next »

[AaronG]

I have a question for the TIGForums design community.  Let me preface my question a bit first, though, for the sake of context.

Atmosphere, and in particular horrific atmosphere, can be a very powerful way of creating that sense of "presence" that, in a lot of ways, sets video games apart from other forms of media.  Some of the most memorable moments in gaming are also the most tense, unsettling and downright terrifying!

Three-dimensional geometry can be used to amazing effect towards the end of creating atmosphere, especially in a game viewed from the first-person.  Walls can close in around you, stairs can wind out of your line of vision, distant objects can reveal their true horrific nature as you approach and a simple door handle can be the harbinger of a terrible revelation.  There's plenty of brilliant examples of these techniques and more in video games but the one in particular that got me thinking about this subject is the Shalebridge Cradle from Thief 3, viewable in part here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8mQNTQCSaU (be sure you have sound).

Frankly, just thinking about it gives me the shivers!  I'd love to make a game that was dripping with atmosphere and a true sense of place.

Then comes reality.

Games are anything but quick and easy to produce and 3D games in particular are simply out of my league at the moment, both as a programmer and an artist.  I'm left with designing for two dimensions, a condition I normally embrace but in this particular instance am simply frustrated by!

How can a designer leverage atmosphere and a sense of presence in two-dimensions?

The question is as much for the sake of academic conjecture as for analytical problem-solving so I'd like to leave specifications like genre, camera position (top down, isometric, sideview etc.) and fidelity / resolution all open-ended.  Assume only that the game plays in two dimensions (that is, not DOOM-like 2.5D).

And lastly, for the sake of getting the ball rolling and contributing to the discussion I want to bring up the original X-Com as an interesting example.  A lot of players report the game as terrifying due to the Fog of War effect that's based on your unit's line of sight.  It's definitely scary but I'm not sure it really creates a sense of atmosphere and presence.

Curious to see what others have to say!

Edited for clarity.

[Christian Knudsen]

I think that what creates the fantastic atmosphere/mood in X-Com is a combination of lighting and sound design. Night missions are a lot more atmospheric than daytime missions because the tile lighting creates these small oases of light around your squad members, but beyond those it's a desert of terrifying darkness. And the sound effects of an alien walking around in the darkness only adds to that. As well as the sounds of distant weapon's fire and a screaming civilian.

[fraxcell]

Another thing that adds to the atmosphere in X-Com is the fact that (at least in the beginning) there's a high probability of dying in one hit if an alien spots you. Also, aliens can see farther than you, so even if you can't see them, they might still take a shot at you. This constant danger always has you on edge.

For other examples of 2d horror, Amon 26's games like Au Sable are great examples of frightening sound design and creepy flashing imagery.

[C.A. Sinner]

Not necessarily horror, but Altered Beast and Demon's Crest are both pretty dark/gothic in atmosphere, mostly by virtue of their graphics and music. Gotta love those decrepit landscapes and washed-out colors in AB.





Another good candidate is Shadowgate, particularly the NES version with that phenomenal soundtrack

[1982]

While "realistic" 3D games are more capable of creating immersion, 2D games don't have that. It is harder to make atmospheric games or some sort of horror. X-com worked very well because of those details mentioned here earlier. But those work because the game is good an addictive at it draws player inside. Rarely games are that good, 3D, 2D, whatever.

Scary and horrific atmosphere is maybe most challenging to achieve in 2D games, but making it sick and twisted and unexplainable can produce some sort of horror feel in it. Great example here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YX_HlhrSdhc

[AndroidScholar1]

Horror-esque atmospheres within videogames, or any media really, is generally done by restricting the user in some way.

Survival horrors generally restrict movement and make your character less powerful than the things your facing, or creating unexpected encounters that put you on the edge of your seat, but the restriction of sight via either lighting effects or the "Fog of War" is also used a lot.


I think one of the more famous examples of the sight restriction is the Silent Hill series and it's iconic fog, used to create a sense of mystery and uncertainty of what will happen. People are inherently afraid of what they can't see, hence why many people as children are afraid of the dark, and some take this phobia to their adult years as well.

Sound can also be used with this, and (not to overuse an example or anything, but it's a pretty damn good one) Silent Hill again used this to further the atmosphere of the town, with the radio static signalling an enemy, but never quite telling you where one is.

Restriction, both in the form of ability and usage, is generally used a lot - one of the more noticeable features of survival horrors is a lack of ammunition (which I believe the more recent Dead Space and Resident Evil titles came into debate with, due to the ability to simply purchase more ammo, and enemies dropping items), or even purposefully frustrating controls that make you go over in your head "should I stay and try and kill this guy, or just run for my life?".

Lighting has got to be one of the greatly used ones though - I think it's hard to create a horror atmosphere within a brightly lit game with a distinct lack of dark areas (again, what Resident Evil 5 was bashed for occasionally). It detracts from the restrictions of the protagonist (having a monster hiding in the shadows is probably more creepy than one tumbling after you down a well-lit open road), and thus adds to the sense of dominance they have - horror atmospheres thrive in environments where the protagonist isn't the most powerful thing out there.

