PDA

View Full Version : Psicologichal aspects (IMPORTANT)



crociato1985
03-14-2006, 11:02 AM
In RS the player shoots to humans targets not to paper targets so I really suggest to Ubi to put in the game a human behaviour to the enemies (ex. if there are 2 enemies & you wound one the other can: get angry http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif, get fear & surrender or try to help the comrade).

Vegas is the fist next-gen rainbow & after Lockdown all rainbow's fans want a realistic, deeper, tactical game http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif
I think that human/psicological aspects for a game like this is fundamental, in fact the operatives of special forces are not Rambo they train themself hard from a fisical standpoint & most of all from a mental stand point.

What do you think guys?

crociato1985
03-14-2006, 11:02 AM
In RS the player shoots to humans targets not to paper targets so I really suggest to Ubi to put in the game a human behaviour to the enemies (ex. if there are 2 enemies & you wound one the other can: get angry http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif, get fear & surrender or try to help the comrade).

Vegas is the fist next-gen rainbow & after Lockdown all rainbow's fans want a realistic, deeper, tactical game http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif
I think that human/psicological aspects for a game like this is fundamental, in fact the operatives of special forces are not Rambo they train themself hard from a fisical standpoint & most of all from a mental stand point.

What do you think guys?

korn311
03-14-2006, 11:57 AM
What aspects?

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Ghost Dog 3
03-17-2006, 03:34 PM
I dissagree that the AI should try to act more like a Human.I'm shooting game characters not Human wanabes.

That will kinda increase parents blaming games for children's bad behaviour.

Real720
03-17-2006, 03:37 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by GhostDog3:
I dissagree that the AI should try to act more like a Human.I'm shooting game characters not Human wanabes.

That will kinda increase parents blaming games for children's bad behaviour. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I, I mean, we all know that you're just kidding about what you said.......... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Ghost Dog 3
03-17-2006, 04:24 PM
You shouldn't say (we) cause you never know what others have to say.

Just look at the Afghan war,how many terrorist were left behind after being wounded.Allot so its not really a move a terrorist,AI would do.

I think they still need to fix how enemy's take cover when being shot cause sometimes they just stand in the middle of the room and worst is when they ar wounded they rush you instead of going for cover and sometimes still stand in the middle lol

This is why I don't think adding new moves to them is useful until they fix whats is already here.

For the parents subject it is true.That is how they base there judgements on video games and more..

Defuser
03-17-2006, 04:48 PM
1) What are kids doing playing games where you shoot people?

2) What sort of serious mental deficiency do you have to have if you cannot distinguish between reality and fantasy?

3) Do you not think that it is important that people appreciate that what they are shooting is not a carboard cut-out but a (graphic approximation of a) person?

4) Do you think it would benefit immersion and increase 'a sense of reality' in the game to have terrorists acting like robotic morons?

Proper parenting and not being a psychopath stops kids from picking up a gun and 'acting out' GTA3. Here's a word for you to add to your dictionary - scapegoat. In all of the cases where shootings have taken place, the games involved were neither the catalyst nor the facilitator of the violence. It was a combination of poor mental health, social depriavation, abuse and woeful parenting by a guardian. No judge in any of the cases where videogames have said to have played a part have ever blamed videogames. Here's another pair of words for you - media panic. The best psychologists throughout the entire world have found no correlation between videogames facilitating violent behaviour or the intention to cause harm. If anything, they increase the capacity of and stimulate the areas of the brain associated with problem solving, spacial awareness and many other abstract thought processes. The media likes to whip up a storm about a relatively young and media inexperienced medium because it knows it lacks the united means to fight back AND it provides well-meaning but ultimately naive readers to jump on their moral high-horse and decry 'this sick filth that is corrupting children's minds'. Oh! And it's great for selling papers, how could I forget.

In conclusion, do some research and realise that games do not cause murder, never have and never will. Parents thinking games are violent is about as valid a thought process as thinking the moon is made of cheese.

Ghost Dog 3
03-17-2006, 05:12 PM
I did my research and I only said parents think that way not me so next time read a second time before passing judgement.

I like my games whit realism as well but fix the previous bugs before adding something new!

Defuser
03-17-2006, 07:32 PM
Ok, I apologise for pinning the blame on you, that was presumptious and for that I am sorry.

I am intrigued, however, as to why you think that the game should be modified because of a potential parental backlash? If you know games are harmless, for all of the reasons above, then why should they be modified? The press?

I do think, however, rightly or wrongly, the game will hold back certain realistic factors of results of combat because of the fact that the publishers will be pressuring the devs to make the game in-line with a 'T' rating (in the US) to maximise sales.

