|
Cutting edge tech of multiple scripted outcomes
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2012 23:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2024 13:53 |
|
|
Plavski posted:This is all just going by that gameplay clip, but if it's representitive of the finished product, it'll just be like a modern Assassin's Creed with cover-based shooting, rechargeable health and a couple more gimmicks. If that's the worst way this game can turn out, I'll take it. For what it's worth, I did get the vibe that the demo was heavily scripted and they don't have many real gameplay mechanics coded in yet. The demo was meant to showcase how they expect the game to play out, not how the game will play out. It's a proof of concept, basically. We just have to wait and see if they deliver on that. If they do, then awesome. If they don't, then we still might get a cool free roaming assassination game.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2012 23:30
|
|
|
VarXX posted:Cutting edge tech of multiple scripted outcomes This is exactly what people were saying about Heavy Rain. Unironically.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2012 23:30
|
|
|
Watched the trailer. It seems kind of neat, but if the city isn't infested with roaming hordes of ravenous ghost bugs by the end then the whole thing will be a wash.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2012 23:31
|
|
|
Electric Pope posted:So why does the existence of a "pulling a guy out of a car" animation imply that this is a cutscene that only happens in this one specific situation? Alright, let's do this. So in the trailer, he smashes the window and pulls the guy out of the car, and just before he pulls him all the way out, there's a camera cut. It's likely that this is probably prerendered in some fashion because the lighting on the car in question is entirely different, and the cutscene still begins with him pulling the guy out of the car anyway. (Also notice that the car bumper instantly repairs itself as he approaches and activates the car, lending additional credence to the idea that the entire thing is a precanned animation) So pulling him out of the car, throwing him on the ground, giving him the speech and executing him are all done in what appears to be one continuous motion. Maybe they have another long continuous animation for you taking him out in some other way, but it's still a lot of work put into one specific way of taking this guy down, and that amount of work more often than not points to a specific way of doing things in game. It's entirely possible that there are multiple ways of taking him down, but the trailer and all the information we have about the game doesn't say anything in regards to that, so what we're doing is discussing things based on what we can actually see in the trailer that actually exists. Maybe he escapes from the cops by turning that car into a transformers jet and flying off. Who knows, but it's not in the trailer. Crappy Jack fucked around with this message at 23:38 on Jun 5, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2012 23:33
|
|
|
Actually I totally misread where you were going with this - sorry!
Seth Pecksniff fucked around with this message at 23:39 on Jun 5, 2012 |
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2012 23:36
|
|
|
ijyt posted:I guess you didn't like Half-Life 2 either. Good call! Half-life 2 was also terrible unless you have a strange affinity towards seesaws. But more importantly, it came out 7 years ago and was brand spanking new in many other ways. We've seen scripting done to death already. You can only script so many scenes until you reach a version of 90's motion capture games. Now, if the game would force you to complete an actual challenge to hack something, or gave you half a dozen option to choose freely from... but at least the trailer didn't. It looks more than a lot like simplified Hitman, with less options and more flash. And at least to me that represents the exact wrong direction to try and push the games.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2012 23:37
|
|
|
VarXX posted:Cutting edge tech of multiple scripted outcomes Too bad we can't say for sure yet. It sure is trendy to make games into slightly interactive machinma right now... so hopefully the adventure/exploration holds up here and they're onto something big.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2012 23:49
|
|
|
Spiky Ooze posted:Too bad we can't say for sure yet. It sure is trendy to make games into slightly interactive machinma right now... so hopefully the adventure/exploration holds up here and they're onto something big. Eh I dunno about that they wouldn't be hyping the game as an open world gta style game if it wasn't an open world gta style game. It's not gonna be like heavy rain or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2012 23:51
|
|
|
I get the vibe like it's a modern Assassin's creed in gameplay - open world (to a point), freedom to take down your targets (to a point), multiple gadgets that interact with the world (to a point). The game will try and steer you towards the story-based narrative it defines, but like with the AC games, you're free to run around before you do the missions. That's just the vibe I get from it - and the choice of engine would certainly make this an easy to implement reality. I don't see anything revolutionary about it; maybe evolutionary, but not revolutionary. 10 minutes of gameplay footage does not a review make though. It's telling that this is what they choose to show us as representative of the game.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2012 23:55
|
|
|
The more I think about this, the more I feel I need to see something 'different' to determine if I want to buy this or not. I can only imagine GTA with some tech elements, and I'd like them to prove me wrong. Its a neat concept, and a neat idea, it just didn't have that spark.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2012 23:59
|
|
|
Some of you are trying hard to find faults in this.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2012 23:59
|
|
|
Maybe they just give you a "mission failed" if the guy makes it to the party without you stopping him?
