Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Ships Ahoy - Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising

Codemasters announces Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising is now shipping to North American stores, with the open world military shooter due in PAL territories Thursday and the UK on Friday. Here are some screenshots, there's a cinematic launch trailer on the YouTube, and here's a bit:

Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising is modern combat in stunning detail. The game authentically recreates conflict in a 360-degree theatre of war, which enables players to approach objectives from any direction. On this realistic battlefield, where one bullet can kill, players face the fear and mortality felt by soldiers as they are challenged to survive the rapidly evolving situations of battle throughout the game's single and 4-player co-op campaign.

Whether assaulting, flanking or suppressing the enemy, or calling on fire support to rain down from the skies, Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising demands players think on their feet, reacting quickly to any situation the game's advanced AI throws at them. In this theatre, every decision counts, every action has a consequence and every bullet can kill.

View
89 Replies. 5 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 ] Older >

89. Re: OFP Dragon Rising Out Oct 11, 2009, 20:53 space captain
 
* REMOVED *
This comment was deleted on Oct 13, 2009, 13:36.
 
Go forth, and kill!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
88. Re: OFP Dragon Rising Out Oct 10, 2009, 18:05 Jerykk
 
I do not need to have played every game ever made to draw basic conclusions about them.

You need to have at least played many games with leaning and used it on a regular basis. Your current assumptions are obviously flawed so it doesn't seem like you've done this.

It's been your assertion for this entire argument.

Please reread my argument. Once again, for the 50th time, a game doesn't need to be 100% realistic to be immersive. However, if something is more realistic, it is also more immersive because it meets players' expectations.

This is proven by the fact that the hacking in Bloodlines can be more immersive without being DOS itself.

Once again, for the 51st time... a game doesn't need to be 100% realistic in order to be immersive. I don't know how many times I can say this. You keep ignoring my actual argument. My argument is that games are more immersive when they are more realistic. The hacking in Bloodlines is more immersive than the hacking in Mass Effect because it is more realistic. You haven't actually provided any rebuttal to this point. Instead, you keep ranting on about how it isn't actually DOS. Please read my actual claims. It doesn't need to be DOS in order to be immersive. It just needs to be more like DOS in order to be more immersive.

Notice how small the market for the simulation genre is? Know why? Because while a certain amount of people will always be predisposed to enjoy work the same way most people enjoy non-productive hobbies, and some of those people do things (fly planes, race cars, etc) that have representations in the simulation genre, the vast majority of people do not have by doing things that closely, moderately or even come more than just a little close to work while they're trying to have fun.

Like I said before, this isn't an argument about realism vs fun. Totally separate things. To some people, the more realistic something is, the more fun it is. To other people, this isn't the case. People have different tastes. However, in all cases, something that's more realistic is also more immersive. This doesn't necessarily mean it will be "fun" to everyone but it will be immersive. Take Operation Flashpoint. You got one save per mission, which meant that dying was a much more significant event, just like in reality. Many players didn't especially like this feature because they don't like investing that much time into each mission. However, this didn't change the fact that they were more immersed when actually playing the game.

Leaning does not offer enough of an advantage over moving partially around a corner to be worth the effort extra keystrokes for the same effect.

I and many others would disagree. I listed four tangible benefits I've experienced when using lean in pretty much any game that offers it (except for CoJ: BiB).

While we're on the subject, we might as well cover the fact that the implemention of leaning is, near universally, very poor and unrealistic in itself. You can't switch what shoulder you're pressing the stock of your gun to in nearly every game ever, which is something real soldiers do when they lean from one direction to another.

Yes, it's not 100% realistic and being able to switch shoulders would improve it. However, being able to lean at all is still an improvement over not being able to. FYI, Splinter Cell lets you switch shoulders, though it's not an FPS.

The fact that hitscan attacks don't usually come from where it looks like the barrel of the gun is from the first-person perspective should make this irrelevant, but all it does is add an extra psychological factor.

Go ahead and play NOLF2. Or Rainbow Six (the originals, not Vegas). Or even Crysis. Try leaning around a corner and then try standing next to the corner. See which one gets you noticed more quickly and which one gets you hit more quickly. Hitscan attacks rely on your hitbox's visibility. The more your hitbox is exposed, the more likely you are to get hit. Pretty simple stuff here.

At no point did I say this is true of every game.

Here's what you actually said:

"Especially in single-player games where the enemy has unrealistic accuracy at ludicrous distances and leaning doesn't even help anyway."

That statement encompasses all single-player games. In truth, the vast majority of games do not have enemies with ridiculously high accuracy. The only one I can think of right now is CoJ: BiB on the highest difficulty setting. If you can list more, feel free.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
87. Re: OFP Dragon Rising Out Oct 10, 2009, 16:28 Tango
 
Every checkpoint-based game should provide this kind of functionality so that more casual gamers can enjoy the game
Agreed. Designing games only for the hardcore audience seems to be a bit stupid. I'm saddened by the dumbing down of games these days as much as the next BluesNewser but I also hate buying a game and not being able to enjoy it, let alone finish it, because I don't have the time or skill or patience to get beyond the first couple of levels. That's not a good way to spend £30.
 
