|
Code Jockey posted:e. Hell I still want a GTA clone that makes you obey traffic laws. It'd be really fun to me, okay Mafia 1 and 2?
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 03:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 18:33 |
|
|
Policenaut posted:Mafia 1 and 2? And it was SUPER loving annoying in Mafia 1. Turns out that having to stop at every red light does not make for a fun game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 03:36
|
|
|
I think the whole "realistic gunplay" thing would be hard to actually implement. I mean how often really would you even get to see the effects of such a system? If it is really realistic you are probably gonna be dead every time someone draws a bead on you, so why bother with all the "crippled limbs" and stuff? 99.99% of the time you'd just be killed outright. I don't see many games where people pop one shot into your leg and run off, or anything, and hitting someone in center-mass isn't exactly difficult. I just don't see it being worth the effort involved at this point, since you'd probably have to build a new engine around the concept. I think that sort of realism is probably not worth going into in an FPS yet, but I think it would be really, really awesome for those survival-type games. "The Last of Us" looks really promising if they stick with the idea of gunfights being very limited and having the ability to completely turn the tables when it comes into play. If you have a bunch of bullets and your enemies have steel pipes and bricks it won't be very tense or scary. If you come across 1 or 2 bullets every few hours it would be amazing. You would have to really decide when you are overwhelmed and need to use them, and being able to bluff with an empty gun is a perfect addition. On the flip side, when a rare enemy pulls a gun on you it should be pants-making GBS threads, like if he gets the drop on you it isn't time to pull your gun or go into a slo-mo sequence, its time to run like gently caress and get away or try to flank. I also think that the limb damage needs to be completely persistent; I've played a lot of games where shooting someone in the arm or leg makes them limp or drop their gun for a minute, but then they "shake it off" or something and come after you again after a few second. No, gently caress that. If you shoot a dude in the leg he needs to limp for as long as he is alive, so that if you miss your shot with your one bullet you might at least still get some sort of advantage out of it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 04:24
|
|
|
Yeah, I never imagined realistic gunplay working in an FPS, and I suppose that's where most of the confusion comes from. It's the ubiquity of guns in games that I have a problem with, where it's to the point that a gun is so often your main means of interacting with the game world. When I talk about a game that makes guns appear to have some weight, I'm not talking about an FPS where everybody goes down in one hit. I'm talking about, say, something like Fallout 3, except where guns are powerful and super rare. The game doesn't revolve around gunplay and encourages you to utilize other means, but there's a very rare chance that you could find a gun and a few bullets, and that's a Very Big Deal; you have to keep it secret or else people would try to take it from you, you have to be careful with it because you only have a couple shots, that sort of thing. Even the act of showing it would have a big impact and have you being treated as a god among men. But nope, most games are just about you having 10 guns strapped to your back and letting you pick up ammo off dead guys without even having to bend over.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 04:44
|
|
|
Crappy Jack posted:Yeah, I never imagined realistic gunplay working in an FPS, and I suppose that's where most of the confusion comes from. It's the ubiquity of guns in games that I have a problem with, where it's to the point that a gun is so often your main means of interacting with the game world. I Am Alive seems to be closer to that idea.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 04:46
|
|
|
That announcement for The Last of Us was exciting for me because it was a hint that it would be a game about exploration and interaction with the environment, with shooting being only a small part of it. The debate about whether realistic gunplay can work in a shooting game is kind of off-topic, isn't it?