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2012 00:00
|
|
|
It's interesting how so many people complain about sequels, and yet when new IP crops up it's greeted with intense suspicion.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2012 00:08
|
|
|
keyframe posted:Some of you are trying hard to find faults in this.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2012 00:11
|
|
|
It's rather obvious the entire gameplay trailer they have shown was almost entirely scripted. That is no surprise. Just for fun, go ahead and watch the UK demo and note how many of the same things happen. It has all the same NPC on the streets having all the same NPC chatter. The club eavesdropping and violent exit played out exactly the same, even the traffic intersection crash had the same cars collide the same way and the gunfight went identically right down to the wife getting shot because you used her car as cover and the husband begging her to wake up. All of that said, I still believe the finished product will be an open-world game with multiple solutions for every mission. Granted they probably all won't end in dramatic cutscenes like pulling that guy of the car did. Most of the time your victims probably won't have the chance to say anything. Realistically, I can't see them ever failing you for that mission if you say, did the obvious and stayed in the club and waited for him to show up. I believe they put the scripted theatrics in as an oversell.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2012 00:15
|
|
|
Semisponge posted:It's interesting how so many people complain about sequels, and yet when new IP crops up it's greeted with intense suspicion. Not really.. it was greeted with a better reaction than anything at E3. It's just there's not much else to say about it right now.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2012 00:15
|
|
|
Like I said last page I have a friend who play tested the thing and he said it plays like a futuristic GTA. So set your expectations with that in mind. The missions in GTA are completely linear as well but you can still walk around and do sandbox "rear end in a top hat simulator" which is where the real fun is.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2012 00:15
|
|
|
Semisponge posted:It's interesting how so many people complain about sequels, and yet when new IP crops up it's greeted with intense suspicion. Every game should be looked at with a critical eye. New IP or sequel. The real problem is that E3 conferences are the worst venue to really get a good understanding of a new game. They only have a few minutes to demonstrate their game to the audience so of course they're going to want to show the coolest stuff. And they don't want any flubs so everything is going to be scripted. The final product may be "Walk From Cutscene to Cutscene: The Game" but we won't really know til later.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2012 00:16
|
|
|
keyframe posted:Like I said last page I have a friend who play tested the thing and he said it plays like a futuristic GTA. So set your expectations with that in mind. That's great because I've wanted to play a futuristic GTA for a while. I want someone to go further and make a GTA set in the Transmetropolitan universe, however.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2012 00:22
|
|
|
Semisponge posted:It's interesting how so many people complain about sequels, and yet when new IP crops up it's greeted with intense suspicion. I declared every last sequel poo poo without bothering to watch the trailers. Suspicion is certainly a step up from that. To be fair the game looks really pretty. It also looks like it's heavily scripted, relies a lot on story that you wouldn't watch if you had to pay $3 on Netflix for it, has little to no replayability and doesn't bring anything new to the table. If it's not missions but open world, it'll almost certainly have huge collect-a-thons padding the otherwise lacking content which is later monetized via DLC. Unless, of course, PC version doesn't sell enough in which case gently caress you, no DLC for you mister! Console versions aren't as pretty due to hardware limitations, and since it's Ubisoft PC version has DRM based on political theories of Stalin and Mussolini combined. It's also one of the most interesting looking things in E3, which makes me really, really sad. How come we had Infiltrator back in 1986 on Commodore 64 and now, 26 years later, we have a game that is a lot prettier but isn't quite as deep?
