Super E3 2015 - General Discussion Turbo Redux Edition

erkifino · 19-06-2015 6:45pm

I must revisit Fallout 3... I got bored walking around deserts... Checking every little container for bottle caps. Have NV, but yet to play it...:o

CiDeRmAn · 19-06-2015 11:05pm

erkifino wrote: »

I must revisit Fallout 3... I got bored walking around deserts... Checking every little container for bottle caps. Have NV, but yet to play it...:o

I don't think I did any wandering around deserts at all in that game. I found it to be quite linear, in a good way.
Tons of action, great story, I had a ball with it and finished the main campaign.
I always meant to return to the dlc but never got to it.

Retr0gamer · 19-06-2015 11:21pm

Just skip Fallout 3 and dive straight into New Vegas. It's such a better game.

YouSavedMyLife · 19-06-2015 11:24pm

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Just skip Fallout 3 and dive straight into New Vegas. It's such a better game.

:eek:

Retr0gamer · 19-06-2015 11:33pm

YouSavedMyLife wrote: »

:eek:

Tis the truff.

Fallout 3 is the usual Bethesda lark. Big open world, not very interesting though. Crappy quests and quest structure and piss poor writing.

New Vegas since it's by Obsidian has much better characters, the quest structure is far more satisfying since it forces the player to make tough decisions that affect the game in big ways, the setting is far more interesting as is the world. Only problem is the rampant bugs but they've mostly been squashed but I'd still say keep multiple save files and sometimes you'll have to google a fix to a quest that won't eactivate or else get the no clip console code

Only negative is the DLC which is pretty crappy for New Vegas, the DLC was the best thing about Fallout 3.

Pedro Monscooch · 19-06-2015 11:57pm

So it's settled, then. Best game of E3 2015 is Fallout New Vegas.

Personally, the things I've read people say about the Oculus Touch have given me a real case of sceitimíní as they they'd in Gaeilge. I'm hoping it's got the games to warrant building a PC.

Gbear · 20-06-2015 12:09am

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Not feeling the warm emotions for Doom I have to admit. Technologically speaking it looks great as the series always has, but even by the end of the demo I was thinking 'alright, what else you got?'. Impossible to judge based on such a brief clip - impossible to judge any game on a brief pre-release clip, really - but the gameplay loop looks like something that would be fun for half an hour before repetition started settling in hard. Also think the art design is fairly insipid TBH (only so many grimy space stations overrun by monsters one can explore in a lifetime, even if Doom pioneered the whole thing). Hoping the developers will embrace the wilder, wackier, more surreal sides of the franchise's main concept.

Huzzah for groupthink!

Far Cry 3, 4, and it would appear, Doom, (and presumably lots of other games), have embraced another dimension of combat that can lead to some interesting emergent gameplay, but it needs to be less formulaic and more fluid.

We need to get to the stage where you're attacking with melee weapons free hand and enemies react dynamically to your actions - dodging, the seriousness of injuries that are inflicted (from a damage point of view - different enemies would require different strategies), and for games like this, the visual gore elements that react to your actions.

That may well require different controllers though - you'd need to be exceeding clever to design a game to use mouse, keyboard or a gamepad and not just feel like the boring repetitive sword swinging of the Elder Scrolls games or the over scripted and overly simplistic CQC of Crysis, Far Cry and so on.

RPG stuff has been thrown in, the graphical fidelty is getting to a stage of diminishing returns (and, indeed, seems to be stalling or going backwards in some cases), they've dabbled in mixing up the backdrops - steampunk, sci-fi, straight horror, etc, they've tried a range of styles from balls out charging around like a maniac to tactical and stealth based games.

If they solved the problem of melee combat and "magic" or other abilities where they can become as much an extension of the player as running, jumping and shooting, that would be the next big innovation in gameplay mechanics for FPS' IMO.

