Page 2 of 3 First First 123 Last

Thread: PC Gamer August 2013 - summary and discussion

PC Gamer August 2013 - summary and discussion

  1. #26
    Originally Posted by contrarian
    I'm generalizing here, but overall, the developers of today are young, fresh out of "video game design school" and have very little knowledge--much less playing time--of games pre 1995.

    I think that's an accurate statement. Anyone care to debate that? No takers. Good.
    What do you base that assumption on? Even if we can conclude that the majority of developers are younger, it would be no less safe an assumption that people in a position of authority, also known as decision makers, would be more senior team members. Its tough to be senior and young.

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    2,710
    Well this is kinda good news - now that the flaws have been exposed, Eidos might listen to them and fix it. I dont believe they'll change just because the forums said so, but when PC Gamer says so - maybe they do.
    Visits the forum once every six months.

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,337
    None of those things are flaws in my eyes. They're questionable design choices at best. Flaws? Nope.

    You want flaws? Skyrim for the PS3. You want flaws? Too Human. You want Flaws? RE6.

    EM, continue to make your game.

  4. #29
    Originally Posted by Pillowman
    according to the lead designer Schmidt:
    "Jumping, bouncing up and down kind of broke the immersion. We didn't want you to be a master thief and just tend to fall off stuff all the time."


    Why is this guy even working on Thief is my question? I'm pretty sure holding my hand the whole time doesn't make me feel like a master thief either haha. Making mistakes and learning from my mistakes is what increases my skill level. Being skilled at the game is what makes me feel like master thief. How am I ever going to be skilled if everything is done for me?

  5. #30
    Originally Posted by HERESY
    You want flaws? Skyrim for the PS3.
    I'd argue that Skyrim alone is a flaw.
    Incredibly overrated game, and all it did was dumb down and remove things from the old games.
    signature image

  6. #31
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Montrealing all over this place
    Posts
    3,041
    It's because the game-design philosophy appears to be more about giving the player an experience rather then letting them create an experience
    That sentence alone resumes the entire AAA industry. And it all comes back to the identity crisis of games.

    If some people want to make an interactive movie, go ahead and do it. But leave gaming alone. Gaming has a very clear, and definite identity. No one needs to question it. No ones need to use other mediums as a way to enhance or define games. Games are not interactive films. They're not interactive plays. They're not interactive songs. They're games.

    And games, in its core identity, are about allowing the player to create an experience for himself. That's why cult classics are so hard to define. That's why one man's Thief is another man's experience. It's because games, real games, offered the player his chance to construct his own take on it. Enough with the forced emotions and "mature" drama. Enough with the story-telling that is shoved down our throat, instead of discovered. Enough of the rails, and the rails disguised as open-world. Enough of the gameplay that is fixed in stone, with a few options to make it look like multiple-paths. I don't care about YOUR experience. What matters is mine. Give me the basic guidelines, give me the setting, give me the tools, keep me in line when it's necessary for pacing and continuity, I will create my fun with all of this.
    To lose one parent, Mr Worthing, may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose both looks like carelessness

  7. #32
    Originally Posted by FrankCSIS
    I don't care about YOUR experience. What matters is mine.
    But I thought what's yours IS mine

  8. #33
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Montrealing all over this place
    Posts
    3,041
    Didn't see THAT one coming

    Just to be clear though, I realise there are boundaries to every game. We will always be limited by coding. But I'm sure everyone gets the difference already, no need to elaborate on this

    Napoleon once used his cannons at close-range, firing point-blank at the enemy line. Not quite the intended use/experience, but quite appropriate at the time! Let the players do this! We will not break your game!
    To lose one parent, Mr Worthing, may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose both looks like carelessness

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,337

    Thumbs Down No.

    Originally Posted by FrankCSIS
    That sentence alone resumes the entire AAA industry. And it all comes back to the identity crisis of games.
    I disagree.

    If some people want to make an interactive movie, go ahead and do it. But leave gaming alone. Gaming has a very clear, and definite identity.
    This is your opinion and not rooted in fact.

