Kamiya: "Brainless camera whiners... Over the shoulder cam is fine."

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

Hawki:

Casual Shinji:
The over the shoulder perspective would be an odd fit for the police station. Most of the areas are cramped hallways, and the enemy density is very small. It works in RE4 and 5 since those games have larger, open areas, and more enemies on screen at a time.

Fair enough, but you could increase the density.

I'm not saying it couldn't work, but it would require Capcom to dramatically rethink how they've done over-the-shoulder enemy encounters up until now. Just increasing the amount of enemies would clutter the levels up (as they were), and you would lose the quieter moments when you're just wandering the halls.

They'd have to come up with a control scheme that would make simply aiming your gun and firing a shot extremely tense and impactful. Where just dealing with 2 or 3 zombies means trouble, and dealing with a Licker means a big fucking problem. Not that this was ever much of a problem in the original, but I feel that taking the RE4 controls and putting them in RE2 would make dealing with enemies totally trivial.

This episode just reinforces my view that gamers have extremely fragile egos. It's like we, as a group, need a giant "fragile: handle with care" sticker slapped on us.

Avnger:
This episode just reinforces my view that gamers have extremely fragile egos. It's like we, as a group, need a giant "fragile: handle with care" sticker slapped on us.

Oh brother... My ego isn't hurt by what this guy has to say. Stop being dramatic. I just felt like discussing it.

Avnger:
This episode just reinforces my view that gamers have extremely fragile egos. It's like we, as a group, need a giant "fragile: handle with care" sticker slapped on us.

Haha, that is pretty true. There's plenty of games to play; if you don't like something about a game, then spend that time on a different game you don't have issues with. Plus, nothing can "ruin" the original, it still exists, you can play it at anytime. I prefer remakes to try something different than just up the graphics to today's standards, there's always stuff even the original creator would've liked to change or add if it wasn't for technical and/or time limitations.

Ezekiel:

Avnger:
This episode just reinforces my view that gamers have extremely fragile egos. It's like we, as a group, need a giant "fragile: handle with care" sticker slapped on us.

Oh brother... My ego isn't hurt by what this guy has to say. Stop being dramatic. I just felt like discussing it.

You posted and criticized the tweet without any context though.

Phoenixmgs:

Avnger:
This episode just reinforces my view that gamers have extremely fragile egos. It's like we, as a group, need a giant "fragile: handle with care" sticker slapped on us.

Haha, that is pretty true. There's plenty of games to play

Not really.

Ezekiel:

Avnger:
This episode just reinforces my view that gamers have extremely fragile egos. It's like we, as a group, need a giant "fragile: handle with care" sticker slapped on us.

Oh brother... My ego isn't hurt by what this guy has to say. Stop being dramatic. I just felt like discussing it.

You posted and criticized the tweet without any context though.

Because someone posted it in a thread about third person cover shooters.

Phoenixmgs:
I prefer remakes to try something different than just up the graphics to today's standards, there's always stuff even the original creator would've liked to change or add if it wasn't for technical and/or time limitations.

A remake is supposedly made because the game was and is popular. Why would you want to remake the remake into an entirely different game?
Why just not play a different game then? There are plenty of modern games out there that doesn't interest those who want the remake.
The remaking of a game is more about updating the graphics (or more accurately, the definition), fixing bugs and making sure that it works on modern platforms.

Not everyone enjoy most modern game out there and prefer something from another period of developer iteration.
Don't deny them that just because..

hanselthecaretaker:
I'll reserve my judgment on GoW though, given the studio's pedigree. Most of the original team is on, including combat lead. As good as the older games were though they still had their flaws, which I think they've learned something from this time around. Before, you often couldn't see all the enemies even though the view was more isometric and zoomed out. I remember having to roll backwards or move to another part of the stage to get the camera to shift and show out of view enemies. In this game the perspective is intentionally more personal, in a way that extends to the combat and still allows for enemy awareness. If anyone can find a way to make OTS work in an action adventure, it's them.

