|
corn in the bible posted:please play games before discussing them What about all my important opinions on how the new Last of Us game is going to ruin everything and is proof that Naughty Dog is run by self-destructive lunatics? I saw the teaser and I feel very qualified to educate everyone. Snak posted:We can agree to disagree. heck 
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 19:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 04:21 |
|
|
Phantasium posted:Can we call games like Metroid Closed World games? Bottle Games
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 19:44
|
|
|
I'll have to wait until I get to FFXV to comment on it, although I think the JRPG genre needed something to shake it up.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 19:45
|
|
|
One thing that GTA's open worlds still have over other games is the chases with police and it seemed like these were better in the earlier games. When we talk about ideal open worlds we want missions, places, and targets that we can approach in a myriad of ways but in GTA the player is the target when they get their wanted level up. Then it's up to the player to improvise their getaway and the more the player is familiar with the game world the better able they'll be to evade police. And the player gets more familiar with the game world the more they fool around or do other missions. Maybe an alleyway doesn't ever have any content but it could be a key route between streets that the player uses to get somewhere faster or get out of trouble. The open world was part of everything you did whereas open worlds in other games can be awfully close to being pretty hubs connecting the actual levels or load time smoke screens.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 19:45
|
|
|
I will say this about FFXV: I am very glad that dungeons are a thing and that there are apparently a few really big hidden post-game dungeons. That's cool! I dig dungeons.Phantasium posted:Can we call games like Metroid Closed World games? Connected world? Limited world? I dunno, something, because the worlds are definitely "open" in that you are free to traverse them without loading screens and sometimes in a nonlinear fashion, but they're also not big, sprawling "go explore and do all these side quests" worlds, either.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 19:48
|
|
|
Harrow posted:When it comes to open worlds, I mostly just want to know what it added and if it was worth it. Like, there are open world games I like beyond The Witcher 3, don't get me wrong. Hell, I like a lot of the Assassin's Creed games, even though UbiSoft is a major offender when it comes to things that I hate in open worlds. Uh... I would guess in a lot of cases open worlds are less resource intensive to implement. I mean, not necessarily, but MGSV re-uses so much of its poo poo for multiple missions. Like I said before, the open world itself is basically considered to be content. The idea that this field with some trees in it has 3 different flowers you can pick and a deposit of ore you can mine "is gameplay content" basically means that it exists instead of a more focused level designed for progression-based gameplay. What's more, this isn't the only field like that, you could go to that one, or any of like 4 other open spaces that are functionally the same. It's up to you! This is a feature.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 19:49
|
|
|
Bicyclops posted:I'll have to wait until I get to FFXV to comment on it, although I think the JRPG genre needed something to shake it up. I am not to the part everybody hates but what I've played of it has showed me a bunch of just really awesome dungeons and bosses and it really feels like an honest to goodness update of golden days Final Fantasy. I drove around at night one time and got ambushed by an Iron Giant that I ended up killing, but was wondering why the battle theme hadn't stopped and it was because a teeny tiny Tonberry was sneaking up from behind everybody from behind a guard railing. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 19:51
|
|
|
Yeah, it seems more and more likely I am getting a Playstation 4 for my birthday and FFXV is definitely one of the games I'll be playing, and I skipped over 13, even though I could have played it on Steam now for awhile. Nobody ever seemed excited enough about it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 19:53
|
|
|
ive been trying to find a vita charger not online with no luck yeah i have a vita, and apparently im the only one who does
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 19:54
|
|
|
LawfulWaffle posted:Bottle Games I will murder you. No. Don't remind me of that lame rear end Other M game.  (the loving goddamn ship was called the Bottle ship)
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 19:55
|
|
|
Bicyclops posted:Yeah, it seems more and more likely I am getting a Playstation 4 for my birthday and FFXV is definitely one of the games I'll be playing, and I skipped over 13, even though I could have played it on Steam now for awhile. Nobody ever seemed excited enough about it. I actually kinda like FFXIII though I really wouldn't try to defend it in an argument with someone who hated it, and I also wouldn't play it again, or even really recommend it to someone. Like, I thought the battle system was actually really cool, but it was badly underutilized and ended up only really getting to shine in the very last superboss (which was a ton of fun to fight, maybe the most fun Final Fantasy superboss I've ever fought). I didn't really even mind the extreme linearity like some people did, if only because I remembered Final Fantasy X and that game wasn't exactly a beacon of open-ended design. The story didn't even really suck that much until the ending, which was astoundingly nonsensical (and I'm not just talking about the setting's weird mythology--I mean the main characters' motivations stopped making any sense at all).