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 05:05
|
|
|
Code Jockey posted:e. Hell I still want a GTA clone that makes you obey traffic laws. It'd be really fun to me, okay Having to stop at the tollbooths in GTA4 pissed me off enough. Anything more than that would make me jut not play the game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 05:15
|
|
|
Mrs. Badcrumble posted:Lack of save points, full stat information for every single capturable monster in the game, high variance in the two main characters' stats. Skyrim and New Vegas save waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more information than that, though. Something else has to be eating up space in that save file.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 06:55
|
|
|
...! posted:Skyrim and New Vegas save waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more information than that, though. Something else has to be eating up space in that save file.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 07:03
|
|
|
Orzo posted:You know, people survive multiple bullets in games not because the developers are stupid but because realism isn't fun.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 10:08
|
|
|
For those who don't have access to the demo of The House of the Dead 3: It's not a Move-only game and can be controlled with a DualShock controller. The left stick or directional pad moves the crosshair around the screen, any of the shoulder buttons fire the weapon, and any of the 4 buttons reloads the weapon. It's also a very short demo: Only the first stage with 1 life and 1 continue. Also there is auto-reload and there is no option to disable it. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 10:44
|
|
|
Troffen posted:I think it's less "realism isn't fun" and more that realism often just doesn't work from a gameplay perspective. Realistic guns make sense in survival-oriented games like I assume The Last of Us is, but I can't imagine something like a multiplayer deathmatch-type shooter where any stray bullet kills you immediately being all that entertaining. All modern multiplayer shooters are literally what you just described.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 11:15
|
|
|
bbcisdabomb posted:This is part of the reason SWAT 4 was so great - heavier armor slowed you down a lot but seemed to only give you a percentage chance of not dying instantly when hit. Heavy armor was something like a 50-50 chance of dropping when shot in the chest, but you still had a (small) chance of staying up when shot with no armor on. I agree completely. CoD is not set up to be a tactical shooter at all - I was just pointing out that there was an alternate game mode but, in my opinion, it sill doesn't offer what bbc (and I, for that matter) is looking for. VVVVVV Urban Achiever fucked around with this message at 18:27 on Feb 10, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 16:40
|
|
|
Urban Achiever posted:There is hardcore mode - but the game still plays like a coked up ferret in a kiddie pool. ... man, I would love a proper next-gen SWAT  I think it's appealing for the same reason Bulletstorm is appealing. FPS's have gotten themselves in a hell of a rut, so anything to break the mold would be wonderful. This one is even a proper FPS, and involves terrorists, and is "realistic" - that's allowable in this generation of shooters, right? 
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 17:00
|
|
|
The Sleeping Dogs trailer may not be in any way representative of the final game, but if the bike-to-bus leap at the end hints at Just Cause vehicle jumping then that'd be great. omnibobb posted:Does anyone remember the game Magic Pengel for PS2? You'd design monsters and fight them and the different colors gave them different stats and poo poo. Magic Pengel had input from Studio Ghibli, worth checking out for that alone. You could create some amazing designs in its sequel Graffiti Kingdom too. Making wrestlers in the WWE games and dressing up Sackboys or your Saints Row character is fun, but I can't think of anything from this gen which comes close to the freedom those two games gave you. 3D Dot Game Heroes maybe. Edit: I loved the punch button that the expansion pack added to Swat 4. You know any civilian who gives me crap when I'm trying to save asses is getting a couple smacks to the jaw. Tokyo Incident fucked around with this message at 17:05 on Feb 10, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 17:03
|
|
|
Aardark posted:On the other hand, when "fun" is constantly funneled down your throat, it just turns into dull busywork. Is there anyone (other than literal children) who is not tired of the tedious "summer blockbuster" (ugh) poo poo represented by big-budget games like Modern Warfare? I'd rather shoot my gun twice in the entire game and have it carry at least some kind of emotional weight. I haven't played MW3, but I liked the SP campaigns in MW1&2 the same way I like summer blockbusters sometimes: as lovely, fun, action movies. Granted, MW2 made basically no sense and I still have no idea why I should care about any of the characters, but the game is only 5 hours long or something and had some pretty good setpieces. I'm not saying they're good, by any stretch, but that they can be enjoyed by people other than "literal children". Sometimes being good at something isn't the same as being good. I'd also like a game that focuses on a tense experience created by an underpowered player character that forces you to think about your actions, but there's room for both in the market. Although goddamn am I tired of modern era shooters with boring real guns and boring boring boring. Stuff like Borderlands had much more fun gameplay.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 17:04
|
|
|
To me this is the only way to approach a CoD/MW game. Take it for what it is, big and loud set piece battles that are fun to play once or twice with multiplayer so twitchy it feels like Mohammed Ali on Mr Toad's Wild Ride. And because you mention it - God drat I can't wait for Borderlands 2!
