Also, how about boobytraps?
Game concept
Moderators: Master_Kale, TNM Team
Re: Game concept
Sounds great! What if the stalker attacked you before you find the rifle though? Or will you script it so that the stalker won't directly fight you unless you've found that rifle? This would make sense story wise — that he gets more agressive when he knows that you know
Also, how about boobytraps?
Also, how about boobytraps?
Re: Game concept
If he attacks you and you don't have a rifle, you run. I don't want to set the game up to play in a linear fashion, so if you don't have the gun by the time he starts attacking you - you'll just have to keep running until you find it. There'll be a pretty obvious clue near the start about where to find it, though - so it's your own fault if you miss it 
Just gave Slender a try and didn't really think much of it. I appreciate the simplicity of the concept but it ended up being a bit boring to me. Plus - you can easily game the system by sweeping your view 360° and seeing if you get the static effect to check if he's behind you.
Just gave Slender a try and didn't really think much of it. I appreciate the simplicity of the concept but it ended up being a bit boring to me. Plus - you can easily game the system by sweeping your view 360° and seeing if you get the static effect to check if he's behind you.
Re: Game concept
Okay, so basically either you gun him down or you run for your life :p Seems fair enough, I can live without melee combat.
Something else came to mind : If I understood correctly you intend to give the player the ability to repair the boat. But, if anyone can repair the boat, then why would the stalker need the player to leave the island in the first place ?
Sorry, I don't mean to sound overcritical since you are just sharing ideas with us for now, I'm just curious about this bit.
Something else came to mind : If I understood correctly you intend to give the player the ability to repair the boat. But, if anyone can repair the boat, then why would the stalker need the player to leave the island in the first place ?
Sorry, I don't mean to sound overcritical since you are just sharing ideas with us for now, I'm just curious about this bit.
Re: Game concept
Babeuf97
Because the stalker either isn't human, or because the stalker doesn't have control of his faculties, or because the stalker is a figment of the player characters imagination.
...It'll be pretty clear that it isn't option two by the time you repair the boat.
Now, here's the other thing. If the player takes the boat and gets out of there...why does that leave the stalker with a better chance of escape than if the player destroys the boat?
Because the stalker doesn't need the boat to escape. Because the stalker needs the _player_ to escape. It is a being that needs to be released.
Of course DaveW could have a different answer for you, seeing as it is his concept, but these are the answers I can think of.
Now, you might say, well, why does the stalker need the player to escape. If the stalker needs the player to escape, why does the stalker seemingly try to attack the player. Does he have a plan with his attacks or does he merely intend to frighten the player. What will he gain from freightening the player - the player was probably going to leave the island on his own anyway - why play the mindgames and not just help the player?
What does the stalker need that he gains from attack the player? What does it want?
In a strictly metaphysical sense...the stalker probably needs a vessel. Not merely a ship - a human, and a human soul.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charon_%28mythology%29
He needs a Charon...or perhaps he is Charon? The point is, I guess, he wishes to leave, either through you or with you or however. Perhaps, if he attacks and he is successful, he will consume you, and leave on his own...perhaps if you shoot him, you will think you killed him, but he is still taking you through his influence and you just delayed it.
Perhaps, even as you escape, you look into the water and see the relection of the shadow as he laughs at you, and your hands start to seem as shadow, and you only have a short amount of time to grab the rifle and fill the bottom of the boat with holes such that you will sink and kill the two of you?
What would be really cool is if you were leaving the shore with a pole (Charon didn't use oars, he used a pole) because the boat is slightly aground, and you can see the shadow at the shore, hissing at you (like the ringwraith at the ferry in lord of the rings), but then suddenly he dissapears in a puff of smoke? But you have to look into the water to pull out the pole, and your relfection is changing and distorted and smoky, so you know that whatever he is or was, he is in you as much as he is anywhere, and you're about to let him leave through you....
Because the stalker either isn't human, or because the stalker doesn't have control of his faculties, or because the stalker is a figment of the player characters imagination.
...It'll be pretty clear that it isn't option two by the time you repair the boat.
Now, here's the other thing. If the player takes the boat and gets out of there...why does that leave the stalker with a better chance of escape than if the player destroys the boat?
Because the stalker doesn't need the boat to escape. Because the stalker needs the _player_ to escape. It is a being that needs to be released.
Of course DaveW could have a different answer for you, seeing as it is his concept, but these are the answers I can think of.