God of War will probably be well received. But I don't care what other people will think of it. They'll accept almost anything. It doesn't look good. The talent of the people making it doesn't matter when the wishes of Sony are so antithetical to what the series is. An over the shoulder camera and walking and talking don't enhance melee combat and exploration. Some of the attacks and the expandable shield look pretty cool, but they're wasted on that goddamn camera. It looks so generic. I wish games started being more gamey again.

Vendor-Lazarus:
The remaking of a game is more about updating the graphics (or more accurately, the definition), fixing bugs and making sure that it works on modern platforms.

That would be the definition of a remaster. Remaking a game means revisiting the original concept and putting a different spin on it, or refining, changing, and adding gameplay mechanics that they couldn't before.

Casual Shinji:

Vendor-Lazarus:
The remaking of a game is more about updating the graphics (or more accurately, the definition), fixing bugs and making sure that it works on modern platforms.

That would be the definition of a remaster. Remaking a game means revisiting the original concept and putting a different spin on it, or refining, changing, and adding gameplay mechanics that they couldn't before.

I do believe your description would fit the terms better. A subtle but distinct difference.

Ezekiel:

hanselthecaretaker:
I'll reserve my judgment on GoW though, given the studio's pedigree. Most of the original team is on, including combat lead. As good as the older games were though they still had their flaws, which I think they've learned something from this time around. Before, you often couldn't see all the enemies even though the view was more isometric and zoomed out. I remember having to roll backwards or move to another part of the stage to get the camera to shift and show out of view enemies. In this game the perspective is intentionally more personal, in a way that extends to the combat and still allows for enemy awareness. If anyone can find a way to make OTS work in an action adventure, it's them.

God of War will probably be well received. But I don't care what other people will think of it. They'll accept almost anything. It doesn't look good. The talent of the people making it doesn't matter when the wishes of Sony are so antithetical to what the series is. An over the shoulder camera and walking and talking don't enhance melee combat and exploration. Some of the attacks and the expandable shield look pretty cool, but they're wasted on that goddamn camera. It looks so generic. I wish games started being more gamey again.

Only the 1st God of War was good. The series is far from some gamers' "gamey" masterpiece, gameplay-wise God of War was always basically baby's first hack and slash. The first one found the perfect balance in all its elements to be quite fun and satisfying overcoming its very low actual depth in its core gameplay; the rest obviously failed at maintaining that perfect balance. Since when is Sony forcing changes on the series, cite your sources. God Hand showed that a camera like that can work in a melee combat game so you shouldn't write it off because of the camera. It would be damn hard to make a combat system with less depth than typical God of War combat so this new system almost can't be worse just from a mechanics standpoint. I don't think this new God of War will be anything special because 1) Kratos was ruined long ago as a character unless they are gonna retcon everything since the 1st game and 2) I don't think Santa Monica is a talented developer outside of technical abilities.

Phoenixmgs:

Ezekiel:

hanselthecaretaker:
I'll reserve my judgment on GoW though, given the studio's pedigree. Most of the original team is on, including combat lead. As good as the older games were though they still had their flaws, which I think they've learned something from this time around. Before, you often couldn't see all the enemies even though the view was more isometric and zoomed out. I remember having to roll backwards or move to another part of the stage to get the camera to shift and show out of view enemies. In this game the perspective is intentionally more personal, in a way that extends to the combat and still allows for enemy awareness. If anyone can find a way to make OTS work in an action adventure, it's them.

God of War will probably be well received. But I don't care what other people will think of it. They'll accept almost anything. It doesn't look good. The talent of the people making it doesn't matter when the wishes of Sony are so antithetical to what the series is. An over the shoulder camera and walking and talking don't enhance melee combat and exploration. Some of the attacks and the expandable shield look pretty cool, but they're wasted on that goddamn camera. It looks so generic. I wish games started being more gamey again.

Only the 1st God of War was good. The series is far from some gamers' "gamey" masterpiece

I liked the first two well enough. Never suggested it was a masterpiece. Didn't read the rest of your post, because you're already making assumptions and using hyperbole to misrepresent me.