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 18:32
|
|
|
Aardark posted:On the other hand, when "fun" is constantly funneled down your throat, it just turns into dull busywork. Is there anyone (other than literal children) who is not tired of the tedious "summer blockbuster" (ugh) poo poo represented by big-budget games like Modern Warfare? Hello, I'm a literal child. I unironically (gently caress I hate that word) loved Modern Warfare 3's single-player campaign and how loving stupid the plot was. Yes, the game is just moving from setpiece to setpiece while shooting dudes who look exactly like every other dude with guns that feel like every other gun, but Infinity Ward is the one developer who I know does setpieces right. The game plays exactly like a summer blockbuster. I'm not going to go see The Avengers looking for an intelligent discourse on the role of gender as it pertains to the human condition, I'm going to go see The Avengers to watch Thor and Hulk beat the poo poo out of people for paper-thin reasons. I don't play Call of Duty to redefine what a shooter should be or see the innovative mechanics. I play Call of Duty when I just want to shoot some dudes in the face and marvel at the explosions. e. Because other people have said essentially the same thing - Yeah, I'm sad the CoD-style game has such a stranglehold on the market, but it's no reason to poo poo on the entire genre. I'd be saying the same thing about Borderlands is Borderlands had the same release schedule. bbcisdabomb fucked around with this message at 19:21 on Feb 10, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 19:17
|
|
|
I bought the MGSHD collection and I just can't get into the controls. Having played the role of the sneak in Deus Ex I just can't deal with the static camera and having to hold the direction to keep pressed up against an object to get the somewhat free view to look around corners. Thankfully I bought it from a place that does returns, so I'll take it back and get something else.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 22:30
|
|
|
Puddin posted:I bought the MGSHD collection and I just can't get into the controls. Have you only played MGS2? The other two don't have static cameras
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 22:31
|
|
|
The best addition to MGS was the non-static camera in Snake Eater. I had a hard time going to MGS2 after playing that, but everything since has had that camera as well.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 22:39
|
|
|
Chemtrail Clem posted:Have you only played MGS2? The other two don't have static cameras Yeah that's what I started on as I've not played the others. I'll give the others a go and see how I feel. It's a 7 day return policy anyway.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 22:45
|
|
|
Treat MGS2 like one of the old Metal Gear games and the overhead camera makes sense. It seems counterintuitive to not be able to swing the camera around to where you want it, but with the enemies limited line of sight there aren't many occasions where you'll be spotted by someone off screen. Also between the radar and small narrow spaces you're usually in you don't have to scan the area in first person too often. It was a pain in 3 because of the more open maps, but in 2 it still works.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 23:17
|
|
|
I have never ever played an MGS game. I love the Splinter Cell series, so I've figured I'll get MGS4 for my new PS3 at some point. Are the first three games must-plays?
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 23:31
|
|
|
Not really if you don't care about the story, but the first three are better. I'd get the HD Collection first, honestly. If you have a Gamecube or a Wii, get MGS: Twin Snakes for the first game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 23:33
|
|
|
csidle posted:I have never ever played an MGS game. I love the Splinter Cell series, so I've figured I'll get MGS4 for my new PS3 at some point. Are the first three games must-plays? I'd say to play MGS3: Subsistence, at the very least. It's a very well done game, and the first game chronologically. Also, I think a lot might be lost in jumping straight into MGS4 because all of the cutscenes are pretty well steeped in backstory.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 23:35
|
|
|
Play 3, at least. It is by far the best of the series (anyone who disagrees is wrong, sorry) and it is first chronologically anyways. MGS4 is still very good on its own, but there are a hell of a lot of references, jokes, and story elements that depend on a pretty good understanding of the plot up to that point. 2 is my least favorite, just because the controls feel so dated and the story is just so goddam bad at the end. I mean the crazy plots are part of the series charm, but 2 goes off the deep end and all of the crazy 30 minute long cutscenes full of dialog in the last half are pretty much a heavy-handed, preachy info dump. Still a loving beautiful game in HD, its amazing what they could do on the PS2. And yeah, Twin Snakes is a good remake of the first game, albeit with some added ridiculousness.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 23:52
|
|
|
Playing MGS 4 is like watching Return of the King without having seen either two LotR movies; you will pretty much have no idea who any of these people are or what the hell they're talking about, and pretty much 80% of the game is them talking about stuff; the gameplay is nice, but there's a TON of story, and three games worth of backstory that they're talking about. You will be so lost as to defy belief. We're talking a game with an hour long ending cinematic here. MGS3, however, stands incredibly well on its own and is pretty much one of the best games ever. I recommend against starting with 4.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2012 00:35
|
|
|
If you're just going to play 4, make sure to pick up the Metal Gear Solid 4 Database from the PSN store (it's free). If the game makes a reference you don't understand, you can just look it up in the database. It's pretty exhaustive.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2012 01:27
|
|
|
...! posted:If you're just going to play 4, make sure to pick up the Metal Gear Solid 4 Database from the PSN store (it's free). If the game makes a reference you don't understand, you can just look it up in the database. It's pretty exhaustive. It really should've been included in the game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2012 01:28
|
|
|
Edit: drat double post.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2012 01:39
|
|
|
I just finished The Darkness II and if you're the kind of person who hates sequel/DLC hooks I would definitely recommend you stay away. As a whole the game isn't really that difficult although I did find it way too easy to get overwhelmed by the enemies who carry around portable lights. The screen gets so blown out that it can be hard to actually shoot out the light.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2012 02:27
|
|
|
muscles like this? posted:I just finished The Darkness II and if you're the kind of person who hates sequel/DLC hooks I would definitely recommend you stay away. As a whole the game isn't really that difficult although I did find it way too easy to get overwhelmed by the enemies who carry around portable lights. The screen gets so blown out that it can be hard to actually shoot out the light. The lights in general are my main complaint with the game. It's nice that the developers try and mix it up with things like portable lights and generators, but taking out lights still feels like a bit of a chore. Other than that it's pretty fun though. The gameplay is a big step up from the original, though so far it seems to lack the emotional oomph the first game had and is more schlock-y comic book type stuff.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2012 02:52
|
|
|
Wrong thread. But i'll post what I was talking about anyways; There is a Nyan Cat game on the Xbox 360, and it needs to be on PSN as well!
