Crafting the Ultimate Asymmetrical Game

[@este5684]

the best asymmetrical game are the mario party 3vs1 mini games, theyre also the scariest in the whole game industry

[@flarfo348]

so true!

[@windowsxpnotfound6494]

Ended the most friendships😂

[@zackattack5803]

Depends on which mini-games specifically. My friends and I play 6 on game nights, and I'm convinced you cant win as the 3 team on crate and peril. Older Mario party games have even worse examples, too.

[@ciabattabuns9328]

Omg I love those mini games!!

[@nicolepanacho7128]

@@ciabattabuns9328lmao was thinking the same thing

[@danielgrantham3756]

People aren't ready for this conversation but Among Us is unironically the second most successful asymmetrical game

[@buraaqwasti7729]

At its peak among us was way more popular than dbd. Successful however?

[@batonrougehistoryclass5194]

what conversation is there to make of that?

[@kalebtacularz8259]

@@batonrougehistoryclass5194don’t be so dense bro. The conversation is that if this phone game blew up and had 90% of the world knowing about how funny & fun it is and it’s literally a mobile game then what did they do right & wrong and how do we incorporate that game into the discussion of the video we’re watching. What aspects of it would fit into this new perfect assym game??

[@youraveragespookster2184]

I don't know if we can really take Among Us into account when discussing this theoretical asym game, mainly because Among Us' balance depends on keeping what you're doing hidden. It's essentially an asym stealth game, which I think is too difficult to compare to the DBD-esque game proposed in the video. But I do think it's worth talking about which aspects of that game DO apply, though I can only really think of one right now Among Us' objectives are really solid, the tasks act as a definitive time frame during which the impostors have to accomplish their goal. Not only do they have a few ways to go about doing so (outright killing, manipulation others for self-insurance and possibly to toss out other people, sabotaging to make use of disjointed teams), but bad plays are still punished by the suspicion of other players, which can very easily lead to a loss.

[@danielgrantham3756]

@@youraveragespookster2184 Did you watch the video. The scope of it is all asymmetrical games, which Among Us most definitely falls under. All asymmetrical games don't have to follow the Cat and Mouse style game that DbD and others do

[@DoctorWhoBlue]

A truly ancient asymmetrical game that I always hold up as one of the best is The Hidden. Quick games, tense for both sides, and it avoids the "siding" with whichever role because who's the Hidden changes almost every round. Been playing the gmod port of it recently and having an absolute blast.

[@sway_onthetrail]

SEANANNERS! Man, I think of the "I can smell you. Although I have a measly shiv, it is quite effective when applied to the jugular" from the Morgan Freeman video at least once a day.

[@pawsome3796]

What a throw back

[@gagekellstrom3978]

Oh god I loved the hidden with tf2 and gmod. Some of the best social shit show games I’ve ever played. It was so fun.

[@Youre-absolutely-right]

The Hidden was great, I'd instantly main a whole game dedicated to it

[@-z4630]

I have memories of playing it years ago. Was amazing + open mic was fucking hilarious.

[@bodacious-hamster]

This guy reminds me of Scott jund

[@jsj0520]

You know what? I kinda see it.

[@WyattOShea]

Nah this is Jott Scund no resemblance.

[@romanlaton3921]

Thats weird because I was thinking the same thing

[@Frostmired]

I say that about Destiny's Datto

[@Blackfire459]

I'm surprised you didn't talk more about Evolve. Sure it had problems but its also an asym iteration that was not just a killer chasing some survivors around blocks of wood. Limiting an ultimate asym game to being something akin to TCM or DBD is kind of a narrow scope when other genres exist and could also implement a 1v4 like asym format.

[@cx29671]

somehow it was worse than a killer chasing some survivors around a block of wood

[@sepronlayden5189]

THIS PLEASE. I fucking hate that DbD is the first thing that comes up as an Asym game when there are ones with FAR better because they are more then just pure pvp at the end of the day. DbD is getting stale and has been for years.

[@ReavenM1911A1]

Evolve would have been a really fun and popular game if it came out 5~ years later. Run as a real "live service" game and it would have done fine. Hearing people complaing about all the "day 1" dlc is hilariously sad, we've lost that battle :(

[@deadhelix]

@@ReavenM1911A1makes me sad everyone thinks it died cause it was bad, when the real story is shitty monetization which led to dropping all support of the game. Was it perfectly balanced? no but it could’ve been had it not just been let go

[@plotwiist6817]

because people jumped on the bandwagon and noobs didnt even know that game was asym lol. came out before its time

[@Forsaaan]

vile scott cooking up the ACTUAL DbD killer

[@LSaltify]

The reason why horror comes to mind is to feel like a big scary goober. You need to feel like a character or thing that is stronger or better than the individuals. Only being able to be counteracted by a team and not one person. But yeah, after the years that dbd has been out it’s no longer horror. But still tries to make the killer feel like the big baddie despite the fact that you’re getting your ankles broken by a toilet paper Dwight

[@residentgeek2370]

Im all about being a big scary goober

[@NachozMan]

The perfect Asym game is one that is fun for both sides, whatever it takes to get there.

[@donyates7300]

Which is impossible. One side will always be worse/less fun, we have like a dozen examples at this point proving that.

[@shnitzel9052]

@@donyates7300 less fun doesn't mean unfun though. I think of Wesker games where I have plenty of fun on both sides, even though playing Wesker is a bit funner, playing against him is still fun. Not impossible to make both sides fun, but sure, one side tends to be funner than the other.

[@donyates7300]

@@shnitzel9052 mattter of opinion, I find all mobile killers unfun to play against, purely because of their propensity to tunnel, which is largely enabled by their mobility. Has beeen that way forever, and it be played solo survivor,since 2018. Is it all of them all the time? No, but I would say it happens 80% of the time.