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 19:58
|
|
|
Shindragon posted:I will murder you. No. Nonsense friend, now you can play the acclaimed Other M on your Wii U, available digitally! (for more than it would cost to get a new copy at retail)
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 19:58
|
|
|
Snak posted:Oh, for the record I meant Tomb Raider (1996). It doesn't have sprinting. I think sprinting was introduced in Tomb Raider 3. I don't remember if it made you jump farther or not. I think you did a roll while sprinting. You might like the original Prince of Persia. All of the jumps are very deliberate and there's no air control. On the other hand, the game is very, very tough so you might end up pulling your hair out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 19:58
|
|
|
Harrow posted:When it comes to open worlds, I mostly just want to know what it added and if it was worth it. Like, there are open world games I like beyond The Witcher 3, don't get me wrong. Hell, I like a lot of the Assassin's Creed games, even though UbiSoft is a major offender when it comes to things that I hate in open worlds. I think it's hard to talk about what they add to a game since being open world is at the core of their design. If you take away the open world from MGSV I guess you could make it individual maps like Peace Walker, but FFXV would have to be completely redesigned from like page five of the design doc onwards. You would leave one place and have one other place to go, over and over. The driving mechanic, if they kept it, would just ferry you from one town to the next. The idea of the over world in an RPG is a hold over from time when you couldn't really display a living environment outside of towns. You would leave town, be represented by a massive sprite or model compared to the icon of the town you just left, then wander towards the next living environment while getting into random battles. FFXV eschews the over world by making the transition between a town and the fields and a cave seamless, and once you do that designing an experience that doesn't allow for or reward exploration would get the same negative criticism FFXIII did. You would have to get rid of so many things in FFXV to eliminate the open world, and I don't think they can put this genie back in the lamp. If FFXVI comes out as a linear experience like FFX, where you leave one area and see a map with dots indicating travel but never experiencing it yourself, I think it would be a massive step backwards. Let me walk around and poke into different corners. Let me find strange enemies to fight or people tucked away where the critical path would never take me. Previous FF games have done that, and now that they have the power to make a real world to explore they should exploit it for everything it's worth. FFXV suffers because it had weak direction for too long, and I have high hopes that the next game will bear the fruits of the tough lessons learned since Final Fantasy Versus XIII was announced.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 19:59
|
|
|
Harrow posted:I actually kinda like FFXIII though I really wouldn't try to defend it in an argument with someone who hated it, and I also wouldn't play it again, or even really recommend it to someone. This is kind of how I felt about FFXII, lol
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 20:01
|
|
|
Phantasium posted:Nonsense friend, now you can play the acclaimed Other M on your Wii U, available digitally! (for more than it would cost to get a new copy at retail) yessss I'm always on the lookout for an excuse to post this picture I took at a Calgary Walmart in January 2014, three and a half years after it was released: 
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 20:03
|
|
|
Hey, if no one in the know will buy that poo poo even if it's on sale, may as well hold out for the one remaining person uninformed enough to pay full price.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 20:04
|
|
|
LawfulWaffle posted:FFXV suffers because it had weak direction for too long, and I have high hopes that the next game will bear the fruits of the tough lessons learned since Final Fantasy Versus XIII was announced. I think in FFXV's case, I can agree with this. Maybe it's not the open world that's the culprit but the overall direction and the fact that they had to rush what was probably a mess of a game to completion led to a swiss cheese story and crappy final act of gameplay. Maybe that's the problem with MGSV, too, though in that case I never really felt like having a truly open world was ever justified. They could've shrunk each of the environments down to Ground Zeroes map size and cut out the huge amount of busywork side ops and it would've been just as good, if not better. Bicyclops posted:This is kind of how I felt about FFXII, lol Ha, I'm a lot more evangelistic about FFXII, which is kind of funny because I think it commits a lot of the same errors FFXV did, it's just a lot more even throughout regardless of those errors (and also I think it generally has a more interesting plot with more interesting leads, except for Vaan).