CiDeRmAn · 20-06-2015 12:44am

I loved that about Far Cry 2, only the respawing enemies spoiled it somewhat.
I must pick up New Vegas as soon as I'm done with Bloodborne.

humanji · 20-06-2015 12:53am

Gbear wrote: »

Far Cry 3, 4, and it would appear, Doom, (and presumably lots of other games), have embraced another dimension of combat that can lead to some interesting emergent gameplay, but it needs to be less formulaic and more fluid.

We need to get to the stage where you're attacking with melee weapons free hand and enemies react dynamically to your actions - dodging, the seriousness of injuries that are inflicted (from a damage point of view - different enemies would require different strategies), and for games like this, the visual gore elements that react to your actions.

That may well require different controllers though - you'd need to be exceeding clever to design a game to use mouse, keyboard or a gamepad and not just feel like the boring repetitive sword swinging of the Elder Scrolls games or the over scripted and overly simplistic CQC of Crysis, Far Cry and so on.

RPG stuff has been thrown in, the graphical fidelty is getting to a stage of diminishing returns (and, indeed, seems to be stalling or going backwards in some cases), they've dabbled in mixing up the backdrops - steampunk, sci-fi, straight horror, etc, they've tried a range of styles from balls out charging around like a maniac to tactical and stealth based games.

If they solved the problem of melee combat and "magic" or other abilities where they can become as much an extension of the player as running, jumping and shooting, that would be the next big innovation in gameplay mechanics for FPS' IMO.

I honestly thought Dark Messiah of Might & Magic was going to be a turning point for melee in games and start a revolution in making it count. But it seems it fell to the wayside like many other "experimental" games.

Retr0gamer · 20-06-2015 1:54am

We still have the Souls games for melee combat!

Xenji · 20-06-2015 2:01am

Retr0gamer wrote: »

We still have the Souls games for melee combat!

Dodge, attack and roll, Souls 101.

humanji · 20-06-2015 2:07am

Retr0gamer wrote: »

We still have the Souls games for melee combat!

As heretical as it may seem, I always thought all the Souls games had sh*te combat. Never saw it as much of an evolution of button mashing. Dark Messiah brought along environmental melee. Combat changed depending on where you were standing.

Xenji · 20-06-2015 2:22am

humanji wrote: »

As heretical as it may seem, I always thought all the Souls games had sh*te combat. Never saw it as much of an evolution of button mashing. Dark Messiah brought along environmental melee. Combat changed depending on where you were standing.

Button mash in a Souls game and you will die straight away, the controls may look simple, but they do require a certain amount of finesse, timing and skill, especially early games when health potions were far and few between, not to mention most bosses requiring a different strategy to defeat than the last.

humanji · 20-06-2015 2:25am

Ah but it's not the same as your battle depending on your surroundings. You learn a boss and that's it. you mash the routine and they're dead. That's it. They can be against a wall, a pit or a clown with a machete and it doesn't' matter. They have their weakness and that's what you use every time to kill them. Games should have moved on from that a decade ago.

Xenji · 20-06-2015 2:58am

humanji wrote: »

Ah but it's not the same as your battle depending on your surroundings. You learn a boss and that's it. you mash the routine and they're dead. That's it. They can be against a wall, a pit or a clown with a machete and it doesn't' matter. They have their weakness and that's what you use every time to kill them. Games should have moved on from that a decade ago.

Ah but you can die about 20 times before you can beat the boss if you avoid FAQs, Souls games are unique in the challenge, but I agree with you that Bosses these days are more design than substance and that besides a bigger hp bar they do not offer a more unique memorable challenge.

humanji · 20-06-2015 3:10am

It's a tall order, I suppose. It's easy to imagine having an enemy and throwing them against a wall and stabbing them as the need dictates, but another completely to program it. It just seems so long since having the option to kick an enemy away or into a wall of spikes was interesting and to how it's now back to knowing how an enemy rhythmically moves and then acting despite of it.

