|
Feenix posted:The latter parts of Max Payne 3, even on normal, are way too punishing. I liken it to how they dropped the ball with MGS4. You start off sneaking around, popping necks of humans, and it's a blast. Then Snake is up against tons of poo poo that doesn't even require stealth. Robots, armies, all looking for him/at him. It's boring. I'm going to respectfully disagree with this. I know that TACTICAL ESPIONAGE ACTION / sneaking missions are a staple of the series, but placing less emphasis on stealth in the latter parts of the game allow you to actually use all the cool weapons you've been stockpiling throughout the game. Otherwise you would never have a reason to use them since they all go BANG and people hear it and now you're not stealthy oh god I did the sneaking wrong.
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 04:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 20:46 |
|
|
titties posted:I'm going to respectfully disagree with this. I know that TACTICAL ESPIONAGE ACTION / sneaking missions are a staple of the series, but placing less emphasis on stealth in the latter parts of the game allow you to actually use all the cool weapons you've been stockpiling throughout the game. Otherwise you would never have a reason to use them since they all go BANG and people hear it and now you're not stealthy oh god I did the sneaking wrong. I did really enjoy the weapon construction and weapon shop integration in MGS4. Rather than missing the stealth-focused gameplay focus, I wish we could have seen more of the Old Snake caught in the middle of to opposing PMC's(?) fighting each other dynamic.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 04:56
|
|
|
Feenix posted:I don't hate the latter half of Max 3, but it goes a long way to undermine any goodwill the first half built up... I thought the last few levels were awesome, the police station and airport especially.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 05:32
|
|
|
And what's the deal with Max Payne 3 taking fifteen seconds to go from "Press start" to the main menu? It's just hilarous how wrong that is.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 06:10
|
|
|
Jjaarreett posted:That's a shame, I love the first 2 Max Payne games and was super excited for 3. There seems to be a trend of everyone disliking Rockstar games past a certain point. 4 clovers in GTA 4, Mexico in Red Dead Redemption, LA Noire to a lesser extent (that article claims Rockstar came in and took over creative control at some point), and now Max Payne 3 I think it should be clarified that RDR doesn't get bad after Mexico, it's that Mexico is the bad part of the game. The first and third part are fine, Mexico is a step down in almost all regards.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 06:19
|
|
|
Max Payne 3 has a pretty hosed ratio of cutscenes:gameplay. Most of these cutscenes are unskippable. The game changes your drat equipped weapon after every cutscene and if you accidentally trigger a cutscene by walking too close to your next objective(the triggers have a HUGE radius), the game forces you forward and won't let you backtrack. This makes looking for collectibles suck. There's been at least three times now when I saw a collectible and started to walk over to get it only to have the game pretty much go, "Nope, I want to show you a cutscene now. You'll have to get that during chapter select. Hope you don't hit a cutscene trigger during chapter select!" Edit: I just shot a shirtless guy in the chest five times with a high-powered assault rifle. He got up and shook it off like he was completely unhurt. Subdermal plating? Edit 2: The game just discarded my assault rifle after a midlevel cutscene. What the gently caress? ...! fucked around with this message at 06:53 on May 24, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 06:38
|
|
|
axleblaze posted:I think it should be clarified that RDR doesn't get bad after Mexico, it's that Mexico is the bad part of the game. The first and third part are fine, Mexico is a step down in almost all regards. This. In fact, I wouldn't even go so far as to say that Mexico is bad. I think it's intentionally a little slower-paced. I always got the feeling that while John's sense of urgency hasn't really dwindled, he does need a breather and there's a lot less heat on him when he arrives. The only real problem I had with that part of the game is that all your rides through the countryside are very same-y, which makes it feel a little more drawn out / less interesting. By the time you near the end of it, you are ready to be done with the place and so is John, because he's wasted enough time single-handedly solving the entire country's problems and heeds to get his own poo poo in order.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 06:57
|
|
|