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 20:06
|
|
|
The plot is actually my chief objection with FFXXII, because everyone talks in this goofy fake fantasy weird way, with lines like "You wear the mummer's farce well!" It's a generic fantasy story with terrible execution. Final Fantasy X's story, for all the flak it gets, was better. I just like that it took the Final Fantasy formula to its logical conclusion, in which you literally just set up for a battle and then walk around and the characters do all the fighting themselves, and you choose how to level up their skills, and buy the next set of weapons and armor at each new town. It sort of falls apart at the end a little more, because too many of the sidequest dungeons for the last few summons are just SUCH A SLOG, but overall, it has a kind of mindless charm that I just enjoyed.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 20:12
|
|
|
I actually like the weird Ivalice-speak that Alexander O. Smith does when he translates Ivalice games (though he got rid of "Blame yourself or God!" in FFT: War of the Lions and I will never forgive that), but that's one part of the game I definitely can't really defend. It totally works for me but I can't at all explain why.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 20:16
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:Lara Croft should be kicking people's tookis, not being grossed out by scorpions. It's not her fault, she doesn't even know what a tooki is
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 20:19
|
|
|
I feel like for an open world game to be good the devs need to put actual effort into making the traversal of the world interesting in some way. Like Density Of Stuff To Do/Things Happening has to be high or traversal itself has to be engaging. Kind of a fine line to walk since "interesting" can quickly become "annoying" if you are forced to do it too many times and then you're right back to quicktraveling everywhere because you're sick of navigating the twisty streets of your GTA-alike or picking your way across the rugged landscape of Skyrim or whatever. Also have to try and balance "I can get across the map really quickly" with "I am traveling everywhere in a straight line so it feels like essentially waiting to get to the next mission/thing" Boring Ubisoft-style open world games are as much a scourge as the Common Ring-Tailed North-American Cover Based Shooter was a few years ago (continues to be?) Monkey Fracas fucked around with this message at 20:26 on Dec 9, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 20:24
|
|
|
tap my mountain posted:It's not her fault, she doesn't even know what a tooki is it's the past tense of takei
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 20:24
|
|
|
Monkey Fracas posted:I feel like for an open world game to be good the devs need to put actual effort into making the traversal of the world interesting in some way. Yakuza
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 20:28
|
|
|
Monkey Fracas posted:I feel like for an open world game to be good the devs need to put actual effort into making the traversal of the world interesting in some way. The danger there is that it leads to the UbiSoft-style "let's just copy-paste the same six missions everywhere, look how much stuff there is to do!" thing. Hell, even The Witcher 3 is guilty of that to a degree, though it has so many actually good side quests that it doesn't bother me much. I think it's much more important, like your first paragraph, that traversal itself is engaging, and that the environment itself is engaging. One of my favorite uses of an open world is if most of the missions take place there and I end up feeling rewarded for knowing my way around the world well. That feeling helps make an open world worth it to me--I've been given time to explore and objectives that encourage me to explore, and later on when I have a story mission in that area, I know its ins and outs, I know what alley I can drive down to escape the cops or that this left turn is a dead end but the next one isn't, that kind of thing. The Assassin's Creed games don't really do that because the maps don't have that much going on despite being beautiful virtual versions of their historical locations. Outside of some specific landmarks, there isn't a lot of interest to find, and even if the layouts were great, the solution to getting caught is more often than not "have a cool sword fight and murder everyone" rather than "escape."