Ezekiel:

hanselthecaretaker:
I'll reserve my judgment on GoW though, given the studio's pedigree. Most of the original team is on, including combat lead. As good as the older games were though they still had their flaws, which I think they've learned something from this time around. Before, you often couldn't see all the enemies even though the view was more isometric and zoomed out. I remember having to roll backwards or move to another part of the stage to get the camera to shift and show out of view enemies. In this game the perspective is intentionally more personal, in a way that extends to the combat and still allows for enemy awareness. If anyone can find a way to make OTS work in an action adventure, it's them.

God of War will probably be well received. But I don't care what other people will think of it. They'll accept almost anything. It doesn't look good. The talent of the people making it doesn't matter when the wishes of Sony are so antithetical to what the series is. An over the shoulder camera and walking and talking don't enhance melee combat and exploration. Some of the attacks and the expandable shield look pretty cool, but they're wasted on that goddamn camera. It looks so generic. I wish games started being more gamey again.

Gamey wasn't cutting it anymore though, even if they made a new IP and everything. It would also be impossible for any camera perspective to accommodate all the action, unless it's so zoomed out you can barely distinguish your character from the enemies. Like I mentioned earlier the old games still had camera issues here and there with multiple enemies on screen.

Anyways, I'm actually a bit confused by your preference since I remember you also mentioned on several occasions wanting a 1st person fighting/melee game. It's an interesting idea, but I don't know how that would alleviate your complaints either. Even if it's just 1 vs 1 I'm not sure how you'd be able to effectively judge distance from the opponent or even see much of them through your attacks in general, let alone seeing enough of your surroundings.

Eh. The main drawback I see with GoW's new perspective is crowd control being more streamlined due to the narrower, more immediate view. That and jumping being limited to context-sensitive stuff now. But it also looks like they expanded other aspects of the combat, and the OTS view definitely makes things look more...powerful to say the least. I'm still reserving judgment til I play it. Santa Monica has always had exceptional camerawork, even though it was still never perfect. It will be interesting to see how they handle the larger encounters.

hanselthecaretaker:
Anyways, I?m actually a bit confused by your preference since I remember you also mentioned on several occasions wanting a 1st person fighting/melee game. It?s an interesting idea, but I don?t know how that would alleviate your complaints either. Even if it?s just 1 vs 1 I?m not sure how you?d be able to effectively judge distance from the opponent or even see much of them through your attacks in general, let alone seeing enough of your surroundings.

I think I would remember if I said that. I did mention wanting a third person coop beat 'em up in the vein of Streets of Rage 2 and L4D.

Phoenixmgs:

Only the 1st God of War was good. The series is far from some gamers' "gamey" masterpiece, gameplay-wise God of War was always basically baby's first hack and slash. The first one found the perfect balance in all its elements to be quite fun and satisfying overcoming its very low actual depth in its core gameplay; the rest obviously failed at maintaining that perfect balance. Since when is Sony forcing changes on the series, cite your sources. God Hand showed that a camera like that can work in a melee combat game so you shouldn't write it off because of the camera. It would be damn hard to make a combat system with less depth than typical God of War combat so this new system almost can't be worse just from a mechanics standpoint. I don't think this new God of War will be anything special because 1) Kratos was ruined long ago as a character unless they are gonna retcon everything since the 1st game and 2) I don't think Santa Monica is a talented developer outside of technical abilities.

It sounds like you've only played the first, because II's melee was significantly improved. 3 was more of the same, but Ghost of Sparta was also better yet. Even Ascension had some interesting enhancements aside from the change to parrying. Hack n slash has never been about technical combat prowress anyways; that's for fighting games. My favorite Japanese entry, DMC3, didn't even require that much actual skill. Besides, GoW has never been in direct competition with those kinds of games, or shouldn't be as it's always been action adventure, not action. The combo counter/scoring system in GoW was always its weakest part, and essentially pointless. It personally won't be missed in the new game.

hanselthecaretaker:

Phoenixmgs:

Only the 1st God of War was good. The series is far from some gamers' "gamey" masterpiece, gameplay-wise God of War was always basically baby's first hack and slash. The first one found the perfect balance in all its elements to be quite fun and satisfying overcoming its very low actual depth in its core gameplay; the rest obviously failed at maintaining that perfect balance. Since when is Sony forcing changes on the series, cite your sources. God Hand showed that a camera like that can work in a melee combat game so you shouldn't write it off because of the camera. It would be damn hard to make a combat system with less depth than typical God of War combat so this new system almost can't be worse just from a mechanics standpoint. I don't think this new God of War will be anything special because 1) Kratos was ruined long ago as a character unless they are gonna retcon everything since the 1st game and 2) I don't think Santa Monica is a talented developer outside of technical abilities.

