You drive your character like a tank, up moves him forward from his perspective, though there might be a setting to change that, it’s been years.
When you walk around the environment, Manny will turn his head to look at interactive objects, then you have “interact”, “examine”, or “pickup”.
The inventory screen is a close up of his jacket, where he reaches in a pulls something out. Hit the “next item” keyboard shortcut and he puts that object back into his jacket, and pulls out the next item.
The remaster of Grim Fandango does make the control scheme more modern (movement direction is camera relative), though you can switch to tank controls if you want.
I completely understand how overcluttered and distracting some HUDs can become. I have found however that fully HUDless experiences tend to be more of a novelty than an increase in immersion.
If I’m playing a shooter and don’t have information on, say how many magazines I have, I find that more distracting than immersive. In real life I could quickly pat my vest to know. A HUD can be a replacement for information that seems intuitive to have because in a real situation we’d have kinesthetic feedback.
Basic information like health while injured is simply too useful. Realistically my health isn’t defined by a single variable bar nor is it restored instantly from a grievous wound by a using a syringe, so I find that seeing the bar is useful for succeeding in the game even if it is equally as unrealistic.
Something like the iHUD mod for modern Fallout games is my ideal HUD. It is modular and I can define what information I see, what information I don’t, and for how long the information I do get stays on the screen. Health can be set to only show at certain thresholds, the compass directions or map markers can be disabled unless I ask to see them briefly. Other elements similarly made optional.
I’ve played fully HUDless in both Metro games and in modded STALKER games, and each time I do I find myself going back to having at least a minimal informative HUD.
I don’t hate HUDs and I think most people who try HUDless don’t actually hate them either. What is hated are obnoxious tool tips, flashy HUD animations, and floating intrusive quest markers. If UX designers do their jobs right, people don’t know they did anything at all.
I think you hit the nail on the head, give me what I need to know when I need it, and make it more environmental when possible. Halo for example had the assault rifle show the ammo count on the gun itself and other games have as well, there are countless other ways to give information organically to the player.
There are diegetic elements like that, but also how the non-diegetic HUD delivers information.
When is it giving information? Is it giving me information I don’t actually need at the moment. For example a first person game that always has a compass or minimap. Maybe I want those sometimes, but do I want them always?
What are the visuals of the HUD like? Are they easy to read? Are they distracting? HUDs that have stretched and difficult at a glance fonts are a bad idea to me. Simple fonts that can be read against a variety of background colors are seemingly underdesigned to many UX designers, but it’s all I want sometimes.
Do HUDs have needlessly animated elements? Sometimes just putting a plain and simple number or bar on a screen is enough, but many games add so many artistic flourishes that it gets in the way of the game visuals.
HALO CE had its shield bar with the little health dots underneath. Technically diegetic, but obviously a gameplay element. It wasn’t distracting, it was clean and easy to read, it gave information that was constantly relevant.
I much prefer a compass to a mini-map, for me the mini-map is the worst offender in terms of pulling my attention constantly into one corner of the screen. Halo’s motion sensor was good in that sense too, I’d check it but not constantly.
Dead Space, which has come up a lot, does have a hud, it's just all diegetic. Whether that fits or not is up for debate.
For true zero hud stuff the first one I think of is Inside, for instance. If you're going for immersion that counts, but of course it's a very light, focused game. Journey and Flower are in that space, too. So is Mirror's Edge, technically, but it feels more intricate due to being first person, for some reason.
There's a bunch of minimal HUD games from that period, too. There's a thing here and there, but not a full HUD. There's the Portal games, which technically show which portals are up on the reticle, but nothing else. There's the Metro series, which will pop up some HUD but mostly relies on other visual cues. There's The Order 1886, which at the time was one of the standard bearers for minimal HUDs but I think now it's just slightly lighter than average, because that game is super underrated in how ahead of its time it was in terms of setting triple-A standards.
Does The Witness count as diegetic HUD or just no HUD? It's borderline. I think the Talos Principle has some light HUD elements, but they may be optional.