    No one needs to question it.
    No, when people are attempting to pass ill formed opinion off as fact it should be quickly questioned and stamped out.

    No ones need to use other mediums as a way to enhance or define games. Games are not interactive films. They're not interactive plays. They're not interactive songs. They're games.
    They're whatever the designer or developer wants them to be. Now they may not achieve the desired results but who are you pigeon hole anyone? Who are you to dictate the meaning of "games?" You can say what games are to you, and you're entitled to that, but you can't speak for the gaming industry, consumers, etc.

    And games, in its core identity, are about allowing the player to create an experience for himself.
    That depends on the game. If you look at any linear title from when games were invented to today, you'll see there are many titles where it isn't about allowing a player to create an experience for himself but more about the player experiencing what the designer/developer wants them to experience.

    That's why cult classics are so hard to define. That's why one man's Thief is another man's experience.
    Now you're contradicting yourself.

    It's because games, real games,offered the player his chance to construct his own take on it.
    Please define the term "real game."

    Enough with the forced emotions and "mature" drama. Enough with the story-telling that is shoved down our throat, instead of discovered.
    You sound like that idiot that spoke at GDC, Blow or whatever. I'm not calling you an idiot, I'm saying you sound like the guy who is an idiot.

    Enough of the rails, and the rails disguised as open-world. Enough of the gameplay that is fixed in stone, with a few options to make it look like multiple-paths. I don't care about YOUR experience. What matters is mine. Give me the basic guidelines, give me the setting, give me the tools, keep me in line when it's necessary for pacing and continuity, I will create my fun with all of this.
    See above.

    Whatever classic post I said you made has now been obliterated by this recent madness of yours. Stop trying to pigeon hole developers and gamers.

  10. #35
    I actually agree with everybody here about QTEs. I hate that garbage, I have never encountered anyone who likes them, and I hope EM decides to scrap them.
    A true professional doesn't leave a mess.
    My YouTube channel-Thief Ghosting videos!

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,337
    Originally Posted by tarvis79
    I actually agree with everybody here about QTEs. I hate that garbage, I have never encountered anyone who likes them, and I hope EM decides to scrap them.
    In one of my classic posts I destroyed the anti-QTE regime.

    Technically, ALL GAMES are QTE's.

  12. #37
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    5,540
    Originally Posted by HERESY
    Technically, ALL GAMES are QTE's.
    You are factually incorrect about almost everything you say on this forum page, but especially this one. Quicktime events often use ambiguous keys, actions that have little to do with the the keys that are used for activating them. Also, largely due to that, they always require a prompt. The game tells you that you need to press some button, which then activates an action that might not have anything to do with that button's actual function ingame, and the button might be different every time just to keep you on edge.

    If what you say that "technically all games are QTEs" would be true, which it absolutely isn't, then all games would show the full control scheme on-screen at all times, this would be the QTE button prompt, but in addition to that, the control scheme would be completely ambiguous and constantly changing, this would be the QTE itself. It would make any type of gameplay not consisting of standing still and doing nothing, completely impossible. QTEs are QTEs. Gameplay is gameplay. Not to mention the time paradox of the prompt telling you which buttons to press in order to achieve your freely chosen actions in a game with freedom of choice.

    If you want to insist on extreme contrarianism, at least have things to say that people might mistake as convincing and not just desperate attempts at forceful disagreement. You might have met some here who are doing a better job at it.

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,337
    Originally Posted by Platinumoxicity
    You are factually incorrect about almost everything you say on this forum page, but especially this one. Quicktime events often use ambiguous keys, actions that have little to do with the the keys that are used for activating them. Also, largely due to that, they always require a prompt. The game tells you that you need to press some button, which then activates an action that might not have anything to do with that button's actual function ingame, and the button might be different every time just to keep you on edge.

    If what you say that "technically all games are QTEs" would be true, which it absolutely isn't, then all games would show the full control scheme on-screen at all times, this would be the QTE button prompt, but in addition to that, the control scheme would be completely ambiguous and constantly changing, this would be the QTE itself. It would make any type of gameplay not consisting of standing still and doing nothing, completely impossible. QTEs are QTEs. Gameplay is gameplay. Not to mention the time paradox of the prompt telling you which buttons to press in order to achieve your freely chosen actions in a game with freedom of choice.