Ghost Dog 3
03-17-2006, 11:41 PM
Its cool http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Just saying fixing what the AI has right now would be better then adding.

tragic1991
08-18-2007, 10:36 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by GhostDog3:
I dissagree that the AI should try to act more like a Human.I'm shooting game characters not Human wanabes.

That will kinda increase parents blaming games for children's bad behaviour. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

could'nt of said it more, isint that the reason they took gta of the market or some ****?

DrDiscoBiscuits
08-19-2007, 06:32 AM
Uh, no, they never took GTA off the market. Many places banned Manhunt in the UK because some parent blamed it when her son was killed after being hit on the head by a hammer. The culprit was a young teenager and was apparently obsessed with the game.

I read all this in the Daily Mail and they also mentioned one rather intriguing fact: The killer was also found to be in the possession of cannabis.

Did anybody report "Boy killed by teenager high on illegal drugs"? No.

So, not only did he own a game unsuitable for him, but he was able to get a hold of illegal substances too. And his parents were where, exactly?

This link is to a later article, as I can't find the original one: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/new...6491&in_page_id=1770 (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=316491&in_page_id=1770)

This page also shows how ridiculous and petty the Daily Mail can be, for those who don't already know much about the "newspaper": http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/games/archives/2004/07/31/d...violence_thread.html (http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/games/archives/2004/07/31/daily_mail_loses_videogame_violence_thread.html)

winning_formula
08-19-2007, 10:08 AM
Thomas is right. Games have never been an influence on teenagers to kill other teenagers. It has only ever been over exaggerated by people such as Jack Thompson (or whatever his name is) because without doing so he would have no career or publicity.

And crociato I agree that physcological aspects in a game would be a good idea. There was a survey done no too long ago on what is the most important aspect in a game or something like that and the most popular outcome was realism. And so what would be a better way to break the realism boundaries than to give enemies each their own personality and what they should do in a situation they've never encountered etc. They should be able to pick as to whether they should hide or fight, scream or cry, seek revenge or put a bullet through his own head etc.

dungensdeath
08-19-2007, 01:35 PM
i love psychology, taken it in highschool and few more times in other college courses. understanding the enemy and their tactics in a twenty minute sharpshooter can be interesting. some people like to take up post and guard a doorway and others like to roam like a sweeper. knowing the likelyhood of a person staying in one spot can help win games, and knowing if you have a flanking enemy can further help understand war tactics.

EGxMgsRbx
08-19-2007, 02:32 PM
Actually GTA was taken off shelves because of it's Ao rating. Walmart and Bestbuy both have policies that ban games with that rating from their shelves. So yeah after they took Hot coffee out of the game they were able to give it back a rated M rating.

DrDiscoBiscuits
08-19-2007, 05:10 PM
I stand corrected, though in my defence I must point out said ban did not take place in the UK.

EGxMgsRbx
08-19-2007, 05:13 PM
Oh I wouldn't know I don't live there sorry. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

BiGbOy922007
08-20-2007, 01:05 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by winning_formula:
Thomas is right. Games have never been an influence on teenagers to kill other teenagers. It has only ever been over exaggerated by people such as Jack Thompson (or whatever his name is) because without doing so he would have no career or publicity.

And crociato I agree that physcological aspects in a game would be a good idea. There was a survey done no too long ago on what is the most important aspect in a game or something like that and the most popular outcome was realism. And so what would be a better way to break the realism boundaries than to give enemies each their own personality and what they should do in a situation they've never encountered etc. They should be able to pick as to whether they should hide or fight, scream or cry, seek revenge or put a bullet through his own head etc. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

holy **** thats deep, that last part, scream cry, commit suicide? thats a little too realistic, i dont want a game where it might maybe feel like im gonna shoot a dude wit feelings. like if you kill a baddies friend, he screams and runs at you like a kamikaze. but, in another scenerio, kill a baddies friend and he bawls his eyes out, and gives up so he puts a bullet in his head...........wow

winning_formula
08-20-2007, 07:10 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BiGbOy922007:


holy **** thats deep, that last part, scream cry, commit suicide? thats a little too realistic, i dont want a game where it might maybe feel like im gonna shoot a dude wit feelings. like if you kill a baddies friend, he screams and runs at you like a kamikaze. but, in another scenerio, kill a baddies friend and he bawls his eyes out, and gives up so he puts a bullet in his head...........wow </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Don't worry I'm only exaggerating the point . Although I still stand by my point of using emotional feelings and acts in video games.

Just remember games do not turn teenagers into serial killers. Take Counter Strike for instance. It creates a comfortable experience with weapons. It doesn't necessarily make people want to buy a gun and kill his best friend or whatever, it only presents a fairly realistic portrayal of weapons for children, adults to engage with.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/353.gif I know just my 2 cent