titties posted:This. In fact, I wouldn't even go so far as to say that Mexico is bad. I think it's intentionally a little slower-paced. I always got the feeling that while John's sense of urgency hasn't really dwindled, he does need a breather and there's a lot less heat on him when he arrives. The only real problem I had with that part of the game is that all your rides through the countryside are very same-y, which makes it feel a little more drawn out / less interesting. See, I had way more problems with Mexico than that. First of all the main plot there is awful. It's like a lovely high school level "those that want to rule are awful people" type thing. While having that type of thing can be done well, in RDR it's pulled off in a downright cartoonish manor. I know the rest of the game isn't exactly full of subtle characters, but making it political makes it feels like it's trying to say something and it all just falls flat. Also at that point in the game I found it really hard to take John seriously. He keeps threatening to kill people if they don't come through for him and then they don't come through for him and he just keeps doing chores for them. It changes him from a mysterious badass you don't want to mess with to a guy that's all bark and no bite. You mentioned the landscape is too samey but it's also too big. It creates this giant wasteland and there just isn't that much to do or see there. Now this would also be true of an actual wasteland, it's not a fun local to put in a game. The size and sameyness of Mexico makes doing missions there overall less interesting. It doesn't help that it's longer than the other two parts with way less development of the central plot. Even the confrontation that the entire game has been leading up to feels a bit underwhelming. There's a few nice parts in Mexico but overall it was just not so good. I dunno, I wasn't as fond as RDR as alot of people seem to be in general, but Mexico definitely lowered my overall impression on the game.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 07:11
|
|
|
I thought the storytelling in RDR was just bizarre in general. You spend the whole game chasing after your old gang members to rescue your kidnapped family but it's hard to care about any of it because you don't meet or even know what any of these characters look like until most of the game is over. And then the big climactic fight against the guy that you're ultimately trying to catch comes way too early and is followed by a bunch of sleepy farm missions while you wait for the ending to catch up to you. I think it would have made much more sense to have those farm missions be right at the beginning to both introduce you to the game's basic mechanics, as well as John's family so you might actually give a poo poo that they're kidnapped. They could also splice in flashbacks to John's days in Dutch's gang to teach you the combat, as well as introduce you to those characters. Why should I care if John sheds a tear over Javier? I don't even know who the heck that is, I hear his name a lot but I just met him...
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 07:50
|
|
|
it doesn't matter if you haven't met John's family or old accomplices, because when the story starts John is separated from them. You don't need to care about them yourself, you just need to know that they are John's motivation for his actions. Nothing bizarre about a story starting in the middle of the action.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 08:57
|
|
|
Shalinor posted:EDIT: Also also, Dragon's Dogma looks awesome, and I have this rule about buying no more than 1 game a month. A rule I only let myself break by being flat out done with a game and trading it back in. You should give us a lecture in the Steam Anonymous thread 
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 12:11
|
|
|
I've got Dragon's Dogma and Atelier Meruru arriving tomorrow, and I'm pretty stoked for both, especially given the amount of stories and testimonies I've heard about DD in the course of the last three days. Just in time for the Diablo 3 buzz to wear off in record time, too.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 12:18
|
|
|
Mechanigma posted:And then the big climactic fight against the guy that you're ultimately trying to catch comes way too early and is followed by a bunch of sleepy farm missions while you wait for the ending to catch up to you. That's what's so interesting about the ending. John thought he was finally done and free, but eventually reality caught up to him as well as the inevitability of it and well, you know what happens. From a gameplay perspective, yeah, it sucks to do hunting missions instead of something big and epic. From a storyline perspective, it was pretty good.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 12:29
|
|
|
I hope you guys aren't talking about the real ending to the game, because there's an actual credit roll after the real end bit, and it's one of the most satisfying endings of any game ever, I thought.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 14:05
|
|
|
...! posted:Max Payne 3 has a pretty hosed ratio of cutscenes:gameplay. Most of these cutscenes are unskippable. The game changes your drat equipped weapon after every cutscene and if you accidentally trigger a cutscene by walking too close to your next objective(the triggers have a HUGE radius), the game forces you forward and won't let you backtrack. This makes looking for collectibles suck. There's been at least three times now when I saw a collectible and started to walk over to get it only to have the game pretty much go, "Nope, I want to show you a cutscene now. You'll have to get that during chapter select. Hope you don't hit a cutscene trigger during chapter select!" No offense intended but for the love of God just trade in the game dude. Im not even in Games that often and this is like the 80th post you have complaining about it. You really dont have to play it 
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 14:57
|
|
|
Fuzz posted:I hope you guys aren't talking about the real ending to the game, because there's an actual credit roll after the real end bit, and it's one of the most satisfying endings of any game ever, I thought. I'm not, even though the "real" ending is in line with the "sleepy farm missions."