Now, you might say, well, why does the stalker need the player to escape. If the stalker needs the player to escape, why does the stalker seemingly try to attack the player. Does he have a plan with his attacks or does he merely intend to frighten the player. What will he gain from freightening the player - the player was probably going to leave the island on his own anyway - why play the mindgames and not just help the player?
What does the stalker need that he gains from attack the player? What does it want?
In a strictly metaphysical sense...the stalker probably needs a vessel. Not merely a ship - a human, and a human soul.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charon_%28mythology%29
He needs a Charon...or perhaps he is Charon? The point is, I guess, he wishes to leave, either through you or with you or however. Perhaps, if he attacks and he is successful, he will consume you, and leave on his own...perhaps if you shoot him, you will think you killed him, but he is still taking you through his influence and you just delayed it.
Perhaps, even as you escape, you look into the water and see the relection of the shadow as he laughs at you, and your hands start to seem as shadow, and you only have a short amount of time to grab the rifle and fill the bottom of the boat with holes such that you will sink and kill the two of you?
What would be really cool is if you were leaving the shore with a pole (Charon didn't use oars, he used a pole) because the boat is slightly aground, and you can see the shadow at the shore, hissing at you (like the ringwraith at the ferry in lord of the rings), but then suddenly he dissapears in a puff of smoke? But you have to look into the water to pull out the pole, and your relfection is changing and distorted and smoky, so you know that whatever he is or was, he is in you as much as he is anywhere, and you're about to let him leave through you....
Re: Game concept
Yes - basically, I like the idea of the player feeling somewhat powerless but I always found the lack of defence in games like Amnesia frustrating. Who couldn't pick up a plank of wood and start hitting an attacker? So you aren't all-powerful but you're not completely defenceless either, and a rifle seems sensible since anyone could use it in that situation.Babeuf97 wrote:Okay, so basically either you gun him down or you run for your life :p Seems fair enough, I can live without melee combat.
Something else came to mind : If I understood correctly you intend to give the player the ability to repair the boat. But, if anyone can repair the boat, then why would the stalker need the player to leave the island in the first place ?
Sorry, I don't mean to sound overcritical since you are just sharing ideas with us for now, I'm just curious about this bit.
I think AEmer got what I was going for with the stalker (as well as adding some awesome ideas of his own, like him being a Charon which I hadn't even thought of). He doesn't have a true physical presence, at least not enough to repair the boat, so his actions can be seen as doing two things: keeping you going (directly helping you) and trying to take control of you (his actual attacks). It would be hinted at that he can possess people - maybe the guy in the lighthouse shouts "I won't let you in!" before he jumps, or something to that effect. In terms of design his attacks are more a gameplay mechanic because it would be boring without them - but that doesn't mean there can't be a rational explanation for them
Right now I'm trying to come up with the actual story of the game - what tasks you have to do when you're on the island. I've got an idea of the locations I want but now I have to try and crowbar them into a coherent storyline which is easier said than done! Especially since I'm not particularly creative and I broke up with my creative other-half a while ago - kind of running blind with this idea at the moment (but people's feedback and ideas have been awesome - so thank you everyone!)
Re: Game concept
Thanks to you both, I think I got my question answered !
To sum it up, the stalker has enough of a physical presence to move objects like keys and ladders, but this is pretty much all he can do. Also, he is real enough that bullets may harm him, although that won't end up as being a problem for him since he can possess the player. Speaking of which — and this will be my last question — how will these attacks show in game? I mean will the stalker try to bite or stun the player, will he try to force the player's way into mantraps so that he can possess the latter without him running away, will he use psychic attacks to get the player's vision blurred and/or to slow him down, etc.?
One cool thing might be to give the player a certain amount of resistance points or something, so that each attack/encounter would cost him precious points. When it comes down to zero, the stalker gets inside him somehow. This way the longer the player stays on the island, the more likely it is that he'll end up being possessed.
Anyway, good luck with the project ! Hope to hear more from it.
To sum it up, the stalker has enough of a physical presence to move objects like keys and ladders, but this is pretty much all he can do. Also, he is real enough that bullets may harm him, although that won't end up as being a problem for him since he can possess the player. Speaking of which — and this will be my last question — how will these attacks show in game? I mean will the stalker try to bite or stun the player, will he try to force the player's way into mantraps so that he can possess the latter without him running away, will he use psychic attacks to get the player's vision blurred and/or to slow him down, etc.?
