Vampyr - The Best Unfinished Game

51457155

11 March 2024 | Elad Cohen

Disclaimer

This article is an analysis of Vampyr’s game design, I will go over everything from story and narrative design, to gameplay design, level design and boss design. This article represents my own personal opinions and ideas.

In this article I take a critical approach when analyzing the game more often than not. This however does NOT mean I didn’t enjoy the game or I wouldn’t recommend it. Moreover as a game designer myself I know full well of the constrains, time limits and budgets imposed to designers and developers as a whole, and as such none of this article is meant as a personal or professional attack of the abilities or ideas of anyone involved with the development of Vampyr.

In the name of learning and improving as game designers I criticize and describe every issue I felt was present in the game, even when fixing that issue or testing those systems so intricately isn’t feasible for most games (even double A games such as Vampyr). I describe the issues that would have to be fixed and my approaches to fixing those issues in order to achieve the maximum potential of the absolute brilliant ideas in Vampyr (be it the premise, the systems, or the story).

Finally, none of this is written with the intention of moving people away from Vampyr and convincing anyone to not try it out themselves, this isn’t a game “review” this is an in depth analysis of the design. I personally enjoyed Vampyr a lot, some moments will stick with me for a long time and I would recommend the game to anyone that thinks they might be interested in what Vampyr has to offer.

This analysis contains heavy spoilers, so if you haven’t played Vampyr yet and are considering to play it in the future, I recommend to come back here once you have finished playing.

With that said, thank you and I hope you enjoy reading this article as much as I did writing it.

Story And Narrative Design

World Building

World Building And Set Up

Vampyr is set up in 1918 London right after the first world war. The world is mostly similar to our own, but as the name suggests, vampires exist. Vampires in vampyr come in a few variations that we meet while playing:

  1. Ekons – Ekons are the “human” vampires and seem to be the most sophisticated and pure kind of vampires.
  2. Skals – Skals are the “monster” type vampires, generally looking more deformed and look clearly dead.
  3. Vulkods – Those vampires are the “mindless” vampires, they are all about muscle and little thought, we meet those as enforcers of vampire law of the Ascalon club.

The qualities of vampires are the classical  qualities that you can expect from a vampire, they are susceptible to sunlight and fire, however those will not kill them, only hurt them, they can’t enter uninvited and are repelled by religious symbolism, and can sire children by allowing them to drink their blood.

History of vampires

For Vampyr’s special twist on the history of vampires, there is a godlike entity referred to as the red queen, that entity seems to not care much about the world and only exists to inflict her wrath on the world in an endless cycle. One of her children is the opposing force in that cycle. Whenever the red queen wakes up her son will choose a “champion” and sire him as a vampire child in order to fight off the red queen and stop her from destroying the world.

The red queen’s means of inflicting pain on the world is through an infection that spreads through biting and blood transfusions, this infection will kill the human infected making him a mindless skal that will hunt everything in sight. This infection was referred to as the “blood of hate”. Skals can be peaceful just as Ekons can however those infected with the blood of hate will seek to kill everything that is not infected and infect it in turn.

This will go on until the champion manages to defeat the red queen’s avatar in our world, at which point she and her son will return to their slumber until the next time. It is said that this cycle repeats every few hundred years. It is not clear if this is the origin of all vampires or just a few Ekons.

State of London

In London there are three main bodies that act to keep the order as they see fit, the first is the “Ascalon club”, the club is a male only club of high power vampire and non-vampires that works in its own interest, the club decides rules that it enforces on the other vampires in London through the use of Vulkods. The club is highly exclusive and only those invited may take part, leaving the rest to either fall in line or experience the consequences.

The second body is the “brotherhood of saint paul’s stole”, the brotherhood is a more accepting organization that seeks to work with vampires in order to sort out issues in London.

The third and last body is the “Guard Of Priwen”. The Guard is a strictly human organization that seeks to hunt and eliminate vampires as they see them all as monsters that only seek the destruction of human kind.

Analysis

The world of Vampyr is an interesting one and the writing in regards to the world order feels inspired, however there is not much new in this world, the world and set up is mostly things we’ve heard before with a different name. This in itself isn’t a bad thing at all, I personally love the world and set up, I love the dark history aspect and I feel we lack these in a lot of fantasy games and those tend to focus on kingdoms and magic. However as there is nothing very novel about this world I feel like a lot of work must be done in order to give it an identity through history which I feel wasn’t done. We find some very minimal historical archives about all three bodies but they mainly focus on the main threat of the game which is the red queen, I don’t feel the long history between the bodies, and the tensions that could have been created between characters which would have given the world that much more depth and made it was more real than it felt.

 I think in general worlds are always so much more rich and believable when we don’t know everything. It might feel unproductive to write whole histories that we don’t intend to ever truly expose to the players, however I think without those the story and characters feel aimless and less believable. Of course there are tensions between the brotherhood of saint paul that works with vampires and the guard of priwen that specifically hunts them, but that feels shallow and boring, I would have loved to see some rich history between the two organizations that don’t necessarily have to do with the red queen. Revealing just some perspectives or some facts about that history will create a feeling of wonder and make the world so much more real, we can’t truly know everything about the world without years of research into books and historical analysis, we want the players to feel that way about the game world, In vampyr I very much got the feeling I read all what the history had to offer, which made the world feel kind of without time and fake.

The lesson that can be learned from that is that writing history first and only then decide what to reveal to the player, if we only write for specifically what the player will see it comes off shallow and unbelievable.

As an example we can look to the dark souls series, in that game the player isn’t told almost anything, but through research and scavenging of the world they learn about some snippets of history which makes the world believable and gives the players a sense of wonder about what else could have happened before their arrival.

Story Writing

First I will give a short overview of the story in order to take it apart afterwards.

Act 1

The story of Vampyr starts with our main character Doctor Johnathan Ried returning from his service in the first world war as a field surgeon, after he gets back we see him get embraced by an unknown vampire and he dies.

The game starts with us waking up in a mass grave confused and lost.  We go forward until we find some woman who seems to recognize us and be happy to see us, unable to control the new thirst for blood we bite that woman and drink her blood, once dr. Ried comes to his senses we find out that woman is his sister Mary, betrayed and confused Mary dies in his arms. Before having time to understand what just happened some people call out a monster and start shooting at him. After escaping he finds himself in a house of two people that he finds dead. We can learn through notes that the wife seems to have lost her mind, attacking her husband who locked himself the bedroom for days to protect himself from her before dying there. Confused and grieving Dr. Ried decides to shoot himself with the husband’s pistol to end the nightmare. He wakes up the following night realizing his attempt at taking his own life was unsuccessful and he seems to have healed. Looking for answers he goes to a local tavern where he meets Dr. Edgar Swansea, Dr. Swansea introduces himself as a member of the brotherhood of saint paul’s stole and the manager of the Pembroke hospital. Dr. Swansea tells Dr. Ried that he is looking into some murders and disappearances that have been going on in the area, Hoping to find the vampire who made him Dr. Ried decides to look into the murders himself as well. Eventually he finds out the one responsible is a newly born Skal. Dr. Swansea offers Ried a position in the night shift at his hospital, hoping that with his help they can uncover the reason for the raging epidemic that is engulfing London and find a cure. Arriving at the hospital we get exposed to a bunch of side stories of patients and crew at the hospital.

Act 2

We meet a vampire that introduces herself as Elisabeth Ashbury, she is the main contributor to the Pembroke hospital.

Dr. Swansea tells us that lady Ashbury has been getting blackmailed and he wishes us to solve the issue as it would benefit the hospital.  We find out that someone found out about suspicious visits of lady Ashbury to patients who die shortly after from blood loss. Lady Ashbury wishes this situation to be resolved and sends us to investigate.

Eventually we find out one of the nurses, nurse crane thinks lady Ashbury kills patients as some sick high society sport and decided to blackmail her for money in order to fund a makeshift clinic for the sick at Whitechapel district which are mostly made out of poor people and immigrants. Nurse crane offers free care using the money from blackmailing lady Ashbury. When confronting her Dr. Ried has a choice about what to do with her. Embrace her, spare her but force her to resign, or use his vampire mind control on her in order to make her forget what she’s doing.  Each choice will lead to different outcomes for nurse crane and the district.