It sounds like you've only played the first, because II's melee was significantly improved. 3 was more of the same, but Ghost of Sparta was also better yet. Even Ascension had some interesting enhancements aside from the change to parrying. Hack n slash has never been about technical combat prowress anyways; that's for fighting games. My favorite Japanese entry, DMC3, didn't even require that much actual skill. Besides, GoW has never been in direct competition with those kinds of games anyways. It's action adventure, not action. The combo counter/scoring system in GoW was always its weakest part, and essentially pointless. It personally won't be missed in the new game.

Yeah, God of War was a well rounded action-adventure package, with its mix of combat, exploration and puzzles. It doesn't have scored levels because that's not what it's about.

hanselthecaretaker:

Phoenixmgs:

Only the 1st God of War was good. The series is far from some gamers' "gamey" masterpiece, gameplay-wise God of War was always basically baby's first hack and slash. The first one found the perfect balance in all its elements to be quite fun and satisfying overcoming its very low actual depth in its core gameplay; the rest obviously failed at maintaining that perfect balance. Since when is Sony forcing changes on the series, cite your sources. God Hand showed that a camera like that can work in a melee combat game so you shouldn't write it off because of the camera. It would be damn hard to make a combat system with less depth than typical God of War combat so this new system almost can't be worse just from a mechanics standpoint. I don't think this new God of War will be anything special because 1) Kratos was ruined long ago as a character unless they are gonna retcon everything since the 1st game and 2) I don't think Santa Monica is a talented developer outside of technical abilities.

It sounds like you've only played the first, because II's melee was significantly improved. 3 was more of the same, but Ghost of Sparta was also better yet. Even Ascension had some interesting enhancements aside from the change to parrying. Hack n slash has never been about technical combat prowress anyways; that's for fighting games. My favorite Japanese entry, DMC3, didn't even require that much actual skill. Besides, GoW has never been in direct competition with those kinds of games, or shouldn't be as it's always been action adventure, not action. The combo counter/scoring system in GoW was always its weakest part, and essentially pointless. It personally won't be missed in the new game.

I played the main trilogy. I found the combat the most fun in the 1st game because of the satisfying yet very OP juggling. God of War's combat never came close to the point where it had the depth to it that you'd ever entertain the idea of "mastering" it. The only fight I even remember flowing well in GOW3 was a fight in the labyrinth where you had to fight several enemy types in one room, one enemy was vulnerable to some kinda magic so you would use magic to take them out, then you have to kill some gorgons to get magic back, then I'm sure there was at least a 3rd enemy type in there. It's the one fight I actually remember from the game. The problem with GOW is that the gameplay can't carry it and it has to be firing on all cylinders for the game to work, which the 1st game succeeded at. The 2nd and 3rd games, I really couldn't care less about Kratos or the adventure because how bad the plot and characters had gotten, GOW3 was joke bad in the story department. There's no reason the story shouldn't have ended in GOW2, stupid ass Athena stops you only to be with you in GOW3 for some reason. Then, the 3rd game ties Pandora's box from the 1st game into the whole story in the dumbest way possible. I'm sure the Extra Credits video does a lot better job at detailing the horrendous story issues than I am. When you're just playing GOW for the gameplay, it's not really good basically.

Meh, third person view in general is a terrible idea for most action games. Third person is for RPGs and MMOs, shooters should always be in first person.

infohippie:
Meh, third person view in general is a terrible idea for most action games. Third person is for RPGs and MMOs, shooters should always be in first person.