One cool thing might be to give the player a certain amount of resistance points or something, so that each attack/encounter would cost him precious points. When it comes down to zero, the stalker gets inside him somehow. This way the longer the player stays on the island, the more likely it is that he'll end up being possessed.
Anyway, good luck with the project ! Hope to hear more from it.
Re: Game concept
I suppose it would depend on whether he can't escape the island because of his physical capability (which is limited to moving small objects around, basically) or because he is bound to the island except escaping through a living host. I think the latter is probably a cooler explanation.
The attacks would be physical - he'd jump at you and knock you back and that would lower your health. If you time a melee with the rifle right, you can knock him away. I imagine him being kind of like the Hunter in Left 4 Dead.
Health is an interesting topic. I quite liked a Half Life 2 mod called "Night at the Office" which had no health kits - the health you start with is all you get. I thought that was quite cool, but it meant whenever you got shot you quickloaded to try and avoid it..
The game will have difficulty levels, so I was thinking of having quickly regenerating health on the lower levels and the highest level will have persistant health with a few medkits spread out on the island.
The attacks would be physical - he'd jump at you and knock you back and that would lower your health. If you time a melee with the rifle right, you can knock him away. I imagine him being kind of like the Hunter in Left 4 Dead.
Health is an interesting topic. I quite liked a Half Life 2 mod called "Night at the Office" which had no health kits - the health you start with is all you get. I thought that was quite cool, but it meant whenever you got shot you quickloaded to try and avoid it..
The game will have difficulty levels, so I was thinking of having quickly regenerating health on the lower levels and the highest level will have persistant health with a few medkits spread out on the island.
Re: Game concept
Seems like it will be fun to play I really look forward to what you can achieve with this concept!
I really look forward to what you can achieve with this concept!Re: Game concept
I recall a specific story about Charon that my dad told me...I can't recall the source, but it's likely the oddysey or another similar one...
In it, Charon is a menacing figure who will always try to convince others to simply help him take a break. He will promise them gold and other such things, if they will merely mind the ferry till he gets back.
The ferry will then bind anyone dumb enough to relieve him untill they die of exhaustion, at which point he will return and ferry them to the land of the dead, taking up his task once more.
In general, the stories surrounding Charon appear to have one theme in common: Charon is bound to his task, just as sissyphos, but he doesn't like it, and he has many godly abilities - very similar, I guess, to the grim reaper. If Charon takes you, you will probably never return.
In it, Charon is a menacing figure who will always try to convince others to simply help him take a break. He will promise them gold and other such things, if they will merely mind the ferry till he gets back.
The ferry will then bind anyone dumb enough to relieve him untill they die of exhaustion, at which point he will return and ferry them to the land of the dead, taking up his task once more.
In general, the stories surrounding Charon appear to have one theme in common: Charon is bound to his task, just as sissyphos, but he doesn't like it, and he has many godly abilities - very similar, I guess, to the grim reaper. If Charon takes you, you will probably never return.
Re: Game concept
I like the sound of this mythology more and more 
Just got a copy of The Oddysey so I'll have a read through that, I think having Greek Mythology as a background theme could be really cool.
I've had some specific ideas about back-stories but nothing concrete yet. Just things to fill journals and expand the world past what I can actually create in physical locations (which will be limited, obviously)
In terms of tasks I figure it's best to keep it simple - maybe not to the extent "Slender" does it, but simple enough that you don't need constant cues to tell you what to do. Rather than have the game verbally tell you what to do, I want it to feel slightly more 'passive'. That said, I think a notebook would be a useful tool to guide the player.
If the player leaves the linear sequence in the mines and is directed to the docks where the ship is moored - as he explores the ship he could note down all the missing parts. The mission of the game is to find each of those parts and bring them back to the ship. Each part is in a different area of the island but requires several steps to get to it - so, for example, one may require you destroy a wall to get to it. The explosives are stored somewhere else on the island - where another item is also kept etc. etc. - so the locations will overlap but ultimately you can play the game in whatever order you choose. You end up at the same point in the end.
The hardest part will be keeping the island small enough that walking from one place to another isn't completely freaking boring - and making the game world feel big enough to be convincing.