Act 3

When coming back to the hospital we learn that a burial ceremony for Dr. Ried’s sister Mary is about to happen, we go attend in secret and go back to the hospital. we find out that one of the patients in the hospital was infected and turned into a skal, he disappeared and another patient seems to have died.

After investigating we find out that both patients are alive a priest that was infected is now a peaceful Skal and the other patient, Harriet jones seems to have faked her death in order to see who would miss her. She turned into a kind of vampire that we can’t exactly understand at this point.

At the end of the act we decide what to do with the priest, who now believes he must eat human flesh as some sign of god. The choice like in act 2 will have consequences for the priest and the district. When going out of the priest’s chapel we find that murders have been occurring, but those murders seem to all have some connection to Johnathan Ried, for example he finds a family trinket on one of the bodies.

He follows the clues back to the cemetery where we find Mary as a powerful Ekon. Overwhelmed with betrayal and anger she seems to have lost her mind, after defeating her she asks Johnathan to kill her to end her nightmare, which he does.

Act 4

We receive a letter from lady Ashbury asking us to meet her in her house as we have been invited through her to meet with the Ascalon club, they have taken an interest in Dr. Ried’s blood as it was able to create a powerful Ekon such as Mary, thus they view his blood as pure and powerful.

In the club we find out they want to recruit us to the be a part of the club. We are mostly forced to agree as we don’t want to fall on the bad side of such a powerful body. As a first assignment we get tasked with finding out the source of infection in a district. Eventually we find out the source, the source turns out to be an infectious Vampire creature that used be doris Jones a famous actor. We also find out through her diary that doris is the daughter of Harriet Jones from the hospital. We defeat doris thus ending a big part of the plague.

Act 5

We get asked by the Ascalon club to turn an old influential human member into an Ekon, we can choose what to do with him, turn him like asked, embrace him, or mind control him into being calm about death and peacefully wait for it. What we do will have consequences to our standing with the club, refusing to turn him will make us a traitor to the club.

Right when going out of his house we learn that the hospital is under attack by the guard of Priwen. When arriving at the hospital we fight the leader of the guard, once we beat him we can choose what to do with him, a choice which like always will have consequences.

We then find out that Dr. Swansea was abducted by the guard of Priwen as they believed he was conspiring with Dr. Ried (us) to create the plague. We find Dr. Swansea and free him, however he is severely injured, we talk with him asking him what truly is going on. He reveals to us that he used vampire blood to try to cure the plague with one of the patients, Harriet Jones, the mother of doris jones, we understand that Harriet infected her daughter with the Skal epidemic that came to be by the use of vampire blood, specifically, Elisabeth’s blood on Harriet jones by Dr. Swansea. We get the choice of what to do with Dr. Swansea.

Act 6

We go meet Elisabeth to tell her of what we found. After realizing her blood caused the mutation of Harriet Jones into what we now know to be a “disaster” she flees, leaving us to save the city alone.

We meet our maker who introduces himself as Myrddin the son of the red queen, he explains that he chose us as his champion to defeat her. We prepare and go face Harriet jones which is the carrier of the red queen’s curse, the “blood of hate”. Once we beat her an avatar of the red queen appears, we defeat the avatar and then the red queen goes back to her slumber, ending the plague.

Act 7

We go to the Ashbury estate in Scotland to find Elisabeth and understand why she fled. We find out her maker to be a legendary vampire knight William Marshal that was also chosen as a champion to face off against the red queen. But after he did he came back infected with the blood of hate. Feeling his pain Elisabeth came to him. In his rage he bit her infecting her with the blood of hate, sending her on a rampage killing everyone she could for fun.

William while also infected was able to control it at times, meeting with the brotherhood of saint paul asking them for help with his affliction. They revealed to him a cure that he was able to make after a few years. Seeing as he was only able to make one dose he decided to give it to Elisabeth. Now cured she promised him to take care of him, locking him in her estate for eternity. By the time she was able to acquire another dose of the cure it was already too late for William as the blood of hate took root in his blood.

Realizing her blood is still infected as it made the disaster Elisabeth decided that living is too dangerous, she decided to kill William and then herself in order to rid the world of the risks of their infected blood.

Depending on whether Dr. Ried decided to feed on citizens throughout the game she will either go through with her plan or agree to come with him while he looks for a permanent cure for the blood of hate.

Analysis

The story is interesting and engaging for the most part, however at times characters feel shallow and unbelievable. For example Dr. Swansea which is one of the main characters feels extremely simple and shallow, to the point I feel as if I can describe his entire personality in a few sentences. He is a scientist who engages in unethical experiments on his patients and he believes it to be for the greater good. We never truly see any meaningful change with his personality, making him a shallow and at times boring character. That can also be said for Elisabeth, even as a vampire who lived about 400 years she seems to be quite shallow, her entire history seems to be just what we were told about her history with being infected with the blood of hate once, it doesn’t truly feel like she has the experience of 4 life times and of living as different people in different periods, we get hints at those but we never explore any of that, and more importantly she doesn’t feel that experienced. As I said in the world building analysis having history even without revealing it can guide everything else, I think writing some history for Elisabeth would have done wonders for the direction her character could have taken, but sadly she came out pretty shallow. The only time we truly felt real vulnerability was when she fled terrified when hearing about her being the source of the infection, I wish we got to explore that vulnerability more than one scene that lasted about 10 seconds.

A strong point of the writing was the dialogues with characters. Characters felt like different distinct people, each with a style of speech and attitude which came out great as it felt like those were real people, however they came out a bit short with the history of said characters.

Side quests feel generally uninteresting and I personally quickly started ignoring them, the stories feel pretty basic and shallow at least when not killing anyone, the game encourages the player to resist the urge to kill in order to get the best ending, however side stories have no resolution unless you are willing to kill a character involved. For example we find out a wife is poisoning her husband and other than kill her we are not allowed to take any other course of action, leaving the stories a bit uninteresting for players who are committed to not kill.

In terms of the story writing itself, the ending isn’t as powerful as I’d hoped, we get locked in what is basically a 20 minute information dump at the end, which can be argued as a narrative design issue, however the writing in that information dump isn’t very powerful, even when Elisabeth tells Johnathan she means to kill herself it is all done in a very logical and cold manner (which could be powerful in certain instances but it didn’t work here as it didn’t fit Elisabeth’s character), I think the voice acting also reflected that feeling, and I don’t believe it to be a voice acting issue as if the meaning and the presentation were so far apart I think it would be on the writer to communicate it better.

My feeling is that the ending was rushed because they ran out of time.

The ending could have been way more emotional and powerful, but it sadly ended up being an info dump of all the story they didn’t manage to fit in the game.

The story has some clear plot holes and issues. For example, it is told to us that king Arthur was also a champion vampire that failed to defeat the red queen, however we saw the leader of the guards of Priwen drink king Arthur’s blood, according to the rules of the world, he should have died on the spot and started the turning process, as if you drink the blood of a vampire you turn into one yourself if you survive the process, however, nothing of the sort happened.

Another example is doctor Swansea administering vampire blood to cure the plague, as one of the few members of the brotherhood of saint paul’s stole I would expect him to at the very least know how vampires are made and not make such an obvious mistake.

Instances of things happening for the sake of the story progressing are spread across the game which to me shows a lack of time to refine the story, and a bad writing philosophy. I think writing should start with the history before writing the present, if they wrote a history for doctor Swansea or the brotherhood, maybe they could have given a real explanation of how he would ever make such mistake.

Lastly, I personally think the “cold love” dynamic between Johnathan and Elisabeth was extremely interesting and I wish it was explored more in the story, however that part of the story was left mostly unaddressed, it felt both Johnathan and Elisabeth were not showing love like most people, they stay guarded and show small tokens of affection through speech, I feel like if a history of why that is for both was written it could have given those characters so much more depth, however it was left without explanation which led most people to feel the situation to just be weird and written poorly.  

The idea of the story is a good one, but the story feels unrefined and empty at times.

