Magic in Video Games

[ReverseEngineered]

Having played games with swords and guns for so many years, I recently had the desire to play something as a magic-user. After hours of searching, I found myself terribly disappointed with the lack of games that incorporate magic. I ask you, fellow Escapists, what games do you know of that make using magic enjoyable?

As an example of what I mean, consider a game like World of Warcraft. From my recent survey, it has one of the strongest elements of magic, including several classes of magic-users (paladins, priests, mages, warlocks, shamans, and druids), a plethora of skills and abilities, and the balance to allow a magic-user to be just as powerful as a traditional combatant. Even still, the magic is merely a replacement for the sword -- spells are no more than skills which can be bought. Most use no reagents, few have any requirements beyond level, and the limiting factor in casting them (mana) is treated identically to the rage/power that melee classes use.

In my mind, magic should be magical. It should be something that few people use, that takes immense study and concentration to harness, and that has distinct benefits to the wielder. Unlike most RPGs, it should involve some measure of the unknown; magic should not be laid out as a science, but discovered as a mystical presence.

Do you know of any games that give magic this same feeling? As an aside, do you have any other thoughts of how magic should be included in games? What games did you play where being a magic-user was "fun"? I'm looking for anything that can make magic enjoyable again.

 

[Aiden Rebirth]

well yeah i get you there are no dedicated magic user games, but with out being able to slash stuff things aren't as fun.

 

[x434343]

Oblivion/Morrowind.

 

[geldonyetich]

In my mind, magic should be magical. It should be something that few people use, that takes immense study and concentration to harness, and that has distinct benefits to the wielder. Unlike most RPGs, it should involve some measure of the unknown; magic should not be laid out as a science, but discovered as a mystical presence.

Do you know of any games that give magic this same feeling? As an aside, do you have any other thoughts of how magic should be included in games? What games did you play where being a magic-user was "fun"? I'm looking for anything that can make magic enjoyable again.

This is a good topic, and a tough question to resolve.

By its very definition, magic defies definition. It has been used for time immortal to explain phenomena mankind has no understanding or control over, yet still exists, therefore it must be "magic."

Computer games are, by definition, something else entirely. Computers are rigid logic machines. Games have rules and goals.

The players must exert some level of control over the elements in a game in order to be involved. How, then, can magic truly be "magical" in a game?

I have seen some implementations where there's a random chance that magic can backfire and do something unexpected. However, is this truly "magical" or is it just a gimmick?

Regardless, it seems the players generally resent having their control taken away from them, and this is why "magic" in the typical computer RPG is definitively unmagical: under complete control, producing a reliable result.

 

[EvilMaggot]

Dark Messiah of Might and Magic (VERY FUN xD Freeze enemies, make them small and stomp on them)

Diablo 1 & 2 (... whats more to say ? )

I really liked "Lord of the Rings: The Third Age" with final fantasy gameplay, but a really nice story that is running parallel with the original Lord of the Rings story but it was only released on consoles.


Fate (havent tried it... but seen some gameplay video's ... looking good . )

 

[Say Anything]

Fable has a few unique spells, and you can play the entire game with just magic.

Neverwinter Nights 2 has many different spells, if I remember correctly. It also has classes like you mentioned in WoW.

 

[geldonyetich]

Dark Messiah of Might and Magic (VERY FUN xD Freeze enemies, make them small and stomp on them)

First good example I've seen on this thread. There was something about Dark Messiah Of Might And Magic's magic that seemed quite magical. I think it had something to do with how magic had a realistic-feeling impact on the world.

You could use freeze to freeze enemies, or you could use it to make a surface slippery and try to use it against enemies.

Flame arrow wasn't just used for attacking foes, it could also ignite things.

Given the way the worlds were built, Telekinesis had a great deal of function. Toss things, trigger traps, solve puzzles, knock back foes, ect.

Maybe the reason why a lot of the magic in DMoM&M seemed magical because the player had to think when they were using the spells. Spells often carried a secondary function by nature of what they effectively did in the world, and you had to think quickly about how to use them in order to survive.

On the flip hand, most games (like Oblivion or Neverwinter Nights 2) just give you a batch of spells that are set up in a very boring fashion: "inflict x points of y element damage."