    If you want to insist on extreme contrarianism, at least have things to say that people might mistake as convincing and not just desperate attempts at forceful disagreement. You might have met some here who are doing a better job at it.
    Refer to my previous classic posts pertaining to the subject as there is no need for me to provide an in depth response to things I've already refuted.

  14. #39
    I'm generalizing here, but overall, the developers of today are young, fresh out of "video game design school" and have very little knowledge--much less playing time--of games pre 1995.

    I think that's an accurate statement. Anyone care to debate that? No takers. Good.
    Well, if you're generalizing there really isn't much to debate. I work in the industry too, and you're going to run into people who either know everything about gaming history or don't know a bloody thing beyond what they played yesterday.

    The vast majority of the 60+ people I work with have an impressive knowledge of gaming history. They all know Thief, System Shock, Deus Ex and many more classics. Despite their differing experiences with Thief, they all feel what is being done with this version of Thief is just wrong.

  15. #40
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    2,710
    Playing a piano requires pressing buttons under certain timing. THEREFORE A PIANO IS A QTE

    Cooking requires turning off the oven under certain timing. THEREFORE COOKING IS A QTE

    Peeing requires not only aiming, but also timing (you have to pee after the pants are dropped) therefore URINE IS QTE

    Heresy logic.

    Originally Posted by HERESY
    None of those things are flaws in my eyes. They're questionable design choices at best. Flaws? Nope.

    You want flaws? Skyrim for the PS3. You want flaws? Too Human. You want Flaws? RE6.
    This is all your opinion, which by the way is the opinion of a weak minority.

    Originally Posted by HERESY
    Refer to my previous classic posts pertaining to the subject as there is no need for me to provide an in depth response to things I've already refuted.
    No one is going to browse through your post history to search for anything relevant. And you know that, so you use it as an excuse to get yourself out of a tight spot in an argument. "Oh i've posted about that before but you never read it, therefore i win this discussion retroactively by default."

    No one reads all all threads, no one reads all posts - in fact very few people even care about YOUR posts Heresy. Quote them up back again, re-type them or face that you are wrong.
    Visits the forum once every six months.

  16. #41
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Montrealing all over this place
    Posts
    3,041
    Whatever classic post I said you made has now been obliterated by this recent madness of yours
    You break my heart.

    That post was written for you, by the way. I meant the first sentence, because I truly like the quote, but the rest came when I saw you posting about Skyrim, trying to stir something as usual, and decided to chip in Seems it worked, I won myself yet another quote for quote never-ending reply. Even the legendary ones are predictable I took your baits three or four times, I'm glad for once you've taken mine.

    (Just in case you'd doubt this, I added this quote as a wink, two posts later, to see if you'd catch it
    Just to be clear though, I realise there are boundaries to every game. We will always be limited by coding
    Behind the intentional gibberish though, I'm repeating what I've said once before. Theater has an identity. Cinema has an identity. Music has an identity. Of course they all offer near-infinite variations, but their identity as a medium is definitive. Gaming has one as well, whether people want to question it, or turn it into their own little new frontier of digital art. Gaming is gaming, in all its variations, it should thrive to be a game. Games don't need to rely on cinema to justify their existence, or any other mediums. They are worthy of their own identity, and should be proud of it. That's all I'll ever say on the matter. Whatever else I write is just for show.
    To lose one parent, Mr Worthing, may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose both looks like carelessness

  17. #42
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    931
    Quick Time Events, taken from the great, all knowing Wikipedia, are:

    In video games, a quick time event (QTE) is a method of context-sensitive gameplay in which the player performs actions on the control device shortly after the appearance of an on-screen prompt [in order] to constrain the player into taking only one specific action at a critical moment.