Narrative design

The main story’s pacing and presentation is one of the strong points of Vampyr, some use of camera angles in order to convey feelings between characters, specifically the romantic feelings that grew between the main character Dr. Reid and Elisabeth Ashbury was beautifully done. At some points I could feel the affection between them even without words at all, just by the presentation. Another strong moment happens should the player choose to charm nurse Crane in the second act. Only to later find out by Crane’s heavy resistance to the charm, her mind was broken. Dooming her to go insane and eventually turn into a skal. The player learns of this only the following night if they choose to visit nurse Crane’s district and ask about her. Players who pay attention to every piece of information they find, could have been warned about such a side effect of charming highly resistant people before making the choice to charm nurse Crane.

I loved the beautiful pacing of the warning, into the choice, into the consonance. The warning was presented in a way that made it so innocent and independent. It didn’t feel at all like the warning was just given for that exact choice, making the mistake of charming nurse Crane only to realize later I was in fact warned about the possibility of such a thing happening was one of the highlights of the game for me. It really delivered on the feeling of autonomy while respecting me enough to make those decisions on my own with perfect presentation and pacing of the information needed to make the choice.  

The main pitfalls of the narrative design are the interactions with side characters and their side quests. Whenever we arrive at a new district we get access to about 15 new side characters, each with a bunch of dialogue and story, and at times even side quests, but once you finish their stories there is nothing new from them almost ever again.

That leaves us with a pretty interruptive system of arriving at a new district, and then being bombarded with at times less interesting content than the main story that the player can feel obligated to go through in order to not miss out on some stories. This makes engaging with side characters extremely interruptive and annoying as it’s not paced at all. When we arrive at a district we get stuck for hours doing less interesting side quests that, if the player chose to not kill don’t even get resolved which can feel very bad to the player as they just invested so much time ignoring the actual story of the game just to get no resolution for even the less interesting stories.

The player can dread arriving at a new district because they know they are now forced to sit through 2 to 4 hours of dialogue with little to no gameplay with no reward or resolution waiting at the end, that type of flow is obviously bad.

A better way would be to only reveal parts of character’s dialogue when the player just arrives at a district, revealing more and more as the main story progresses and characters trust Dr. Reid more and more. That solution will fix the pacing issue but might create an interruptive gameplay loop of engaging with a bit of the main story, then running around all the side characters to make sure nothing new is happening. However the game already has a system in place to fix this problem, where the player gets notified whenever a new dialogue option is unlocked for a character. If we open new dialogues slowly while notifying the player it could make for a better system, but that of course would have to be tested as this kind of system could be interruptive in its own way, forcing players to stop what they’re doing every once in a while to make sure they are exploring all the new dialogue options with all the characters.

A better system would have to be tested but I think it would be worthwhile as it would make interacting with side characters fun, as it stands now, I personally stopped interacting with side characters all together by the time I arrived at the last district and even before then I only did so when something seemed unordinary interesting.

Environment design

The story telling through environment is very well done in Vampyr. The streets of London are dark and unwelcoming which gives a general feel of dread and hostility from the environment which is exactly what Dr. Ried would feel as a newly reborn vampire. The streets are filled with bodies and splashes of blood of vampires and humans alike. The generally very dark tone of the environment hits just right, Looking around, you feel like a lone vampire in the hostile and dark streets of London, caught in a complex struggle between organizations and a natural disaster.

More about the feel of the Level design itself in the Level Design section.

Gameplay

Character progression

Vampyr is a narrative driven role playing game, the “role playing” part implies a system that promotes autonomy, decision-making and individual expression through character progression and development.

In Vampyr the character progression “RPG” elements are relatively generic and uninspired.

In games there is a difference between optimal and viable strategies, while optimal strategy refers to the best possible way to achieve a goal, a viable strategy refers to a way that works good enough and generally still conforms to the rules of the game without going in the complete opposite direction.

Vampyr’s system creates an environment where very few viable strategies exist. This issue comes from a few design choices:

  1. The first issue is the implementation of the resistance system. In Vampyr there are 4 types of damage, ranged physical, melee physical, blood and shadow. Each enemy (including bosses) has one or more resistances that come in 2 levels, a mid-resistance, which allows the monster to ignore a modest amount of the damage received from that type, or a high resistance, which allows the monster to ignore a large amount of the damage received from that type. In idea this system can encourage players to think about each encounter and adjust their strategy accordingly, which is a fun idea.
    However this implementation creates a big issue that often happens when designers try to promote variety of strategies in games (such as the mythic system in league of legends, which achieved the complete opposite effect it set out to achieve), instead of allowing players to vary their strategies depending on the encounter, it forces players to build their character in a very specific way that includes all damage type. It is unreasonable to expect players to rebuild their character for each random encounter they come across, thus players can feel forced to pick up one ability of each damage type which when counting the almost mandatory healing ability accounts for almost all ability slots available, locking the players to almost no choices regarding their set up if they want to feel viable and want to play by the “game’s rules” (not specifically dealing a damage type the boss or monster is highly resistant to).
  2. The second issue is a lack of options. Sure you are allowed to choose whether or not you want more hp or more levels in abilities, but that’s mostly the only choice you really get. Most vampire abilities that don’t deal damage feel underwhelming and honestly kind of useless, more to the point, the feel unviable, as in you work in complete opposition to the design when you choose more than one. This issue is a real one but I believe it mostly exists because of the first issue. In combination with the first issue this lack of options in abilities that deal certain damage types emerges a system that feels as it was put in place to lock the player to play exactly how the designer expected them to, which goes against the goal of an “rpg” system in the first place.
  3. Enemies seem to scale entirely based on the player’s level. The only other variable taken into account is the number of citizens the player chose to kill, if the player killed a big number of citizens, the enemies will scale to be a much lower level than the player, almost trivializing the gameplay (aside from the last boss). If the player chooses to not kill (as I expect most people would on their first playthrough), enemies will just scale to always be a few levels above you, making leveling up feel pointless and counterproductive. I understand the intent behind this decision, they wanted to truly make players feel way more powerful if they choose to embrace citizens in order for players to feel the temptation a vampire would feel to drink the blood of humans through gameplay, which is a very respectable goal that I think would have made this game great with a bit more testing and modifying.

Because of these design choices I believe players are forced into a very specific kind of build when playing Vampyr which works in opposition to what an “RPG” character progression system sets to achieve.

Equipment

Vampyr’s equipment includes only weapons, those weapons come in a few variations, main hand, offhand weapons and two handed weapons. In general, weapons split into two categories:

  1. Blunt weapons, those are things like one or two handed maces, or blunt offhand weapons. Those types of weapons generally inflict “stun” on enemies. Every enemy in Vampyr has a stun bar below their health bar, when this bar reaches zero the enemy will be stunned and unable to perform actions for a few seconds, In that time, the player is allowed to bite the stunned enemy to give himself a large amount of blood (basically mana used for abilities).
  2. Cutting weapons, those are things like swords or knives. Those types of weapons generally directly drain blood from enemies filling the player’s blood bar with every hit.
  3. Firearms, some deal stun and some don’t. these are a type of offhand weapon that is mainly used to deal ranged physical damage, however bullets are relatively hard to come by, so choosing the best targets is key to using firearms. 

This system is nice as it allows for a variety of builds and play styles. For example. One might choose to use a two handed mace to deal large amounts of damage while also stunning the enemy every so often to keep their blood topped off. Or they can choose to use a one handed sword that drains blood and a firearm for damage support. However it’s not without issues:

Stun weapon issue

This system does have a slight balancing issue as it can sometimes feel as if it favors the stun playstyle over the drain playstyle. This issue was very apparent in the early game, where enemies stun bar is generally quite low and can be stunned with 2 or 3 hits to get a bite off which fills a lot of your blood meter, while cutting weapons drain blood at an extremely low rates early in the game, making them almost unusable unless you have a blunt weapon in your offhand in order to bite every now and again to sustain your blood. Later in the game however cutting weapons are definitely viable and I in fact even used a sword and a shotgun combination in my playthrough which felt really nice for the late game.

In addition, while not being exactly related to the weapons and equipment, the stun system itself is extremely broken in Vampyr. In my first playthrough I didn’t even notice the interaction that breaks the whole system.

If you choose to bite an enemy when they recover from the stun state, their stun bar will be filled all the way plus some extra points. Making it harder to stun them again. However if you choose to not bite them and just wait for the stun to end itself, they will not only not get the extra stun points, they will recover with only half of their original bar filled. This creates a system that encourages players to just stun lock enemies forever while not interacting with them at all. I have personally not found this out until after my first playthrough which I’m glad about, because if I had found out, it would have trivialized combat and break the game in a severe manner.

