The Stun Effect

[modeps]

Reader 3Suns doesn't like being stunned in video games... so much he's decided to write an article about it (http://thestranded.wordpress.com/2009/11/25/stun-effect-has-no-place-in-games/)! Weigh in and let us know what you think. Do you hate losing control of your character to the point you feel it's a poor design decision, or is it just part of the game and you have to deal with it?

One of the most devastating criticisms of any game is poor controls. Whenever I read a review, no matter what the score, content, or criticisms, I take all points as subjective. However, when the reviewer writes that a game has bad, unweildy, poor, or frustrating controls I take note, and usually my interest in the game dies right then and there. I wonder how many others feel the same way. We play video games, in part, to exercise control in one small aspect of our lives. Impede or take away our control, and you take away the fun. Take away control in a situation where a person expects control and you frustrate, not entertain.

Why is it then, that developers continue to use a “stun” effect in games? I have never heard or read of anyone enjoying the “stun effect” in any game. The stun, by definition, strips the player of all control of the character for a given period of time. Usually when it happens, the player can be heard shouting and cursing in frustration and displeasure.

Three of my favorite franchises have implemented unnecessary and unwanted stun effects. The Gears of War melee stun was so eggregious, that in my little community, house rules had to be implemented. Similarly in Gears of War 2, the smoke grenade stun effect, in addition to the melee stun, was so devastating and frustrating, that Epic actually shortened its duration. Valve similarly implemented a stun effect as an update to the Scout class in Team Fortress 2. I have read nothing positive about that addition, and personally hate it. Competitive gamers have banned its use.

Check out the full article (http://thestranded.wordpress.com/2009/11/25/stun-effect-has-no-place-in-games/) and weigh in.

[pwnophobia]

Rogues in WoW used to be able to stun lock people with kidney shot from 100% - death without any fancy tricks or skill required because there were no diminishing returns on stuns.

I hate stuns.

Epic. Rage.

[JazGalaxy]

I don't think being stunned is ever supposed to be fun for the stunned party, I think it's supposed to be fun for the stunner, who can then set up a combo or a devastating attack. For them it's VERY fun.

[AlfredT]

I find that this whole "stun effect" argument has been going on for sometime in the history of gaming. It usually polarizes gamer factions into ones that think using any tool given by the dev, even exclusively and repeatedly is OK, and the other faction that believes overuse of stun/throw etc is unskilled and cheap.

I.E. Street Fighter and throws, Guilty Gear and the Insta Death Moves, Mortal Kombat and spamming punch, WoW Rogues, Ion Cannon Spam in Xwing VS TIE etc etc

Personally I find it a bit boring when I use the same 3 abilities to do the same overpowered combination to always win. At the same time, this doesn't mean I don't do it :)

[shpankey]

The worst is basketball games. Sit idle and watch animation 50% of the time. I'm looking at you 2k series.

[schmeis]

You know sucks, when you're the Quarterback and the other teams sacks you. You lose control and can't do the pass you were planing on and the other players keep trying to do it to you over and over again. They should totally ban sacking the Quarterback from football.

[Meusli]

Well wait till APB comes out, they have a stun gun for the police and it is very annoying.

[bean19]

Rogues in WoW used to be able to stun lock people with kidney shot from 100% - death without any fancy tricks or skill required because there were no diminishing returns on stuns.
L2P. ;)

Actually, in all seriousness shamans could frost shock people ridiculously but rogue stuns have always had an escape mechanism for every class. Druids shift form, mages use blink, Paladins have a stun removal ability, etc. I remember being super frustrated with them at launch as they absolutely destroyed me.

So this is a good example. I like rogue stuns in WoW as they are now where every class has a way to get out of them, but they must use a special ability that is on a timer to do so. However, Frost Shock before it was nerfed could be chained over and over to slow players so that they could easily be picked apart by shamans while also dealing excellent damage. Likewise, on occasion in Dragon Age, my lead character is put is held by one of various holding spells that I find annoying. Sure, I can switch to another character, and I do, but I like playing my rogue. . . so it annoys me even though it is acceptable design given the fact that you are playing a group of adventurers rather than a single character.

So stuns can be awesome, but they MUST be short and they MUST have counters in order to be awesome. Otherwise, they are cheese.

[ElfShotTheFood]

You know sucks, when you're the Quarterback and the other teams sacks you. You lose control and can't do the pass you were planing on and the other players keep trying to do it to you over and over again. They should totally ban sacking the Quarterback from football.

It's easy to counter the sack stun by casting +5 fat offensive linemen. :D

[digital_whore]

This guy's article is nothing new and is worthless dribble. You can complain about the balance of stun in a particular game but you can't complain about the mechanic itself. It's like complaining that all flathead screwdrivers are overpowered. It's nonsensical.

[Orphiuchus]

This guy's article is nothing new and is worthless dribble. You can complain about the balance of stun in a particular game but you can't complain about the mechanic itself. It's like complaining that all flathead screwdrivers are overpowered. It's nonsensical.

I disagree, a large portion of the comunity feels that stun is an unfair/unfun game mechanic. I personally feel that any effect that causes the loss of controll of your character is a bad design decision. It's just not fun, and why would you want to make your game less fun to play?

Forgive any spelling errors, I'm posting from my iPod at the airport.

[bean19]

This guy's article is nothing new and is worthless dribble. You can complain about the balance of stun in a particular game but you can't complain about the mechanic itself. It's like complaining that all flathead screwdrivers are overpowered. It's nonsensical.
I don't know. I think you can complain about annoying gameplay mechanics. For instance, I absolutely detest jump puzzles that require perfect timing and/or jumping with half your character already suspended halfway off the ledge they are jumping from. Though I loved Tomb Raider Legend, I think the early ones sucked terribly because of this (as well as countless classic games).