CiDeRmAn · 20-06-2015 8:14am

humanji wrote: »

As heretical as it may seem, I always thought all the Souls games had sh*te combat. Never saw it as much of an evolution of button mashing. Dark Messiah brought along environmental melee. Combat changed depending on where you were standing.

:eek:

Think you're talking through your hat there mate.
The Souls games had characters with deep attacks that varied depending on everything from weapon load out to attire to stats.
The enemies had layers of attacks too depending on your position, their weapon and environmental issues like light, fire in certain cases.
Bosses may turn out to have weaknesses to be exploited but it may take time to learn to get past defences and avoid attacks. Attacks tend to have stages too, and that often depends on position, time of day, proximity and the boss characters often have evolutions during battle that mixes this up demanding new approaches.
The Souls games are possibly the pinnacle of the melee title tbh.

cloud493 · 20-06-2015 9:09am

http://www.reddit.com/r/Metroid/comments/3aao9r/rumour_semiconfirmed_nlg_insider_leaks/

See, normal metroid is also in development!*

*it may be a bull**** rumour, but the guy in question leaked stuff about federation force before it was announced and does indeed work for NLG.

Retr0gamer · 20-06-2015 11:21am

I did really like Dark Messiah but at the same time it was kind of just a physics simulator and combat could be a bit clunky. It's definitely something that should revisited.

As for Souls being a button masher, I just spent last night butting my head against Crown of the Ivory King. Sometimes I wish it was only button mashing! It's all about knowing your enemy and having the skill to beat them. The attack patterns are varied enough that even basic enemies are a danger and can surprise you and the developers make you face these enemies in situations that make the player re-evaluate their approach to enemies they have already fought, a trait of good game design. It's pretty much what Castlevania in 3D.

Kirby · 20-06-2015 12:08pm

Dark souls 1 and 2 can be cheesed like any other game. You can use magic to 2 shot nearly every boss in dark souls 2. Thats not very strategic and there is nothing to evaluate when every boss dies after a few seconds.

If you choose to play melee, it's a little tougher but frankly most people go into each fight looking for the point in the environment where you can hit them but they cant hit you.

I'm with Humanji. The combat is functional but not the zenith that some make it out. There is a fierce amount of romanticising about the souls games.

Robert ninja · 20-06-2015 1:08pm

Indeed. Dark Souls combat isn't nearly as complex as people make it out to be. I also really enjoyed Dark Messiah's first person melee but as Retro said, not exactly the best, either. Although it's still lightyears ahead of something like TES or Fallout melee.

Anyone else think this is turning into general discussion thread? Which I'm all for, I just wanna talk about video games. That said, SBH posted this E3 video.

Although I largely agree with this, I'm surprised he didn't separate it into the goods v bads of this year. I didn't watch E3 from start to finish so I kind of took his advice beforehand, anyway. I saw an hour here, and hour there. Usually on stream with other people talking on mic that I like to listen to. Was fun, we played the E3 bingo (everybody won multiple times).

His video really showed me stuff I'm glad I missed... that girl asking about memes? For real? Christ. As well as all the non video game related malarkey.

But yeah he had not a single good thing to say about it... not a good call on his part in my opinion. It is all kind of moot when you come to the realisation that big corporations are actually using kickstarter as their way of testing waters. Isn't their massive data gathering enough for them to know what their consumers want? No, they gotta lie with fake kickstarters making it seem like they don't have the money to fund pretty much any video game project they want. People going to be really careful about crowd-funded things like this from now on. You never know what suits are behind them.

That said, I don't know how true all of this is. Anyone want to chime in on this?

Gbear · 20-06-2015 1:11pm

Retr0gamer wrote: »

We still have the Souls games for melee combat!

The third person perspective is a whole different ball game.

The perspective gives you a much easier time of keepign abreast of what's happening.

The Witcher in first person would be a confusing mess with all the tumbling.

I'd like to see any future Jedi-based RPGs, the Mass Effect series and so on take a lead in this sort of thing.

