: by just being in an area near the other survivors, they can project their voice to give the other survivors temporary boosts in health or speed
driver: operate vehicles (mostly the civilian variety. So no driver jump into a tank)
local maven: while most players might have a map that shows where buildings are, this guy will have a map that shows even more info like where are all the ammo drops, where are all the keys, etc
local security guard: has key cards that allows them to get into one or two areas. The closest thing to a real combatant the civvies will have

now, here's another concept, to make sure that people playing civvies will actually have stuff to do, we can have the civvie team players have the option to jump between civvies in the group. maybe with a ratio of 1 player : 3 civvies.

objectives will also need to be tailor properly. That is, the civvies' objective need to be in conflict with the opposing team interest.

I would go for a Stalker like approach to this... lol... I meant with the way they handled weapons you know if you pull out a gun everyone pulls one on you like a mexican stand off, and they don't talk to you or let you in anywhere and I think level design similar to the Duty run city in Shadow OF Chernobyl would work well...

I didn't read all of the comments so I don't know if this has been mentioned:
Not keeping a single character removes all of the attachment you'd form with the protagonist.
They would just turn into meat.
If you kept a single character you could form his background and build his family.
If you'd really like some variation, perhaps you could make several short stories intertwined.
Example:
One civilian male, middle aged and has a family. (Suburbia)
One civilian male, teenager and works fast food. (Downtown)
One police officer, 30ish and only has a small handgun. (Mall, riots)
One psycho, perhaps as an intro and shows the most brutality. (Attacking a civilian to build a story)
Gameplay could involve first person hand to hand combat (Condemned) for the most 'oomph'
Gunfights could be sporadic and abrupt (Riddick).
Also, no sandbox. I believe this kind of game would benefit from well designed linear areas.

EDIT
After going back and reading the comments, I can see that everyone else had a much different take.
Disregard this if you'd like.

It would be a rather interesting concept to try out. The possibilities for design would be enormous as you could pretty much then fill any role in the society. You could be a loyalist with the invaders, a spy, someone who incites riots and anger, or simply a terrorist. It would have the potential to become a great survival-sandbox game. Although, admittedly, marketing it to the current trigger-happy generation of gamers would be a little difficult if not damn near impossible.

"Who would want to play an accountant-wets-his-pants sim?" -- MW2 fan on Unnamed Survival Title

I actually had hopes for something like this in MW2 (yeah, I know, I'm a dreamer sometimes). But that part where the little intro cinematic thing was a TV telling civilians to evacuate to such-and-such a place and I imagined a world where I was a civilian with hunting equipment sneaking around well-armed Russians in my hometown, occasionally utilizing the confusion off a full-scale invasion and my knowledge of the surrounding terrain to pick off Russian soldiers and nick their gear. Also, Israel and Palestine got together and had a pork-free barbecue, gaming was universally accepted as an art form, and I was, in fact, and incredibly sexy man. Yeah. That.

dlawnro:
I actually had hopes for something like this in MW2 (yeah, I know, I'm a dreamer sometimes). But that part where the little intro cinematic thing was a TV telling civilians to evacuate to such-and-such a place and I imagined a world where I was a civilian with hunting equipment sneaking around well-armed Russians in my hometown, occasionally utilizing the confusion off a full-scale invasion and my knowledge of the surrounding terrain to pick off Russian soldiers and nick their gear. Also, Israel and Palestine got together and had a pork-free barbecue, gaming was universally accepted as an art form, and I was, in fact, and incredibly sexy man. Yeah. That.

Minus the sexy man part, this seems like what a game of this type would be like... although it does start to blur the line between shooter and pure survival quite a lot.

US takes over Canada. I want to see it.

