Is Text adventure + First person RPG a good combination?

I was told doing something. In fact, I did some game prototype some time ago, but didn't show them.
This prototype is a combination text adventure + first person RPG.
Text adventure is inspired by "Lifeline".

The story happened 20 years after post-apocalypse. The player has been hibernated for 20 years. He was wakened up by the controller. Of course, the player has no memory but with hidden power.The controller call the player doom agent.
The player has to go back to Hibernation cabin every 10 hours because some unknown reasons. The controller use portal technical to transfer the player to world for different tasks.

When the player goes back to the cabin, he has to use text to communicate with the controller.

Skip the text,
First task at 2:00
Second task at 4:15
Third task at 5:30

I appreciate your suggestions.

Text adventure to carry out the story

 

I'd say no but it depends on 2 factors:
1. Target demographic
-- Some cultures enjoy reading but others do not and it's entirely a cultural thing. I am not sure which culture you're targeting but be aware of that.

2. Game style
-- Compare Bioshock and Alien Isolation. Both are FPS however one is dealing in horror while the other is dealing in action. If your game is action oriented, no, reading is not fun and usually a bad combination because you impose uninteresting downtime. Instead, having it being read to the player in the form of a recording and then accessed later is better.
If your game focuses on horror, then yes, the safe downtime in reading is usually preferred to lower the angst.

Finally, if we're not talking FPS, several games have adapted away from reading and into narration like for Divinity and Divinity 2.

 

This. Being aware of your target audience is important because what you believe to be a game that would fit their genre may not actually be what they would expect to be part of their genre. In the spoiler below is an example of a traditional text adventure game and an example of a more modern approach to them.

One important thing to note is that regardless of how different they are in appearance, they're both completely focused on actual text. I can't read the text on the buttons in the video so I don't understand the context completely but the fact that it shows the results of your choices in a graphical format says to me it isn't a text adventure.

You might want to look at graphical adventure games in the style of Lucas Arts and Sierra. Having text/icon buttons on the screen that you click on for a certain action to be performed followed by clicking the object on the screen or in the player's inventory might fit better. That said I feel like the switch between FPS and non-FPS controls might be too jarring.

Spoiler: Zork

 

Thanks. Maybe you're right.

 

The prototype seems not good.
Yes, it's not a text adventure. I plan to make combination of text adventure plus some 3D adventures. In this prototype, when the player agrees to do a task, a 3D scene will be loaded, and the game play become first person RPG.

 

@hongwaixuexi
The idea is interesting though.
But I have to agree with the others. Not everyone likes, text based adventure games. If you're going to include, text adventure stuff in your first person rpg game, you might have to find some way, to make it fun, interesting and appealing for the players.

 

Thanks.

 

Take a look at Operencia: The stolen sun.

It is a hybrid of FPS dungeon crawler and a modern tactical RPG. Although the FPS-part is closer to the dungeon crawler.

 

Thanks. Though it is not released.

 

EPIC exclusive.

 

I have spent a lot of time thinking on how this stuff works, and my opinion is that no - text style storytelling and first person do not work well together. Basically, text storytelling is best when there is more space for the players imagination.

The best text driven games have minimal graphics, very abstract representation, or have 'cuts' where the game splits off from the first person camera to some other completely different interface.

Generally.

• First person: minimum imagination. The idea is to make the player feel they are in the world, and seeing everything with their eyes.
• Text: a lot of imagination. The world is happening in the players head. Little/nothing to see with your eyes.

It's hard to mix the two of these directly without the game feeling awkward. It can be done a little bit, but it will always feel a bit wrong.

Text wants the player to feel removed. First person wants the player to feel immersed.

 

I don't agree with this. Mainly because "first person" is a broad category. If we're talking about fast paced action-style FPS, then I agree. Like Skyrim or Fallout or other FPS-action RPG.
But if it is a dungeon-crawler-style game with low pace, it can work. Like in Wizardry or the Operencia above. The text can be simple narration (voiced or not).
If you haven't played Divinity Original Sin 2 yet, I really can recommend to do that. It is a classic western-style tactical RPG, camera above, so 3rd-person-ish style. But it has narrator (voiced), and the additional text even without the corresponding animation is many times very satisfactory. And it lowers the cost of production, because you don't have to show, animate everything. You just need to put it on the screen and maybe voice it if you choose to do so.

 

You're right.
First person: minimum imagination.
Text: a lot of imagination.

Difficult to mix them.

 

Top down camera is way more removed than first person. You use top down to disconnect the player and put them in 'god view' - also, text in DoS2 is all dialog, and 100% voiced.

Think about my argument, I'm arguing about the role of FPS camera (full immersion) and text (imagination).

Top down with text dialog doesn't break that, because the text doesn't really need imagination and the camera isn't really driving full immersion. Like, of all text, dialog is the least imaginative and the least abstract.


Like imagine you had text that said, "Then Jim hit Tod in the head with a hammer, and he died". This is incredibly awkward in FPS, in FPS you expect to see Jim hitting Tod, not to read it.

In top down camera, this is a bit better. After the text, Tod could fall down. Much better than FPS, but still awkward.

In very low graphics or fully abstract games, this could be fine. A game like Crusader Kings 2 for example, you can have huge amounts of action being driven by text. It works because the game is very abstract. You never really see your characters in world, so text actions are completely acceptable.

 

This sort of thing has definitely been done before:

 

It was also done at least two or three times in Divinity Original Sin 2 also. Doesn't change the fact that its awkward having actions taking place in text pure text when you have visual representation.

The more you want to drive the game from text, the worse fitting 'immersive' camera is. First person being the worst. Third person being slightly less bad. Top down being not quite so bad. Entirely abstract being completely acceptable.

How much of the action is happening in your imagination vs with your eyes.

As the camera moves away from first person, toward pure abstraction - having more action in the imagination fits naturally. As it moves to something closer to first person, action should be driven by the eyes, not in your imagination.

I'm not sure how to better explain this. It's quite simple.

 

Ah, yeah. Now that I look closer, I see someone already mentioned a few good examples before mine.

Some things that might help smooth it out the "awkwardness" a little would be:

• If your first-person view has a very abstracted appearance (somewhat like the game i posted above) then that signifies to the player that what they see should not be taken too literally, so when they see a message presented they won't see it as conflicting with the visuals.
• Instead of just text, also show a still image of what is happening. A picture of two people fighting is faster/easier/less-expensive to produce than modeled/animated characters.

Some people will find this presentation awkward, but if you're a solo developer, it may be the only way to realize the game. You just have to use your own judgement to make sure it's working for your game. Some people will like it and some won't.

 

I agree with this.

Some games use little subscenes where they completely cut away the camera, like in pillars of eternity.



Another top down game. I thought these were 'ok' - but again, always imo felt awkward because they cut out from the normal mechanics.

Again, I compare this to something that had a really abstract view, like Crusader kings, where almost anything can happen driven by text and feel very natural - since the game is super abstract as a starting point.

Another note about those illustrations - even here - you will often find the best illustrations are not generally high detail. The best images that games use tend to be kinda vague - not showing faces, not having too much detail, etc.

I think this more abstract illustration is also the same idea - you're trying to help peoples imagination - so you want to leave blank spaces even when you're showing them an image.

__________

I dont agree with your last point. I think that if your game needs other mechanics, you should rework something generally - or try to build a tighter design.

 

https://store.steampowered.com/app/470260/Event0/