I'm talking about the red part that shows where enemies are attacking from.
I think it's a variation on: Damage Flash
Which should probably be renamed from Damage Flash to Damage Indicator. It's a directional indication of where damage is coming from.
Hm, I would actually argue that they are different and can both exist at the same time.
I agree they are different things. The jelly and red sides of the screen are damage indicators and the arrow indicates hit detection.
They both indicate damage, because they only occur when you are being damaged. In some cases the damage indicator also indicates the direction of the damage. As such, they are the same thing. You can have both a directional and non-directional damage indicator at the same time, as many games do, and they're still both damage indicators.
edit: Alternatively, you could have them as separate concepts, but they should be Damage Indicator and Directional Damage Indicator.
Bear in mind that there's two kinds of that thing: The one showing you what direction you're getting HIT from, and the one showing you the direction where the enemies are merely aware of your presence and about to start shooting.
I'd call the former 'hit detector' and the latter 'detected detector'
They both indicate damage, because they only occur when you are being damaged. In some cases the damage indicator also indicates the direction of the damage. As such, they are the same thing.
By that logic, all rectangles are squares.
What are you even talking about? Regardless, taking your nonsense and turning it around, since all squares are rectangles:
The Damage Indicator is the rectangle and the Directional Damage Indicator is the square, a type of rectangle. They are both damage indicators, just the directional one also denotes direction, thus it is a sub-category of the damage indicator.
If you want to better explain to me how that's incorrect, go for it, I'm listening.
That explanation seems right, but it doesn't really justify making the directional indicator a subset of the damage indicator. Again, rectangle/square analogy.
Actually, I remember what I was going for: you can only say two things are the same if neither one can exist without the other. Or something along those lines. In this case, that doesn't hold up. We can have damage indicators without directional indicators, but does the inverse hold true? It doesn't, so how can we call them the same if one can exist without the other? Again.....well, I think you know.