Telekenisis and wielding a sword are too cool to be restricted to "moves" designated to hotkeys.

Robert ninja · 20-06-2015 1:34pm

Gbear wrote: »

The third person perspective is a whole different ball game.

The perspective gives you a much easier time of keepign abreast of what's happening.

The Witcher in first person would be a confusing mess with all the tumbling.

I'd like to see any future Jedi-based RPGs, the Mass Effect series and so on take a lead in this sort of thing.

Telekenisis and wielding a sword are too cool to be restricted to "moves" designated to hotkeys.

Third person isn't objectively better for fighting with melee, it's just had more time to be refined. We honestly haven't seen too many decent attempts at making melee properly in first person. Chivalry is one I think of that's recent.

1st/3rd person camera is not objectively better for either as the entire game has to be redesigned based on which one is going to be used.

The perspective gives you a much easier time of keepign abreast of what's happening.

Dark Messiah, Chivalry etc would be terrible to play in third person as you'd just have a big, unnecessary player model in your way. You would not be able to see the important small movements of the opponent's hands, their footwork when they're at very close range and so on and so forth. Similarly, first person in Dark Souls would be pretty bad as the combat is simply not set up for that kind of camera. Although there is a first person mod and you can see why... although it does give you a yearning that maybe a game similar to Dark Souls would get a first person designed system instead.

The Witcher... hell no. It would need a complete overhaul in design to be first person.

Overall, I want to see more first person melee action games. We have enough 3rd person right now... hell even lots of games with shooting have someone's arse in your face for the whole game for no reason other than to be made-for-gamepad or more visually what people seem to favour.

And that's another thing. With modern games being so heavy on QTEs and other cinematics, you find yourself out of control of your character or put in the seat where only one button can get out out (QTEs or similar stuff)... that feels especially bad in first person in my opinion because it's a time when you have more control over the camera than ever, so having it taken away is just jarring and totally brings me out of the game. I'm looking at you, Metro.

If they focussed more on fluid combat, letting the player be in control 99% of the time, having an actual reason to see the entire opponent's movement in hands, feet, even their expression and eye movement thanks to modern graphics (yes, graphics can effect gameplay like that) I think first person melee would be incredible. They'd also need to add a much higher default FoV if they want you to be fighting multiple enemies at once, too. Something that seems to be a huge problem with first person games these days seeing as they want an FoV to match TV distanced gaming more and more. Which wouldn't be a problem if they just added and FoV slider but they constantly leave that out, too! I suspect that may be a symptom of focussing on console hardware too much.

Retr0gamer · 20-06-2015 2:32pm

The problem with first person combat is depth preception. It's easier to judge in third person and also it's not really as vital. Perhaps with VR we'll see some new innovations?

Kirby · 20-06-2015 3:55pm

The reason why first person combat feels so weird to play is mainly due to weapon physics.....or lack there of. In real life when a person swings a sword, and it hits somebody or something, the motion of the swing stops and the sword sticks into them. A person swinging and missing looks very different to swinging and connecting.

If you think about what happens in Skyrim, you just swing away and your swing animation is the same whether you hit him or not. The only way you know you hit is that the enemy grunts and his health gets lower. And this is a big problem because there is no feedback for the player. Hitting and missing plays the same animation.

So the issue of depth perception gets even worse as you are never quite sure how far away you need to be. It's not very satisfying.

Robert ninja · 20-06-2015 4:05pm

^ In the games I've mentioned, the attacks do change based on whether you hit or miss. And in DM, they can get stuck in the enemy.

At least if my memory serves me correctly. It's been a while since I played either. It sounds like you just haven't played any decent first person melee games. TES and Fallout are atrocious in this regard.

Kirby · 20-06-2015 4:18pm

Robert ninja wrote: »

It sounds like you just haven't played any decent first person melee games.

No. I havent. Nobody has. Because it's never been done well.

Some have managed "less crap" but nobody has hit first person weapon combat out of the park yet.