And hey, let me call out the times when a super dense HUD is actually immersion-creating, especially when it comes to representing tech or machinery. There's Metroid Prime, making the HUD part of the suit and placing you inside it. There's Armored Core, where the mech stuff is such a part of the fiction. There's the new Robocop, which I don't like but does a lot with its HUD. HUDs can be cool and immersive.
This is a great answer and I learned a new word today! I’m okay with diegetic elements, as it feels organic and as long as it’s not distracting I’m okay with that! I forgot about mirrors edge, the minimal(ish) design of that game is great.
I suppose saying “no HUD” was a bit narrow, the spirit of my question was more about games that don’t have displays and elements pulling too much attention from the game itself. I appreciate the response!
No worries. Paradoxically I feel like a pedant now for using the big word.
Anyway, that question is weirdly different from the "no HUD" one, I agree. Some of the games that make me look more at the world instead of at the pointers and indicators are full of HUD stuff. Somebody mentioned Zelda, which is fine. PUBG is a weird example, because yeah, it looks like a (messy, cheap, poorly designed) HUD, but the whole proximity audio and high stakes gameplay makes you stare at things like a hawk. We take it for granted because Battle Royale games became such a huge deal, but that was a neat trick.
Elden Ring and other fromsofts have the Hud disappear unless something actively happens with it sometimes. You don't see your health or mana unless you get hit or cast a spell.
I used to play Overwatch with no HUD. The game is definitely not designed around that, but I found I did decently well, and many characters have displays on their guns that relate the same info.
I know Jurassic Park Trespasser infamously used a tatoo on your characters chest instead of a healthbar to avoid using a HUD.
I did the same as you in GTA, very different and fun way to experience the game.
I always thought it’d be cool to make a no UI fighting game, with health being related by the characters appearance (ie more and more beaten up) rather than the usual top of the screen health bars.
Yessss I feel like developers really have room to get creative with visual elements like that for fighting games. For first person games even just the redness on the edges of the screen is good enough in most cases!
Both Zelda BotW and TotK have the option for a “PRO” HUD mode which only shows certain elements of the HUD at the right time.
It makes exploration so much more fun when you’re not (if not subconsciously) navigating with the minimap instead of the environment in front of your eyes.
+1 for Battlefield 1. That game nailed the cinematic experience and without a HUD it’s turned up to 11.
Have you played heists in GTA5 in first person without a HUD? It becomes a completely different game!
I never forgot the woman who asked me to look for her husband, I found him, dead, killed by bandits. She was in tears, saying life would never be the same.
Five minutes later I sold her stuff, and she was like “Nice weather today, isn’t it?”.
That killed every immersion at that moment.
It was Skyrim. It has fantastic moments, but there are lots of moments that kill every immersion it built up on a grand scale.
Like I kinda get what you mean but stuff like physics glitches and weird moments like your described just make me laugh.
Even in a serious situation like a grand epic battle the sight of a deceased character model slowly vibrating before launching into the cosmos is hilarious to me.
Or in your case a widow who’s heartbroken and sobbing then the cutscene ends and she’s just “hi how can I help you today?” in a cheerful tone and I just burst out laughing
Immersion is one aspect, but I also find that artists put so much work into creating great visuals, it almost feels like I’m ignoring the great things to look at by chasing dots on a map. I really just want experiences that help me focus more on the world in front of me.
It maybe works better as "suspension of disbelief", like in other fiction. You sustain it and you can go very abstract. You break it and things get weird.
I don’t think it’d be possible to trick me into thinking I’m not playing a video game. You can have 0 UI, and I’ll still know I’m looking at a screen and pushing buttons. Maybe way off in the future when VR has gotten a lot better, sure, probably.
I think it's less about being "tricked" into believing you aren't actually playing a game, and more along the lines of having the mindset that you are actually playing as your character. It's more like the difference between performing tasks, going from A to B, and checking boxes on a list, versus actually feeling like you're going on an adventure.
I didn't say anything about actually believing you are the character. Immersion doesn't have anything to do with deception and is more about being engrossed or deeply involved with something. You can be immersed in other things too, like a tv show, book, or tabletop game.