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2012 00:40
|
|
|
Semisponge posted:It's interesting how so many people complain about sequels, and yet when new IP crops up it's greeted with intense suspicion. When a sequel comes out, it's typically stagnant bullshit, when a new IP comes out, it's typically that same stagnant bullshit in a different wrapper. Right now, this looks like a third-person open world cover shooter with tons of scripted scenes for missions, we have plenty of those, maybe not all of them have the cover aspect, but most of them operate in the same way, a radial wheel with some hacking abilities that cause things to occur in what seem like a static and prearranged manner is dull, and it isn't new at all. There's no point in making these games and not giving the player a certain level of agency that allows him to fail even in the final act of a plan. This is why Hitman: Blood Money and Hitman 2 are so beloved, you can screw up at practically any point of your mission, regardless of where or how far down the line you are. In Watch Dogs, as the trailer seems to be showing us, it's an issue of "Hack this, and it's out of your hands." That's the same kind of poo poo that's been advertised as freedom in games this entire generation and just ends up giving you a few toys to play with in-between levels to accomplish minor tasks in a myriad of ways, but is still intensely limited. Compare this to games like Thief, or the original Deus Ex, or the original Fallouts, there were many, many, many ways to approach situations and you were in complete control of them. Making a game like this and having the player relinquish control at the most pivotal moments is a really, really, stupid mistake, and it's a very popular mistake to make in these days when making a game look like Hollywood Trash 2.0: Interactive Edition is the marketable thing to do.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2012 04:00
|
|
|
Why does this forum act like the ability to get behind cover is an automatic testament to a game being a piece of poo poo? There are a lot of great games with cover mechanics, its not all whack-a-mole. Its a ridiculous knee jerk reaction to dismiss every game that has a cover mechanic, and even worse is that it reeks of stinky neckbeards muttering under their breath about bro gamers and Gears of War.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2012 04:09
|
|
|
Plavski posted:I get the vibe like it's a modern Assassin's creed in gameplay - open world (to a point), freedom to take down your targets (to a point), multiple gadgets that interact with the world (to a point). Speculation postAs if anything other than "this is a game" is more than just speculation after a 5-minute scripted gameplay sequence This is how I think it'll be. If people want to compare it to a Rockstar game, it shouldn't be GTA, it should be LA Noire. Technically open world, but the vast majority will be "featureless city block" with a traffic light and a collectible dude with cell phone you can hack/tap for info. There will be a degree of freedom in how you meet objectives, but they will all boil down to "go to point X/Y/Z and press X/Y/LTrigger/RTrigger to use Phone Hack/Traffic Light/Gun/Comms Jammer" in sequence. I'm not saying it's a bad thing because this game looks loving intense, but that's definitely what the trailer implies, whether it's the case or not. A shrubbery! fucked around with this message at 04:13 on Jun 6, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2012 04:10
|
|
|
A shrubbery! posted:Speculation postAs if anything other than "this is a game" is more than just speculation after a 5-minute scripted gameplay sequence How does the trailer imply LA Noire instead of GTA? Have you actually played GTA IV? The missions are scripted and linear as hell.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2012 04:29
|
|
|
Fonzarelli posted:Why does this forum act like the ability to get behind cover is an automatic testament to a game being a piece of poo poo? There are a lot of great games with cover mechanics, its not all whack-a-mole. Its a ridiculous knee jerk reaction to dismiss every game that has a cover mechanic, and even worse is that it reeks of stinky neckbeards muttering under their breath about bro gamers and Gears of War. because mostly goons will be the ones to bitch about halo 4, gears of war 4, and all of the new marios but then in the same breath try to find more reasons to hate games like last of us/watch dogs and the like.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2012 04:31
|
|
|
x!te bike posted:It's fun to dismiss interesting new concepts in the face of 5 minutes worth of gameplay and upcoming next gen consoles. It's not going to be on next-gen consoles and it seems like the poster you're responding to is 100% correct in regards to the option of which setpiece you would like to "play". I like to glean accurate information from demo displays; I was going to buy Medal of Honor from the trailers before I saw how lovely the actual presentation and gameplay was. VarXX posted:Cutting edge tech of multiple scripted outcomes Totally agreed. Let's hope Ubisoft is more optimistic than we are. I doubt it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2012 04:37
|
|
|
Al! posted:That's great because I've wanted to play a futuristic GTA for a while. I want someone to go further and make a GTA set in the Transmetropolitan universe, however. Well, CD Projekt, the makers of the Witcher, are making a game based off of R. Talsorian's Cyberpunk table-top game. Edit: about the game on hand, I hadn't considered that it was pre-rendered gameplay, but I figured it was setpiece sandbox like like Mass Effect and Alpha Protocol. Considering what I've seen with open-world, free-roam sandboxes like GTA4 and Saints Row The Third, I can tell you that's not on a current generation platform. Both those games, especially SRTT, are severely limited in the size and scope because they're chained to current platforms. PC, as it's been speculated, might be more in line to what we've seen, but the final product still has to deal with the technical limitations of almost 8 year old hardware, unless they're going to be ports of some uberadvanced PC version. Young Freud fucked around with this message at 04:44 on Jun 6, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2012 04:39
|
|
|
Fonzarelli posted:Why does this forum act like the ability to get behind cover is an automatic testament to a game being a piece of poo poo? There are a lot of great games with cover mechanics, its not all whack-a-mole. Its a ridiculous knee jerk reaction to dismiss every game that has a cover mechanic, and even worse is that it reeks of stinky neckbeards muttering under their breath about bro gamers and Gears of War. Look at the video, almost the entire gunfight is spent behind cover. The only reason he moves is because you can hypothesize that the cars blow up when shot enough, or option two, and the more likely one, the E3 demos are purposely made to look more kinetic and fast paced than the game really is during firefights so that it doesn't look boring as poo poo while you peek out of cover and make potshots. Cover in something like Max Payne 3 isn't bad, because it still encourages you to play an action game like an action game, but there's something fundamentally boring about games that emphasize cover mechanics, because it slows down the action, because it turns the game into a shooting gallery, because it just makes a shooter feel like it's a loving slow-as-molasses slog. I don't give a gently caress who plays those games and enjoy them, I just think it's godawful game design and that it's sad that it's become the 'standard', there are plenty of ways to incorporate cover and entertaining gunplay into firefights in realistic + more cautionary shooters, but it's not really being done, it's filling the market with boring crap. (And yes, the majority of them are whack-a-mole)
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2012 04:41
|
|
|
Even if all of the negatives people have mentioned so far turn out to be true this still looks like a day one purchase for me. The writing, animation and art design all seemed like a step above even the best of this generation. I really hope we get complete freedom to screw around with that phone thing. Like if during that art gallery scene you could mess with the art or people's devices to get a bunch of easter eggs I will love this game for ever.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2012 04:52
|
|
|
Fonzarelli posted:Why does this forum act like the ability to get behind cover is an automatic testament to a game being a piece of poo poo? This would really require a topic of its own, but essentially it's because Doom got it right. 3D shooters are all about movement and very little about shooting. Aiming with mouse is easy, so you have two ways of approaching the problem. 1) Make movement hard. Character moves at high speed, has strange controls or has limited HP that does not regenerate. Every time you make a mistake you face death. Doom, Quake, Max Payne and Half-Life 1 all do this. 2) Make weapons hard to use. As far as I know, there is only one game that does this well and that's Team Fortress 2. Half-Life 2 sort of attempts this but doesn't pull it off as well. Sniper Elite also attempts this route. Call of Duty pulled the movement factor off with infinitely respawning enemies, forcing you to choose the correct moment of bounding from cover to cover. Doom did it with limited HP, quick movement and hordes of enemies. Team Fortress 2 did it with powerful but hard to use weapons that are possible to dodge. Watch_Dogs looks like you have pinpoint aiming and no time pressure to move ahead: script for police choppers only plays out after you dramatically shoot the bad guy. Would the demo look as cool if the player took five minutes to kill the guards, just because he could regenerate to full health and afford to take his sweet time?
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2012 07:39
|
|
|
One can only assume that the enemy AI will be aggressive and seek you out behind cover, that pretty much seems standard in all shooters nowadays. Uncharted 3 and Max Payne 3 both show that adding cover to a game doesn't choke the gameplay, but can instead provide some interesting environmental choices as far as how you tackle a scenario, as opposed to just twitchy quick shooting. VVV No the game will suck because your character puts objects between his body and gunfire, obviously. Caesar Saladin fucked around with this message at 07:59 on Jun 6, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2012 07:52
|
|
|
Considering that the demo was heavily scripted because of the format of the presentation and that the game is likely 1-2 years from release (if not more), I think it's too early to begin damning the gameplay for being too linear. I think people are already projecting their desire for an open world Deus Ex/their anger at GTA 4 on what is essentially very advanced stage concept art. It's just too early to pass judgement on how scripted or not the end product is going to be.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2012 07:54
|
|
|
Hob_Gadling posted:Call of Duty pulled the movement factor off  This game actually looks pretty promising. It's obviously going to be heavily scripted for the demo, we just need to wait for some actual gameplay to surface. The whole "HACK THE PLANET" thing going on seems pretty sweet for both normal gameplay and loving around.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2012 08:05
|
|
|
I just like the way the main dude walks around. The graphics look current-gen, if what any modern-day PC game set to max looks like is anything to go by. The consoles we're currently using can be correctly classified now as previous-gen.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2012 11:48
|
|
|
Cactus posted:I just like the way the main dude walks around. I like the way he half-heartedly holds his gun behind his back like he kinda doesn't want anyone to see but doesn't really care.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2012 12:00
|
|
|
So talking more to the play tester friend: -The car crash was NOT scripted -There are multiple ways to do objectives. (In an interview yesterday ubi said you could have ambushed the guy at the car park instead of causing the car crash and many more ways) -Your guy gains new abilities as the game goes on -You can be an rear end in a top hat walking around hacking stuff causing mayhem for poor npc's
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2012 17:14
|
|
|
Considering this is the first I've ever heard about this game (I'm not paying much attention to E3) that trailer has got me all kinds of hyped up. Although I get the feeling that every time I have to use the Traffic light control thing I'll have to go out of my way to rescue all civilians as quickly as I can before I start shooting back or else I'll feel like a massive jerk to let all these virtual innocents be killed in a firefight.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2012 17:24
|
|
|
keyframe posted:So talking more to the play tester friend:
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2012 17:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2024 13:53 |
|
|
I wonder if any developers will take feedback about how many people are sick of the protagonist getting ultra-violence immunity. I mean they can leave 'go nuts' options in there as a joke, or as a fugitive thing, but tons of people would actually like to be able to play a story in a sensible way.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2012 17:31
|
|