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 15:43
|
|
|
Hmmm, I'm surprised at the sentiment that the last third of Max Payne 3 is more generic/difficulty ramp up, where I actually found it to be a nice build off everything else I had done and fantastic level design. The hardest part for me was the end of Chapter 12 due to the building tremors but otherwise, I still found myself able to run-and-gun in Max Payne style. Target prioritization (guys with shotguns and lasers) and shoot dodging into cover spots so I could crawl into safety after landing were my key strategies.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 16:01
|
|
|
Personally I did as well. MP1 and 2 had very similar "bullshit" ramp ups in difficulty so it didnt seem out of place to me
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 16:04
|
|
|
Fuzz posted:I hope you guys aren't talking about the real ending to the game, because there's an actual credit roll after the real end bit, and it's one of the most satisfying endings of any game ever, I thought. Hey, I love the entire final part of the game. I think it just works for what they were going for. In regards to not knowing anything about John, I think that might be the point. John is supposed to be a classic Man with No Name archetype. He's a mysterious stranger that rolls into town and solves everyone's problems without any of them getting to know who he is or why he helped them. He is stuck being this character and is fighting to be something else. He doesn't want to be that guy any more. He wants to live for himself an his family and just lead a regular life. This is why we don't really get to know him until his job is done. Up until that point he didn't have an identity.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 16:25
|
|
|
Would anybody want to play a sequel to Journey? (Not that one is announced as far as I know.) I was thinking about it earlier this week as I was dorking around in one of the games levels, just kind of screwing around not really progressing or anything. Would you want a sequel that had the same characters, sand theme, and gameplay mechanics? (Like the scarf, jumping around, and chiming with your buddy.) Or would you prefer a whole new game world with a different theme and different looking characters. Perhaps a water setting with green woods, rivers, lakes, waterfalls, etc. Initially I thought that I would rather That Game Company keep coming up with new ideas in order not to run a concept into the ground. And yet, I can't help but smile when I play around in one of the Journey levels and do goofy things with my bewildered traveling companion. It makes me yearn for more.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 19:50
|
|
|
Nope. Definitely not. They did exactly what they set out to do with it, the best thing to do now is move on to the next thing and not ruin it. I have infinite faith that TGC is going to learn all the lessons they need to from Journey and make a new game that builds off of those concepts. We've got more than enough sequels that are just rehashes with new coats of paint, it's nice to have some actual honest to god creative juices flowing.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 20:08
|
|
|
Crappy Jack posted:Nope. Definitely not. They did exactly what they set out to do with it, the best thing to do now is move on to the next thing and not ruin it. I have infinite faith that TGC is going to learn all the lessons they need to from Journey and make a new game that builds off of those concepts. We've got more than enough sequels that are just rehashes with new coats of paint, it's nice to have some actual honest to god creative juices flowing. This exactly. Leave Journey to be a one off incredible game, but learn from the amazing things it did and make more games "like" it.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 20:12
|
|
|
I got my TV replaced with a newer set (warranty replacement from LG, who has had astonishing customer service over the last couple of months) which uses passive 3D glasses as opposed to the active shutter, and oh man the difference is crazy. The effect doesn't fall apart more than 10 feet away, the glasses aren't nearly as uncomfortable (but just as dorky), and I didn't get any eye strain at all. I played through some Wipeout, Stardust, and SotC, as well as watched a couple of 3D videos. 3D SotC is kinda cool.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 20:14
|
|
|
Code Jockey posted:This exactly. Leave Journey to be a one off incredible game, but learn from the amazing things it did and make more games "like" it. Do we want them to make another "navigate the environment in cool ways" type of game, or should they go in a completely different direction? A music rythmn game, a fighter, or (gasp) a tower defense game? How high do we set the bar for them because of Journey?