    Personally, I despise QTEs, because in my world, QTEs = Lazy development. And I'll wager that that laziness shows in the developers' everyday life. Show me a developer who loves QTEs and uses them frequently and I'll bet he is a lazy slug who probably parks in the closest parking spot to the door, drives his car down to the mailbox to get the mail, whose favorite outdoor activity is trying to get back inside, calls up McDonald's and asks if they deliver, and finally, developers who love QTEs are so lazy they stick their noses out the window so the wind can blow it for them

    I hate lazy people. I hate lazy developers. I hate QTEs. And I hate people who like QTEs, most of all.

  18. #43
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,337
    Originally Posted by AlexOfSpades
    Playing a piano requires pressing buttons under certain timing. THEREFORE A PIANO IS A QTE

    Cooking requires turning off the oven under certain timing. THEREFORE COOKING IS A QTE

    Peeing requires not only aiming, but also timing (you have to pee after the pants are dropped) therefore URINE IS QTE

    Heresy logic.
    I already addressed similar analogies and wacky scenarios in the other classic posts. We're talking about games here, genius, not drinking sodas, urinating, cooking, playing instruments, etc. Stop relying on fallacies.


    This is all your opinion, which by the way is the opinion of a weak minority.
    It's fact. Also, I know I'm in the minority because a lot of you are sycophants and only see things one way. However, I say things and weeks later you see devs and media outlets saying the exact same thing I previously said. In addition, more and more people are coming out and saying that I'm actually correct but that's another topic.

    No one is going to browse through your post history to search for anything relevant.
    I'm not going to waste my time addressing things I've addressed. Case closed.

    And you know that, so you use it as an excuse to get yourself out of a tight spot in an argument. "Oh i've posted about that before but you never read it, therefore i win this discussion retroactively by default."
    Use the search engine. Time is a precious commodity and I'm not going to waste my time addressing things that have already been covered. Prior to this thread someone else attempted a similar argument and it went down in flames. Hell no, I don't have time to keep going over the same points.

    No one reads all all threads, no one reads all posts - in fact very few people even care about YOUR posts Heresy. Quote them up back again, re-type them or face that you are wrong.
    Listen guy, there is a HERESY fan club in these parts and you're like the vice president of it all. When I post people listen, their passions are stirred and, regardless if they agree with me or not, they want to post. You?

    Originally Posted by contrarian
    Quick Time Events, taken from the great, all knowing Wikipedia, are:

    In video games, a quick time event (QTE) is a method of context-sensitive gameplay in which the player performs actions on the control device shortly after the appearance of an on-screen prompt [in order] to constrain the player into taking only one specific action at a critical moment.

    Personally, I despise QTEs, because in my world, QTEs = Lazy development. And I'll wager that that laziness shows in the developers' everyday life. Show me a developer who loves QTEs and uses them frequently and I'll bet he is a lazy slug who probably parks in the closest parking spot to the door, drives his car down to the mailbox to get the mail, whose favorite outdoor activity is trying to get back inside, calls up McDonald's and asks if they deliver, and finally, developers who love QTEs are so lazy they stick their noses out the window so the wind can blow it for them

    I hate lazy people. I hate lazy developers. I hate QTEs. And I hate people who like QTEs, most of all.
    Never cite wikipedia as a source. In addition to this, not all QTE offer one specific action. Again, in the previous classic posts this was explained and examples were shown.

  19. #44
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    2,710
    However, I say things and weeks later you see devs and media outlets saying the exact same thing I previously said. In addition, more and more people are coming out and saying that I'm actually correct but that's another topic.
    Post proof or shut up.


    I'm not going to waste my time addressing things I've addressed.
    Then dont bring them up as facts. Your arguments are only as resilient as the facts you bring up to the table. If you cant bring them, shut up instead.


    Use the search engine. Time is a precious commodity and I'm not going to waste my time addressing things that have already been covered.
    Dont expect anyone to do it. If you wanna make a point, bring the proof - no one's going after it. Your time isnt more precious than anyone else's.