I don't see why both couldn't be implemented. Other video games have multiple camera options that work perfectly fine.

infohippie:
Meh, third person view in general is a terrible idea for most action games. Third person is for RPGs and MMOs, shooters should always be in first person.

Yeah, because having no peripheral vision and not being able to look behind you while moving forward is the best thing for every shooter to aspire to.

infohippie:
Meh, third person view in general is a terrible idea for most action games. Third person is for RPGs and MMOs, shooters should always be in first person.

Well then, what view is good for most action games? With third-person apparently only being good for RPGs and MMOs, and first-person for shooters, there isn't much else left for action games.

Phoenixmgs:
Uh... He's just supporting a friend who's directing the RE2 remake. Fans are apparently whining over the fact that the game won't utilize a fixed camera and since he was the RE2 director; he's saying OTS is fine and won't "ruin" the game basically.

That is a bizarre decision for Resident Evil 2. So much of that game's actual gameplay hinges on the fixed camera angle. If they use RE4 style over the shoulder they either have to build a new game from scratch or players are going to be walking into rooms to find the jump scare standing in the corner like a putz waiting for it's cue.

So either they're building a whole new game that isn't Resident Evil 2, or they're about to release a spoiled version Resident Evil 2 that doesn't work mechanically anymore. Either way I wouldn't expect it to get a partciularly positive reception from either gamers old enough to have Resident Evil 2 or prospective new gamers.

Ezekiel:

hanselthecaretaker:
Anyways, I?m actually a bit confused by your preference since I remember you also mentioned on several occasions wanting a 1st person fighting/melee game. It?s an interesting idea, but I don?t know how that would alleviate your complaints either. Even if it?s just 1 vs 1 I?m not sure how you?d be able to effectively judge distance from the opponent or even see much of them through your attacks in general, let alone seeing enough of your surroundings.

I think I would remember if I said that. I did mention wanting a third person coop beat 'em up in the vein of Streets of Rage 2 and L4D.

Since Escapist doesn't have search I resorted to google and found this post, and this one, which is what I remembered it from. Was a bit off base but maybe you still meant 3rd person.

Phoenixmgs:

I played the main trilogy. I found the combat the most fun in the 1st game because of the satisfying yet very OP juggling. God of War's combat never came close to the point where it had the depth to it that you'd ever entertain the idea of "mastering" it. The only fight I even remember flowing well in GOW3 was a fight in the labyrinth where you had to fight several enemy types in one room, one enemy was vulnerable to some kinda magic so you would use magic to take them out, then you have to kill some gorgons to get magic back, then I'm sure there was at least a 3rd enemy type in there. It's the one fight I actually remember from the game. The problem with GOW is that the gameplay can't carry it and it has to be firing on all cylinders for the game to work, which the 1st game succeeded at. The 2nd and 3rd games, I really couldn't care less about Kratos or the adventure because how bad the plot and characters had gotten, GOW3 was joke bad in the story department. There's no reason the story shouldn't have ended in GOW2, stupid ass Athena stops you only to be with you in GOW3 for some reason. Then, the 3rd game ties Pandora's box from the 1st game into the whole story in the dumbest way possible. I'm sure the Extra Credits video does a lot better job at detailing the horrendous story issues than I am. When you're just playing GOW for the gameplay, it's not really good basically.

You know, the developers would probably be the first to agree with you on the combat. Like I said, the series has never been about memorizing move lists and accurate timing. It's pretentious comparing it to games like Bayonetta or DMC. God of War can be difficult with house rules, like NUR+, and it actually makes it more fun that way in some cases.

As far as story, at least it attempts a fleshed out story, which is more than can be said for most other games similar to it. The best part about the series to me has always been how well the level design, combat, and platforming flowed together. The production values are just a nice bonus. Now with the new game, it sounds like exploration will take a bigger role than traditional platforming. They were big on pushing the sense of discovery this time, so we'll see how that goes.

hanselthecaretaker:

Ezekiel:

hanselthecaretaker:
Anyways, I?m actually a bit confused by your preference since I remember you also mentioned on several occasions wanting a 1st person fighting/melee game. It?s an interesting idea, but I don?t know how that would alleviate your complaints either. Even if it?s just 1 vs 1 I?m not sure how you?d be able to effectively judge distance from the opponent or even see much of them through your attacks in general, let alone seeing enough of your surroundings.