Firearms issue

Another big issue is the lack of clear way to acquire bullets. This fact pushes an issue I call the “consumable effect” where even if the game has a perfectly balanced consumable system, where the player can acquire said consumables in a good rate to the expected use, most players will horde all of it just to never even consider using it at all. Without clear knowledge of what comes next hording consumes always feels like the best option as you might really need it later, and you can probably get through the current challenge without using them. This problem effectively removes those consumes from the player’s mind which removes some of the fun that can be had managing and using those consumes.

In Vampyr firearms suffer from this issue pretty hard. The main reason this happens in my opinion is the lack of a good way to acquire more bullets. Vampyr is not a horror survival game where short supply of bullets is part of the gameplay. I feel like the idea of not having endless bullets is a cool idea in principle, but in practice we can achieve more fun allowing players to spend some time farming extra bullets if they ever run out. These endless bullets are balanced through the limitation of only holding about 3 full magazines of your chosen firearm at a time, to fill those up you will have to visit a hideout. With this in mind, having players feel like they won’t get screwed over by overusing bullets in the macro level, while still having to manage their use each mission while they don’t have access to an hideout will encourage use of firearms and can make builds more fun as I think firearms can be very fun in Vampyr.

Weapon upgrade system

Vampyr’s weapon enhancement system is quite straight forward and pretty uninteresting by itself. Which is not a bad thing, some systems should be simple to understand to allow players to focus more on the more deep and interesting systems (usually the game pillars).

Basically the player plays the game, getting all sorts of items along the way (more on Crafting And Looting in that section).

They can then use some of those items to upgrade weapons in any hideout.

Every weapon (aside from the starting weapon) has five levels, with each level (from 2 onwards) the player can choose “enhancements” (one per level). Those usually consist of things like “drain 2.5 blood with each successful attack” or “deal 10% more damage”. Enhancing weapons with those also requires some extra items, but players mostly get those naturally by playing. The small bit of extra autonomy when choosing enhancements works pretty nicely and players can choose the best ones to match their chosen play style. The balancing can feel a bit off at times (as for most of the game’s systems) as at some levels the player is given false choices such as “10% stamina used when swinging” vs “10% damage”, on a one handed fast weapon. The obvious choice to anyone who played Vampyr is to take the damage every time, as running out of stamina while swinging a one handed weapon is almost never an issue, and 10% wouldn’t make nearly as much of an impact as opposed to 10% damage. Sometimes the player doesn’t get a choice at all (Only having one enhancement available for that upgrade level) which hinders the feeling of autonomy at times and can damage the fun and feeling of achievement when upgrading the weapon.

All in all this system was implemented pretty well, but as it is very much a “supportive” system that only works when related to the character progression system, it sometimes isn’t able to save the lack of autonomy that infected the character progression system.

This system can use some balancing and some more interesting and impactful upgrades to enhance the feeling of autonomy and competence, but wouldn’t be my first priority if I set out to fix the game’s issues.

Embracing System

The embracing system is one of the pillars of Vampyr.

Embracing is used to achieve a couple of goals:

First and most importantly, it is used to simulate the unending thirst and temptation of draining people of blood for a vampire. This system attempts to place the player in a similar position to a vampire, tempting them with power to drink the blood of citizens, conflicting with their moral compass.

Secondly, It is used to conclude some side quests and investigation by killing the citizen the player decides is in the wrong to stop them from committing their crimes.

To support this system and make it more interesting, the stability system was introduced. In short, the more sick or dead citizens in an area, the less stable it is, the less stable an area is, the more likely it is for citizens to go missing or die, making the player miss out on potential embrace targets and a lot of exp.

In general the idea of such a system fits perfectly in a vampire game and can create a great sense of immersion and storytelling through gameplay which helps sells the vampire fantasy.

Sadly the implementation of the embracing system was problematic and some design decisions were made that hurt the interactions players have with the system.

Balance

The first issue is a balance issue for players who decide to kill all citizens for power. In general, enemies will scale with your level while taking into account the exp you acquired from killing citizens as opposed to the exp you got by playing the game normally. If a lot of exp was acquired by killing citizens, the enemies will scale to be lower level than you, while if you don’t kill, they will scale to generally be about 4 to 5 levels higher.

There is of course a middle ground, the game wants to tempt players into just killing a few citizens to gain enough power to match enemies level. However, for those who decided to go all the way, killing a large amount of citizens (or all of them), the game becomes trivial, enemies don’t stand a chance against the player, and bosses die in 3 to 4 hits. This creates a pretty complicated issue. On one hand trivializing the game is what’s being sold to players who are willing to kill for power, that’s the power they deserve, which makes it really fun for players who chose to NOT kill everyone. The feeling of how powerful you could become keeps the temptation alive for those players which achieves the goal of the system perfectly.

However for those who decided to succumb to temptation, the game now became a trivial matter of pressing left click 3 to 4 times to kill everything in their path, which after the initial feeling of great power, can get boring quick.

An interesting idea that could be examined in order to fix it is changing the world based on how powerful the player is: Imagine the guard of Priwen receives word of the vampire rampaging through London (The player), killing everything in its path without breaking a sweat, maybe in the following night, they send more guards and more powerful guards in order to hunt the player down to end the threat.

While executing this we should be cautious, there is a fine line in balancing this type of system, we wouldn’t want players to feel like killing citizens was never worth it because now combat is harder, we want combat to get more interesting and more complicated as opposed to harder (a thing that can be achieved in part by diversifying character progression and adding more abilities that can only realistically be used by players with a lot of extra exp from killing citizens).

Stability system

As stated above, the stability system was introduced in order to force the player to strategize when killing citizens if they want to get the most out of it as possible. The idea is to make killing people an intricate game of balancing stability while killing the most you can without losing possible kill targets to instability (citizens go missing or become infected by the skal epidemic). This system could introduce a layer of planning ahead and being the mastermind of the show which further sells the vampire fantasy. However in practice this system is broken by a few factors:

The first issue with this system is the equality of each npc’s stability contribution. Simply put, when the player kills any NPC stability of the district will be decreased by the same amount as any other NPC, for example killing a nurse at a hospital will remove as much stability as killing a criminal who could have just left without anyone knowing. This removes the autonomy of the player to execute an interesting strategy regarding who to kill and when. This lack of autonomy also hurts the players competence, as when they reach new districts they won’t feel as if now as a more seasoned vampire they will be able to execute their master plan better to manipulate the citizens while picking them off one by one when they least suspect it (as we would expect from a vampire). This issue makes the system relatively boring and feel like it was just put there to reassure players that their choices really matter to the story.

The second issue has to do with an “exploit” this system offers. I call it an exploit as I feel like it goes against the goal of the system, however as it stands this is the optimal strategy when engaging with the stability system.

The player is encouraged to talk to all the npc’s to find out everyone’s hints at once (again reinforcing the pacing issue when presenting side content in chunks instead of slowly over the game, this issue is talked about more in the Narrative design section), then once everyone’s blood is at its max capacity, kill all the citizens at once without giving the stability system a chance to even kick in as it gets update only when the player levels up. This to me is clearly not a strategy the designers wanted to encourage. It doesn’t match the fantasy, it’s so much better and simpler than any other way of engaging with the system that it just feels silly to do it any other way which hurts autonomy and competence, and it ends up being pretty boring to execute, as it can take up to 15 minutes of just going back and forth picking up each npc from the district, leading them to a quiet spot and killing them, one by one.

Unconcluded side quests

Side quests in Vampyr allow the player to learn about the citizens of London, their hardships, relationships and aspirations. As one might expect, not all those characters the pure of intentions, in the hard conditions of post war London push people into uncomfortable positions, and some decide to solve their problems in immoral ways. One example can be a nurse and an ambulance driver forcing the sick to pay them under the table to get a bed at the hospital that should be free, or a wife of an old friend trying to poison her husband. When finding out such behaviors, the player might feel obligated to intervene and force them to stop, however the player isn’t giving an option to, after the player learns about those horrible things happening, the dialogue ends, and we’re thrown back to the game with no recourse. The only option left in order to solve the issue is of course, to embrace the citizen responsible for the immoral acts, however this might leave the player unsatisfied, wondering why he couldn’t just force them to stop by threatening to tell the authorities, or get them fired from their job at the hospital.