    Take you for example, you really want me to address your idiocy when someone else attempted a similar argument but went down in flames? Hell no, I don't have time for that.
    Try harder Heresy. If you cant fight back our arguments, then admit you're wrong or leave the forums. Ad hominem isnt going to bring you anywhere.


    When I post people listen, their passions are stirred and, regardless if they agree with me or not, they want to post.
    Wow, you just admitted you're a troll. Would be funny if it wasnt so tragic.
    Visits the forum once every six months.

  20. #45
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,337
    Originally Posted by AlexOfSpades
    Post proof or shut up.
    You're the same guy who said Thief started the stealth genre. You shouldn't ask anyone for any type of proof. Like I said man, I'm not going to address things that have already been covered.

    Then dont bring them up as facts. Your arguments are only as resilient as the facts you bring up to the table. If you cant bring them, shut up instead.
    Actually someone else brought them up. Please follow the flow of the conversation, sport. Btw, you don't pay my net bill, electricity, mortgage, etc. So don't tell me what to do.

    Dont expect anyone to do it. If you wanna make a point, bring the proof - no one's going after it. Your time isnt more precious than anyone else's.
    Again, I'm not going over stuff I've already covered. Sorry, pal.

    Try harder Heresy. If you cant fight back our arguments, then admit you're wrong or leave the forums. Ad hominem isnt going to bring you anywhere.
    This makes no sense at all. Use the sites search engine. It's there. I'm not going to go over things I've already gone over before. I've done this with the likes of you before and it's too time consuming. People either use the search engine or they don't. If they want to bypass the classic posts and forsake the gemstones of wisdom I type, so be it.

    Wow, you just admitted you're a troll. Would be funny if it wasnt so tragic.
    Are you insane? How is that an admission of trolling? People like what I say. Regardless if they agree it's thought provoking, they read it and want to reply. That's not trolling guy, that's me simply being a person that people find interesting and worthy. You can't say the same about yourself so you develop these idiotic claims in hopes garnering a sliver of attention.

    Stop.

  21. #46
    Contrarian and I agreed on something. Hatred of QTEs can unite almost anyone. "Press X to not die!"

    The RE4/5 style is especially irritating. I don't mind QTEs so much when they are part of a fight and all they do is make it easier/harder (like shaking off a zombie), but those drawn out cutscenes where you have to get 10 of them right or start the damn scene over from the beginning make my blood boil. The Krauser scene in RE4 and the plane scene with Wesker in RE5 are the most egregious examples I can think of.

    If Thief has "press X to not die" QTE's, the devs need to take them out. They aren't enough to ruin a game-despite their ubiquity, I'd still put re4 in my top ten-but they certainly drag it down.
    A true professional doesn't leave a mess.
    My YouTube channel-Thief Ghosting videos!

  22. #47
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    5,540
    Originally Posted by tarvis79
    Hatred of QTEs can unite almost anyone. "Press X to not die!"

    The RE4/5 style is especially irritating. I don't mind QTEs so much when they are part of a fight and all they do is make it easier/harder (like shaking off a zombie), but those drawn out cutscenes where you have to get 10 of them right or start the damn scene over from the beginning make my blood boil. The Krauser scene in RE4 and the plane scene with Wesker in RE5 are the most egregious examples I can think of.
    The worst thing about the RE4 QTEs isn't the fact that they happen in the middle of cutscenes. The worst thing is that the action being performed has nothing whatsoever to do with the buttons used in the QTE, and the buttons or button combinations don't stay the same. They vary at random, yet the action stays the same. Oh, and you're also meant to utilize muscles that have not evolved for rapid sustained repeated action (your thumb) to signal muscles that are meant for rapid repeated action (the character's legs). In other words, tap X to run fast.

    It's the absolute opposite of an immersive experience, because it triples the strain of performing something that should come naturally. Your reflexes and training are supposed to allow you to quickly dodge incoming attacks. Yet in RE4 QTEs, first the game emulates the reaction time of the character, then there is the reaction time of the player, and on top of that the player needs to determine which muscle groups (button combinations) are supposed to be used this time to execute a specific maneuver. Compare that to any game with classic FPS controls, where in order to dodge to the side, you just press left.

