'Off with their HUDs,' cries industry news site Gamasutra - the amusing headline to a mini-feature on how game developers are abandoning the use of HUD displays for information like energy, ammo, speed, etc, in favour of in-game representations.
The author of the piece, Greg Wilson, mentions Call of Duty 2 on Xbox 360, but there are plenty of other examples. In EA's Fight Night Round 3, for example, the condition of each fighter is represented solely through physical attributes (slumped shoulders for fatigue and so on) - the high-definition graphics apparently portray so much information there is no need for alienating icons and numbers to litter the borders of the game world. King Kong also goes for the natural approach.
As Wilson puts it:
"Many elements found on a typical HUD are there not out of necessity, but out of convention; they represent a sort of "info overkill" that, for the vast majority of players, has no impact on gameplay at all. For every piece of information you offer the player, ask, "Is this information essential to the game experience?" In doing so, you might find that you don't need to bombard the player with quite as much data as you once thought you did."
I'm not sure how I feel about this - certainly game designers are going to have to be extremely careful when going HUD-free. Immediacy of information is often vital - especially in shooters. If you have to squint, or worse, change the camera angle, to see the ammo display on your current weapon you're losing valuable micro-seconds to your opponents. And an accurate health meter can be a vital tactical component.
Is this a sacrifice too far in the quest for visual authenticity?