A big chunk of players will inevitably (at least in their first playthrough) try to be morally good, and not succumb to the thirst while staying weak, being forced to overcome harder challenges to stay moral. However for those players, no end for side quests is ever offered. Side quests just remain unconcluded which can make them unsatisfying and feel unfinished.

Effect on the main story

As most players could expect from such a system, the implications of killing citizens on the main story are generally negative (such as Mary killing her and Johnathan’s mom, or Elisabeth dying at the end of the game). Such expected negative effects will incentivize most players to not kill any citizen and thus never engage with the embracing system at all. This in itself isn’t a problem, however when put together with the previous points it makes the game feel as if it was made with the intention of players being forced to embrace at least some citizens throughout the story, but then the option to not embrace anyone was put in at the end.

The problematic balance, exploitable stability system, unconcluded side quests and the effects of embracing on the main story prevented this system from being the absolute perfect system for a vampire game, the potential of the system is great and could have taken the game to great heights, unfortunately the implementation feels a bit rushed and required more testing.

Crafting and looting

Looting System

In most RPG’s players will acquire loot through fighting and scouring and Vampyr is no different.

Almost every enemy the player kills will drop loot on the floor that the player will have to go over to and pick up.

Even though it sounds like just more work and kind of annoying to pick up after every fight, I think it actually does a service to the game, it allows players to physically feel their rewards when actively pressing a button to pick those up, This system exists in almost all RPG’s which goes to show how effective it is.

However, looting doesn’t end there in Vampyr, Going through levels will have the player running close to any glowing drawer closet or cabinet and pressing a button to loot them. Aside from the obvious (and kind of minor all things considered) issue of having npc’s stand around while you steal everything in their house right in front of them, it creates a real issue in gameplay. The goal of having loot not go straight to the player’s inventory is to allow players (as noticed above) to physically feel their rewards which makes the activity feel more rewarding. In this case however, the sheer amount of drawers, cabinets, closets and random boxes thrown around each level makes the player numb to the feeling of getting rewarded and just becomes interruptive to the flow of the game. One big example of this is the second time the player arrives at the cemetery following leads to a killer that has been messing with him. For those of us who were observant we could already guess who that killer is and what had happened. Rushing to the climax of the chapter through the cemetery to face that major enemy the player should be fully immersed in the stress of what comes next, but because of the looting system some players might feel the need to run to corners of the level every time they see something that might look like loot just to spam the interact key which felt incredibly interruptive and actively pulled me out of the strong feelings of stress and anticipation I should have been feeling.

One way to fix this issue while still keeping the system, is to reduce the amount of less impactful loot and keep drawers and closets to only the impactful loot that is used for upgrading weapons. That way we are able to strategically place loot where it would be least interruptive to the flow of the game, allowing us to not constantly pull the players out of the flow state and break their immersion, while also having the player feel the impact of loot (which is the whole idea behind having a manual looting system as opposed to just placing loot in the player’s inventory).

Crafting System

Like upgrading equipment, crafting in Vampyr is relatively straightforward. The player accumulates a big amount of reagents while playing the game (through the looting system) and can then use those reagents to craft medicine for the citizens of London. The crafting system ended up being somewhat boring and kind of a chore, as you got all you needed through playing (and spamming interact on everything along the way) and didn’t really provide an interesting addition at all, just some extra steps to go through.

I think this issue was created because of the amount of reagents required to craft the medicine needed by citizens. For that reason, looting such reagents doesn’t feel impactful or rewarding, and crafting them feels trivial. If instead of needing 8 of a specific reagent, 5 of another, 10 of another, and 9 of another just to craft one medicine you just needed one of each, but they were really hard to come by, players will constantly be on the lookout, which will also make looting more impactful, as every time they see a drawer shine, they will be excited to check it, maybe it contains the last ingredient required to heal an NPC they have grown attached to.

Level Design

Vampyr’s level design in general is pretty linear, which isn’t necessarily a bad thing for the right game, and in general it works pretty well for vampyr, I wouldn’t call the level design of vampyr one of its weak points. However like almost in any game there is one issue that bothered me. In a few levels seemingly at random, the player is able to teleport to high or far places, which sometimes looks like an alternative way of traversing the level. Some levels have high platforms above enemies that allow you to skip fighting those enemies by sneakily moving through the shadows above them (just like a vampire). The issue however presents itself very quickly, It seems that those alternative routes were never actually finished. Sometimes a single platform will be there just allowing the player to teleport up, then they have to jump right back down to the same enemy pack they hoped to avoid. When this happened to me the first time I thought, oh, maybe I can surprise the enemies by engaging from above with a powerful attack (a plunging attack), however I just reached the ground with no aerial attack taking place.

These issues make me feel like the level designers wanted more than linear levels, they wanted to allow for alternative ways of traversing and possibly alternative ways to engage enemies in combat. Sadly the final product didn’t get to reflect those goals and we’re instead left with linear levels that sometimes feel like they shouldn’t be.

Combat

The combat system of Vampyr is quite straightforward and intuitive, The player can attack, dodge or use a special ability. This is a combat system we can see in a plethora of different games, however not all of them get it just right for their game. While simple, this combat system can be incredibly intricate to design in order for it to match the feel of the game, the exact time that has to pass between the end of a player’s attack and when they can dodge (attack recovery), the average swing time of the player and enemies, or the casting time and recovery of special abilities are all extremely important factors that need to be tested and tweaked to make the combat as a whole feel fluid and in place for the game.

In dark souls 1 for example, most recoveries took quite a long time, which gave the combat a feeling of gravity that matched beautifully with the enemy design, boss design and overall game design and feel. When you try to heal, you know you are going to be vulnerable to attacks for a long time, so you must strategize and play based on your understanding of the enemy move set.

In dark souls 3, the combat has evolved to be more fluid, recovery is generally quick and combat challenges reflexes and speed while still retaining the basis of having to understand enemy patterns. And as expected from FromSoftware, this combat matched the enemy design perfectly, with quicker attacks, faster recoveries and more reflex challenges.

Vampy’s combat design fell somewhere in the middle of those systems, while the dodge is incredibly quick, feels great to use and in my opinion fits great for a quick vampire moving through the shadows, attacking and casting is incredibly slow. The startup and recovery of melee attacks felt endless, the startup on casting spells felt unnecessarily long for no apparent reason as well. Both those factors made combat feel clunky and unresponsive. The unconfutable dissonance between the speed of attacking and dodging impacted the feeling of combat greatly for the worse.

The enemy and boss design was also split in half, some enemies being incredibly quick (such as the skals) and some being slow to move with some quick attacks that come out of nowhere (the heavy Priwen guards).

See more about the Enemy design and Boss design in their respective sections.

Another issue was the camera angle and movement. At times the camera felt extremely close to Dr. Ried even in combat, which when combined with the slow and sometimes unresponsive movement of the camera made it hard to see a good distance behind Dr. Ried which was required to avoid some boss attacks (such as Mary) and made some losses feel unfair and unnecessarily frustrating.

Enemy design

Vampyr’s enemy design all things considered is pretty solid, at its core the design of the basic enemies is relatively simple which I think is a good thing. Players can’t be expected to learn the attack patterns of every basic enemy the come through. And thus giving those enemies relatively simple to understand attacks and abilities allows the player to understand them over time without feeling forced to sit through the same fight for long periods of time just to memorize and understand all the patterns (that’s called a boss fight).

However as with anything else in this article, there were a few things that didn’t quite click with the rest.

As mentioned in the Combat section, enemy design should match the general combat design and the approach and challenges we want the player to experience during combat (reflexes challenges/strategic challenges/memory challenges etc..).