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 20:29
|
|
|
I always thought FFXII was neat but I stop playing around the Tomb of the Wraithking or w/e every time. I like setting my gambits up so I was constantly being healed and exploiting weaknesses, probably for the same reason I like Spacechem or Big Pharma. I like making systems that automate themselves but allow me to make adjustments and experiment with optimization. On the other hand, playing FFXIII was an uphill battle for me. People mock FFXII for having automated battles but XIII was literally picking Auto over and over, shifting paradigms a few times for beefier enemies and getting a little crazy I guess with the bosses. That's to say nothing of the linear design for the first 2/3s and the fact that the game will happily let you dump money and crafting items into making your first weapon just slightly better than everything else you'll find but not giving enough resources to build up those later weapons too. I was on and off for a long time and finally made it to the open world with a very loose understanding of the plot, then put it down forever. I tried the two sequels but neither captured my interest. It was a rough time for a Final Fantasy fanboi.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 20:30
|
|
|
LawfulWaffle posted:I always thought FFXII was neat but I stop playing around the Tomb of the Wraithking or w/e every time. I like setting my gambits up so I was constantly being healed and exploiting weaknesses, probably for the same reason I like Spacechem or Big Pharma. I like making systems that automate themselves but allow me to make adjustments and experiment with optimization. On the other hand, playing FFXIII was an uphill battle for me. People mock FFXII for having automated battles but XIII was literally picking Auto over and over, shifting paradigms a few times for beefier enemies and getting a little crazy I guess with the bosses. That's to say nothing of the linear design for the first 2/3s and the fact that the game will happily let you dump money and crafting items into making your first weapon just slightly better than everything else you'll find but not giving enough resources to build up those later weapons too. I was on and off for a long time and finally made it to the open world with a very loose understanding of the plot, then put it down forever. I tried the two sequels but neither captured my interest. It was a rough time for a Final Fantasy fanboi. FFXIII's combat system has a lot of depth to it that never gets used. I'm told (though I can't confirm from experience) that XIII-2 doesn't do anything to fix that, either. You really do just mash auto most of the time in FFXIII, but then there's this tiny handful of post-game bosses that require you to have smart paradigm setups with the right equipment and you have to be ready to switch paradigms at the drop of a hat and it's a ton of fun! But then you do those three or four fights and that's it and you're left wondering why nothing else in the game even tried to engage with the combat system. Its weapon upgrade system was unforgivably grindy, though, god drat.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 20:32
|
|
|
Harrow posted:But then you do those three or four fights and that's it and you're left wondering why nothing else in the game even tried to engage with the combat system. Probably because even in the combat system they have people refused to engage with it and then complained that the battles were bad and took forever.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 20:36
|
|
|
corn in the bible posted:Yakuza I really like the way the Yakuza games are laid out. It's juuuuust big enough for you to get to the place where you're going before you go "this is taking too long". Also a lot of unique things to get distracted by on the way there. Can see some people being annoyed by the random JRPG-style thug encounters though. Harrow posted:The danger there is that it leads to the UbiSoft-style "let's just copy-paste the same six missions everywhere, look how much stuff there is to do!" thing. Hell, even The Witcher 3 is guilty of that to a degree, though it has so many actually good side quests that it doesn't bother me much. I think it's much more important, like your first paragraph, that traversal itself is engaging, and that the environment itself is engaging. One of my favorite uses of an open world is if most of the missions take place there and I end up feeling rewarded for knowing my way around the world well. That feeling helps make an open world worth it to me--I've been given time to explore and objectives that encourage me to explore, and later on when I have a story mission in that area, I know its ins and outs, I know what alley I can drive down to escape the cops or that this left turn is a dead end but the next one isn't, that kind of thing. Yeah, more important part is definitely the traversal being an actual engaging part of the game instead of watching a dot move on a tiny map until you get where you're going.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 20:54
|
|
|
