protocraig

Phaedrus' Street Crew
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    15

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by protocraig

  2. Posted

    Wasn't sure where to post feedback, so why not here...

     

    Disclaimer: I've only listened to the first two episodes so far.

     

    I've been an Idle Thumbs (podcast) reader since just about the beginning, starting with episode 8. I wasn't surprised by the Important If True announcement. It was pretty clear that being beholden to a video game theme was chafing against my favorite podcast hosts. IIT seems like a natural move, and I totally support it.

     

    That said, I'm a bit disappointed by the two episodes I've listened to so far. The show just feels like one massive tangent, with very little anchoring the discussion. That's probably fine for a lot of people, but the biggest reason I fell in love with the original podcast was the weird balance between thoughtful criticism and absurd humor. With only the latter, Important If True feels like all sugar and no substance. It's fun to hear all about ant parasites and bee-driven cars, but my ears are crying out for some of that classic Thumbs insight alongside all the weirdo trivia.

     

    Hope you guys take this as its intended: as constructive criticism for a show I very much want to love. ^_^

     

    <3

  3. Posted

    So has anyone dipped a toe into making levels? It doesn't look too tough if you're at all familiar with things like Valve's Hammer editor. Brendan has a nice intro here. He mentioned in another thread that he's working on a more advanced guide soon, but you can open up the existing level files to see how he made them in the meantime.

     

    There's a "batch" command: if you enter batch [newcommandname] [chain of commands], you can then use newcommandname.bat to execute the saved chain of commands.

     

    Whaaaaaaaat

     

    That's amazing.

     

    Can you execute multiple batch commands at once? Like "command1.bat;wait(10);command2.bat"?

  5. Posted

    Edit: Again on Legendary, i'm noticing that this game doesn't do any smart checkpointing like the Bungie games did, It won't pop in an extra checkpoint during a lull in a battle.

    I miss this so much.

    I'm enjoying the campaign, but the new enemies don't have half the character as the old ones. I also find the new weapons pretty bland and redundant.

  6. Posted

    I use that one, too, and I believe it's Recon. Starting with Halo 3, they've switched up control schemes pretty much every game because of things like dual-wielding, equipment, and armor abilities, and I always have to switch to the one that I find is the closest to the original. I almost never have problems learning new control setups for all sorts of games, but when there's a series that I'm used to a specific style on, it's hard to adjust. I still sometimes sprint in Halo 4 when I mean to reload.

    Yeah. Recon. That's the one.

    I know what you mean about adjusting. Recon isn't ideal. but Crouch on LS was mandatory for me. The default scheme had it on B, which just doesn't work if you're as sneaky and conservative as I am in multiplayer. I'm constantly crouching to take myself off people's motion detector. (It also works really nicely with hologram, my favorite armor ability.)

    Halo 4 makes me wish the 360 controller had one more non-face button. I'm totally fine with Sprint on X and Jump on A, but Melee on B means that I miss a lot of punches. Ideally, I think I'd have B: Sprint, X: Use/Reload, RB: Melee, and leave the rest the same as Recon. Too bad there are no control schemes like that. :-/

  8. Posted

    I forget the name of the control scheme, but I use the one that maps Sprint to X, Crouch to LS, Melee to B, Reload to RB, and Armor Ability to LB.

    It's not ideal, but I needed Crouch on LS, and this was the only control scheme I could live with that did that. I don't understand why they don't just let you remap everything to your liking. I don't mind Sprint and Jump being on the face buttons, but it'd be nice if I could aim while trying to punch people.

  9. Posted

    I totally respect where Chris is coming from on Mark of the Ninja, but personally, I loved how the game rewards a more lethal style.

    In most stealth games, the “best” way to play is to be a ghost. Never kill anyone, never get detected. Anything less than that makes you feel like you’re playing poorly or taking the easy way out.

    Sometimes that’s fun. Sometimes, I do want to be the badass ninja that infiltrates, assassinates, and then vanishes without anyone ever knowing I was there. But other times, I want to be the badass ninja that kills everyone in the room in the span of a light-flicker.

    Mark of the Ninja makes a strong effort to show the player that both styles are totally acceptable. You can get just as many points killing a guard as you can avoiding him. They also give you lots of lethal challenges that reassure you, “No, really. It’s OK to kill guards.”

    As someone who enjoys lethal/predator stealth (e.g., Splinter Cell: Conviction, Arkham City) just as much as non-lethal/ghost stealth, I really appreciated Klei’s all-inclusive design.

    (I also loved the different outfits, which completely change the way you play the game. They too help reinforce the idea that all play styles are not only viable but welcome.)