As the combat system itself is conflicted, some enemies feel out of place. An example of this dissonance is the stagger system of enemies. Like in many other games, when enemies get hit they will stagger, being unable to attack or move for a short period of time after the attack. This system is generally put in place to allow the player to get off more than one attack using quick weapons and reward the player for successfully attacking the enemy by allowing them to finish their combo. This system is usually paired with a “capping system”, a different system that will stop the player from staggering enemies to death once they’ve landed a single attack. For example (and a system that was used in Vampyr) we could use a stamina system. A stamina system lets us allow the player stagger the enemy as much as they can, but only until their stamina runs out, players who let their stamina run out completely open themselves up to counter attacks as they won’t be able to dodge until it replenishes. Thus challenging the player to manage the stamina while staggering the enemy which makes the process a lot more interesting, and also guarantees players can’t kill stronger enemies with essentially once successful hit (some even stronger enemies such as “elite” enemies or boss enemies can even be immune to stagger altogether).

Another type of system (that was also used in Vampyr) is a stagger break system. This system either caps the amount of times enemies can be staggered or allows enemies to counter attack through stagger after being staggered a certain amount of times.

Both system can have their place and can even be used together (as was done in Vampyr). However when using multiple “capping systems” we must be aware of their interactions and make sure the feeling we wanted to achieve isn’t lost in the process.

In Vampyr stamina was used to challenge players to manage it in combat and cap player’s stagger potential. However the counter attack system was also used for some enemies, allowing players to only stagger those enemies a couple of times (generally twice) before being forced to retreat to avoid a counter attack.

One example is the Priwen heavy guards, those enemies move and attack slow with their shotgun. However after some successful attacks they would execute a quick attack that would punish the recovery of the attack that already hit them, which not only felt out of place for that enemy, but also felt frustrating, as the game punishes the player for landing a successful attack without any indication the enemy is about to launch one of their own before the player’s attack is already half way done.

Such a counter attack system could have worked well as a reflex challenge if the player was allowed to cancel their attack in favor of dodging half way through the animation when they saw the enemy starting up their counter attack. However this system just ended up being put there for no clear reason as we already had the stamina system to cap stagger, and only further favored heavy hitting 2 handed bats as the player is allowed to land 2 hits regardless of the weapon they’re using which is usually balanced by a cheaper stamina cost per swing. This counter attack system ended up being interruptive to the balance that was supposed to be done by the stamina system and made fast attacking weapons feel even worse than they already were (read more about weapon design issues in the Equipment section).

Other than the stagger system, some enemies had poor communication about certain effects. This issue mainly came from one type of enemy, the exploding skals. Those enemies had the effect of exploding when killed, however there is no indication this effect is going to take place, and even after I already knew about this mechanic I found myself getting hit by them almost every time as I just kept forgetting about it and getting baited to loot them once I killed them. Adding some indication of the explosion (such as a pulsing glow before the explosion goes off) would make it avoidable by new players who are paying attention, rewarding players who read their environment well and would serve as a quick reminder to more experienced players allowing them to avoid the frustration of forgetting about it endlessly.

Our memory is sometimes unreliable and fallible, and we should keep that in mind when designing games.

Boss design

I particularly love boss design, so I took the time to analyze each (Interesting) boss in-depth.

With that said, boss design in Vampyr is a bit of a curve ball. The actual bosses, are quite interesting and I have a lot to say about each of them. However only 6 out of the 15 bosses in the game are what I call “actual” bosses. The rest being either a repeat of a boss we have defeated before (i.e. Leon Augustin being a repeat of Fergal) or just basic enemies (i.e. all the rest). As such I will not go through all the bosses available in the game, instead I will only analyze bosses who are either “actual bosses” or interesting in another way.

William Bishop

The first boss we encounter in the game is William Bishop, a newly reborn skal who has been killing to survive without direction since he was reborn, the boss is just a basic skal that the player will face as a basic enemy a lot in the future. However for this specific fight I think this was used well. Introducing the player to skals in a strong way feels really good in the long run, as the player can feel their competence growing, later being able to take on 3 or 4 skals at a time, while the understanding of what each of those creatures can do if left unchecked lingers in the players mind which I think is beautifully done. The choice to place William bishop at the start and to make him just a basic skal serves the story and the competence of the player as a player and as a vampire. However this isn’t the only boss that is just a basic enemy, and I think William Bishop alone had a good justification to be just a basic enemy.

As a basic enemy there isn’t too much to say in terms of design. He is a rushdown type enemy who will charge at a player whenever possible and will execute some short attack strings when he is close. He can also use a block ability where he puts his hands up to defend his face. If the player uses a melee attack into his block, the attack will get parried and the player will be staggered. In general, a very good boss at what he does (which is being a simple rushdown skal that turns into a basic enemy later on).

Fergal

Fergal is a Vulkod vampire who works as the main enforcer of the Ascalon Club. We meet him a few times where he threatens us that if we don’t fall in line with vampire law, we will face his power. Eventually we find him in the sewers, where we take him on.

Fergal is a brawler/summoner boss, the mixing of the two archetype might sound alarming to some designers, whoever personally I’m a big believer in letting creativity and fun run wild when making a boss before putting them in a category. I think mixing archetypes in bosses can be done correctly which can produce great bosses (one of my personal favorites is dark souls 3’s soul of cinder).

Brawler

Fergal will walk slowly towards the player swinging his big fists in a 3 attack string (which is a pretty global type of string for this game, which isn’t necessarily bad for consistency. However it can come off as boring for players looking for a bit more challenge), stomp the ground to damage the player if they’re too close, or make a quick charge at the player to close the distance quickly. Those are all great moves for a brawler, as a brawler the boss is strongest when close to the player, making them think twice before engaging in melee combat. Players can choose to stay at range and control Fergal with spells and guns or engage him in melee range to challenge themselves to a hard battle.

Summoner

Fergal will at times stop in place, lifting his hands at the sides of his body, summoning shadow clones of himself close to the player, each shadow clone attacks the player once then disappears. Mostly forcing the player to dodge attacks in quick succession. This is a timing challenge as well as a mental stack challenge, to properly punish Fergal for this attack, players will have to count the shadows that appeared, Fergal will always spawn 3 shadows in quick succession, opening him up for attacks for a short time after dodging the third shadow.

As Fergal is not a true summoner (his summons basically serve as a single attack each) this doesn’t present too big of an issue in terms of design or an identity crisis. However the ability to summon shadows did feel out of place for a brawler, and kind of went against his theme of being a steelhead (literally) vampire. I think a better way for him to counter ranged players was to have him charge 3 times at the player in quick succession while overshooting each time the player dodges, this achieves the same types of challenges his summon attack achieves while still being in theme and feeling way more in place for him, allowing players to construct a coherent strategy of keeping him far away at all times, countering his brawler archetype.

In general I feel like the mix between brawler and summoner was problematic and went against his theme as a character which made it feel unnecessary.

Mary Ried

Mary is Johnathan’s sister that he accidentally killed at the start of the game. Unbeknownst to Johnathan he accidentally turned her into an Ekon. Since then she has been watching him, driven mad with grief and betrayal, waiting take have her revenge on her brother for the eternity of suffering he has inflicted upon her.

Mary is personally my favorite boss in the game, both in terms of design and story. Fighting Mary is one of the strongest moments in the game and has a lot of gravity to the story (when fighting Mary for the first time I had one of those “wait, this game’s awesome” moments).

Rushdown Assassin

Using a big cross as her weapon, she is able to dash through space very quickly to close the distance between her and the player, swinging her cross to attack the player once she reaches close range, she has a few attack patterns the player can learn and punish.

Zoner

Mary can stop her movement, placing blood explosion zones on the ground around her, those areas will explode after a short delay and leave a lingering effect that damages the player for a few seconds after the explosion. Once the player has dealt about half her hp in damage, she will transform to phase 2, giving her the ability to summon explosion zones across the stage that appear in patterns for a while after she cast it. Adding the challenge of area of denial to the already existing fight as the players will have to navigate between explosion zones while still keeping track of Mary’s attacks and punishing accordingly.

I think the mix between a rushdown assassin and a zoner was done beautifully with Mary. Separating the two aspects in phase 1 to hint at what’s to come in phase 2 was a great touch that gives phase 2 a real punch. Mary offers detection and knowledge, reflex and timing challenges as well as area of denial in phase 2 (and a bit in phase 1 from the lingering effect), I think those challenges flow very well into each other without covering each other’s weaknesses and instead amplifying the challenges by cleanly loading the player’s mental stack with related challenges.

