PDA

View Full Version : Great News!!



The Glome
22nd Nov 2003, 06:09
Straight from Chris Carollo on the ISA boards:



(coming out of woodwork, this thread looks like the most levelheaded one around)

First, there are headshots. It may be that we've not tuned them very well for the pistol, but the engine does pay attention to them. We'll definitely be looking at the values and the tuning.

That said, we wanted the basic weapons (remember mods can be significant) to not be too powerful. In general we didn't want combat to be over too quickly -- it's more interesting if you can trade a few shots.

In any case, we'll be looking at the tuning of headshots.

As far as the stun prod, I'm not sure how big of an issue this is -- the person you're prodding is pretty incapacitated while you're "prodding", so it's just a matter of time. And I'm not sure having a quicker takedown makes for better game balance. We definitely don't want it to be a trivial way to take people out.

The disadvantage of the demo is that we provide a character that we've set up, that you haven't had a chance to customize yourself throughout the first section of the game. For example, the baton can be very powerful with the strength biomod and can be a great "silent takedown" weapon.

Is the flamethrower really not effective? Seemed like you could set people on fire pretty well, and there's not much recovering from that.


One word: YAY!

Jesus, P.I.
22nd Nov 2003, 06:27
Well I'm happy that the engine does indeed pay attention to headshots after all. But what about taking three hits to make friendly/neutral AI hostile? What about that? Are they going to fine-tune that, or are they still afraid that we might ruin our game with a "stray shot?" I'm sorry, but it is not immersive when you can insult someone to make them attack you, but a slug between the eyes elicits a warning (Frightening! :rolleyes: )

Still, though, the infeasibility of one-hit takedowns was the biggest problem, IMHO...

exo
22nd Nov 2003, 06:32
I'm thinking they did this so that say if you were in a battle where friendlies were in the line of fire and you accidentally shot them your faction with them would still be okay, but after the 3rd bullet it's more than likely you're being an idiot just trying to piss them off.

If it was just one bullet fighting would be like walking on egg shells with neutral/friendlies on the field.

And in the end this is a GAME. Not real flife. Stream lined. Think about it.

Jesus, P.I.
22nd Nov 2003, 06:46
Originally posted by exo
If it was just one bullet fighting would be like walking on egg shells with neutral/friendlies on the field.

Well, if the developers spent as much time making good AI as they used to claim, then allies would not be stupid enough to run directly into your line of fire. Besides, friendly fire is a danger of combat encounters. There should be consequences for every slug you empty into a friendly. How can the game achieve immersion if you shoot someone twice in the head and they go on their merry way?


Originally posted by exo
And in the end this is a GAME. Not real flife. Stream lined. Think about it.

Yes this is in fact a game. An interactive recreational computer application, also known as a computer game.

If you want to split hairs, the game is in fact real. It is probably written in C++, and was developed by a very real corporation, but I see what you're trying to say.

Streamlined. Yes, that is a word that Warren liked to use; now to many of us it is synonimous with "dumbing down."

Think about it? Think about what? What exactly is your point?

exo
22nd Nov 2003, 06:52
...

Wow didn't think at all did you.

Ever stop to think that console gamers and pc gamers alike don't want to have to reload just because he/she made a mistake?

Oh wait, you're jesus, you're a perfect being.

Only in your little world.

El Padrino
22nd Nov 2003, 06:56
This line is my favorite: "Seemed like you could set people on fire pretty well, and there's not much recovering from that. "

Well I guess the prod and baton thing make sense. But there really, really has to be one headshot kills. Exchanging fire is cool and all, but nothing says "I'm your daddy" like taking someone down with one well-placed shot.

Jesus, P.I.
22nd Nov 2003, 07:04
Originally posted by exo
...

Wow didn't think at all did you.

Ever stop to think that console gamers and pc gamers alike don't want to have to reload just because he/she made a mistake?

Oh wait, you're jesus, you're a perfect being.

Only in your little world.

Ah, I see what you're saying now. Sort of. Is this an argument against a challenging game? In my opinion, challenging games keep the player on his/her toes. Without a challenge, there is no incentive to immerse yourself in the game. Repeated loading of saved games is an inevitability if you are careless in a challenging game. I think that is the way it should be.

And as for your latter comments, I will not dignify them with a response except this: it is only to your advantage to accuse another of not thinking if you come across as making an intelligent argument yourself.

exo
22nd Nov 2003, 07:32
Think of it like this.

I'll use Need For Speed as an example.

You race and unlock cars and modifications that make your car faster. Later on in the races, traffic etc. are obstacles in your way. Do you force the player to lose the race just because the situation of coincidence makes him HAVE to crash into a pedestrian ai driven car? or the situation forced him to run into a corner or take a wrong turn?

Your way of thinkin is, slap him and make him lose the race and totally give up. Force him to restart the race. Great so when he does that 6+ lap circuit and on the 6th lap screws up he has to do it all over again, hi where does it say must have no life?

This will ONLY work up to a point.

A wise game designer realizes that's far too anal and fine a line the player has to walk every bleedin second of gameplay because it's just a game. I'm VERY quite sure that if you set the game to realistic difficulty you'll get what you want.

Couldn't resist the Jesus needle btw, but you know you should expect it if you choose to take a religous figures name as an alias.

Jesus, P.I.
22nd Nov 2003, 07:51
You bring up a very good point. This is one reason why I don't like racing games. I think Deus Ex-style games are completely different because they allow you and even encourage you to take stock of your situation before acting. If you don't have good reflexes, you can still make it through Deus Ex. You can play the game on your terms, which is one reason for its great success.

Racing games are different, in that they are very rigid, and very reflex-oriented, and they don't allow for much player choice.

Don't get me wrong, player choice is one of the most important aspects that I look for in a game, and forcing players into a corner is definitely not a recipe for success. I think we can probably agree on the this: that a good game is one that presents enough of a challenge to be immersive while being accessible to as wide an audience as possible. Alas, you can't please everybody, and when a game developer tries it is usually with disastrous results.


Originally posted by exo
Couldn't resist the Jesus needle btw, but you know you should expect it if you choose to take a religous figures name as an alias.

Actually, you'd be surprised how few people reference my user name ;)