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 20:18
|
|
|
Cartoon Man posted:Do we want them to make another "navigate the environment in cool ways" type of game, or should they go in a completely different direction? A music rythmn game, a fighter, or (gasp) a tower defense game? We let them do whatever they want and if it's interesting and cool, we give them money so that they can take that money and make another thing.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 20:22
|
|
|
They fulfilled their agreement with Sony and are now free to do just that, right? I hope they go multiplatform including Steam. Earlier in this thread somebody mentioned that Sony should just throw a bunch of money at them and make them exclusive. Would Sony leave them alone to do what they want, or would it be better for gamers for them to remain independent? Either way, I really hope they announce something at e3, its one of the few reasons that I would watch the Sony press conference.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 20:26
|
|
|
EC posted:I got my TV replaced with a newer set (warranty replacement from LG, who has had astonishing customer service over the last couple of months) which uses passive 3D glasses as opposed to the active shutter, and oh man the difference is crazy. The effect doesn't fall apart more than 10 feet away, the glasses aren't nearly as uncomfortable (but just as dorky), and I didn't get any eye strain at all. I played through some Wipeout, Stardust, and SotC, as well as watched a couple of 3D videos.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 20:28
|
|
|
Right. I guess what I meant by "like" Journey was another game that's that... I dunno, that different, that captivating. Doesn't matter what genre to me, or what the details are, I just can't wait to see what the next thing they do is.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 20:35
|
|
|
EC posted:I got my TV replaced with a newer set (warranty replacement from LG, who has had astonishing customer service over the last couple of months) which uses passive 3D glasses as opposed to the active shutter, and oh man the difference is crazy. The effect doesn't fall apart more than 10 feet away, the glasses aren't nearly as uncomfortable (but just as dorky), and I didn't get any eye strain at all. I played through some Wipeout, Stardust, and SotC, as well as watched a couple of 3D videos. I was holding out for passive 3D TVs, so it's good to hear that they work well. I've already got a lot of games that support 3D, so if I make the switch then I won't be lacking for content. I'm also glad that Sony encourages their developers to use proper stereoscopic 3D, which involves rendering two entirely separate viewpoints as opposed to an approximate '2D with some 3D elements' method that several other games use. For example, Crysis 2 only renders a different viewpoint for your gun and the HUD, because they produce the most apparent depth in the screen. Other games use the Z-buffer, which determines an objects' depth in the scene, to create a diorama. This means that the objects and characters themselves don't have any actual depth, plus you get artefacts when it tries to render something that would be obscured in just one of the eyes. In a first-person stereoscopic game, you would be able to press up to a corner of a wall and peek round it with one eye, with the other eye obscured by the wall. You would also be able to look at an object from close up and see its shape and contours. The downside to this is the extra processing power needed, which can result in lower resolutions, frame rates and visual detail. Since the PS3 was never designed for stereoscopic games in the first place, I'm sure dedicated hardware on the PS4 would be able to render dual framebuffers much more easily.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 20:39
|
|
|
They'll probably continue to explore the online aspect in some form or another. I agree though, Sony are fools not to throw money at TGC to remain exclusive. Also they're already working on their next game; they started working on Flower before flOw was done and on Journey before Flower was done. It's just gonna be a couple of years now...
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 20:41
|
|
|
Cartoon Man posted:They fulfilled their agreement with Sony and are now free to do just that, right? I hope they go multiplatform including Steam. Earlier in this thread somebody mentioned that Sony should just throw a bunch of money at them and make them exclusive. Would Sony leave them alone to do what they want, or would it be better for gamers for them to remain independent? I think that's why people were saying that they should work under Sony, because Sony lets development studios do what they want and gives them a lot of freedom to be creative. If they had to go to other publishers instead, they most definitely would not have the same freedom to do as they please like they did with Sony, if they even got picked up in the first place. So on the one hand, more people getting to play their games if they go multiplatform would be great, but on the other hand if they stayed with Sony it would be more beneficial to the actual games themselves, if that makes sense? Sony are very friendly towards unique ideas and more arty/creative games, which makes them the absolute best publisher in the industry to be with for a studio like TGC. I'd be disappointed to see them work with somebody else since the games would probably suffer for it.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 20:41
|
|
|
homeless snail posted:Be sure to go into the options and play with the intensity slider, full-on you get a really great sense of depth that makes the world feel so much bigger. I did! I tried it on the default, lowest, then highest setting. The highest definitely expanded the world. I fought the first colossus and thought it looked great. That loving Sned posted:I was holding out for passive 3D TVs, so it's good to hear that they work well. Yeah, I'm pleasantly surprised. I had pretty much written off 3D gaming as a headache inducing nightmare, but the new glasses/TV have made a big difference. Enough so that I'll at least keep a couple of sets of glasses handy on the coffee table. Makes me glad LG decided to replace my TV with this year's model! 