The only issue I had with this boss fight was in relation to the combat system, sometimes it felt like I should be able to dodge faster and at times I felt like I was fighting the camera more than I was Mary. However those issues are not specific to the boss design itself so I wouldn’t say they take away from the brilliant boss design of Mary Ried.

Doris Fletcher

Doris Fletcher/Jones is a famous actress, and the daughter of a patient at the Pambroke hospital Herriet Jones. When looking for the source of the infection of the skal epidemic we find her in the theatre, her body disfigured by the infection, she became a creature different than a skal. Mad by her disfigurement she plans to infect her audience in the next show.

Doris is a mid to long range keep out/summoner boss with some melee tools. As opposed to Fergal, Doris is a true summoner, summoning skals to assist her in combat. I will not also call her a zoner, however she does have one move that does area of denial, in a very small cone in front of her for a short time, this move feels mostly like a way to give the player a free pass to deal with her summons, however instead of being a weakness, this move just nullifies any hope she had of being a scary summoner.

Keep out

Doris has mid/long range capabilities, using her disfigured blood arm to attack, she can swing it in a few different patterns. The main issues with that part of her kit mostly had to do with readability, speed and a slight issue of hitboxes.

When a boss begins an attack, the player should be able to tell pretty intuitively where the weapon is going to go (the direction of the swing) unless the boss is designed to challenge (and most likely frustrate players) in that way, which when the game is right could work wonderfully, however it didn’t feel like the intention behind this boss.

Doris has 3 mid-range keep out moves. A quick thrust, a slower thrust, and a sweep. The issue comes in mainly with the slow thrust and the sweep.

The slow thrust’s startup doesn’t at all communicate a thrust, Instead she brings her arm around over her head in a sweeping motion just to thrust it instead of keeping the motion she already started.

These are the kinds of things that would be really hard to spot as a designer, as once you know an memorized this attack well, it can become intuitive, but only because you trained yourself, not because it would make sense to a new player (even as I’m writing it I keep wondering if it was actually a big deal). However as a player I remember the frustration this move caused me as even if the player knows she has 2 thrusts and a sweep, but as I said before, our memory is fallible, and most players will play on intuition in order to determine which move is coming next, which made this move frustrating to deal with.

It’s important to note that challenging the player with confusing detection challenges isn’t necessarily a bad idea, however there is a difference between challenging players ability to detect and distinguish between two moves with a similar startup as the dodge timing should be different, and having unintuitive startups. Unintuitive startups that don’t seem like they would make sense.

The second problematic move was the sweep, The startup of it is slightly problematic, she picks up her arm, spins around quickly, then sweeps her arm in front of her. The issue is her arm sweeps with her body instead of following it which feels more intuitive. The speed of the sweep is also extremely quick, in combination with the unintuitive timing (which is now our only indication of when to dodge, as the sweep itself is too fast to react to), it leaves us with a pretty frustrating move to figure out that challenges timing based on trial and error as opposed to intuition or reflexes.

Summoner

Doris has the ability to summon skals to her aid, which act and fight like basic skal enemies would. The beauty of summoners is the intricate dance of the summoner and the summoned, both weak on their own, but once they fight together, they can cover each other’s weaknesses and appear indestructible. I think for a boss to be a good summoner their kit needs to somehow synergize with their summons, allowing the summons to cover up their glaring downsides (generally speed, recovery and lack of melee options). A keep out boss can also be a great summoner, as they can cover their summons attacks from far away while keeping themselves out of danger. Forcing the player to partake in their dance, finding weak spots to dispose of the summoned, then take care of the summoner in their weakened state.

Doris doesn’t feel like she fulfils this role. Instead she fights completely the same regardless of any skals she spawned, sometimes doing completely meaningless attacks, leaving her skals undefended on the other side of the arena (such as her area of denial “attack”).

I think (again as with a lot of the bosses in this game) the mix between keep out and summoner is a good mix, and can work great. However the execution came out unconnected. She also had individual issues with some specific attacks. And cluttering the arena with random boxes and barrels didn’t do any favors to this fight. Keep out summoners should force the player to think of a strategy to deal with both the summoner and their minions at the same time, this usually requires a large area to maneuver in to allow for openings for attacks. The clutter in the boss arena felt interruptive to that process.

Even with these flaws the boss fight was by no means bad or unfun, and her relevance to the story made the fight even more exciting.

Geoffrey McCullum

Geoffrey is the leader of the guards of Priwen. We meet him in the attic of the hospital after we defeat Doris. We learn the guards of Priwen took Dr. Swansea and intend to punish him for what they believe he did. Geoffrey is convinced Dr. Reid and Dr. Swansea worked together to create the epidemic and intends to put an end to it, and punish the culprits. We confront him in the attic of the hospital, where he reveals Dr. Swansea’s anti vampire defense system, which are rays of light that hurt vampires, he uses that system, his hand crossbow and his sword to take on Dr. Ried.

Geoffrey is an area of denial zoner and a mid/long ranged keep out boss with some melee tools.

Keep out

Geoffrey uses mid/long range attacks with his crossbow to keep the player away and make it hard for the player to approach. He can reload his hand crossbow, then shoot a single bolt or 3 bolts at the player. This variety challenges the player to a difficult detection challenge in order to notice Geoffrey is done shooting after one bolt in order to punish properly, or risk getting hit by the following 2 bolts. Using his ranged attacks he can sometimes stand on a spotlight (which the player can’t access) and shoot bolts, forcing the player to rethink their strategy, encouraging the use of ranged options to interrupt Geoffrey from endlessly shooting bolts at the player. As an alternative, the player can choose to dodge the bolts and wait for the spotlights to go away, or for Geoffrey to decide to charge at the player.

I think this part of his kit is well made. The timing between bolts is intuitive, the startup animation is clear, and it allows for a fun approach challenge.

Zoner

Geoffrey uses the spotlight system to place spotlights across the arena that hurt the player. The player has to navigate between the spotlights to always fight Geoffrey in the dark. I think the system works pretty well, it gives the fight an identity and I still view it as one of the most iconic fights in the game.

The only issue I had with this system is not specifically about the system but how it relates to the combat system. Similarly to the Mary fight, I often found myself fighting with the camera in order to understand the patterns of lights being deployed at that moment. Some light patterns feel like they work against the way the player interacts with the game, e.g. placing lights in front the player and behind the player, making the player back away from the lights he can see, just to be surprised by lights they couldn’t even see. When using a controller it is impossible to spin the camera 360 degrees in order to see the entire arena before the lights take effect, making some patters frustrating to deal with. However like in the Mary fight, that wasn’t too much of a big deal and it is a drawback I can be ok with if it was necessary to making the fight as good as it was.

Melee

Geoffrey has a few attacks where he uses his sword to attack the player. The most prominent one is his charge attack. Every so often Geoffrey will abandon his hand crossbow in favor of charging at the player with his sword ready to swing. Once he reaches the player he will swing his sword in a cone in front of him. This attack is used to break a possible loop of Geoffrey standing in the spotlights, shooting bolts at the player without allowing them an option to retaliate without ranged options.

Allowing the players to choose to play how they want, even when it goes against what the fight encourages is an important part of allowing autonomy. If the fight forced the use of ranged options it wouldn’t have been nearly as fun.

I think choosing to include an attack that breaks the possible frustrating loop of Geoffrey standing out of reach was a great decision and this attack achieves this goal well. The only criticism I have, if you want to even call it that, is that the attack could have been a bit more creative, to fit his fighting style a bit more. Sometimes it feels out of character for him to randomly give up his advantageous position just to charge at the player for no apparent reason. But I think this move works well enough, especially if they felt a need to allow him to use his sword.

Geoffrey McCullum in my opinion is one of the most iconic fights (together with Mary) in the game. The balance between keep out long ranged attacks and area of denial zoner works out great which is very impressive. When combining those archetypes bosses can become frustrating very quick as the player can at times feel like they are powerless and can never approach the boss. The more aggressive AI of Geoffrey works great to nullify this issue. Bosses that use long ranged attacks tend to back off a lot when the player reaches them, which can feel like 90% of the fight is just spent chasing the boss which can be frustrating. Geoffrey manages to be just aggressive enough for it to not feel like the fight is a constant chase, instead it is a real fight where both sides are just using their tools to the best of their abilities.