Harrow posted:The Assassin's Creed games don't really do that because the maps don't have that much going on despite being beautiful virtual versions of their historical locations. Outside of some specific landmarks, there isn't a lot of interest to find, and even if the layouts were great, the solution to getting caught is more often than not "have a cool sword fight and murder everyone" rather than "escape." AC could have been a lot better overall but especially with respect to the open world if combat had you be more of a swashbuckler. IIRC there is a very limited environmental attack ability in one of the Ezio games but the series wants you to be a one-man army so it's unnecessary except for your own sense of style or to check off some upgrade/collectibles requirement (Kill 5 Enemies with Collapsed Scaffolding). If the Assassins were terribly disadvantaged on flat open ground then there would have been more reason to seek out and also memorize locations that were best to lure attackers to. A courtyard that is full of ledges and boxes and pots and hedge walls for all kinds of environmental attacks and to help crowd control the group of guards after you. A shipping area full of ropes to swing from and lots of goods to topple over onto enemies. Make getting up to the roofs a priority because the controls mean knocking guards off the edge is a better tactic than trading blows. Make the guards attack all at once instead of the cliche of only one or two. Give more guards ranged attacks so ducking around corners or up and over rooftops is essential.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 20:54
|
|
|
It sounds kinda like you're saying rear end Creed should take a couple hundred notes from Hitman.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 20:59
|
|
|
Like the vast majority of the time you can just counter-murder your way through piles of guards You'd think guards coming in would see the big piles of dead guys and be like "hmmm y'know what, no thanks" Kind of reminds me of something- what games have a mechanic where enemies react to you doing something brutal to one of their comrades? I remember in Sleeping Dogs there were a few moves that would cause enemies to wince and go "oh man what the gently caress" for a second and just kinda back off momentarily because they just watched you break a guy's arm or whatever
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 21:11
|
|
|
^^Shadows of Mordor had enemies that would peace out if you were doing too well in battle and there was also a specific type of kill you could do to terrorize them (and that ability could also be upgraded).Lurdiak posted:It sounds kinda like you're saying rear end Creed should take a couple hundred notes from Hitman. Environmental attack usually means something like Hitman, or Punisher, or Sleeping Dogs but those tend to be way more plodding and forgiving than I'm thinking. You grab a guy and start marching him over to a sawblade 10 yards away and every other enemy stands around like "let's see where he goes with this" and that's not what I mean. Arkham Knight's use of them was pretty good in that you could only activate the attack once you and the enemy were in range of both each other and the section of environment and if that system was developed a bit more it would be perfect. Having the Assassins be both masters at stealth kills and masters at open combat feels overpowered but if they were masters of stealth and when forced into open combat they have to turn into something like Errol Flynn or Jackie Chan you could still have awesome and stylish victories but it wouldn't seem like you were winning because you're an unstoppable war god but because your ingenuity and agility saved your rear end. Lobok fucked around with this message at 21:16 on Dec 9, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 21:14
|
|
Lobok posted:Environmental attack usually means something like Hitman, or Punisher, or Sleeping Dogs but those tend to be way more plodding and forgiving than I'm thinking. You grab a guy and start marching him over to a sawblade 10 yards away and every other enemy stands around like "let's see where he goes with this". Arkham Knight's use of them was pretty good in that you could only activate the attack once you and the enemy were in range of both each other and the section of environment and if that system was developed a bit more it would be perfect. Having the Assassins be both masters at stealth kills and masters at open combat feels overpowered but if they were masters of stealth and when forced into open combat they have to turn into something like Errol Flynn or Jackie Chan you could still have awesome and stylish victories but it wouldn't seem like you were winning because you're an unstoppable war god but because your ingenuity and agility saved your rear end. Gotcha, but what I meant was like "your environment matters a little more than not at all and you should take note of it before making your move", which Hitman is pretty darn aces at. Monkey Fracas posted:Kind of reminds me of something- what games have a mechanic where enemies react to you doing something brutal to one of their comrades? I remember in Sleeping Dogs there were a few moves that would cause enemies to wince and go "oh man what the gently caress" for a second and just kinda back off momentarily because they just watched you break a guy's arm or whatever Shadow of Mordor gives you a Brutalize option in addition to your stealth kill option, which dismembers a target and makes other orcs freak the gently caress out. Like a lot of the game's mechanics it becomes obsolete once you get your mind control powers, but it's pretty useful until them.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 21:16