Just got a copy of The Oddysey so I'll have a read through that, I think having Greek Mythology as a background theme could be really cool.I've had some specific ideas about back-stories but nothing concrete yet. Just things to fill journals and expand the world past what I can actually create in physical locations (which will be limited, obviously)
In terms of tasks I figure it's best to keep it simple - maybe not to the extent "Slender" does it, but simple enough that you don't need constant cues to tell you what to do. Rather than have the game verbally tell you what to do, I want it to feel slightly more 'passive'. That said, I think a notebook would be a useful tool to guide the player.
If the player leaves the linear sequence in the mines and is directed to the docks where the ship is moored - as he explores the ship he could note down all the missing parts. The mission of the game is to find each of those parts and bring them back to the ship. Each part is in a different area of the island but requires several steps to get to it - so, for example, one may require you destroy a wall to get to it. The explosives are stored somewhere else on the island - where another item is also kept etc. etc. - so the locations will overlap but ultimately you can play the game in whatever order you choose. You end up at the same point in the end.
The hardest part will be keeping the island small enough that walking from one place to another isn't completely freaking boring - and making the game world feel big enough to be convincing.
Re: Game concept
Well, to make things work well, the less clunky the mechanics you use, the better...to a point.
For instance, having Gordon Freeman or Chell never say a word is pretty cool for the games they're in. It's an interesting constraint to work around.
But it does mean that certain interactions feel forced.
So what I would do is, figure out what's an interesting constraint. I'd say the most interesting one would be to have zero interface. There's no crosshair, no hitpoints, nothing. You want to access your inventory, you have to take off your backpack, and there's an LA-noir like examine function that lets you take items from the various pockets.
Along those lines, I think perhaps having a "yelp" function that has the pc 'yell' "help" or "is anybody there" or similar might be cool. There'd be no choice, but the player would be able to realize, ok, yelling does nothing, I've tried it, nobody can hear me.
Having no internal monologue would also be cool. With the yelp mechanic, the player is going to realize, the designer could have done this, or he could have had audiologs - but he chose deliberately not to. It'll also make the game connect with the game: From the very first moment, the player will have to figure out what he wants to do by himself.
Also - since we're on the subject of greek mythology - having the player character die and try again could be seen as a kind of sissyphos'ian task, if you really wanted to. The character might not have any memory of the other savegames, or he might if you wanted to go for something truly unusual - but it's a little bit akin to being in limbo.
Limbo which, by the way, I thought was circular for a few moments before I completed it, which was the best thing ever...
Anyway. You can do a lot of mindfuck with the setting, but I think it's important to set some constraints to highten immersion, but also to add some tools to make the games design clear.
For instance, having Gordon Freeman or Chell never say a word is pretty cool for the games they're in. It's an interesting constraint to work around.
But it does mean that certain interactions feel forced.
So what I would do is, figure out what's an interesting constraint. I'd say the most interesting one would be to have zero interface. There's no crosshair, no hitpoints, nothing. You want to access your inventory, you have to take off your backpack, and there's an LA-noir like examine function that lets you take items from the various pockets.
Along those lines, I think perhaps having a "yelp" function that has the pc 'yell' "help" or "is anybody there" or similar might be cool. There'd be no choice, but the player would be able to realize, ok, yelling does nothing, I've tried it, nobody can hear me.
Having no internal monologue would also be cool. With the yelp mechanic, the player is going to realize, the designer could have done this, or he could have had audiologs - but he chose deliberately not to. It'll also make the game connect with the game: From the very first moment, the player will have to figure out what he wants to do by himself.
Also - since we're on the subject of greek mythology - having the player character die and try again could be seen as a kind of sissyphos'ian task, if you really wanted to. The character might not have any memory of the other savegames, or he might if you wanted to go for something truly unusual - but it's a little bit akin to being in limbo.
Limbo which, by the way, I thought was circular for a few moments before I completed it, which was the best thing ever...
Anyway. You can do a lot of mindfuck with the setting, but I think it's important to set some constraints to highten immersion, but also to add some tools to make the games design clear.
Re: Game concept
I'm not sure about a "Yelp" function - I'd rather keep the main character silent for practical reasons. But I have been thinking of having no interface - the only problem is indicating ammo left for the rifle. The workaround I've thought of is having the player character tap the magazine on the side of the rifle each time he reloads - once for one magazine, two taps for two magazines, etc. - the only other 'interface element' would be the notepad.
I've downloaded the CryEngine SDK to see if that would be better suited for the game - seeing as how it was basically built to render beautiful islands.