So, for two dimensional environments, the same key features of three dimension environments exist to create atmosphere:

• Player restriction
• Lighting
• Sound effects
• Setting (less fields, mo' corridors)

[agj]

I don't really understand what you mean by 'atmosphere and presence'. Would you be more descriptive?

I suggest you play Metroid 1. It should be obvious, but don't use any guides or cheats.

One game that's fixed on my mind is Alien 3 for the NES. When you're alone and mildly depressed, I suggest you don't fire up one of these dark, unintuitive, punishing and confusing old video games; it nearly made me cry in angst.

[AaronG]

I don't really understand what you mean by 'atmosphere and presence'. Would you be more descriptive?

Absolutely!

Look at it this way: creating a sensation that the area is real and lived in.  With 3D geometry you can replicate real-life architecture and still create a playable space.  2D level design tends to rely on more abstract approaches to representing structure: floating platforms or see-through walls.  The goal is simply to make the player feel like they're really "there" so that you can more effectively put them in an area that they really want to explore, escape from or sometimes both.  In short, the player has a very strong sense and understanding (even if only intuitively) of the place they're in - sense of place.

Lots of interesting responses so far!  Thanks everyone for participating.  I definitely see a lot of ways to still scare, or even harass, a player in two-dimensions but I'm still not sure how to manage the above.  A lot of it is just art style and music, as C.A. Sinclair pointed out; the Metroid games definitely thrive on competent production style.

Also, with the things mentioned about X-Com I'm starting to think a lot of it has to do with occlusion, which is pretty easily achieved with 3D geometry but a bit trickier in 2D.

[LemonScented]

Did you ever play "s h i n e" from the Assemblee competition?
http://forums.tigsource.com/index.php?topic=10407.0

Scared the hell out of me.

As for the abstractions taken by 2D games (floating platforms, invisible walls - or ceilings in top-down games), I don't think those things would break immersion if presented properly. Almost every play or TV show makes heavy use of rooms with one invisible wall, and it doesn't bother people. Film uses a huge amount of abstraction - the audience's viewpoint is constantly cutting to new angles, places where an observer could never be - when you get into something as abstract and sophisticated as a montage or a rapidly-edited action sequence it's a wonder that audiences can keep up and stay immersed at all. Games are much more direct and grounded in a sense of place, atmosphere and continuity in that respect.

One area where a 2D horror game might have an advantage over a 3D one is that it can provide some level of dramatic irony, where the player can see the monster approaching but the character can't see it yet. Films do this a lot. Sure, you miss out on the big shock moments if you can see the monsters before they attack but you get a better sense of that creeping, rising dread.

[Ben_Hurr]

Did you ever play "s h i n e" from the Assemblee competition?
http://forums.tigsource.com/index.php?topic=10407.0

Scared the hell out of me.

As for the abstractions taken by 2D games (floating platforms, invisible walls - or ceilings in top-down games), I don't think those things would break immersion if presented properly. Almost every play or TV show makes heavy use of rooms with one invisible wall, and it doesn't bother people. Film uses a huge amount of abstraction - the audience's viewpoint is constantly cutting to new angles, places where an observer could never be - when you get into something as abstract and sophisticated as a montage or a rapidly-edited action sequence it's a wonder that audiences can keep up and stay immersed at all. Games are much more direct and grounded in a sense of place, atmosphere and continuity in that respect.

One area where a 2D horror game might have an advantage over a 3D one is that it can provide some level of dramatic irony, where the player can see the monster approaching but the character can't see it yet. Films do this a lot. Sure, you miss out on the big shock moments if you can see the monsters before they attack but you get a better sense of that creeping, rising dread.

It's also wayyyy easier to change the environment unexpectedly in 2D games. B)

[slembcke]

Somebody already mentioned it, but I think lighting is a big deal for creating that thick atmospheric feeling. It allows you to create especially dark levels and still make them interesting. Extra props if you have dynamic lighting possibly with shadows. I think the first game I remember that did dynamic lighting well was Abuse back in the 90's (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojrzuW2ZsEU). The game would often do stuff like drop the lights and then spawn a bunch of bad guys. Diablo used dynamic lighting in the dungeons to create a creepy effect too.

In general, I think dynamic lighting/shadowing effects allow you to hide all sorts of unexpected creepy things. Imagine getting stuck at a dead end with a flickering light. Put a monster there that can't be seen every time the light flickers. Or imagine jumping across a chasm between platforms, halfway across there is an explosion or something, the lights flicker, and when they come back on all the platforms are gone. Force the player to make a leap of faith into the chasm. Another thing you see in movies a lot is monsters that only only make noise when the lights are out. I think the last thing I can think of is eyes. Make the monster's (and player's?) eyes be lit separately from the rest of the scene. Then you can see monsters chasing you even through darkness as you bump into unseen blocks or something. You could even make fake eyes to toy with the player. They run away from the eyes in the darkness, but then the eyes simply disappear when you get to some light leaving nothing there. Extra bonuses if you can animate the eyes.