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:Gotcha, but what I meant was like "your environment matters a little more than not at all and you should take note of it before making your move", which Hitman is pretty darn aces at. Ah right, then yes. Exactly. Not just for planning an assassination but if things go south the environment is something you'll have to improvise with to stay alive.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 21:20
|
|
|
Lobok posted:AC could have been a lot better overall but especially with respect to the open world if combat had you be more of a swashbuckler. IIRC there is a very limited environmental attack ability in one of the Ezio games but the series wants you to be a one-man army so it's unnecessary except for your own sense of style or to check off some upgrade/collectibles requirement (Kill 5 Enemies with Collapsed Scaffolding). Hell yeah, that would own. I'd love it if an Assassin's Creed game really played up that your advantage as an assassin is your ability to climb to places where others can't and your ability to sneak and perceive opportunities in the environment. The fact that every assassin we play as is also an insanely good swordfighter who can take down 12 dudes and react to bullets with ridiculous speed undermines what I think could be a really fun game about using the environment to your advantage. What if assassins didn't generally carry large weapons, because they could knock against walls and make too much noise while they climb, and the player has extremely limited health so that a stand-up fight with more than one or two enemies is a terrible idea. Your hidden blade should be amazing at killing from stealth but not particularly useful in a direct fight. Maybe you can disarm an enemy and temporarily use their weapon, but you drop it when you duck back into stealth, that kind of thing. Then work in the environmental attacks like you're talking about and make it a game entirely about stalking, killing, and escaping if things get hot instead of one-man-armying your way to victory atop a pile of corpses. It doesn't need to be like Hitman--I'm cool with AC's general paradigm of stalking and murdering guards on your way to murder your target and not generally caring about whether you ghosted it or not--but it could definitely take some cues.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 21:21
|
|
|
Sometimes I really like that kind of combat and sometimes I prefer to mash the X button, murdering thousands of people, until my meter builds up and I can press circle to execute a move which kills a couple hundred people at once.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 21:22
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:It sounds kinda like you're saying rear end Creed should take a couple hundred notes from Hitman. Yeah. Man, if Ubisoft decided to make an Assassin's Creed game where the focus was on infiltration and stealth assassinations that needed to actually be stealthy rather than being a mass murdering sociopath with preternatural climbing abilities, I would be interested again. In AC:Syndicate, the game tries to make Templar Hunts (generic assassinations) more restricted by giving optional objectives like "Run over with a carriage" or "Kill with a falling crate" but the only penalty for headshotting them with a throwing knife from 100 feet is an imperfect sync. Ubi, if you think a few missing percentage points is going to get me to jump through your dumb hoops, I've got news for you. Even missions where you go inside a building or some area you can get to via the rooftops it all comes down to moving with a group of NPCs which makes you invisible and dealing with the act of killing with a rather limited verbset for a group who's creed includes "Nothing is forbidden." gently caress it, just give Agent 47 a wrist blade in the next season. Problem solved. e: The next Assassin Creed game should be an adaptation of Steve Ditko's Mr. A. That would explain the lack of non-lethal options; if you hinder me, you're on the wrong side of the card. LawfulWaffle fucked around with this message at 21:30 on Dec 9, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 21:26
|
|
|
I mean, it doesn't have to be "Hitman: Historical Setting Edition" or anything. I'm cool with it still being a faster-paced, more action-focused thing. Just want the emphasis to be on using the assassin's supernatural mobility to be elusive and try to pick off targets one-by-one instead of every situation being solvable by rushing in head-first with a sword (or sword-cane, in Syndicate).Bicyclops posted:Sometimes I really like that kind of combat and sometimes I prefer to mash the X button, murdering thousands of people, until my meter builds up and I can press circle to execute a move which kills a couple hundred people at once. Sure, but I think the improvise-and-try-to-escape combat would mesh a lot better with everything else about Assassin's Creed--especially the player's great mobility--better than the Arkham combat does. Plenty of games do it better, anyway, like the Arkham games themselves, or Sleeping Dogs.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 21:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 04:21 |
|
|
Bicyclops posted:Sometimes I really like that kind of combat and sometimes I prefer to mash the X button, murdering thousands of people, until my meter builds up and I can press circle to execute a move which kills a couple hundred people at once. If AssCreed started aping Dynasty Warriors out of nowhere, instead of Arkham, that would be a welcome improvement. You want Dynasty Warriors and I want The Warriors (PS2).
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 21:28
|
|