[@drawkustuff2049]

I like how a lot of what your wanting in a asym game is deathgarden with movement and moving around to complete the survivor goal

[@FangelicVive]

That plus it had a 2v10 mode, which was super fun and not as oppressive as it sounds since survivors had an advantage in numbers if the killers group up on one survivor. That plus having at least 2 killers in a mode gives that side less frustration since they're not helpless against one really good player. Don't think I ever "won" a 2v10 game when I was playing but it was so much more fun than the 1v5 mode.

[@slavajuri]

Most important part is the custom server elements. Hardest part of these style of games is getting them off the ground and maintaining a player base. Custom servers would surely go a long way towards helping with that!

[@Shadowknight1224]

I think 2v4, 2v5, 3v5 and 3v6 are all viable forms of asymmetrical gameplay, since you can solve the "2 killers vs 1 survivor" problem by giving every survivor a get out of jail free card ability with a decently long cooldown and even adding the ability for the killers to lay traps/lock down areas (like in TCM) to create their own situations where they don't even need a teammate to secure a down. These get-out-of-jail card abilities can even be varied and customizable to work better in different situations, depending on terrain/map design and even against specific opponents. Likewise, you can just switch it up and make the team with the *most* players be the aggressor/dangerous team and give the team with the lowest members some super strong abilities to compensate (which would allow them to play solo/without coordination very effectively, solving the solo-queue vs comms issue). For example, let's say it's a 3v6 game themed around big heists or infiltration missions. The 3-person group is made up of superspies/the best heist crew ever. The 6-person group are the guards protecting the location. The 3-person group has a series of complex objectives and a bunch of very powerful abilities, but they have a limited time window to pull everything off before whatever they need to get gets locked out of reach and they lose. The guards are obviously much weaker, but you could have them infinitely respawning due to some cloning tech or whatever in-universe handwave. However, in order to stop the trio, the guards have to be sneaky/clever and use the environment/surprise attacks/larger numbers in order to prevail. And you can then have a system where the guards capture the thieves and put them in a really inconvenient part of the map but the player can still lockpick/bruteforce their way out of that place, getting captured is basically just a waste of time (which is the actual defeat factor for them). Having a set time for every match also helps manage player expectations of how long a game will last and will discourage (to some extent) leavers and AFKs. And this is just one example, I think you can have a lot of different iterations.

[@Sasquatchseattle]

I feel like an alternative definition for assymetric games is different roles/players have different ways of interacting with the game. Like operation tango, where one player is a secret agent and the other is a spy. Or natural selection 2 where there's aliens vs Marines but also each team has a commander/hive mind that's playing an rts. The aliens, Marines, and rts players have 3 unique ways of interacting with the game world.

[@Katana314]

Just gotta say, I love having this discussion! For years, DBD had facecamping, and many people just said "Well, that's the game" - but choosing to change that core game, while scary, is often worthwhile. I thought of someone making a competing game that goes cartoony-style, and has a team of animal characters trying to accomplish a heist, and law-enforcers trying to chase them down; there's plenty of ways you could apply chase mechanics, capturing/"hooking", etc. It's even possible for something like that to be E-rated.

[@cpt_hellman]

A pretty good asymmetrical game not many people talk about is scp:secret laboratory with like 3 teams one of which is a small team of monsters

[@tiazoh]

Hell yeah

[@shnitzel9052]

High skill ceilings & opposing player's options to counter strategies are so important for longevity. Especially in terms of meta. Melee's longevity can easily be explained in terms of its best character: Fox. By far the hardest character to master, and combo food if they mess up (and they do). CS, as you mentioned a ton, has some of the highest ceilings in terms of shooter games, and one of the ways they maintain that is by keeping the AK as the best weapon in the game. It's the meta gun for a reason, and that's because it's the hardest gun to master. And with CS's low time to kill, even the AWP (which is a hard gun) being meta is still 100% easy to counter. High skill ceilings and counter options are so important no matter what game you are creating, which is why Wesker is the best killer ever added to DbD

[@greenetea2284]

Whenever I think about asym multiplayer games I always first think of Giants: Citzen Kabuto. It was a really interesting game that 5v3v1 in multiplayer, with you playing game modes like death match and capture the flag with different teams of really different characters. You could play either some basic ish solder types, magic mermaids, or a giant pacific rim esk monster.

[@securoserv1405]

Im currently studying games design and production in Scotland right now, and i find your videos very informative regarding to game design, It's actually pretty helpful. I also love that its all related to my game. Just wanted to say thank you for these videos I really enjoy them.

[@thedoomslayer5863]

May you make the game that gives us what DBD cannot

[@securoserv1405]

@@thedoomslayer5863 hahahaha making a asymmetrical game sounds fun but also a nightmare

[@mineshawn8960]

I’ll buy whatever you make.

[@breckenharrisDL]

Dying Light's Night hunter invasions is the greatest asymmetrical game I've experienced, and it's a niche side mode that was still getting great balance updates years later. Both sides are powerful and fun, and it has stat balancing when you change the survivor player count. Super high skill ceilings for both sides.

[@Grafii2198]

A bit on a topic, I want to point out that the "Parts" system would greatly combat the 3 gen scenarios as repairing gens would be much faster in itself meaning the ratio of time it takes to patrol gens to time to complete them would be much, much closer and if survivors just do 2 gens at the same time it could perhaps mean that they will not have physically enough time to fend of survivors off of one for the other to complete another one. Basically moving a part of time of siting on a gen to moving around the map and searching for parts means that while the killer is patrolling the gens, you can freely and safely go and look for parts, meaning you are doing your objective.