Gish also uses dynamic lighting/shadows to create a pretty good atmosphere I thought. There is one boss fight in particular that takes place in a completely dark level. The only light in the scene is cast from Gish and you have to smash through walls to get away from the monster that is chasing you. You don't even know which walls are breakable until you smash into them. While not particularly scary, it did evoke a sense of fleeing desperately. We tried to create an atmosphere for our game Twilight Golf (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhSq8jqxTx4) as well by using dynamic lighting and shadowing. We were going for a more dark/dreary feel than a horror feel though.

Lastly, music. More correctly, creepy ambient noises that aren't quite music. Extra props if you tie them closely with the lighting changes. Add in more yowling monsters when the lighting slowly changes. Stop the music abruptly for a sudden drop in light, and change the music suddenly when you bring the light back up after changing the scene (adding monsters or changing the level layout).

edit: Oh, and of course the most important part: Moderation! You can keep a tense atmosphere by keeping things dark and playing weird ambient noises, but don't abuse the player. Constantly dropping the lights to spawn enemies or modify the level can get old real fast especially if it kills the player without a recent save point.

[1982]

As for the abstractions taken by 2D games (floating platforms, invisible walls - or ceilings in top-down games), I don't think those things would break immersion if presented properly. Almost every play or TV show makes heavy use of rooms with one invisible wall, and it doesn't bother people.

You are basically comparing some sort of pixel mario to living real people? When you use real people (actors) you get huge immersion bonus points, no matter how they are presented. And yes, it doesn't bother, and mostly it doesn't work either. There is not much more scary movies/tv than there is games. Scariest games however have always been realistic 3D games with first person view. 2D is just too abstract to achieve any sort of horror immersion. But they are not abstract enough. Some sort of psychedelic and schizophrenic game with same kind of visuals and sounds, might do the job. Haven't yet seen one... maybe some one knows one?

[AndroidScholar1]

I remember a 2D game that had great atmosphere, and was even multiplayer based. It was called Murder Mansion, and was made on BYOND years back (where I used to be a programmer on various games before I got into actual programming languages):

http://www.geocities.com/supersaiyangokux/MurderMansion/

Essentially, a bunch of people would be put in a mansion where there would be various things to pass the time, and one of them would be secretly told that they've been assigned as the murderer. It's then their job to go about the house, at night, day, whenever, and kill the other players - the players had to have witnessed or found out somehow who the killer is, and then call the police to win the game.

Phone lines could be cut, electricity could be turned off, disguises could be used, guns could be found, etcetera. Overall, it was a pretty great game, for BYOND at least.

[agj]

creating a sensation that the area is real and lived in.  [...]  The goal is simply to make the player feel like they're really "there" so that you can more effectively put them in an area that they really want to explore, escape from or sometimes both.

Do you mean games that give the feeling that their levels were not designed to be played, but, rather, emerged from, and really exist in, whichever their diegetic context is?

But then again, the following seems to suggest something else:

In short, the player has a very strong sense and understanding (even if only intuitively) of the place they're in - sense of place.

Far from meaning the same as what you wrote before, you seem to suggest here that the game should have a certain logic to it, which is most often offered by functionally-designed levels.

Unless by 'understanding of the place' you really mean an empathy to the avatar's situation within the game world, i.e. really feel distressed by the environment, or whatever the avatar is supposed to be feeling.

[LemonScented]

You are basically comparing some sort of pixel mario to living real people?

No, I'm not. Not all 2D games have pixel art, or feature Mario. I don't see why a world and its inhabitants would have to be rendered with polygons rather than pixels to be scary. Whilst there are some brilliant 3D first-person horror games, the most well-known and well-loved of them (Alone in the Dark, the Resident Evil series, Eternal Darkness, etc) are third person. And controlling an avatar in 2D isn't fundamentally different to controlling one in 3D, it's just a question of rendering techniques and camera placement.

When you use real people (actors) you get huge immersion bonus points, no matter how they are presented. And yes, it doesn't bother, and mostly it doesn't work either. There is not much more scary movies/tv than there is games. Scariest games however have always been realistic 3D games with first person view. 2D is just too abstract to achieve any sort of horror immersion. But they are not abstract enough.

I suspect games are a better medium for scaring people that TV or movies, since (even with the abstraction of an avatar) the immersion is greater - on some level, the bad guys are coming to get YOU, not those people you're passively watching on a TV or movie screen. But I don't agree that you need to have actual human actors for it to work in games - that tends to lead to really awful FMV stuff like Night Trap. Digital actors (be they polygonal or pixellated) seem to work just fine.

The reason the vast majority of horror games are in 3D isn't because there's something fundamentally broken about 2D, it's that the genre didn't really exist until after 3D games were becoming common anyway. Not many people have tried going back to 2D to see if the techniques would work, but I see no reason why they wouldn't. If you want to talk about the absolute best way to scare people with fictional horror, the more abstract mediums seem to work better - ghost stories, or horror novels. They leave the person experiencing the story to fill in the blanks with their own imagination, and the imagination often comes up with something far scarier than a fully realistic image on a screen.

It's why (for me, at least) "s h i n e" worked so well. It's not about the cartoonish giraffe guy avatar, it's about the ill-defined, nameless, shapeless things that lurk in the dark, that don't make any sense even when you do see them.