 

[ReverseEngineered]

By its very definition, magic defies definition. It has been used for time immortal to explain phenomena mankind has no understanding or control over, yet still exists, therefore it must be "magic."

Computer games are, by definition, something else entirely. Computers are rigid logic machines. Games have rules and goals.

The players must exert some level of control over the elements in a game in order to be involved. How, then, can magic truly be "magical" in a game?

I have seen some implementations where there's a random chance that magic can backfire and do something unexpected. However, is this truly "magical" or is it just a gimmick?

Regardless, it seems the players generally resent having their control taken away from them, and this is why "magic" in the typical computer RPG is definitively unmagical: under complete control, producing a reliable result.

I considered this for several hours tonight and came back to the theory of game design. Every game is centered around a basic set of rules. How those rules relate to the outcome of the game is a mystery: it is a complex function of all of the variables that the player controls, as well as some unknown variables that the computer/opponent controls. Mastery of the game involves determining that function. At first it seems impossible to determine the outcome of the game, but with enough experimentation and practice, the player can learn how to influence (if not entirely control) the system, to the point where they will win.

Now compare this to magic. As one possible view of "magic", it is an external force which we don't understand. We have the ability to influence and even control it, but we don't realize it because we don't understand how it works. Mastering magic requires experimenting with and learning how magic works. Using this analogy, magic is just a game, and as such, should be able to be incorporated into a game.

Obviously there needs to be more to the game than just trying to figure out magic. The magic should be a means to an end -- saving the world or unlocking a deep secret -- something typical of current games. But one mechanic in the game should be this game-within-a-game where the player must learn to harness magic. Perhaps it could be similar to alchemy in many modern RPGs -- players must experiment with different reagents and test the effects of the resulting concoction. To give this some depth, each experiment could give clues to the operation and outcome of a spell, slowly increasing the caster's knowledge of magic. The more a given spell is used, the more the caster understands it and the better they are with it (uncovering properties of the spell, or just increasing their hit chance/damage). New spells could be discovered by trying new combinations, or by discovering "clues" during the adventure that point the player towards those combinations. To keep things really "mystical", some of the outcomes shouldn't be immediately apparent.

Just to be clear, note that this system doesn't involve any randomness. The combinations of reagents may seem random at first, but over time it becomes clear that there is a specific set that performs specific functions. This is the difference between a random permutation or mapping, and a random variable -- one is unknown but constant, whereas the other is constantly changing in an unpredictable manner. The former can be discovered, the latter cannot.

I think the other thing that's needed for a reasonable magic system is a de-emphasis of direct-damage spells and the reintroduction of utility spells. Spells that change the environment of combat, such as confusing the enemy, buffing the protagonist, or otherwise shifting the balance of power, make magic much more interesting. Combat is generally a bigger-weapon-wins situation, so more tactical and strategic maneuvers like distractions, charms, mind control, and other externalities, result in magic being something more than just a replacement for the sword.

 

[xitel]

Oblivion/Morrowind.

This, at least on the Oblivion count. When you hit an enemy with a fireball and their flaming ragdoll corpse files into the air, that's just perfect.

 

[geldonyetich]

This one's going to take a lot of reading. I hope you don't mind if I butcher your post into more discernible pieces.

I considered this for several hours tonight and came back to the theory of game design. Every game is centered around a basic set of rules. How those rules relate to the outcome of the game is a mystery: it is a complex function of all of the variables that the player controls, as well as some unknown variables that the computer/opponent controls. Mastery of the game involves determining that function. At first it seems impossible to determine the outcome of the game, but with enough experimentation and practice, the player can learn how to influence (if not entirely control) the system, to the point where they will win.

So we're starting with the observation that how players learn to play games is effectively a transformation of a mystery into something they can control. A fair observation, I think.

Now compare this to magic. As one possible view of "magic", it is an external force which we don't understand. We have the ability to influence and even control it, but we don't realize it because we don't understand how it works. Mastering magic requires experimenting with and learning how magic works. Using this analogy, magic is just a game, and as such, should be able to be incorporated into a game.

Under the observation that magic is a mystery that can be mastered, yes, magic is just a game, nothing more.

However, go back to the second sentence here, and you have the crux of one issue: this is just one possible view of "magic."

I'd say a lot of what you're suggesting here is less "magic" and more "science." This is a science game: take natural phenomena and learn it to the point where you can put it to practical use.

Obviously there needs to be more to the game than just trying to figure out magic.

Not necessarily. If you add enough depth to figuring out science/magic, you could put a whole game that takes place in the wizard's lab, just figuring these things out, and many players would be satisfied with that. However, lets say you're making a RPG, in that case...

The magic should be a means to an end -- saving the world or unlocking a deep secret -- something typical of current games. But one mechanic in the game should be this game-within-a-game where the player must learn to harness magic. Perhaps it could be similar to alchemy in many modern RPGs -- players must experiment with different reagents and test the effects of the resulting concoction.

Sure, that works. I've actually played a few games like this before. Consider The Witcher's alchemy, which has you learn how to extract and combine various parts into potions. Consider how Loom [http://www.mobygames.com/game/amiga/loom] has you learn how to cast spells based on musical notes recovered.

I suppose that technically, if you're going under the definition that the process of learning magic is the process of any game, you could pretty much shoehorn any game into this and just keep magic as a 'dressing' - the plot surrounding the activity.

Spoiler: (Expand) Specifics

To give this some depth, each experiment could give clues to the operation and outcome of a spell, slowly increasing the caster's knowledge of magic. The more a given spell is used, the more the caster understands it and the better they are with it (uncovering properties of the spell, or just increasing their hit chance/damage). New spells could be discovered by trying new combinations, or by discovering "clues" during the adventure that point the player towards those combinations. To keep things really "mystical", some of the outcomes shouldn't be immediately apparent.

Just to be clear, note that this system doesn't involve any randomness. The combinations of reagents may seem random at first, but over time it becomes clear that there is a specific set that performs specific functions. This is the difference between a random permutation or mapping, and a random variable -- one is unknown but constant, whereas the other is constantly changing in an unpredictable manner. The former can be discovered, the latter cannot.

Sure, that works. Just so long as we're on the same page that this is one possible way to go about it and not the only possible way to go about it.

I think the other thing that's needed for a reasonable magic system is a de-emphasis of direct-damage spells and the reintroduction of utility spells. Spells that change the environment of combat, such as confusing the enemy, buffing the protagonist, or otherwise shifting the balance of power, make magic much more interesting. Combat is generally a bigger-weapon-wins situation, so more tactical and strategic maneuvers like distractions, charms, mind control, and other externalities, result in magic being something more than just a replacement for the sword.

Ah, now we're getting into something else entirely, what it was that made Dark Messiah of Might and Magic's Magic seems more magical to me. Spells were more than just boring ol' "inflict x points of y damage" on foes, they actually have a realistic influence on the environment. At least, that's a pretty good way of looking at what your'e getting at here.

 

[vede]

Arx Fatalis. The magic system in it was awesome, from what I can remember.

 

[Tattaglia]

Dark Messiah of Might and Magic (VERY FUN xD Freeze enemies, make them small and stomp on them)

Diablo 1 & 2 (... whats more to say ? )

You mean... like Duke Nukem 3D... which was made twelve years ago? Cool! I do agree with you on Diablo/2. Simply amazing games, both of them.

 

[bkd69]

This is one reason why I was never terribly fond of psionics in D&D. Indistinguishable from magic indeed.

The problem is that all power effects have to be expressed within the rules of the game system, and the more categories of power effects you have, the more alike they become, in terms of game mechanics. In four color supers, for example, you pretty much have the kitchen sink of magi, psionicists, divine entities, and super science, so the detail that a focused mana blast seems to behave exactly the same way as a focused beam of gamma radiated plasma isn't necessarily a deal breaker for the setting.

So how do you design a setting with compelling magic?

The first question should be, is it a high mana, or a low mana world? In a high mana world, you can bid on lich grade reliquaries on ebay. Low mana, you have to douse a desecrated baptismal font with the blood of a virgin by a crossroads under the light of a full moon. Solstice optional.

The second question should be is it a high magic, or a low magic world? Now, there's no real set definition for high magic vs. low magic, so figuring how those terms would apply to your setting is probably a great start to setting a unique cast to your world. Personally, I like considering high magic as unusable by mortals, ie, no spellcasting, no special effects, and indeed at it's most rarefied, indistinguishable from coincidence, while low magic, on the other hand, is your stock casting of spells complete with magical auras.

 

[Fightgarr]

Dark Messiah of Might and Magic (VERY FUN xD Freeze enemies, make them small and stomp on them)

Diablo 1 & 2 (... whats more to say ? )

You mean... like Duke Nukem 3D... which was made twelve years ago? Cool! I do agree with you on Diablo/2. Simply amazing games, both of them.

I don't understand how Duke Nukem 3D got in there.
For me I feel like magic would be best implemented for puzzle solving rather than combat. That's one of the reasons that I dislike the 4th Ed. rules for D&D, they make all magic into combat spells. I feel like a good implementation of magic would be to have a select number of simple spells to solve environmental puzzles with, in a similar way that Portal gave you some simple tools at your disposal and gave you a series of environmental puzzles to work through.

EDIT: Never mind I now realize why you mention DN3D.

 

[ReverseEngineered]

Under the observation that magic is a mystery that can be mastered, yes, magic is just a game, nothing more.

However, go back to the second sentence here, and you have the crux of one issue: this is just one possible view of "magic."

I'd say a lot of what you're suggesting here is less "magic" and more "science." This is a science game: take natural phenomena and learn it to the point where you can put it to practical use.

Absolutely, this is only one possibility that I came up with (I hope I hadn't implied that it was the only view). I designed it to go with what you said earlier about magic being something that people don't understand. In a game (like in any numerical system), there are two types of inputs: controls and random variables. If the player can't control it, it's a random variable. Magic could certainly be modeled as a random variable, but if a player wishes to be a magician, that implies they have at least some control of magic. Therefore, this magic is not understood to most (hence, magical), but can be learned and controlled by some (hence, magicians).

Your observation of magic vs. science is apt. According to Arthur C. Clarke's third law, "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." 2000 years ago, somebody who could predict the weather was considered a magician. Nowadays, they are meteorologists and they study the science of how weather works. When the British first came to North America, the natives thought they had magical sticks that shot fire and lightening. To the British, they were just muskets. What is the difference between science and magic? Perhaps nothing.

Obviously there needs to be more to the game than just trying to figure out magic.

Not necessarily. If you add enough depth to figuring out science/magic, you could put a whole game that takes place in the wizard's lab, just figuring these things out, and many players would be satisfied with that.

You're absolutely right; I'm not even sure why I said that. I had actually realized that previously and considered making an entire game based around it. However, my original goal was to find another game (like an RPG) that utilized magic, and so discovering magic couldn't be the whole game -- there would have to be some reason for me to be discovering magic. Certainly though, the discovery of magic could tie in directly with the plot line (perhaps I wish to become a powerful warlock and possess the Necronomicon, but I must fight my way to it and must be powerful enough to utilize it).

I suppose that technically, if you're going under the definition that the process of learning magic is the process of any game, you could pretty much shoehorn any game into this and just keep magic as a 'dressing' - the plot surrounding the activity.

Absolutely. As with any true "game", the theme is only a veneer over an abstract system. It could be science, magic, a puzzle, or cracking a safe, and still have the same mechanic underneath.

I think the other thing that's needed for a reasonable magic system is a de-emphasis of direct-damage spells and the reintroduction of utility spells. Spells that change the environment of combat, such as confusing the enemy, buffing the protagonist, or otherwise shifting the balance of power, make magic much more interesting. Combat is generally a bigger-weapon-wins situation, so more tactical and strategic maneuvers like distractions, charms, mind control, and other externalities, result in magic being something more than just a replacement for the sword.

Ah, now we're getting into something else entirely, what it was that made Dark Messiah of Might and Magic's Magic seems more magical to me. Spells were more than just boring ol' "inflict x points of y damage" on foes, they actually have a realistic influence on the environment. At least, that's a pretty good way of looking at what your'e getting at here.

Yes, this was definitely an aside, but it illustrates one of the things that makes magic so interesting to me. It's more than hack-and-slash, it's situational. Arguably, you could make many hack-and-slash games better by giving the player tactical abilities -- trip, blind, gutshot, block, counter, etc. My main on WoW is a rogue and this is exactly what makes it slightly more enjoyable than staring at the wall.

 

[hippieshopper]

Dark Messiah of Might and Magic (VERY FUN xD Freeze enemies, make them small and stomp on them)

Diablo 1 & 2 (... whats more to say ? )

I really liked "Lord of the Rings: The Third Age" with final fantasy gameplay, but a really nice story that is running parallel with the original Lord of the Rings story but it was only released on consoles.

Fate (havent tried it... but seen some gameplay video's ... looking good . )

I completely agree, Diablo rules!
Maybe Oblivion, but all of the damaging spells look kinda silly to me.

I liked Baldur's Gate for magical stuff. Like the fireball spell or Cloudkill.

 

[geldonyetich]

I designed it to go with what you said earlier about magic being something that people don't understand. In a game (like in any numerical system), there are two types of inputs: controls and random variables. If the player can't control it, it's a random variable. Magic could certainly be modeled as a random variable, but if a player wishes to be a magician, that implies they have at least some control of magic. Therefore, this magic is not understood to most (hence, magical), but can be learned and controlled by some (hence, magicians).

Your observation of magic vs. science is apt. According to Arthur C. Clarke's third law, "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." 2000 years ago, somebody who could predict the weather was considered a magician. Nowadays, they are meteorologists and they study the science of how weather works. When the British first came to North America, the natives thought they had magical sticks that shot fire and lightening. To the British, they were just muskets. What is the difference between science and magic? Perhaps nothing.

Well, we do have one aspect (or difference between science and magic) we can work with here if we really are trying to capture the feel of "magic," and that is to preserve something that the players really can't control. Some strange phenomenal that puzzles and fascinates them and so, perhaps as a function of intelligence, the players try to get closer to it and explore it.

The tricky business is that, at the moment they successfully harness it, it stops being magic and goes back to being boring old science. If we're trying to preserve the feeling of magic as being magical, we might want to give it a bit more 'life' than that.

But then we're back into the original issue that if the players can't control it, it may make for a frustrating game mechanic. The best solution I can think to that is to not require the players lean heavily on it to succeed.

You could, I suppose, balance magic as being a sort of variable reward schedule. Gambling. It entices you to try it for the chance of having a great payoff, but still strikes you as dangerous - magical - because it is not fully under your control; magic/unexplained phenomena oft seems to have a mind of its own.

Yes, this was definitely an aside, but it illustrates one of the things that makes magic so interesting to me. It's more than hack-and-slash, it's situational. Arguably, you could make many hack-and-slash games better by giving the player tactical abilities -- trip, blind, gutshot, block, counter, etc. My main on WoW is a rogue and this is exactly what makes it slightly more enjoyable than staring at the wall.

This has been a reoccurring thought to me as well. A lot of RPGs fall flat because they do not give the players adequate choices, while many other RPGs are problematic because the choices they give the players are inconsequential. To create a wide variety of consequential choices is a major part to promoting the kind of interactivity that RPGs lack. Unfortunately, this approach also requires the most work in designing in coding, as each choice is essentially a new trick to teach the computer how to do.

 

[Aardvark]

Quest for Glory.

The magic in that was more of a tool-kit, though.

 

[Ex_ery]

Betrayal at, and Return to: Krondor (PC) were both very good at incorporating magic. But these are both early 90's games...

 

[JMeganSnow]

In my mind, magic should be magical. It should be something that few people use, that takes immense study and concentration to harness, and that has distinct benefits to the wielder. Unlike most RPGs, it should involve some measure of the unknown; magic should not be laid out as a science, but discovered as a mystical presence.

Mystical, computer code, mutually exclusive.

Or, to be less succinct: you're asking for the impossible, here. Nothing spells "not fun" like abilities you don't control or that don't work reliably, and adding in "reagents" or whatever just turns the game into a combination scavenger hunt/rummage sale. If there's going to be magic that is accessible to the protagonist, there's going to be a magic system and the mysticism will be thrown out the window. Do it any other way, and it's just a Deus Ex Machina and a tired old plot device.

I think it'd be nice if the system incorporated more elements than killing things and taking their stuff. A more realistic world and more utility spells and abilities would be quite neat to me. But asking for mysticism in a realm that is inherently built on hard and fast rules is just silly.