[@lethal_pursuer_]

I feel like a big thing that people are missing with every asymmetrical game that comes out is that DbD has a lot of factors to its gameplay as a whole, be it perks, maps, and killers, with every single one of those being almost completely different in their own way. Maps have a large amount of rng to them, while still keeping a somewhat familiar format despite all the changes, and that helps maps feel fresh for somebody that's still getting used to the game. using TCSM (and i think VHS as well?) as examples, most maps generally stay the same except for the placement of some removable barricades and items survivors can grab, and a couple objective locations. With DbD you have pallets, generators, chests, hooks, loops [which have their *own* rng when it comes to pallets spawning], exit gates, even entire buildings or structures can be rotated in a different way every single time you load in [or even moved/replaced when it comes to structures, the non-shack/non-main buildings on Yamaoka's being an example], meaning a new player can't get *completely* familiar with a map after a few times being on it, which keeps them on their toes, and also keep them engaged. Even with players with 2000+ hours can't just look at a map instantly and go "okay i know this map like the back of my hand", they always need to be paying attention to their surroundings because it'll *always* be different. Perks, especially at this point in the game's life, are a bit pricey but with how many there are, but that's a consequence of a game existing for 7 and a half years with DLC. Just how it goes at this point. However, with how many perks that synergize with each other to do wildly different things, for both killer and survivor, I feel like half of the fun after a while stops being about the objective, and starts being about what sort of wack-ass builds you can throw together while still having fun. From stealth builds and (formerly) regression builds, to "meme" builds like Flip Flop + Unbreakable + Tenacity + Power Struggle, there will *always* some new shit to do even if you're familiar with everything. Of course that doesn't stop people from running the same dozen or so perks on either side, but that's besides the point. Same applies to killers, even on launch where it was just Trapper, Wraith, Billy. Every single one functions completely differently from one another, which adds to the the whole feeling of not really knowing what's coming next and not being 100% familiar with everything. Add-ons also play into that, with some powers making a killer's power work completely differently on occasion (pallets on Freddy or Rule Set #2 on Pig) or having some elements that would normally stop or hinder the power suddenly not be an issue anymore (think LoPro Chains, or Uchiwa), or even somebody actively making their power worse for the fuck of it (Speed Limiter, "The Beast" - Soot, etc). Ultimately, every DbD match is a near-complete crapshoot, even down to skill of your teammates and opponent(s), and I feel like that's a huge part of why DbD has lasted so long. Another thing as well is that most asymmetrical games that come out tend to focus on a specific franchise, which can possibly limit the audience. Friday the 13th, Texas Chainsaw Massacre, Evil Dead, and (soon) Killer Klowns From Outer Space. Thing is that part of the fun when it comes to horror is (at least meant to be) rooting against the heartless thoughtless emotionless thing that's killing everybody (although sometimes you do root for them if the film is poorly written enough) But with games like the three listed above, it removes the entire "heart/thought/emotionless" part to all that, and it causes issues on how things feel in general. It's different when there's an actual person behind the mask. Especially in Friday the 13th, where you could have someone going on a weird power trip, but not everybody is always game for that. It can range from an okay time to just being sad on either side. Especially when you can hear both ends as a bystander. VHS wasn't tied to anything. It was just kinda there and since I listed most of the other notable asymmetrical games I kinda have to mention it here too. i personally don't think it should've been a video game, but that's entirely unrelated. I also feel that even if another game were to take notes from all of this and have *this much* to keep things from feeling stale, there's also the issue of players (especially these days) not wanting to dedicate that much time to learning a new game, which is where I think games like VHS failed, as there was a LOT to learn with VHS that wasn't the basic objective. I feel that most people just want to start something up and know exactly what's going on without having to look up a guide or study for it. Just drop in and have a good time. DbD just happened to show up at the right time and had all the right components to remain standing to this day. Not a bad thing, just a matter of (most likely unintentional) timing.

[@xReifox]

I used to play a game that had the best (subjective for sure) asymmetrical gamemode I ever seen. It was in S4 league, the mode "Melee chaser", you had 1 killer/reaper and 10-20 survivors. The killer had multiples options of weapons to kill the survivors (could take 3 secs or minutes depending of the players skill) and the survivors could also use the same weapons but they couldn't kill the reaper, only knock him back or stun him. The game had a lot of techs for movements to get to high spots, to move really fast with bunny hop etc, so you had multiples ways to deal with the reaper. If the survivors stayed alive long enough for the timer to run out, they would win. In every game, the best player would win and both sides had their chances to shine to the eyes of every player in the lobby. Sure, the game is old, with an anime style and empty today but that was just asymmetrical done right imo.

[@rixypixie7219]

I loved Deathgarden and despite its...questionable later balance decisions, I also think it did a lot of things right. The movement, the collecting "parts" for the objective, finding upgrades to unlock and level your perks in the match, runner abilities with the same base concept that were equally fun to use, the limited charges to said abilities that only recharged while you did the objective, the oppressive nature of the hunter who could traverse half the map in .5 seconds, map design that fit the chase gameplay (structures for parcour and bushes for stealth), and the countless small decisions you had to make on the fly. If there was a drone on the objective, you either ate the aura reveal, slowly disabled it with your regular arrows, or instantly disabled it with your limited special arrows. And while the game wanted you to use stealth, it punished you for *ab*using it: the hunter had said aura revealing drones, an aoe stun ability, turrets that auto-targeted you, and the game would just flat out reveal your aura if you stayed still too long. Because the game wanted you to juke the hunter since they were faster and had a ranged weapon, but it also wanted you to keep moving as soon as you gave them the slip. I hope we get more asymmetrical games in the coming years. It would be fun to see more takes on the genre, especially non-horror ones!

[@The_Mister_E]

I wonder what redeeming qualities DragonBall: The Breakers has...? Huge maps and lots of hiding places, but the killer can both fly and shoot projectiles, some can aura sense (with a long cool down), and as they complete objectives they reach milestones that let them literally blow sections of the map to smithereens. In a loose sense both the killer and the survivors are seeking the same resource (civilian NPCs that literally do nothing but cower in fear), but they aren't strictly necessary for the survivors as much as they are for the killers. Any unclaimed civilians are destroyed in the the area removal blast, so it also causes a dilemma whether to blow an area or not. The gates (Super Time Machine) can be destroyed by the killer, but the escape hatch (Emergency Time Machine) can be summoned by the survivors at predetermined locations, though that too can be destroyed as a caveat causing a loss for anyone who didn't escape before it was destroyed.