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2012 05:40
|
|
|
Troffen posted:The lights in general are my main complaint with the game. It's nice that the developers try and mix it up with things like portable lights and generators, but taking out lights still feels like a bit of a chore. Other than that it's pretty fun though. The gameplay is a big step up from the original, though so far it seems to lack the emotional oomph the first game had and is more schlock-y comic book type stuff. Glad you guys are finally playing the game. I did a mock review of it a few months ago and came away feeling the same way. The emotional weight and investment in the characters just isn't there (seeing Jenny die in the first game was one of the most surprisingly shocking things I've experienced in a game), but the gameplay itself has definitely gone up a few notches. Props to Digital Extremes for really pulling off a solid shooter with a gorgeous visual look. Did they fix the endgame, though? The final level in the game was incredibly frustrating for me -- such that I didn't even WANT to finish it. I did, eventually, but not without a ton of cussing. And of course I want to see how it The Darkness III turns out, as that's one of the more interesting storylines in The Darkness saga if I'm remembering right. As someone said before, the best part of the game is Johnny and his hilarious diatribes he gets into while describing the relics. Really any time he's talking is the best part of the game. Vinny (I think?), Jackie's right-hand man, has some really great bits of dialogue too. I may not have cared too much about the characters, but I sure did laugh at 'em. Really, really good writing there.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2012 06:49
|
|
|
Its kind of hard to form any emotional attachments to any of the characters when Jackie himself doesn't really seem to care all that much. He's so obsessed with Jenny that other character deaths don't have any impact. They really needed more character moments other than the Jenny hallucinations. Another thing I would have liked to see more would be more time spent in the asylum section. To balance out some of the negative, the graphic style is fantastic.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2012 07:27
|
|
|
muscles like this? posted:Its kind of hard to form any emotional attachments to any of the characters when Jackie himself doesn't really seem to care all that much. He's so obsessed with Jenny that other character deaths don't have any impact. They really needed more character moments other than the Jenny hallucinations. Another thing I would have liked to see more would be more time spent in the asylum section. I love when any medium makes you question the validity of the perspective, but it's especially effective in video games. I don't think I've ever seen a more convincing "is it or isn't it reality?" moment in a game than all the asylum stuff. Even when I was like, "gently caress this, I'm out," I still didn't really know until the end if I was ready to fully commit to it. Did they fix the ability to see both endings without consequence if you chose the right one first? [edit] Actually, the more I think about it, the more I realize the length of the asylum stuff was PERFECT. It straddled that line between letting people who were willing to really drink in the setting and see all the parallels (I'm trying to keep things as vague as possible for those that haven't played it yet) and really "get" what they were trying to do vs. just letting those that hate dialogue and cutscenes because they're ADD-addled shut-up-and-let-me-kill-things types move forward. SamBishop fucked around with this message at 08:14 on Feb 11, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2012 08:01
|
|
|
Are any of the Tomb Raider games on PSN worth getting?
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2012 13:11
|
|
|
csidle posted:Are any of the Tomb Raider games on PSN worth getting? I don't care what anyone else thinks, I loving ADORE Tomb Raider Anniversary. It's a wonderful HD remake/reimagining of the original Tomb Raider game which I also loved. Legend is painfully short, the second half is dull as hell, and it just suddenly stops halfway through the story which made me feel cheated. Get Anniversary. Has all the great new movement system of Legend, but actually has a decent story and levels as the content is that of the very first game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2012 13:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 18:33 |
|
|
Yeah, Anniversary is brilliant. It screws up some elements of the original (adding QTEs, attempts at Lara character development, relegating one of the series' best in-game moments to a cutscene) but as far as the gameplay and level design goes it's the best Tomb Raider. Legend and Underworld concentrate too much on action and boring plots with a support cast who ruin the isolated feel from the first title. There's also a bunch of challenges and unlockables to work through. Great game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2012 14:23
|
|