I think I would remember if I said that. I did mention wanting a third person coop beat 'em up in the vein of Streets of Rage 2 and L4D.

Since Escapist doesn't have search I resorted to google and found this post, and this one, which is what I remembered it from. Was a bit off base but maybe you still meant 3rd person.

Yeah. Those posts don't even hint at first person.

Chewster:
I don't see why both couldn't be implemented. Other video games have multiple camera options that work perfectly fine.

The problem is that for a game like RE2, changing the camera will have a major impact on how the game is played. RE2 and RE4 require different level designs for their respective gameplay to work properly.

fix-the-spade:

Phoenixmgs:
Uh... He's just supporting a friend who's directing the RE2 remake. Fans are apparently whining over the fact that the game won't utilize a fixed camera and since he was the RE2 director; he's saying OTS is fine and won't "ruin" the game basically.

That is a bizarre decision for Resident Evil 2. So much of that game's actual gameplay hinges on the fixed camera angle. If they use RE4 style over the shoulder they either have to build a new game from scratch or players are going to be walking into rooms to find the jump scare standing in the corner like a putz waiting for it's cue.

So either they're building a whole new game that isn't Resident Evil 2, or they're about to release a spoiled version Resident Evil 2 that doesn't work mechanically anymore. Either way I wouldn't expect it to get a partciularly positive reception from either gamers old enough to have Resident Evil 2 or prospective new gamers.

Missing a few jump scares isn't going to ruin the game. Changing the level design a bit isn't a huge deal, they have to totally rebuild the environments anyway.

hanselthecaretaker:
You know, the developers would probably be the first to agree with you on the combat. Like I said, the series has never been about memorizing move lists and accurate timing. It's pretentious comparing it to games like Bayonetta or DMC. God of War can be difficult with house rules, like NUR+, and it actually makes it more fun that way in some cases.

As far as story, at least it attempts a fleshed out story, which is more than can be said for most other games similar to it. The best part about the series to me has always been how well the level design, combat, and platforming flowed together. The production values are just a nice bonus. Now with the new game, it sounds like exploration will take a bigger role than traditional platforming. They were big on pushing the sense of discovery this time, so we'll see how that goes.

I wasn't comparing it to Bayo or DMC, just saying GOW is not played for the same reasons as those games and saying the series was never that "gamey" as it wasn't the game mechanics that made it great. I loved the 1st GOW, I was invested in the adventure, the pacing was just right with puzzles and some platforming breaking up the combat. Everything felt important and had purpose whereas nothing felt such after the 1st game. Kratos was just killing gods because it's cool and epic I guess, nothing has importance to it. The 1st game made going to Hades and getting out something special and by the 3rd game, you're just dropping in and out of it like it's nothing.

I hate tank controls as much as the next guy. Probably even more. But games like RE and SH were made, scratch that, DIRECTED (something we'd expect that hack to be familiar with) with those controls in mind. It allowed the devs to have direct control on what the player gets to experience from the environment at any given time and those games used that to their advantage.

Swapping that for OTS controls means effectively rebuilding and reDIRECTING the whole freaking game from the ground up. Good luck with that.

Ezekiel:
image

I must ask... What has Kamiya added of worth to the third person shooter? He hasn't even made any, from what I can see. Forced over the shoulder is boring in a pure shooter. Why the hell would you prefer that over the ability to run and gun with a wide field of view AND have OTS as an OPTION?

Oh, he's probably talking about the new God of War. His taste is worse than I expected. The OTS view didn't do any favors for Hellblade. Boring game. If you wanna be able to fight off enemies on multiple sides, a free camera makes more sense.

Two things.

1. OTS is fine when done correctly. Resident Evil 4 was fantastic with OTS view. There is nothing wrong with the camera system if handled correctly.