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 20:46
|
|
|
Krad posted:That's what's so interesting about the ending. John thought he was finally done and free, but eventually reality caught up to him as well as the inevitability of it and well, you know what happens. From a gameplay perspective, yeah, it sucks to do hunting missions instead of something big and epic. From a storyline perspective, it was pretty good. RDR spoilers Yeah, it works for the character to think that he's finally free of his burden. But I don't think the interactivity of a video game is the right platform for that kind of twist. As the audience is controlling and not just watching John, there is an innate sense of inevitability because you know that there is no way that a video game is going to end on a whimper. Since you are still doing missions, you KNOW that the game is not finished, and that something big is still going to happen. And that feeling gets stretched out for several mandated hours. I think that's terrible pacing. To me it would have made much more sense if the entire Marston Ranch section was condensed into a cutscene (his family having been established earlier on in the game ideally). That way they could have at least fooled the audience into thinking that Dutch was the final fight and John has earned his happy ending, since the events are now out of their hands. And then they know something is amiss when they're suddenly controlling John again. But hey that's just my opinion.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 22:09
|
|
|
Payndz posted:I read somewhere that Avalanche recently advertised for people to work on a large sandbox project, so hopefully it's Just Cause 3. On the Bombcast they talked about this and apparently it was leaked that the job listing was for Just Cause 4. Yeah, that's right. While I enjoyed JC2 in general, I do agree with the criticism that it was too generic and repetetive in spots. The part that was most lacking however were the missions, 99% of which were just boring.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2012 12:23
|
|
|
muscles like this? posted:On the Bombcast they talked about this and apparently it was leaked that the job listing was for Just Cause 4. The main story and missions thereof really sucked, but there was like seven of them and you could do them in an hour and a half, tops. They weren't necessary in any way, either; doing them didn't unlock anything if I recall and I was at like 75% completion even before I did the second one. JC2 is a perfect game for playing when you're doing something else like listening to podcasts or audiobooks.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2012 13:10
|
|
|
http://www.vg247.com/2012/05/25/new-sony-patent-is-for-a-method-to-interrupt-games-with-ads/ Sony has filed a patent that allows a game to be stopped so that an advert can be played over it. It also allows the game to be rewinded by a few seconds so it doesn't disrupt the gameplay. Either this is just going to be for Free-to-Play games, or Sony has bought the patent so that nobody can use it. Or they have lost their minds, and will wonder why our consoles will be thrown out the window when the emotional climax of The Last Guardian is interrupted by an advert for AXE body spray.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2012 13:37
|
|
|
That loving Sned posted:Either this is just going to be for Free-to-Play games, or Sony has bought the patent so that nobody can use it.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2012 13:52
|
|
|
That loving Sned posted:Or they have lost their minds, and will wonder why our consoles will be thrown out the window when the emotional climax of The Last Guardian is interrupted by an advert for AXE body spray. That's not going to happen because The Last Guardian is never coming out.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2012 14:05
|
|
|
Mechanigma posted:RDR spoilers But That sense of "it isn't over" is exactly what the game is going for. The point of it is that both John and the Player are waiting for something to happen. Remember the one mission where you're suddenly given a chance to go and get back into action if you choose? The point of it is that you're supposed to be feeling the tension of knowing it isn't over and seeing hints that John, in a way, wants to go back into action. He obviously doesn't know he's going to get shot and killed, but he's lived a long violent life and he can't escape what that life as set up for him. This works with the player who is just waiting for the violence to start again or for the twist or for a chance to leave the cattle raising and go shoot some bandits when the chance arises. It's actually a very clever way to combine John's emotions with the player's. RDR is a game about what living a life of violence does to you and the cycle of pain that violence causes. It's why the final mission is so god damned clever. It isn't a big obvious story mission. It's a small nagging thing you do, that sits there, urging the player on until they (and John's son) end up going and killing the man responsible for John's death, falling right into the cycle of violence and revenge. It's a sad and horrible but thematically appropriate ending. A cutscene couldn't have conveyed the innate sense of unease and restlessness to the player in the same way. We can be shown how John feels, but that's something a movie does. A video game should be using the interactive elements. A lot of RDR is pretty goofy or poorly paced (loving Mexico) but the ending is tone-perfect for what they were trying to do.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2012 14:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 20:46 |
|
|
ImpAtom posted:A lot of RDR is pretty goofy or poorly paced (loving Mexico) but the ending is tone-perfect for what they were trying to do. Tone perfect but gameplay retarded considering all you'd done leading up to that point.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2012 14:28
|
|