[@CZARFAZE]

fortnite's thanos mode was the best Asymmetrical Game to ever grace us mortals.

[@thedoomslayer5863]

Hated fortnite. Kiddie zoomer trash. But even I had fun in that Thanos mode I'll admit

[@danielmikula1375]

One aspect of asyms that isn't really discussed much: match progression. In DBD, as the match progresses, there are fewer generators to do, so the survivors naturally start to narrow down the areas they must be to win the game. Generally, the killer gets more powerful as a result. On the other hand, TCSM has the map open up as the game progresses, more locks opening, more distance to patrol, meaning that if victims aren't killed early the match starts to swing in their favor.

[@maxsm_]

TCM differs with the black and white 2v1 gameplay by still having spinning, endurance-like effects, Leland Shoulder Hit, Bone Knife, Pit. it’s a strategy game with less mechanical skill you know your next move

[@djdepression]

You've described Friday the 13th. It was the GOAT.

[@LivingDeathGuy]

My favorite asym by far is evolve, that game is one of my favorite games I’ve played

[@ovisrose5168]

Man I forgot about death garden. I loved that game, still sad they shut it down

[@tartipouss]

I miss Evolve Stage 2 so much... It died so fast it was left in a quite unbalanced state before the plug was finally pulled...

[@36snakesolid]

There was an old splinter cell game, I think it was "Blacklist," that had an asym multiplayer mode and I would totally like to see a game like that come about because I think they could easily do the gameplay well and it wouldn't be a "horror" asymmetrical game. Like have it be 1 or 2 guards trying to stop spies from getting intel, and that intel is gotten from varying types of objectives, some give more while others give less (IE you find some documents, which might give a bit of intel but you hack a computer you get way more intel because there just is more data). That way there is the single objective of "collect intel" but you do it in a variety of ways, and the guards have to patrol and find the spies/infiltrators before they gather too much intel to send back to base or whatever. Is it perfect? No. But I prefer that idea than another "Horror asymmetrical game" because I think we all are in fatigue of that genre of asym games.

[@cardinaljake6167]

I think that the number of players isn't what make it asym, it's the roles each side fulfil. sure in counterstrike they have different goals, but they're both gun dudes that shoot at each other and that's it. DBD is often compared to tag, and you could have 1v1 tag (heck when the last survivor is the only one left it's a 1v1 then). what matters is that killer and survivor are playing different games

[@floofzykitty5072]

The worst part of asymmetrical games is actually the asymmetrical part - Asymmetrical games are inherently unfair. It is impossible for two sides that have different goals and abilities to be equals. However, this doesn't mean the game has to be unfair. Not many people really consider this, but CS:GO/Valorant are partially asymmetrical. Although you can have two sides with the exact same abilities (minus the ability to plant a bomb), the thing that makes attacker vs defender balanced is that the teams switch between roles. Even if, for example, Attacker is the stronger role, in the long run it doesn't really matter because everyone has an equal chance to play the stronger role. I think any "ultimate" asymmetrical game should have role switching baked into the core gameplay loop. I can't think of any other way to have a balanced asymmetrical game otherwise.

[@allither6310]

an asym that i feel doesnt get enough love is Last Year its pretty much dead even after its revival but its depth was amazing and it had super inviting community

[@f666j7]

omg yes

[@etourdie]

Just realizing, TF2 fits a lot of Scott's criteria

[@HistoryRepeats445]

what game is that?

[@etourdie]

@@HistoryRepeats445 Team fortress 2

[@Garaylo]

Honestly im glad scott brought up death garden. I literally hadnt heard of that game until like, maybe a week ago? and looking back it looks like it wouldve been actually kinda good? like maybe because i didnt play it i dont know why it failed or how it felt, but i wish it hadnt.

[@DeerestAshe]

It didn’t get a lot of support since people were like ‘it’s not dbd so I don’t want To play it’ It even got a Terminator license but sadly the game could never keep its numbers Survivors were upset that you couldn’t run a killer for a whole game and the power role was actually a power role. The game heavily leaned into needing cooperation with runners. A good team of runners could give a Hunter a run for their money something fierce. I’m really sad it never got ported to consoles. I feel like it would’ve helped with the player base A lot of hunters with bad aim or time management complained they couldn’t just win against good teams. The game was an AESTHETIC and I loved it. I wish they had just made it open source and gave it to someone else because I really Miss Death Garden :c I wonder how itd do today if it relaunched on consoles and pc

[@b3helit]

I love you Scott, you’re the only guy that is refreshing the community, or me at least

[@hxppy_demxn]

Okay freelance developers, you know what to do. Scott will siphon millions into your project

[@smokeyson436]

Scott “spun by Quentin” jund

[@kav1ar5]

at around 3:00 he defines asymmetrical games as games with uneven amount of players on each of the teams, which is true, but there are other factors that can make a game be considered as asymmetrical. take rainbow six siege for example, both teams of 5 players, one team attacking and the other defending, but what really separates them are the operators(characters with unique abilities) and loadouts that are exclusive to those characters that are only able to be used on their respective team whether that be attacking or defending.