After downloading it I couldn't find a simple instruction manual and most of the official wiki is for the Crysis Wars / Crysis 2 mod kit. When I tried to run the sample editor or game, I got a black screen with smearing HUD elements (but the menu's worked fine). I restart the computer and try to run it, it crashes my display drivers twice then the game launcher starts in a loop where all I can do is scroll through multiplayer options. I force quit (since I can't get back to the normal exit option), start it up again, and at last, the example map! Except half the world is missing and it runs for about 2 seconds before crashing the display driver and locking up my computer.
TL;DR fuck you Crytek and your shitty engine. I was wondering as I was browsing the site why there weren't any major projects listed using the SDK - and between the fact that it doesn't fucking work and requiring a constant internet connection I can't possibly see why that is.
I've downloaded the CryEngine SDK to see if that would be better suited for the game - seeing as how it was basically built to render beautiful islands.
After downloading it I couldn't find a simple instruction manual and most of the official wiki is for the Crysis Wars / Crysis 2 mod kit. When I tried to run the sample editor or game, I got a black screen with smearing HUD elements (but the menu's worked fine). I restart the computer and try to run it, it crashes my display drivers twice then the game launcher starts in a loop where all I can do is scroll through multiplayer options. I force quit (since I can't get back to the normal exit option), start it up again, and at last, the example map! Except half the world is missing and it runs for about 2 seconds before crashing the display driver and locking up my computer.
TL;DR fuck you Crytek and your shitty engine. I was wondering as I was browsing the site why there weren't any major projects listed using the SDK - and between the fact that it doesn't fucking work and requiring a constant internet connection I can't possibly see why that is.
Re: Game concept
The issue with a silent protagonist is that he _would_ say something if he's a human being. Conjecturing that he may be mute is also a really big stretch, and if it was supported by the fiction, it would feel like a cop-out.
So nomatter how you look at it, having him be mute will come off as an aesthetic choice, one where you do things a certain way because you feel the fiction is better off this way...and that is, in my oppinion, a bit dangerous. It will make people suspicious of something that they could otherwise trust completely.
Maybe I'm an overly sceptical reader/player in general, but if I realize that information is being withheld for me, or that there is something I don't know about what I'm doing, I get really, really analytical about it. It becomes a puzzle.
The best solution may be to have the character morse code someone on the radio as the ship is sinking; it very clearly indicates that the character is a specific person who is part of normal society.
Anyway, so about the ammunition - have the player count. I assume the rifle won't be a fully automatic one anyway. If the player wants to check how much ammo is left, let him pop out the magazine and have a look. Let him check out his belt for additional magazines. Let him manage the magazines on his own - for instance combining ammunition from two magazines into one.
I know these things aren't easy to do, but I feel like they are important because they establish fictional cohesion.
So nomatter how you look at it, having him be mute will come off as an aesthetic choice, one where you do things a certain way because you feel the fiction is better off this way...and that is, in my oppinion, a bit dangerous. It will make people suspicious of something that they could otherwise trust completely.
Maybe I'm an overly sceptical reader/player in general, but if I realize that information is being withheld for me, or that there is something I don't know about what I'm doing, I get really, really analytical about it. It becomes a puzzle.
The best solution may be to have the character morse code someone on the radio as the ship is sinking; it very clearly indicates that the character is a specific person who is part of normal society.
Anyway, so about the ammunition - have the player count. I assume the rifle won't be a fully automatic one anyway. If the player wants to check how much ammo is left, let him pop out the magazine and have a look. Let him check out his belt for additional magazines. Let him manage the magazines on his own - for instance combining ammunition from two magazines into one.
I know these things aren't easy to do, but I feel like they are important because they establish fictional cohesion.
Re: Game concept
While that could be cool I think they'd be hard to do in two ways. First, it's difficult to code and animate - and I'm probably going to be the only artist. Secondly it would be hard to explain to the player how to do that, without having tooltips etc. to guide them.
I'd rather have the game-play unobtrusive so the player can enjoy the experience more.
But - the player can morse code someone at the start. And that leads to a few additional events happening in the game where you get hints over various radios that there is a rescue team looking for you.
I've been trying to plan out the story a bit - though it ends up looking like a mess:
And I've decided to replace the L1A1 rifle with a Webley revolver instead (British army issue around WW1/WW2 time). I think it would be better if I tried to leave the time the game is set a little more ambiguous, so an older weapon would help that. Plus I think a revolver will seem less 'FPS' than a rifle.
