Hi,

Below i have linked a survey that i have created that will help provide information about how players perceive damage to characters within games.

This survey is a part of my MSc Dissertation entitled, The Application of Character Damage within Games. This dissertation seeks to understand how damage systems have been implemented, with the final project centered around creating my own damageable character based upon the research i have found.

Any personal data that i collect will be confidential and anonymous.

I would be grateful to anyone who takes the time to carry out my survey.

Thank you.

http://kwiksurveys.com?u=CharacterDamage

Done. General theme of my answers was, No damage is not realistically represented in games. But honestly why would you want it to be. I don't want my game to be a gore themed shock fest every time there's a headshot.

I started it, but got frustrated that I had to choose from the set answers.

75% of the questions in your survey are hugely subjective.

Imagine this;

Survey applicable to next Crash Bandicoot game;

Is Violence important?

No

Next Bulletstorm game;

Is Violence important?

Yes


Two totally different answers based on subject matter. It's impossible to answer those questions as they could never apply 'in general' to all games.

I don't mean to be harsh, but surely at Masters level that kind of thing should've been considered before constructing the survery?

Did it too, I agree with creationtwntytwo on how "open" this is, I answered all my questions as if they were meant for some new M rated FPS.

I've always been a sucker for violence in games, and I answered accordingly.
If I empty 100 bullets into a guy I want to see his damned spine on the wall. In multiplayer games especially, the reward of shooting the arms of that annoying camper is priceless, especially if you get some kind of bonus exp for shooting up his body as he dies, some kind of Overkill/Vengance multiplier

It's probably meant to gauge the expectations of people based on what type of games they prefer, hence why there's nothing specified about the type of game in the questions. Still, the design could use some work -- there's far more nuance than a multiple-choice survey is going to be able to capture.

Done! But I agree that the questions were quite vague. Also,

11. Characters need to explode into pieces when they die

Is that when they are killed by an explosion? shot? stabbed? poked in the eye?

If thats just should characters be exploding when they die no matter how my answers no. If thats if they were killed by an exlosion then my answer is yes.

Thank you for taking part,

iconoplast is right the survey is designed to gather information from an individuals perspective, based upon what the individual has experienced.

I do understand some of these questions are vague/general/not related to a particular game etc and therefore need re-jigging, this will help me in the future.

Originally Posted by creationtwentytwo

I started it, but got frustrated that I had to choose from the set answers.

75% of the questions in your survey are hugely subjective.

Imagine this;

Survey applicable to next Crash Bandicoot game;

Is Violence important?

No

Next Bulletstorm game;

Is Violence important?

Yes


Two totally different answers based on subject matter. It's impossible to answer those questions as they could never apply 'in general' to all games.

I don't mean to be harsh, but surely at Masters level that kind of thing should've been considered before constructing the survery?

I have to agree, this seems extremely vague and its completely situational. Even something like "Character Damage in first and third person shooters" would have better than just GAMES. Surprised this is for a masters dissertation. Anyways, took the survey.

Completed the survey, but as has been said, 90% of those questions are subjective. Most of my answers landed exactly on "Neutral", because my answer to almost all questions was "It depends."

When I'm playing a game meant to immerse you with a sense of realism in its events and depictions, let's say - Skyrim. Yes, when that game comes out, I want to be able to stab someone in the neck and discard their lifeless corpse off the bridge we're standing on. But when I'm playing Zelda, I want my bad guys *poofing* into rupees and ammo for my bow.

There are videogames besides halo and call of duty? Took your survey.

Is this the 'why dont we have procedural bruising and fracturing GUYSSS' dissertation?

Reminded me of

You Tube

While the survey maybe vague in its construction, the feedback is exactly what I'm after. From saying that particular questions are situational, related to particular circumstances etc will all aid my study.

I too happened to land mostly on neutral because it all depended on the game.

"In a game like XXYY, how important is AABB?" instead of "how important is XXYY?"

I really don't care how damage is represented so long as I have some idea of how damaged the object, player, character is. This will effect things like, if I charge forward will a single hit melee move finish them off? Or did the entire clip of ammo I sent slamming into their face only tick off .2% of their overall health?

Most of the time I have a good enough sense of what my own health is without ever having to look, just through playing the game and dying. If I'm not given a sense of what the health of other players or objects is I'm more likely to set the controller down and walk away.

However it is represented, I don't really care just so long as it is represented.

Switch the game to a puzzle game and my answers completely change...

In some games character damage is a gameplay feature. In AVP you can blow the legs off the aliens and they'll still keep coming at you but at a reduced speed.

So as everyone else said "it depends"

I ended answering neutral on most questions since it's very subjective. I agree with vig. I don't really care much how it is represented, as long as i can see it clearly. It's all about communication, whether this is a heathbar, gibs, the character blinking red. As long as it's clearly visible.

Thank you for your feedback.

Yeah, very subjective.

Which leads me to believe you're going after very skewwed data for some slanted vantage point you want to present as "fact".

:/

@JacqueChoi ye, your probably right. There are definitely elements of this survey that will still be pretty useful to my study, but i need to give it a specific focus next time.