  10. Posted

    Man, i just finished watching that giantbomb quicklook, and they're just constantly down on it for not doing anything new, which is crazy to me. Halo 4 brought with it some of the biggest changes the series has seen.

    I mean, i guess the disconnect is that, if you're not into the multiplayer, it just looks like Halo with a better story. 4 is a radically different game on the multiplayer front though, and it's not just beause there are perks. I'm not sure if those changes are for the best, but there are definitely a lot of changes.

    Yeah, I feel like this is similar to what happened with StarCraft 2. If you were really into Brood War's multiplayer, every minute change in SC2 feels earthshaking. I mean, the new pathfinding alone would have completely changed the way BW played.

  11. Posted

    I just put the game up on Craigslist... Wasn't enjoying myself at all.

    Like others have mentioned, it's super handholdy/scripted. It feels like the game sacrifices fun mechanics for the sake of flashy action.

    Like, tree-climbing looks cool, but it's not very interesting. Most of the time, the layout of the trees/branches will lead you on a single path from Tree A to Tree B to Tree C. Occasionally the path will branch, but for the most part, trees are very narrow routes that don't offer you many options.

    They try to make the combat more like Arkham, but the animations are so long and unpredictable that it's impossible to get into a rhythm. I never know when to time my next button press because I don't know when the animation will finish.

    I was hoping Connor's story would offer an escape from the hokey sci-fi stuff, but they're more interwoven than ever.

    I think the hunting QTEs might be the thing that annoys me the most. Fighting wolves, bears, and other predators would've been a nice change of pace. It could've posed a different kind of challenge and made the wilderness feel much more dangerous, with bears charging you, wolves fighting as a pack, cougars pouncing from the bushes... But nope. All predator attacks are just two-button QTEs. Wolves still roam in packs, but that just means you'll be executing 5 QTEs in a row instead of 1. It's just lazy game design.

    When hunting animals early in the game, the hidden blade animation will play before you get the hidden blade. I guess they just didn't have time to create a new animation for a relatively small part of the game (~3-5 hours?).

    Also, bugs abound. I've fallen through the world, gotten stuck on geometry, and when I last played, all the graphics suddenly disappeared except the HUD. I could still control Connor and hear NPCs moving around, but the screen was just white. I reloaded a checkpoint, still blank. I restarted the mission, STILL blank. This stuff is inexcusable.

    Overall, AC3 is just really disappointing. It feels like they cut a lot of corners to get this thing out the door (tree climbing, QTEs, out of place animations, bugs...).

  12. Posted

    Like someone mentioned in the Spec Ops thread, I doubt the Spec Ops writers or Haneke want you to not experience their work. What they're probably attempting to do is make you question the pleasure you get out of other, less self aware work with similar content. (for Haneke it's thrillers and slashers, for Spec Ops it's military style FPSers)

    Well, I do think they'd like people to buy and play their game. But once you're playing it, the game offers "the player turning off the game and walking away" as a legitimate option available to you in reaction to the situations it presents.

    I'm thinking of the dialogue that's basically aimed at the player. Moments when your squadmates insist, "There's always a choice," or ask why you don't just turn around and leave Dubai. The characters are clearly in over their heads, what are they still doing here?

    I'd really recommend reading the Giant Bomb interview. Not to say that designer intentions = reality, but for me at least, I thought they executed what they set out to do.

  13. Posted

    In the two interviews I've read/listened to, the lead writer talked about how he had a lot of control over the overall direction of the game.

    From Klepek's Giant Bomb article:

    To ensure consistency, Williams was not just a script guy, but his fingers were everywhere: level design, voice over sessions, cut-scene and animation development, environmental storytelling, and art design.

  14. Posted

    Y'know, I agree with Chris that Spec Ops is following in a line of "pulling the rug out from under you" subversive games, but really disagree that it's both having and eating its cake. Just because Spec Ops is using the same shooter mechanics as happy-gore-time shooter games, doesn't mean it benefits from them in the same way.

    I mean, for me, Spec Ops was not "fun" to play. It was kinda brutal. Like someone punched me in the gut, then just sorta left their fist lodged in my solar plexus.

    With Braid and BioShock, pulling-the-rug-out happens in a single, surprise moment right near the end of the story, casting a shadow backward on everything you've done. But you still had fun doing it.

    In Spec Ops, that shadow appears about a third(?) of the way into the game, and it hangs over everything you do from then on. It's an atmosphere that permeates most of the game, actively trying to stamp out any casual enjoyment you might get from its shooting. This is a game that does not want you to have fun, that presents turning the game off and walking away as a legitimate player choice.

    To me, that's not a game that's trying to benefit from the thing it's criticizing.