I'd rather have the game-play unobtrusive so the player can enjoy the experience more.
But - the player can morse code someone at the start. And that leads to a few additional events happening in the game where you get hints over various radios that there is a rescue team looking for you.
I've been trying to plan out the story a bit - though it ends up looking like a mess:
And I've decided to replace the L1A1 rifle with a Webley revolver instead (British army issue around WW1/WW2 time). I think it would be better if I tried to leave the time the game is set a little more ambiguous, so an older weapon would help that. Plus I think a revolver will seem less 'FPS' than a rifle.
Re: Game concept
Agree on the choice of a revolver. It's the quintessential western weapon.
I watched an analysis on the difference in popularity of FPS games in the western and eastern gaming markets. One of the more interesting bits was that western audiences tend to view weapons, and guns in particular, as tools that are seperate to the person weilding them...whereas eastern audiences tend to view weapons as an extension of the self, that is, a swordsman is not a person who has been empowered with a sword, he has himself become a sword...indeed you are not a swordsman just because you hold a sword, it is something you attain through integrating in the martial tradition of swordsmanship.
A pistol, to a westerner, makes anybody capable of killing anyone, is the thinking, which makes assuming the controller for an FPS game compelling to western audiences. They feel that the basic premise empowers them. To a western audience, the experience would be different.
Whether or not you agree with that conclusion, the general analysis of what a gun means is still pretty interesting.
Choosing the revolver - a tool designed primarily for empowering people to take responsibility for their own personal safety - rather than a military rifle, strikes me as very right for aesthetic reasons as well.
Anyway, I also had the thought that it would be cool if the player himself had to morse, meaning only people knowing how to SOS would be able to do it, but that's probably a lot less people than you'd want...
As for how to do the interface...well, that's part of the constraints you impose on yourself to make things that are clever. You might not have any good idea on how to do it without tooltips right now, and you might not be able to do it at all because the art would be too expensive in terms of time, but you might want to only cut corners after you have an "ideal" design that would be optimal. Either way, I hope you won't dismiss it as impossible, because it doesn't seem like you have that much feature creep in the game as it is...
But revolvers are also weird in the first place. Reloading them can be done manually, or if you're fortunate enough to have a loading grip you can do it quickly if you discard the rest of the drum. It's probably going to be acceptable to a lot of people if you cut corners surrounding it, and they'll think nothing more of it. That's also why you could get peoples attention by doing it right, though...and make them think, ok, this game doesn't even know its just a game itself, it really wants to be like reality...
I watched an analysis on the difference in popularity of FPS games in the western and eastern gaming markets. One of the more interesting bits was that western audiences tend to view weapons, and guns in particular, as tools that are seperate to the person weilding them...whereas eastern audiences tend to view weapons as an extension of the self, that is, a swordsman is not a person who has been empowered with a sword, he has himself become a sword...indeed you are not a swordsman just because you hold a sword, it is something you attain through integrating in the martial tradition of swordsmanship.
A pistol, to a westerner, makes anybody capable of killing anyone, is the thinking, which makes assuming the controller for an FPS game compelling to western audiences. They feel that the basic premise empowers them. To a western audience, the experience would be different.
Whether or not you agree with that conclusion, the general analysis of what a gun means is still pretty interesting.
Choosing the revolver - a tool designed primarily for empowering people to take responsibility for their own personal safety - rather than a military rifle, strikes me as very right for aesthetic reasons as well.
Anyway, I also had the thought that it would be cool if the player himself had to morse, meaning only people knowing how to SOS would be able to do it, but that's probably a lot less people than you'd want...
As for how to do the interface...well, that's part of the constraints you impose on yourself to make things that are clever. You might not have any good idea on how to do it without tooltips right now, and you might not be able to do it at all because the art would be too expensive in terms of time, but you might want to only cut corners after you have an "ideal" design that would be optimal. Either way, I hope you won't dismiss it as impossible, because it doesn't seem like you have that much feature creep in the game as it is...
But revolvers are also weird in the first place. Reloading them can be done manually, or if you're fortunate enough to have a loading grip you can do it quickly if you discard the rest of the drum. It's probably going to be acceptable to a lot of people if you cut corners surrounding it, and they'll think nothing more of it. That's also why you could get peoples attention by doing it right, though...and make them think, ok, this game doesn't even know its just a game itself, it really wants to be like reality...