[@tylerrassi4148]

Unironically I think Evolve was by far the best asymmetrical game. For those that don't know there were 4 hunters that would hunt down a monster with various weapons, tools, and technology while the monster would use its ability to quickly evolve to grow in power beyond the point the hunters could stop it as it's health and abilities become stronger and stronger. Hunters are divided into 4 roles. Assault which are the damage dealers and often the tanks for the team as well. Medics keep the team alive and healthy. Support buff their allies and debuff the monster. Trackers track and trap the monster. With several different hunters in each role there's all kinds of different ways to tackle the threat. At the beginning of the game the hunters are dropped in a massive map and the monster is at its weakest but will need to be found. At this point the hunters are much stronger than the monster but only if they can find the monster before it evolves which is done by it killing and eating wildlife. After enough is ate the monster can evolve and upgrade its abilities which also gives more health and armor. At this point the monster and hunters are equally matched in a fight. The monster will be able to take some fights without sustaining significant and permanent damage. However, if the hunters fail to kill the monster by the time it evolves to stage 3 the tables turn and the monster is significantly stronger than the hunters. At level 3 the monster is able to destroy an objective and win the game. Alternatively, killing all 4 hunters at the same time will win the game for the monster however if even one hunter lives the ones who die can respawn after just a couple minutes. Hunters can win at any time by simply killing the monster. This game was honestly so good! It was balanced and never felt unfair or frustrating like one side or the other had an advantage or was being carried by something. If you won you played better and everyone understood that. Map design was phenomenal and never favored one side over the other but just simply offered an arena to be played in and never offered any benefit for a given side. Overall balancing was great among the more than a dozen released DLC hunters and probably about 6 monsters. The only thing that killed this game was the monetization which wasn't all that bad considering but it happened in an Era where nobody was having any of that. But yeah, anyways... I love and miss Evolve. It was a phenomenal game and one of my favorites of all time and by far my favorite asymmetrical game.

[@regeoberon3676]

I would love to see an asymmetrical game like Left4Dead or maybe Dark and Darker where you have one player who can control the action as a Game Master type role, like an RTS game, and the 4 players are trying to accomplish a goal like escape, or loot the dungeon and leave.

[@marcelinho3dplus773]

I think if you want to have two killer roles, you can, but only if they are distinct. Like one of the killers is playing Dead by Daylight and the other is playing Resident Evil Resistance. Kinda like how it feels to play that scp game with the computer scp being more of a support role to the scps that actually go around murdering people. Honestly, a asymmetrical game like that would be so much fun, I really hope someone makes that someday. It would make, killing with friends super super fun, and remove the binary chase options problem Texas Chainsaw has.

[@skerpi4068]

best asymmetrical game has match replay that you can watch with your friends so you can laugh and learn

[@Frostmired]

SCP:SL probably holds up the most as a horror game Assyms that I have played: SCP:SL TCM DBD Davigo Project-Playtime Among-Us as well as some other murder mystery / cops and robbers style games

[@Imhikoyume]

So this is what an asymmetrical game needs to be- Not built around a theme. A true Invision of a game needs to be what's designed first, theme and setting is what comes after. Asymmetrical itself just needs to be a ratio between players on a team. You balance the side with more players to be "weaker" and the side with less "stronger". However, you can NOT make the goal (win condition) be something achievable by not interacting with the other team, especially such as a killer, because that killer is the fail state. Asymmetrical games are multiplayer, and multiplayer without it being co-op always means people need to interact with other players to overcome a fail state. After those aspects are completed, you need to stick with those factors, and not make characters have play styles that devolve away from the game that can be played itself.

[@alexanderperl6945]

Being able to kill Jason in a really convoluted way made F13 a ton of fun. Imo F13 doesn't get enough respect for what it was

[@deadhelix]

I know a lot of people don’t like it cause “it was jank and took no skill” bur imo it seemed to do what dbd envisioned itself being, a game a bunch of friends boot up to fuck around and have fun. You don’t need to learn optimal play to play F13 causw theres little of it meaning the gap from the best and worst player is lower and everyone has a chance to do something, as well as still having rng so one person who may be better can still lose to one who is worse (not getting any pocket knives ect.)

[@Ben_of_Milam_Music]

I've always liked the idea of an asymmetrical game where one team goes on an a Mission Impossible or Ocean's Eleven style heist with mobility based gadgets and need to use stealth, while the other team needs to stop them from stealing the goodies by setting up traps and can use cameras and guns. It would be fun to play both security and as a spy imo. I will probably never make that game tho, I'm not very interested in making multiplayer games since you kind of have to get married to them or watch them die without much in-between.

[@liamconnelly3115]

One of the things I've always wanted to see in dbd is a 2v8 but have it varied where the survivors might not always be on the same objectives and the killers might not always work together. That would change so much and it would be awesome.

[@BreadAccountant]

13:00 The subtle dota shout out

[@oneofthe12sionmains70]

Plants vs Zombies Garden Warfare was the greatest asymmetrical game IMO, since we aren't talking horror alone. The sequel homogenized the classes so I'm looking at the first. 8 unique classes, 4 on each side, all that played very differently from one another, and each side had a specialized class for its role in the standard gamemode (engineer could place teleporters since zombies were offense and cactus placed barricades and mines and could scout defensively). Every class was fun, had variations within the class, but the core gameplay mechanics were the same regardless, but most importantly the teams had balanced player counts. Games with asymmetrical player counts on each side will forever have the issue of the many needing to overpower the one/few, because any game where a full coordinated team that works together perfectly loses to some random guy won't last a month.

[@derunfassbarebielecki]

They should add a ranked and unranked mode. They dont even need to be different, the difference should be visible ranks or MMR. Overwatch does this for example, the only difference between ranked and quickplay (unranked) is, that in quickplay you dont see your MMR and you can be ranked with worse or better players. This would reduce toxicity extremely, because the sweaty players would be separated from casual ones.

[@PadraicSmith]

Thank you Scott. Dead by Daylight is Horror Themed, not a horror game.