But yeah, this could be a very good way of getting out a message. Make yourself an unarmed civilian who has to survive through warzones as a good way of showing just how terrible life is for others.
The immediate thought for a setting is Jews during the Holocaust, but I think the WWII setting has been bled out too much in recent times (aka ever since WWII.) But cool/powerful settings could include:
-Darfur or Somalia, during the genocides there
-Afghanistan, as a refugee trying to escape to Pakistan while the country's under Taliban rule
-Vietnam war, as a civilian retreating south, caught right in the middle between American and Viet Kong attacks.
-Political dissident, preferably very left-swinging person who disagrees with western values, but it could work in any country really

I like where this is going. Unfortunately, no big gaming company has half the balls to even experiment with this idea. Or really anything other than the "you are a tank, here are your gigantic overcompensatory weapons, go have fun."

I've always liked the idea of a game with other protagonists doing stuff that affects you. Like imagine Fallout 3, but with 2 vault dwellers, so if you take your time getting to Megaton, say, that quest is already taken care of by the other guy. And he'd have a personality determined at the start, maybe he's good, maybe he's bad.

Here, I'm thinking the game would be completely unaffected by you at all. There's three sides, the occupying army, the defensive army, and the civilian resistant. They're fighting. You're not really a member of any of these. Instead of setting it up with predetermined plot points, why not make it more like Mount and Blade? The different factions fight and each playthrough is totally different because different sides win.

As the player character, you'd have several options. You can try to escape or you can pick a side. Say you're captured by the invaders. If, on your escape, you passed through a rebel base, you can trade that information for freedom. Of course, depending on the temperament of your randomly determined bad guy, he might kill you anyways. And giving the invaders information would make things harder in the long run. On the other hand, you could get picked up by the defense and accused of being a spy. Or maybe you just get caught in the middle of a battle and have to work your way through a bombed out town.

I really like this idea.

Talking about America, I can't honestly say you'll be defenseless.

I mean, even in Manhattan, you still got plenty of diehards willing to kill themselves to take out at least one enemy with them. There's enough guns to go around for that. Don't get me started on the Deep South, they got so many guns and diehards down there there'd be no point in occupying the area, because all the civilians would be dead from resistance.

Manhattan would be interesting mostly because of the skyscrapers (which could be collapsed just to cover the streets in rubble), number of cars (very natural cover), density (lots of bodies), weather (very large wind gusts rendering snipers useless on a windy day), etc. I think most people would opt to go into a resistance movement or something. Or make a dash across the George Washington or Holland Tunnel to get to New Jersey ASAP (and most will be in the clear once they get past Jersey City). Not many people would be honest civilians still left in the action.

There'd be no point in occupying an American city. You can't establish a foothold in a major city without crippling its economy, and if you wanted to cripple America, all you'd need to do is launch a plane into a building like a few blocks from the WTC site that conveniently serves as the American government's mainframe. Yeah, that's right, 9/11 was a publicity stunt.

Blue_vision:
US takes over Canada. I want to see it.

But yeah, this could be a very good way of getting out a message. Make yourself an unarmed civilian who has to survive through warzones as a good way of showing just how terrible life is for others.
The immediate thought for a setting is Jews during the Holocaust, but I think the WWII setting has been bled out too much in recent times (aka ever since WWII.) But cool/powerful settings could include:
-Darfur or Somalia, during the genocides there
-Afghanistan, as a refugee trying to escape to Pakistan while the country's under Taliban rule
-Vietnam war, as a civilian retreating south, caught right in the middle between American and Viet Kong attacks.
-Political dissident, preferably very left-swinging person who disagrees with western values, but it could work in any country really

I like where this is going. Unfortunately, no big gaming company has half the balls to even experiment with this idea. Or really anything other than the "you are a tank, here are your gigantic overcompensatory weapons, go have fun."

Well, you don't have to immediately for the big budget AAA. This could actually work as small scale experiments in the begining for a proof of concept.

i.e. anybody here who knows how to do map modding can give it a go as a small map first.

Hmm, you know with some work that sounds like one hell of a premise. Yeah, I'd probably buy that game.

heck, if I knew anything about modding FPS games at all, I'd probably try to give it a roll myself.

 

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked