|
The one thing that really worries me about Watch Dogs is that it's going to have a bunch of missions where you have to trail someone from just the right distance, the NPC will stop a whole bunch, and if you are not in the exact spot the game wants you to be in then the mission automatically fails. That poo poo killed Assassins Creed 4 for me. Those story missions are annoying enough to make me give up on a game.
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 14:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 5, 2024 11:51 |
|
|
Assassin's Creed gives you literally 10 seconds to break line of sight.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 14:44
|
|
|
Aphrodite posted:Assassin's Creed gives you literally 10 seconds to break line of sight. And obvious 'HIDE HERE' bushes, crowds, and benches. I agree those missions were irritating, but game ruining? Come on.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 14:48
|
|
|
Ice Fist posted:And obvious 'HIDE HERE' bushes, crowds, and benches. I agree those missions were irritating, but game ruining? Come on. Yeah sure if that actually worked most of the time, but the stealth mechanics were broken as gently caress and NPCs could spot you from half way across the gameworld. Watch Dogs is a totally different developer, so maybe they will be way more competent.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 14:52
|
|
|
I said come in! posted:Yeah sure if that actually worked most of the time, but the stealth mechanics were broken as gently caress and NPCs could spot you from half way across the gameworld. I can't think of a single instance where a hiding spot where you're blending in failed to work properly.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 14:56
|
|
|
If I could hide in the trunk of cars, that would make up for everything.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 15:11
|
|
|
Ice Fist posted:I can't think of a single instance where a hiding spot where you're blending in failed to work properly. Yeah, you can stand right there and let your target spot you and watch you hide in a nearby bush looking SUSPICIOUS AS gently caress and they'll just stare for a couple of seconds and go right back on to whatever they're doing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 15:12
|
|
|
Crappy Jack posted:Yeah, you can stand right there and let your target spot you and watch you hide in a nearby bush looking SUSPICIOUS AS gently caress and they'll just stare for a couple of seconds and go right back on to whatever they're doing. It even worked in cornfields that barely conceal you. You could game the system really easily, but it was still stupid as gently caress and completely unbalanced. I would not challenge anyone who said the stealth in Assassin's Creed was potentially game-ruining, 'cause fuuuuck that poo poo was never fun, even when they made it practically impossible to fail at. Still not as bad as tailing people, however.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 15:20
|
|
|
You didn't even have to use stealth in AC4. The eagle view tagged the bad guys, allowing you to see them through buildings. Some of those annoying tailing missions that went into restricted areas could be finished by just standing near a wall and waiting.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 15:51
|
|
|
That loving Sned posted:None of them are dual core. It's only been recently that PC games have been able to make quad-core processors, 64-bit support, and DirectX 10/11 the minimum requirements, because otherwise they'd be incompatible with older or weaker computers. I don't really think that's what it is, consoles will set the minimum bar, PCs have had i7s/8-core AMDs out for a while, no one was rushing 6 threaded games, now Watch Dogs has set a minimum but I think that's because they developed with Ps4/XB1/Any-Pc-With-Quad-Core-At-Least as their minimum.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 16:21
|
|
|
JohnSherman posted:You didn't even have to use stealth in AC4. The eagle view tagged the bad guys, allowing you to see them through buildings. Some of those annoying tailing missions that went into restricted areas could be finished by just standing near a wall and waiting. I think they're talking about the "eavesdrop" missions where you have to stay within a circle that follows the guy around, which are much less tolerant. Dvlos posted:I don't really think that's what it is, consoles will set the minimum bar, PCs have had i7s/8-core AMDs out for a while, no one was rushing 6 threaded games, now Watch Dogs has set a minimum but I think that's because they developed with Ps4/XB1/Any-Pc-With-Quad-Core-At-Least as their minimum. Just because they're out doesn't mean people are buying them in droves or that weaker stuff leaves the market. Look at the current steam hardware survey- half the install base is still on dual core. haveblue fucked around with this message at 17:13 on Apr 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 17:10
|
|
|
What's probably going to happen with follow missions is that you'll just park your rear end on a bench and follow by bouncing from camera to camera. At least until they have guys with guns after you, so it turns into "hide from angry dudes while still tailing a suspect remotely." If the Wii U wasn't worthless it would be a great use of the second screen and a TV, but alas.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 17:22
|
|
|
C. Everett Koop posted:What's probably going to happen with follow missions is that you'll just park your rear end on a bench and follow by bouncing from camera to camera. At least until they have guys with guns after you, so it turns into "hide from angry dudes while still tailing a suspect remotely." If the Wii U wasn't worthless it would be a great use of the second screen and a TV, but alas. SmartGlass 
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 17:29
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:SmartGlass Speaking of this, will the PC version have that Tablet support they demo'ed a while back?
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 17:36
|
|
|
haveblue posted:Just because they're out doesn't mean people are buying them in droves or that weaker stuff leaves the market. Look at the current steam hardware survey- half the install base is still on dual core. You can't really count cores, especially when comparing AMD to Intel. Current lower-end i3 chips basically match AMD's 8 core space-heater behemoths when it comes to games. Even when it comes to multithreaded application performance there isn't a huge difference in most cases despite the core count and speed differences.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 17:41
|
|
|
There have been a lot of comparisons to this game and FarCry3/ProtoType but neither really strikes me as what WD is. I am reminded of Splinter Cell Conviction original footages and Assassin's Creed. Conviction was all up on "social stealth" and go anywhere do anything open world mentality. Lots of improve and manners to escape and re-hide. They scrapped that idea and came out with the more action oriented SCC later. But on the same note, Assassin's Creed 1 was being announced just a bit after that and it too was all about "going anywhere doing whatever" social stealth ideas were included. IMHO AC1 had a ton of flaws and severely under-delivered, but AC2 was fun as hell. (Ac3 meh a litle boring but same idea). Honestly I think WD was what SCC was supposed to have been and lessons taken from AC1/2/3 thrown in. Replace Aiden with Sam Fisher on the run from police and you have Watch Dogs now, the "hiding in plain sight" idea and improve escaping refined to the next level.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 19:16
|
|
|
Personally, I just expect Assassin's Creed with GTA flavor. I'd say depth, but GTA is not a very deep series.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 19:35
|
|
|
Mordaedil posted:Personally, I just expect Assassin's Creed with GTA flavor. I'd say expecting this game to have the depth of a GTA game is some extreme wishful thinking. And I say that while agreeing GTA isn't very deep.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 19:39
|
|
|
uh... it already looks like it has more depth than literally every GTA game
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 00:52
|
|
|
How can you tell "depth" from a trailer
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 01:43
|
|
|
Greenplastic posted:How can you tell "depth" from a trailer Just the basic interaction with environment from the trailers shows it has more depth in its gameplay than GTA. It's a low standard, I know, but it's not hard to see.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 02:00
|
|
|
Mordaedil posted:Because the last generation of consoles had only dual core, they never bothered developing games that exploited the rest of the cores you had if you bought multi-core processors for the last 10 years. Now with the new consoles, they are finally able to take advantage of all that hardware development that has happened since then. This game is going to be more like Sleeping Dogs mixed with Blacklist I bet. I have an i5 4670k actually. My computer is more like on the border of medium and high. Considering how much it cost though I'm not complaining if I have to turn down some settings. I am bothered still by developers Focusing on stuff that doesn't affect gameplay at all. NeoSeeker fucked around with this message at 04:35 on Apr 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 04:21
|
|
|
NeoSeeker posted:gently caress me, I just bought this i7 haswel quad. 8 cores weren't even on the market. Why do I always buy tech at the moment the new poo poo comes out. i7s have 8 virtual cores.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 04:24
|
|
|
Ice Fist posted:And obvious 'HIDE HERE' bushes, crowds, and benches. I agree those missions were irritating, but game ruining? Come on. If you saved the story missions for last it felt like the only thing you were doing... Have people been plying hands-on or has it all been off screen demos for the press?
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 13:52
|
|
|
In my personal opinion games stopped looking "better" many years ago to me. My problem with that is all games look like they should on the highest settings. The variety of graphics options and how much you turn them down tends to make a game's graphics look out of whack, sometimes causing them to look like poo poo. Also the other problem lies in the fact that developers boast about how much their game requires the latest tech for graphics and only graphics. You never really hear about a game requiring the latest tech for gameplay. Seldom you may and always it's either for something that doesn't make it to release or doesn't improve upon gameplay enough to be worth it. NeoSeeker fucked around with this message at 19:04 on Apr 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 18:53
|
|
|
NeoSeeker posted:In my personal opinion games stopped looking "better" many years ago to me. Next-gen fish AI
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 19:17
|
|
|
friends watch porn posted:Next-gen fish AI How about the titanfall we wanted with destroyable environments. That lame duck argument I keep hearing is bologna. All you'd have to do would either make the buildings slowly build themselves back up (don't bullshit and say it's a bad idea, it could easily be worked into the game where it actually made sense. It could make those useless AIs have an actual purpose maybe..) or make the buildings hard enough to destroy that it doesn't create a no cover situation... Oh hey, maybe both?! But yeah it's a detrimental scapegoat. I think it bothers me a lot in this thread because watch dogs was way cooler when they weren't showcasing the graphics like it was the selling point. I hate that in general, how the gently caress is that a selling point when the point is to play it, not look at it. This game went from something completely new to GTA and Blacklist had a baby. In my mind something like that says the developers just went "It's too hard to create cool innovative new stuff... How about we blow smoke up their asses and focus on tesslation and god rays instead? We could even showcase it in a way that makes them forget this was going to actually be innovative and trick them into thinking it's innovative by including some visual device that's hardly noticeable but sounds really fancy and important." NeoSeeker fucked around with this message at 20:17 on Apr 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 20:05
|
|
|
NeoSeeker posted:How about the titanfall we wanted with destroyable environments. That lame duck argument I keep hearing is bologna. All you'd have to do would either make the buildings slowly build themselves back up (don't bullshit and say it's a bad idea, it could easily be worked into the game where it actually made sense. It could make those useless AIs have an actual purpose maybe..) or make the buildings hard enough to destroy that it doesn't create a no cover situation... Oh hey, maybe both?! it sounds like you have a pretty good grasp on the games industry... have you considered a position at a major developing house as an "ideas guy"?
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 20:55
|
|
|
NeoSeeker posted:How about the titanfall we wanted with destroyable environments. That lame duck argument I keep hearing is bologna. All you'd have to do would either make the buildings slowly build themselves back up (don't bullshit and say it's a bad idea, it could easily be worked into the game where it actually made sense. It could make those useless AIs have an actual purpose maybe..) or make the buildings hard enough to destroy that it doesn't create a no cover situation... Oh hey, maybe both?! Someone could create a game with the most amazing gameplay the world has ever seen, but they'd still trumpet about the graphics in the advertisements and trailers. Because it's a selling point. You sound like you're assuming that because it has decent graphics, it will be a poo poo game. You know good game and good looks aren't mutually exclusive.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 21:04
|
|
|
Funso Banjo posted:Someone could create a game with the most amazing gameplay the world has ever seen, but they'd still trumpet about the graphics in the advertisements and trailers. Because it's a selling point. It's a selling point in part because you can actually show it off in ads and trailers. It's pretty hard to show that blowing up a building can change the flow of battle in a Wikia ad unit or YouTube preroll, because it requires a bunch of understanding about the flow of battle in the first place. (But you could have deformable terrain because OMG DEFORMABLE TERRAIN and check that box in the ads, to appeal to those who see mechanics rather than game impact as the hallmark of meaningful innovation.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 21:33
|
|
|
The only real way to advertise gameplay over graphics is the way they used to advertise old NES/SNES games. Show the players playing it, not the game itself.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 21:44
|
|
|
Iunnrais posted:The only real way to advertise gameplay over graphics is the way they used to advertise old NES/SNES games. Show the players playing it, not the game itself. Nah, the best way to advertise how good a game is to give all games "journalists" a free Nexus tablet when they're re/previewing your game. It'll be sure to give good praise and scores but it is in *NO WAY* a bribe.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 21:48
|
|
|
Or you could be an indie game and use ~pixel art~ and call everyone who says it looks bad a mass-market philistine.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 21:49
|
|
|
They tried infinitely destroyable buildings in Red Faction. It was great for those of us who played but in the sequel they took all that poo poo out. When the solution to every missions is: ram your truck through the building and kill everyone, it becomes stupid and boring.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 21:49
|
|
|
Vintersorg posted:They tried infinitely destroyable buildings in Red Faction. It was great for those of us who played but in the sequel they took all that poo poo out. When the solution to every missions is: ram your truck through the building and kill everyone, it becomes stupid and boring. I don't know what Red Faction you played, but ramming my truck through buildings never got stupid or boring.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 21:50
|
|
|
Iunnrais posted:The only real way to advertise gameplay over graphics is the way they used to advertise old NES/SNES games. Show the players playing it, not the game itself. Most recent instance of this I can think of is Rocksmith 2014, but that's sort of an exception I guess. Cantorsdust posted:I don't know what Red Faction you played, but ramming my truck through buildings never got stupid or boring. Agreed. Playing Space rear end in a top hat: The Game never got old, but I did start to run out of buildings to destroy after a while. Also it was never my truck, I would usually play a mission straight for a while, steal one of their trucks, go on a rampage, and then return it to them, often by driving into the second floor of a building by using a nearby cliff or turning them into "jihad-jeeps". Hopefully this game gives us enough toys to play around like that to some extent, although I realize not everyone is a fan of emergent game-play stuff and will demand something more.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 22:53
|
|
|
Vintersorg posted:They tried infinitely destroyable buildings in Red Faction. It was great for those of us who played but in the sequel they took all that poo poo out. When the solution to every missions is: ram your truck through the building and kill everyone, it becomes stupid and boring. Additionally, Red Faction games rarely felt like a "city". Just some empty huts, and perhaps 1-2 big structures scattered within miles of wasteland. A giant "city" where it would be truly destructible, and perhaps persistent enough to use "the power of the cloud" would be the next leap. That would also be something that would make that Titanfall cloud use truly useful, for storing calculating, and working on behind the scenes for the player, that city rebuilding effect he was talking about.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 22:56
|
|
|
Cantorsdust posted:I don't know what Red Faction you played, but ramming my truck through buildings never got stupid or boring. Seriously, Red Faction's destructible buildings made for some amazing gameplay and some pretty decent screenshots. And I didn't think it was hard on my framerate, but that might just be because cool guys don't look back at explosions. It would be amazing if WATCH DOGS had destructible buildings, but people would lose their poo poo so fast it wouldn't even be funny.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 22:59
|
|
|
Red Faction Guerrilla (the only good one) was also fantastically labor-intensive to make, despite the smallness and relative emptiness of its world. Each building not only needed a detailed interior, but it also needed to be tested to make sure it destroyed properly and didn't break the game while partially or fully destroyed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 00:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 5, 2024 11:51 |
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:Red Faction Guerrilla (the only good one) How can you say that when Red Faction exists.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 00:41
|
|