[@nazodan]

The ultimate asymmetrical game already happened, it was called Natural Selection 2 (Evolve gets the silver medal for asymmetry)

[@yuikoo0613]

I would LOVE a custom game that modders can mess with to make custom games like hide & seek, training modes to practice killers, chases, skill check practice, ETC. I wanna play as Yui or Thalita but im frustrated at the game i'd love to load into a custom game but still be in the same universe with the same characters. They can even make it like Fortnite where you CAN earn shards, BP, or XP by playing but limit it to a daily amount so u cant just farm all day

[@MrDudeman9442]

To the part where Scott talked about games, not being scary after you play them a bunch, I can confirm this with my experience with outlast. The first time was absolutely terrifying, but I played it so much just to tryin to get the platinum and completely “beat” the game and the DLC on nightmare mode, that it wasn’t really scary. If anything, the scary part was if I died, I had to start all the way from the beginning. 😂😂

[@pandies4570]

One of my favorite "Asymmetrical" games was Darwin Project. While technically a battleroyale, it played like the hunger games. One player played as a game master and their goal was to run the game. It was super neat. But it did eventually die entierly. It was cool while it lasted, but i do want more games like that, Effectievly being a left for dead where one player is the overlord.

[@keltonschleyer6367]

Saxton Hale mode in TF2 is an interesting asym alt-game mode.

[@Minronis]

Something akin to the Hunger Games mixed with The Most Dangerous Game...Or I guess in other terms, Dead By Daylight + Meet Your Maker. Here's how I'd do it. -Survivors can work together or by themselves, are selected to represent their faction, and strive to either escape or be the last one standing, while seeking resources throughout the map. Their choices will determine basic abilities and possible starting items, as well as invest them into the world's lore based on the faction they go with. -Hunters would act more like the game's overseer, their character would also extend to the map that's played and they'd be able to set it up in a load out of sorts, before starting match making, where the Survivors are subject to their machinations. Resources that benefit the Survivors should give bonuses to the Hunter, sort of like a 'hard mode' or perhaps its part of their build where those benefits can be turned on their head later.

[@lucaskopke6886]

Honestly Overwatch has the best custom games system developed, even if the actual game is in a sadge state right now in balance and other shit, the workshop is insane.

[@deadhelix]

Overwatch is always in a sadge state when it comes to balance lmao. but I definitely agree the custom games are amazing and if they had a map maker it genuinely could make the giant pool of custom modes double

[@Chris____.]

16:00 holy shit, theres a Perk Search bar now??? it only took BHVR Half a Decade!

[@aaron1845]

Evil dead gets a lot of shit because it was both handled and balanced poorly, but it had a very good formula. The survivors need to collect 3 pieces of a map to locate the Khandarian Dagger and the lost pages of the Necronomicon. After finding the map pieces, they activate one or both objectives, which fill up faster as more survivors group up on them. They then need to kill the dark ones, and defend the book for 2 minutes before the demon can destroy it. Survivors get stronger by finding loot around the map, including health items, better weapons, and upgrade points to increase their stats. The demon needs to find and kill the survivors. The demon does not have any knowledge on where they are located, so they need to search for them. Demons get stronger by harming survivors and using their powers, like summoning minions. There's a lot more nuance to it, but that's the basic formula, and it works very well. Most of the game is focused on avoiding the demon, but when they do objectives, the survivors have to stand and fight. It's not like DBD or other asym games where one role is powerless and can only delay the other side, but the asym formula it has is very well made. It's a shame that game is dead now

[@epicface239]

As someone who got to play the fable: legends beta before lionheart got shuttered. I do hope that more asymmetrical games like that are created

[@cornmoss638]

You inspired me to start making my concept of an asymmetrical horror game, hopping into unity rn lol. Wish me luck and hopefully I stay motivated

[@deadlungs_the3rd]

What ideas do you got?

[@mccrii5701]

whatcha thinking? game design is always fun

[@cornmoss638]

@@deadlungs_the3rd & mccrii I am thinking of redoing Death Garden: Blood Harvest, making a parkour style asymmetrical "Horror" Game set in a post apocalyptic future. Today I got basic movement done though I am gonna be adding grappling, wall riding, boosting, and more. Think something like the movement in Black Ops 3. This game is gonna both vertical and horizontal

[@cornmoss638]

@@mccrii5701 Also its an FPS, killer specific

[@mccrii5701]

@@cornmoss638 Ooh interesting, so the killer is trying to shoot the survivors out of the air?

[@deadhelix]

I haven’t watched yet but I hope somethings about what evolve did right is talked about. I still think that formula could be way easier to balance when the 4 is hunting the 1, and also that means all 5 players are interacting instead of dbd where the killer only interacts with 1 or 2 survivors at a time.

[@kasianowakowska7984]

I agree. In Evolve, the monster was excessively powerful against a single hunter, necessitating the four hunters to stick together and coordinate to level the playing field. In Dead by Daylight, when a killer is too strong for a single survivor, they are typically adjusted to be less powerful. For instance, let's consider the old Deathslinger; his one-on-one performance was overly dominant, resulting in constant survivor complaints, even though his effectiveness in a four-versus-one scenario was limited due to his slow map pressure. Similarly, the nurse is another example. Her one-on-one performance can be oppressive, but her balance in a four-versus-one context is evident when observing competitive players, as the nurse struggles to secure more than two kills. Some survivors claim she's overpowered solely because of her strength against individual survivors.

[@deadhelix]

@@kasianowakowska7984 The problem with nurse isn’t that shes powerful its that she takes away from the only gameplay of survivor whos only “ability” is looping. Same with slinger to some degree but there’s the fun of trying to dodge the shot and breaking LoS and as you said low map pressure so it balances out. Either way tho it’s not “survivors complain something is good” it’s that the game was not made for a killer to 1v4 all the survivors in one place. Every player in evolve is fighting and also the 4 hunters play as different classes so you need all 4 and the monster has a reason to try and down or kill each on for different reasons. You have a dps to do big damage, Trapper to hold the monster in one place so they cant run, the medic to keep everyone up, and a 4th class that I don’t fully remember their role but I think it involved weakening the monster for the team. Im thay scenario each person has a reason to exist and fight. In dbd when a nurse downs your teammate you just sit there and let it happen, and when she “chases” you again all you can do is run so you don’t get to interact with your team whereas evolve you are constantly helping eachother. It’s a matter of different gameplay making the power difference work, and also again the monster was made to 4v1 because they are the one being hunted at the start. Even then it was not always fair. There was a monster in the game called wraith who was essentially the nurse of that game and off the bat they could kill 1 or 2 hunters with ease, and after evolving just 1 time out of 3 they were able to wipe teams and it was also not fun to go against. If something in a game feels helpless to go against it no one will want to go against it.