The only two criticisms I could think of are:

1) the mismatch between some patterns and the camera placements.

2) sometimes the charge attack feels like Geoffrey is just trying to give the player an opening to attack him.

Aside from those two issues the fight came out great and is one of the highlights of my playthrough.

Disaster Harriet

Harriet was the first person to be infected with the epidemic. Inflicted by the blood of Elisabeth, administered to Harriet by Dr. Swansea to try to fight the influenza. Harriet turned into a disaster, spreading the skal epidemic. We confront her in the sewers.

Harriet is a mid-ranged keep out boss. She doesn’t have a lot of health and doesn’t have too many attacks, she is mostly there as a story element to be the “phase 1” of the final boss which reveals herself right after we defeat Harriet.

Harriet has very similar (some exactly the same) moves to Doris, which makes sense as they are both the same type of creature. She uses her disfigured hand to launch mid-ranged attacks at the player. Her moves seem like enhanced versions of the attacks of Doris which is cool as it makes sense with the story. However the extra properties of her slow thrust move (see more about this move in the Doris section) feel unclear and uncommunicated. She now gained a hitbox as her arm returns to her body after the thrust. The hitbox itself is very hard to read and there is seemingly no real way to avoid it (sometimes I would even get hit by this hitbox when I was all the way behind her). As the boss is already very short, this encourages to just ignore the move, not try to punish it at all and just wait for her to do another move before fighting back.

There isn’t much to say about this boss as it’s mostly a narrative boss and not an actual fight (which isn’t a bad thing in and of itself). The only real issue was her unreadable hitbox after her slow thrust move. Giving her a new move, or a new type of property for Doris’ moves (like maybe an area of denial gas zones that last for a few seconds where ever she swing her arm) could benefit her, the addition of the extra hitbox had readability issues and was generally uninteresting.

Even if they were to remove that hit box completely and just leave her as she is right now, I think it could benefit her. Her role is kind of a warmup or introduction for the final boss, as such she doesn’t have to be too difficult or have any frustrating mechanics in my opinion.

Red Queen's Avatar

The Red Queen’s Avatar (which I will refer to as the queen for short) is the final boss of Vampyr, it’s clear a lot of effort and passion went in to make this boss as epic and interesting as possible, and I think the execution was great.

The queen is a caster summoner that gets to also be a rushdown assassin at phase 2. The combination of caster and summoner is a pretty standard one, however, forgoing her role as a caster to rush down the player with her two sickles in phase 2 is a great addition. It really pushes the feeling of the final battle, nothing is held back, which feels great for a final boss fight.

Caster

The queen gets access to two out of our 3 vampire abilities, the shadow bomb and the blood thrust. I think giving enemies access to player abilities in the right ways (like I feel was done here) is one of the best things to do if appropriate. It makes sense in terms of the story for the red queen to have similar abilities to normal vampires and it makes the fight just that much more entertaining.

Both abilities are readable and clear and are both a perfect fit for a caster.

Summoner

In the Doris section I mention how a good summoner uses their summon in a kind of “dance”, the summons, covering the summoner’s weaknesses and vice versa, becoming stronger than they would be individually. As opposed to Doris, the queen executes this beautifully. The queen’s summons between 4 and 6 blood creatures that use melee attacks. After some time those creatures’ time ends, dissipating back into pure blood. This creates “burst” periods when the queen is at her strongest when her summons are active, and a weaker moments when her summons are absent.

When the summons are active, the queen tends to stand back, casting spells at the player while her summons attack the player with endless melee attacks. This feels exactly like what a summoner should do, the queen uses her summons to make approaching her through them very hard while she keeps sending hard hitting spells in the player’s direction.

These “bursts” of power feel very good to play, allowing the player the autonomy to choose whether or not they want to engage the queen in her powered state, or just allow her to use her spells freely while waiting for her summons to run out. I think the synergy between the queen and her summons, and the visible change in her approach to the fight when the summons are on the field make her feel like a real summoner, making the fight feel challenging and well made.

In addition, the summons themselves have a very weak stun resistance, allowing the player to use those summons to refill their blood gauge. Allowing the use of the bosses abilities against them feels great and should be considered whenever possible.

It’s worth pointing out the pitfall that was avoided with the queen’s strong “bursts”. When designing bursty bosses, it is tempting to make the bosses invincible during their burst, which can leave the player truly powerless against the boss, forced to just dodge for the burst time. Even if most players end up doing just that regardless, having the option to attack her while her summons are active allows the player the feeling of autonomy even if the gameplay would look exactly the same. This is to say it’s important to consider that the feel of the player can be totally different doing the exact same thing. This fight was designed with the player mainly dodging when the summons are active in mind, however leaving the players able to engage the fight differently if they find a way to do so not only benefits those who find those ways, but also those who don’t.

Rushdown assassin

In phase 2, the queen gains access to her two sickles. Allowing her stronger melee options, enhancing her dash attack to  swing three times and a dive attack where the queen jumps up in the air, stopping her movement for a couple of seconds in the air, then diving towards the player.

The addition of harder to dodge, harder hitting, melee options for the queen covers her normal weakness as a caster (close range). The addition of archetypes that cover each other’s weaknesses is risky business as it can produce an unfun boss with no apparent weaknesses, leaving the player without options for strategy. However with the queen the addition of melee options feels great, even if the general weakness of the archetype is theoretically covered by the other, the same openings of both still exist. When the queen casts a spell, it leaves her vulnerable to attacks, it’s just that now once she recovers, she can fight the player better in melee.

When the queen’s summons are active, the balance and weakness coverage is still in full effect, just as it was with her “caster form”. She uses her summons to cover her recovery after attacks, making it safer for her to attack the player, while also covering the summons’ recovery with her own attacks. The feeling again is one of a real summoner, synergizing with her summons.

The Red Queen’s balance between all 3 of her archetypes works in perfect harmony. She can be a caster summoner or a rushdown assassin summoner, both feeling like real summoners that make good use of their summons to cover their weaknesses.

Her abilities force the player to stay on their toes, constantly switching playstyles in order to counter the queen’s actions. If she casts a spell, the player will rush her down to punish her cast, then once she starts rushing the player down with her sickles, they will try to intercept her with stuns and keep her away, only punishing when possible.

This fight encourages players to react quickly and switch up their strategies on the fly. Making these opposing archetypes work together this well truly ends this game with the bang it deserved.

Conclusion

Vampyr is a double A narrative driven RPG.

In this article we discussed what made this game great and what could be improved. We discussed both the story and narrative design side of the game, we also discussed the gameplay part of things and how both parts came together at certain times to induce emotional and motivational responses.

We discussed what makes the world of Vampyr so appealing and its presentation through the writing, narrative and environment design. We also went through some criticisms and some plot issues that were left unresolved.

We touched on the character progression system and its issues of lack of options, empowered by the resistance system, we also discussed issues having to do with enemy scaling.

We showed some issue with the equipment available in Vampyr, and some balancing issues with some equipment that allow permanent stun locking of enemies.

We talked in length about the embracing system which is one of the pillars of Vampyr, and one of its biggest selling points. We investigated the goals of this system and compared those goals to the results of the implementation.

We analyzed what makes crafting and looting fun, then broke down those systems in Vampyr, also suggesting some possible changes to make it more satisfying to use.

We touched quickly on some level design issues.

We analyzed the combat system and its relation to the enemy design in depth.

And finally we broke down the boss design of the unique bosses of Vampyr, discussing each one’s challenges and archetypes, analyzing the interesting archetype mixes, their implementations and the effects of those implementations.

It truly goes to show how much thought and planning goes into even a game that on the surface looks relatively simple.

Vampyr has a great premise and I would recommend it to anyone who’s even slightly interested in vampires and dark settings.

I decided to write this analysis of Vampyr because I saw how interesting this game was, with all its flaws it was still one of the best double A games I’ve played, and I honestly believe that with the same time and budget, it could have been the next “Witcher 3”. That may be hopeful, but I figured I’ll leave with a hopeful sentiment.

 

Thank you for taking this journey with me through the harsh times of a newborn vampire in 1918 London. And as Myrddin once said: “My queen sleeps once again, and I’ll soon join her slumber. Until alas she rises, woken by the hunger never fed.”

Scroll to Top