    The randomized illogical QTEs in RE4 makes the player think that he's playing a person with schizophrenia and cerebral palsy. You never know what your body is doing, and when you're just about to figure it out, it changes again.

  23. #48
    It's not a smart thing to always criticise things in the game that weren't in the originals. Gaming has moved on, it's nearly been ten years since TDS got released. If you can't accept the changes then try to work on adapting. The game looks great to me and I'll be enjoying it rather than compare the features to a game which came out so long ago.
    Dwight Schrute: Every weekend I volunteer at the local animal shelter and they need a lot of help down there. Last Sunday I had to put down a hundred and fifty pets by myself.

  24. #49
    Originally Posted by FrankCSIS
    If some people want to make an interactive movie, go ahead and do it. But leave gaming alone. Gaming has a very clear, and definite identity. No one needs to question it. No ones need to use other mediums as a way to enhance or define games. Games are not interactive films. They're not interactive plays. They're not interactive songs. They're games.
    I kind of disagree. Where does this kind of definition put games like Bioforge, Monkey Island and Rock Band? All games which I have vastly enjoyed, all of which involve heavily some of the elements you just excluded from games. I think gaming is a rather mixed bag, far from having a clear identity in this regard, at least.

    That being said, though, Thief as a game does have a specific kind of indentity, which IMO definitiely does not include it being and interactive movie, play or song. Thief's driving forces are very simple and primal. In its essence, it's an interactive game of hide and seek. Things that facilitate this aspect include discovery/exploration: sand-boxy levels, freedom of movement, high interaction possibilities with the environment; feeling vulnerable: managing resources, good AI, unfamiliar environment and the unknown etcetera.

    I don't know how exactly Thief relates to having elements added from interactive movie category (provided that the essential gameplay is intact and solid), but I'm pretty certain that it doesn't need them. Who knows, Thief might benefit from a cleverly implemented QTE, even - which probably shouldn't be "press X to not die"...

    So rather than games in general having a definite identity (which might exist but I don't know what it is or better yet, how to put it in words), I'd say that any single game should strive to have a definite identity - a game should know what it is trying to be.
    ~You reap what you sow~

  25. #50
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Montrealing all over this place
    Posts
    3,041
    I kind of disagree. Where does this kind of definition put games like Bioforge, Monkey Island and Rock Band? All games which I have vastly enjoyed, all of which involve heavily some of the elements you just excluded from games. I think gaming is a rather mixed bag, far from having a clear identity in this regard, at least.
    Just to be clear, because I was being intently mad for one of our fellow posters and worded things chaotically, do not confuse having other art forms in the game, or even being built around another art form, with being defined by other art forms. Loom was a magnificent game completely built around Swan Lake, yet proud of its gaming identity.

    What I'm saying is, games do not require to be defined or heightened by other mediums to justify their existence. Of course they will have music in them, and some games share a chaos theory structure that is the trope of refined songs, but they are not improved by trying to be like an advanced version of another medium. Why would you define yourself in reference to someone else? This obsession to deliver a movie+ experience is just plain sad.

    A note on Rock Band. This was an experiment. Theater is as old as dust, and every now and then still produces a few interesting experiments. But the core identity of theater is set in stone, and will be around for quite a few millenniums. Experiments, while often worth the price of admission, rarely create a permanent impact on a medium. Rock Band was fun, but it did not shake the foundations of gaming as a medium. A highly lucrative, somewhat entertaining experiment, which I'm glad has existed. But do not confuse it with anything of substantial influence on identity. It was a clever, entertaining gimmick, which has burnt as fast as it was bright. It had every right to exist, of course. I'm not a dinosaur campaigning for purity and hegemony! Quite the contrary. I just wish games a brighter, better future, instead of being a sad version of another medium.

    a game should know what it is trying to be.
    This is very true, however. It's strange, because as simple and obvious as it sounds, many games, individually, do not even know what they are trying to be.
    To lose one parent, Mr Worthing, may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose both looks like carelessness

Page 2 of 3 First First 123 Last