[Roc Ingersol]

I don't mind a stun or loss of control in general. If it's properly balanced, it can certainly be a useful tool.

Consider the rough analogue of non-viewable action in a film. That is, a crucial bit of activity that is off-screen, or blacked-out for whatever reason. Seemingly anathema (a chunk of movie without anything moving?) it can instead make for some powerful and evocative situations.

Unfortunately, stuns are rarely well-balanced in practice.

Mostly, they seem to be applied like game-design-Bondo, to hold the game together, despite an unsightly missing piece. Usually, the lack of proper collision detection or a counter system.

Instead of being a tool to convey weight and consequence to an action, they frustrate.

[RMan]

I disagree, a large portion of the comunity feels that stun is an unfair/unfun game mechanic. I personally feel that any effect that causes the loss of controll of your character is a bad design decision. It's just not fun, and why would you want to make your game less fun to play?
It's not as black and white as that, I mean, dying in a game is also loss of control, and is not fun, but overall, not 'bad design'. Lots of things make a game less fun to play for a period of time, doesn't mean that it makes the game less fun overall. Well designed games frequently benefit from emotional highs and lows, and elements that add tension, and well implemented stuns can contribute in those ways, improving the experience overall.

[TheBot]

Think about when you get a jockey on you in L4D2, or hunter in L4D1, or the charger. There's a reason for it, it's a gameplay mechanic that works. Yes they can be annoying, so guess what, kill them first or have a teammate looking out for you if you're point man. I think it's a nice addition to games. Yes it gets annoying, but it's part of the game. I don't know many other games that do it, but L4D1/2 does it right.

[gzsfrk]

Stun as a general mechanism is fine. It can serve as either a tool of the player (whether in single or multiplayer experiences), and it can also serve as a disincentive to performing poorly when it's an option available to your antagonist.

However, like any feature, it can be and has been implemented poorly. Yes, stun-lock rogues were ridiculous in early WoW, but were eventually balanced out. And yes, cheezers who get you in infinite/near-infinite combos (which are effectively stuns) in fighting games suck nine kinds of balls. But the stun mechanism itself in a broad sense is fine.

Now, if you break it down between on-demand stun abilities (e.g.WoW Rogues) and stuns which result from either a series of successful attacks (e.g.fighting games) or a proc mechanism (e.g. hammer weapons), I would agree that the on-demand variety are far more likely to be unbalanced, particularly in PvP play. However, when implemented in a balanced way, I really don't mind even those (although they do often fill me with rage, at least when I'm on the receiving end).

[yutt]

Quarterbacks being sacked never lose control of their body as part of the design of football. That was a terrible analogy.

[Vulture]

Well you know it is unbalanced when every single member of a clan in a PvP fps match has the exact same stun loadout.

But a big part is the no counter available for a stun. games that put in a player stun but don't have equipment/abilities/tactics to avoid it are might as well be scripting your death scenarios.


/Cue the Kirk non winnable scenario example.

[gzsfrk]

/Cue the Kirk non winnable scenario example.

Wouldn't it have been easier just to type "Kobayashi Maru (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kobayashi_Maru)"?

[3Suns]

Interesting comments. Just a clarification. Never did I mention "unfair" or "unbalance". L4D and L4D 2 are balanced and fair by definition. Each team gets the same opportunity to lay the pain, or run the whole field (with the exception of witches or tanks that are sometimes in slightly different positions, and known to the team who plays Survivors second). Saying L4D or L4D2 VS MP is unbalanced, would be like saying that a football field is unfair.

Negative consequences for poorly executed actions are good. Taking away control, however, might not be the best way to punish gamers. I am surprised however, that most don't seem to mind the stun.

Cheers!

[Syl]

I've played many a game with stun, it generally makes sense to me. Don't like being stunned, do everything you can to not get stunned.

[randir14]

Did anyone play Dark Age of Camelot and do you remember the bullshit with mass stuns that lasted up to a minute, allowing whichever zerg got off the first stuns to completely wipe out the enemy zerg. Dark Age of Mezalot I think was the nickname.

[brandonjclark]

I'm ok with stuns in RPG games, or single-player strategy or something like that. A slow-paced game includings stuns is ok. A first-person shooter, fighter or other similarly fast gametype shouldn't include stun. I dunno, I guess it's my opinion that it depends on the genre.

D&D = stun OK
SFIV = RAGE

[Anenome]

I can say this, rogues in WoW have stuns that are completely BS. Well, it depends on your class. Some classes were nigh invincible to rogues, and other classes were consistently weak throughout my entire WoW career against them, which made me hate Blizzard for it. I played two classes most: paladin tank, enhance shammy.

My paladin tank was so rogue proof that I used to duel rogues and win without ever once attacking them. Just let them hit me, and I'd end up reflecting more damage back on them than they did to me, resulting in their deaths, and often their utter confusion :P

In fact, once I was doing 2v2 pvp as a pally tank and my partner dropped out last second. For a minute I thought I was doomed, until the match started and I saw it was two rogues! I laughed my head off as I proceeded to win the match, solo, against two rogues ^_______^ And no, I didn't need to heal. I was a tank anyway, barely any mana.

But, when playing a shammy you learn to hate rogues, and Blizzard for how ridiculous weak to rogues they are and always were when I played. Probably they still are. If a rogue snuck up on me, I was literally dead before I could do anything. I'd be stunned, and stunned, and stunned, and have maybe a half-second in there where something could be done. I had rogues argue that a half-second should be enough for anyone :P It was maddening and frustrating.