Sorry, when you said “have the mindset that you are the character”, that came across to me as believing you are the character. Also, I have been told in the past by people who care about immersion that that is what immersion is, so I’m still trying to grasp what it actually is.
I’m also struggling to see having a UI hurts immersion, especially since, as you say, reading a book is immersion, and a book is all text. I’m wondering, also, if maybe different people mean different things when they talk about immersion.
What is or isn't immersive is subjective, for sure. As far as a UI goes, some people may think that having a UI with too many elements or taking up too much space can detract from actually experiencing the game and its environments.
VR is decent enough that you can get lost in the game as is. Even if momentarily, like trying to kick the ball while playing ping pong and it falls near you
People get immersed in different ways. Some people get involved in the story, putting themselves in the character’s shoes and imagining it’s a real world. Some people get lost in the gameplay, enjoying the mechanics and focusing entirely on completing the challenge. For some people it’s TV, film, books, or just chatting at the pub and losing track of time. I’m sure you get immersed in something!
I’m on your side a bit, I mean, I hate getting lost, for me that ain’t immersion, having a HUD or being able to look beyond your usual sight scope is awesome and one of the best features of the videogames which are an escape of our mostly boring life.
With that being said, the other day I was playing BOTW (with HUD) in handheld mode in pitch dark (late night) with my headphones put on and I felt totally immersed more than when I play on my 50 inch TV, IDK, it just helps you to isolate in Hyrule that way I think.
I don’t think you can fully remove all the HUD elements in Ghost of Tsushima, but there’s an “expert” mode that removes most of them to make it more immersive.
Dead Space, my favorite game of all time. All HUD elements are holographic projections from your suit and weapons, integrated into the game world and moving with the camera. Your health meter is a series of light segments going up your spine, and the meter for one of your abilities is a pie-chart style light on the back of your right shoulder. Even the objective markers are a trail of light projected from your hand when you press down on the control stick.
Dead Space. Ammunition is displayed on your weapon, health and stasis on your suit.
Prey 2016 also displayed your ammo on your gun, but had traditional health bars (it was an fpp game after all).
But I like a good HUD if it’s implemented in the story, like Cyberpunk where it’s a part of your augmented eyes, like an advanced Google lens. Doom did the same with the helmet.
Regarding GTA V, I never got to know the city well enough to play without a map. That fucking town was just to big for me. But I remember Vice City, I knew the map in and out, and playing without a map was fun!
The Rock, Paper review in particular seemed to resonate a lot with what I suspect I’d end up feeling when it talked about how glad the reviewer was to not have to keep playing the game any longer.
I don’t mind the core elements of Ubi’s design, but they’ve recently been cranking the dial on the repetition to 11 to the point I find myself exhausted by continuing to play their games to the end.
FC3 was the perfect amount of Ubisoft.
I was really hoping for something more like FC3 meets Avatar and not FC6/AC:Valhalla meets Avatar, which looking at the reviews is what they delivered.
Most anti-cheat software can’t do much on the client side. Really all it can do is look around at it’s environment where it’s allowed to look and see what’s going on.
Most Cheat Software will run on a higher privilege level than the game; whether that’s as an “Administrative” user or as “root” or “SYSTEM” in a context where it’s running as an important driver.
In any case, the only thing the Anti-Cheat can reliably do on the client side is watch.If it’s cleverly designed enough, it will simply log snippets of events and ship them off for later analysis on a server side system. This will probably be a different server than the one you’re playing on, and it won’t be sending that data until after the match has ended properly.
Sometimes it might not even send data unless the AC server asks it to do so; which it might frequently do as a part of it’s authorization granting routine. Even when it has the data there may not be immediate processing.
Others have also mentioned that visible action may be delayed for random time periods as well; in order to prevent players from catching on to what behaviors they need to avoid to get caught, or to prevent cheats from getting more sophisticated before deeper analysis could reveal a way to patch the flaw or check to ensure cheating isn’t happening.
Since cheat software can often be privileged, it also has the luxury of lying to the server. So clever ways to ensure that a lying client will be caught will probably be implemented and responses checked to ensure they fit within some reasonable bounds of sanity.
bin.pol.social
Najnowsze