[@kasianowakowska7984]

@@deadhelix I know. I don't understand why you responded that way. Perhaps you misunderstood me, thinking I said survivors always complain when a killer is strong because they have a hard time. You know, like the mentality some people have. But that's not the case. I was just agreeing with you when you said, "it would make it easier to balance when the 4 hunt the 1 since all 5 players are interacting." The reason why I think you are right is, as I mentioned, in Dead by Daylight when the killer is strong in a 1v1, it can be good in terms of balance but not in terms of fun, which makes it hard to balance. That's why I consider the Nurse balanced (in terms of optimal play on both sides) but she is not fun to play against, precisely because of what you said.

[@wesleybrock315]

Asymmetric can also speak to the relative power of the players. Which is true in DBD.

[@PsychoMachado]

The game should be on a set timer. If the survivors don't escape in 15 minutes, the match ends and the killer wins, for example. The players should also not be eliminated from the match, it should stay a 4v1 for the entire game. With this, instead of the killer working towards eliminating the survivors, his goal now is to cause pain and delay them as much as possible. The longer the match, the better. And for games where you're dominating, it could have something like with every survivor on the hook the time goes faster, so games could also end in 8 or 6 minutes. And if you think that is too long, tweak the numbers a bit.

[@donyates7300]

Might wanna look up the 3 gens meta from a few months ago….your idea would literally remove all skill from killer.

[@PsychoMachado]

@@donyates7300 Not quite, because if you just 3-gen, you're not inflincting pain, you're not hooking survivors. The Entity doesn't like slackers. And I forgot to mention that each gen completed shortens the timer, so the killer is losing points because it wants to delay the game as much as possible and with the timer shortened, that's not possible. So the timer is capped at 15m, but if with each gen done the timer is short by 1,5 minute, you don't want to just wait for 4 gens to be done and lose 6 whole minutes. Also, since now you're balancing it for a constant 4v1, it's easier to tweak numbers, because you don't have to consider how the game progresses when the first survivor is killed, or countermeasures against camping and tunneling. You just give them less points. The Entity wants diversity, playing with the same toy is no fun. The tunneled survivor isn't punished that harshly because he'll still be at the game instead of being removed on minute two. And the high tier killers would be slightly less oppressive because you can't remove a player from the game, you're constantly playing 4v1. If you think "wouldn't work because of X", think of how to change it. "Then the killer would hook two survivors closely and guard them", have the survivors die after 30 seconds on the hook, give a bunch of points and respawn away from the killer. Just throw stuff around and have fun Note: this is not a tweak, or a simple patch, this would be a full rework of how the game goes, so probably would be better to do a "DBD 2".

[@dayman4593]

all problems in dbd are fixed when skillchecks are replaced with a mini section of a guitar hero song

[@iraeus4188]

A bit of a weird example, but I think the Infection gamemode in Halo quite often had an asymmetrical dynamic, especially with some of the more creative custom games in 3 and Reach. But otherwise I think Evolve stage 2 had a lot of promise and was really fun for a while. Most games that try and copy DBD's blueprint put the pressure on the 1 player side to be efficient and end the game quickly, whereas Evolve very much made the 4 player side the aggressors from the start, which I don't think any other asym has done (could be wrong).

[@tobymardis1009]

You made me remember that Halo gamemode Juggernaut

[@meistersalomon]

There are TF2 servers that run the Saxton Hale mod to this day. There is demand for asymmetrical non horror games. It just needs someone to capitalize on it

[@realjimmycasket]

If they did the part mechanic, they could do something like, a 40 second gen time. Then the BNP could be reworked to allow you to instantly start repairing a 60-70 seconds generator.

[@unspeakableamalgamate8756]

Modders did make a prop hunt game mode for dbd, there's vids up about it, I don't know if it's still being developed though

[@nicolepanacho7128]

i dont really have a problem with generators, if you are actively evaluating ever drop of information and logically processing it then you can deduce a lot of the happenings in the match

[@Thomastm33]

There are more ways to counter the Knight then just get hit. There was an interesting video from a P100 Knight describing it actually.

[@jessewilkin]

Asymmetrical I always interpreted as different mechanics for each side

[@thewrightone13jack]

A sci-fi parkour game where you run from your robot overloads while sabotaging computers could be interesting 🤔

[@MastermindRidendo]

I would like some alternate gamemodes, I'm starting to feel gloomy whenever I load up DBD. I LOVE killer, I do, but I'm starting to get burnt out on it to the point I hesitate to que up, I'm sitting there thinking of a thousand things to look out for and think of before I even hit the que button and it's making me just go "Oh no I don't wanna do this anymore." and eventually even if I get a 2k 3k or 4k I don't feel accomplished just relieved it didn't go as bad as it could have for me. Survivor I don't get this way, but there are times I start going "Oh of course why wouldn't it be this killer." or "Yeah that's right all of you sit on the gen don't mind me going to phase 2 or anything." and the frustration grows. It would be nice to just have a mess around mode, think about nothing but just messing around and laughing which is really hard to do in a normal game setting cause even if you're playing chill good time Killer, the 4 survivors are probably playing like this is the end of their life, or if you're playing chill meme survivor the killer is gonna smash you and your teammates are gonna juice them and your meme attempts will mean nothing and no good times are had by anyone.