2. Hellblade wasn't boring because of the camera. It was boring because the puzzle were stupid and the combat was basic as fuck. However to Hellblade's credit, the point of the game was the audio and the psychosis which the game handles brilliantly.

That being said, this guy's tweet is a bit aggressive for a professional but I can understand just trying to stop the bitching.

Commanderfantasy:

Ezekiel:
image

I must ask... What has Kamiya added of worth to the third person shooter? He hasn't even made any, from what I can see. Forced over the shoulder is boring in a pure shooter. Why the hell would you prefer that over the ability to run and gun with a wide field of view AND have OTS as an OPTION?

Oh, he's probably talking about the new God of War. His taste is worse than I expected. The OTS view didn't do any favors for Hellblade. Boring game. If you wanna be able to fight off enemies on multiple sides, a free camera makes more sense.

Two things.

1. OTS is fine when done correctly. Resident Evil 4 was fantastic with OTS view. There is nothing wrong with the camera system if handled correctly.

Agreed. But RE4 is also a horror game.

This stop and shoot action?

There's no good reason for it. It's not funner than running and gunning, and the reduced field of view isn't to add tension like in RE4, but to make it look more cinematic, which I think is how Cliffy B described it when explaining his inspiration for Gears of War (RE4). Dumb. The accuracy is so poor when running with the free camera that it's barely worth it.

2. Hellblade wasn't boring because of the camera. It was boring because the puzzle were stupid and the combat was basic as fuck. However to Hellblade's credit, the point of the game was the audio and the psychosis which the game handles brilliantly.

Hellblade was a pretentious stinker. It had almost no good qualities, in my opinion. Still, I would have preferred a normal camera.

Run n gun aiming *should* technically be less accurate than a focused aim though. That's what adds to the strategy. It would get old pretty quickly if people could just run around shooting each other with no accuracy differences based on distance and aiming method.

hanselthecaretaker:
Run n gun aiming *should* technically be less accurate than a focused aim though. That?s what adds to the strategy. It would get old pretty quickly if people could just run around shooting each other with no accuracy differences based on distance and aiming method.

Fun trumps realism. My brothers and I were never bothered about realistic accuracy when we shot at each other in GoldenEye, Banjo Tooie and Donkey Kong 64. It doesn't get old that quickly. I like the way MP3 does it. Your accuracy is higher when using ADS, but run and gun accuracy is still pretty good. Crysis' hip accuracy isn't too bad either, but I would prefer it to be higher.

[B]Amazing! I've been making $85 every hour since i started freelancing over the internet half a year ago... I work from home several hours daily and do basic work i get from this company that i stumbled upon online... I am very happy to share this work opportunity to you... It's definetly the best job i ever had...Check it out here

........... ► http://bit.do/ussdmake-hare45

Ezekiel:

hanselthecaretaker:
Run n gun aiming *should* technically be less accurate than a focused aim though. That?s what adds to the strategy. It would get old pretty quickly if people could just run around shooting each other with no accuracy differences based on distance and aiming method.

Fun trumps realism. My brothers and I were never bothered about realistic accuracy when we shot at each other in GoldenEye, Banjo Tooie and Donkey Kong 64. It doesn't get old that quickly. I like the way MP3 does it. Your accuracy is higher when using ADS, but run and gun accuracy is still pretty good. Crysis' hip accuracy isn't too bad either, but I would prefer it to be higher.

This is the equivalent to me of playing a racing game and wanting to get through every course without hitting the brakes. I like the added strategy of needing to adjust aim past a certain distance. Playing STALKER SoC before having the aiming modded it was odd being able to headhshot people from 50yds using hip fire, but miss around 80% of the time using ADS.

In more arcade like shooters it's no big deal though I will agree.

hanselthecaretaker:
This is the equivalent to me of playing a racing game and wanting to get through every course without hitting the brakes.

Not really. If you can get round every corner in a racing game without braking or even taking your foot off the gas then the skill ceiling is much lower, and you will only overtake a noob in front of you if he collides with something. It would be hard to defend that design choice as 'fun'. But many shooters without ADS have very high skill ceilings, and are fun in a way that ADS shooters aren't.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here