[@REDI2UM]

Before you can make the perfect asymm game, you need to first decide how you want the game to feel. If you want it to be intense, scary, immersive, and encompass the horror/survival-horror genre - then you'll most likely need a slower paced game with a further destination of winning a match. So easily a match time of 20 minutes or higher. This also ensures that repetitious playing doesn't wear off the affect the game should have on you - because experiences will be spaced out further apart. However if you want the game to be faster with match times of only 10-15 minutes, then you should drop trying to make things intense & scary, because a player's exposure is going to wear off a lot quicker. This is something DBD, F13, and TCSM failed at. However, I said nothing about aesthetic. You can still adopt a horror aesthetic - but instead of calling your gameplay horror/survival-horror.... you instead call it *Slasher.* For DBD, F13, and TCSM - they're all essentially asymm-slasher games. Not horror. Not survival. *Slasher.* Expect the violence. Expect the killing. And expect the escaping. Had these games leaned into only their horror aesthetic but made no attempts to make the gameplay scary/intense/immersive - these games could've incorporated wildly different mechanics and objectives - and supported the repetitious playing with quicker matches, by prioritizing fun, over realism or intensity. DBD should be point based. Not about escapes - Nor Kills. *Just Points.* Can still hook survivors for points, or do gens to get points. But by making the objective *"Get more points"* you can include an economy of things that earn players points, that makes the objective for killer & survivor, repeatable but not repetitive & tedious.

[@Kerruo]

Deathgarden had so much potential imo. Also Evolve deserved better than this.

[@dr.archaeopteryx5512]

For non-horror maybe-asymmetrical Games, it feels odd that people don't talk about Primal Carnage (extinction) and Depth more. They both work quite differently from DBD and while I wouldn't call either masterpieces, aspiring asym game devs should probably take at least some inspiration from their successes and failures. Their teams are pretty even in size, but the teams work and play radically different, even moreso than they do in some undeniably asym games.

[@Frostmired]

Davigo is a fun nonhorror

[@mryukicho]

I agree with Scott

[@anitoancognita7060]

Hey sister, we ate that family and left no crumbles, period👄💅

[@jamescarrotcsl8]

very minor point but i disagree for the point about new player lobbies not have dlc killers at 10:33 , ive played this game on 3 different accounts and swfd with people who are brand new and the killer difference isnt that big , the main outlier is probably trapper but the rest is pretty in line with the overall popularity with very similar killers (ie huntress wesker wraith blight ghostface) being popular

[@jamescarrotcsl8]

id argue this point could be argued more to perks than killers

[@3xpression296]

As an older gamer, I'm going to have to kindly disagree with "best assym game" being DBD. Splinter Cell Pandora Tomorrows MP (3 spies vs 2 Mercs) was so dope. It was so ahead of its time. If that was remade today, it would be WILDLY popular.

[@Benji1922]

Yeah this type of asym game sounds great. If someone made a pitch for this type of game I would throw a couple bucks at it. I basically want dbd but better, so Im always keeping an eye out for asyms out there. Pretty much every asym game that has come eventually died but they were fun while they lasted.

[@rabbidguarddog]

The stickening...this is my idea for a asymmetrical horror game. One player runs around with a stick and tries to poke the other fleeing players to death. The fleeing players and only scream, run away and die. Thanks for reading my stupid comment.

[@polarsix_hello]

hes just describing deathgarden i miss that game 😔

[@wafflegeddon]

I think if they made a 2v8 for DBD, i think the best idea for balance would be to either remove or limit perk slots and allow no addons. At least in the beginning to understand a baseline.

[@donyates7300]

There would be a meta of a few pairs of killers, especially if they don’t literally double the size of all maps.

[@SuspiciousBox]

best asym I've played so far was Evolve

[@TheJGSkull]

I think your view on this comes from mainly playing / being exposed to horror asym games and the hype they tend to get. There's a bunch of asym games on different platforms, my favorite being VR asym games and there's a bunch of them. Most of these aren't as big and expansive as you want and are relatively small and casual within a niche. Horror Asyms are like Smash and platform fighters, where their well known among the common person, but they're not the entire market. (edited for bad grammar)

[@thedoomslayer5863]

Quest pro owner here, and thinking about upgrading to quest 3 and VR Enjoyer. Tell me more about these VR Asym games I heard of one I REALLY liked the concept of but forgot the name of It has four PC players go against one player in VR and the VR player was like the raid boss while the four PC players had to take it down. The concept looked so cool but it took too long to come out so I forgot about it

[@mccrii5701]

personally I loved Friday the 13th's asymmetrical aspects. Survivors had to work with each other but also be selfish with who gets cars supplies and weapons

[@iHateHandlesGetRidOfThis]

my favorite asymmetrical game (despite the developers) is scp: secret laboratory

[@WolfBlade606]

ok so im only a third through the video and i have an idea, asym thats 2v4-6, the 2 player team has a unique dynamic of one person on the ground, another as a sort of support role, like the computer in scp:sl or the pov of an rts game. now what kinda game would that be?

[@DerPekko]

Resident Evil Resistance was extremly fun, especially with all the content updates but eventually they stopped supporting the game and made some questionable balancing adjustments, which lead to its sad downfall.

[@evstergaming839]

Someone needs to revive White Noise 2, I loved that game but it died pretty quick

[@RaffoPhantom]

Funny how you mention Deathgarden since that game was also made by Behaviour. I really did enjoy it, sad it died while DBD strives. Also what you described there at the end was pretty much Deathgarden to the tee. Weird.

[@derpudeldestodes4614]

The best game of this genre would be an acesymmetrical game. Everybody plays as Ace Visconti from the hit game Dead By Daylight.

[@SKako64]

Zombie Master the old source mod was pretty good

[@PadraicSmith]

On the topic, moreover, I think that Evolve had a really interesting concept and could have gone a long way if the merc roles were more fulfilling.