Avatar 18712
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
86. Re: OFP Dragon Rising Out Oct 10, 2009, 15:55 Ecthelion
 
The game can be bloody frustrating. It has no quicksave function, and yes, I do consider that a weakness. For the 10% boost in "realism" that checkpoint saves give (making you more afraid of death) they add 95% to the irritation factor, especially in a game where someone from 400 yards away can kill you with one shot. I play games for fun, not for realism, and would have appreciated the ability to quicksave. The hardcore realism guys could then ignore that function if they so wish.
Why don't more games handle savegame frequency via the game difficulty selection? The Hitman series (at least starting with the second one... I can't remember how the first handled it) handled it perfectly - at the hardest difficulty you got no or one save per mission (depends on the mission I think), with each easier difficulty level providing more saves. Every checkpoint-based game should provide this kind of functionality so that more casual gamers can enjoy the game. It also doesn't affect the hardcore gamers who want to play without quicksaves.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
85. Re: OFP Dragon Rising Out Oct 10, 2009, 14:31 Tango
 
For those more interested in the game than the admittedly fascinating and never-before-heard-on-these-boards leaning discussion on this thread, I thought I'd offer some initial impressions based on maybe 10 hours with the PS3 version. Yeah, I know, consoles suck, whatever ;P.

The good:
The game is a worthy successor to OFP, it gets the same sense of scale (only bigger) as the original, the same sense that you are only a small part of a much bigger war. The graphics, even on the PS3, look pretty sweet so I imagine on a decent PC they would be amazing. Terrain, vehicles, people and world objects are all beautifully modeled. Missions are fun and varied.

The not-so-good:
The game can be bloody frustrating. It has no quicksave function, and yes, I do consider that a weakness. For the 10% boost in "realism" that checkpoint saves give (making you more afraid of death) they add 95% to the irritation factor, especially in a game where someone from 400 yards away can kill you with one shot. I play games for fun, not for realism, and would have appreciated the ability to quicksave. The hardcore realism guys could then ignore that function if they so wish.

One other irritant - controls are not very well explained in the tutorial, they tell you how to do something once but there are no further reminders, which can be irritating.

One final warning for the heathens like me who are going to play this on a console, forget it unless you have a big HD screen, because you cannot even get past the first mission in standard definition TV - you simply cannot see the enemy at any sort of distance, and this game requires you to be able to.

The big picture:
I'm only a few missions in, and it's really good fun and frustrating at the same time, but the fun does win out. Just like the original then.
 
Avatar 18712
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
84. Re: OFP Dragon Rising Out Oct 10, 2009, 07:43 Dr. D. Schreber
 
Wait, so you're actually admitting to basing your argument around assumptions of how leaning is implemented in games, rather than actual experience using those implementations? This doesn't help your argument.

Except it does, and I've said this more than once now, so I don't know why it's surprising. Again, design philosophy follows predictable trends, especially in the current generation with the attitude towards risk-aversion in the industry right now. I do not need to have played every game ever made to draw basic conclusions about them.


Incorrect. My claim is that immersion and reality are intrinsically linked.

And it's wrong.


That's not my assertion at all.

It's been your assertion for this entire argument.


I'm saying that realism and immersion are directly correlated.

And you're wrong. This is proven by the fact that the hacking in Bloodlines can be more immersive without being DOS itself.


Oh brother. I was referring to simulations, not The Sims. You know, racing sims, submarine sims, flight sims, etc. The appeal of these games is how realistic they are. The less realistic they are, the less immersive they are to the players.

Proves my point. Notice how small the market for the simulation genre is? Know why? Because while a certain amount of people will always be predisposed to enjoy work the same way most people enjoy non-productive hobbies, and some of those people do things (fly planes, race cars, etc) that have representations in the simulation genre, the vast majority of people do not have by doing things that closely, moderately or even come more than just a little close to work while they're trying to have fun. This is why things that are part of daily life are stripped down in videogames and other mediums as well. This is why the hacking system in Bloodlines is like DOS, but not DOS; because even if you enjoy mucking around with DOS and want to do it in your free time, you probably don't fire up a videogame thinking "I hope this game entertains me by making me muck around in DOS."

This isn't just about mock OSs in games, this is everywhere. HAWX got a lot of flak for being too arcade-ish, when most of the players leveling those complaints have never talked to a real combat pilot. If they had, they'd know that in reality, most fights between fighter jets begin outside of visual distance, end outside of visual distance, and that it's near impossible to actually dodge an AMRAAM because they turn faster then every plane in existance and explode in proximity, not on contact.

This does not make for what nearly everyone would think of as a playable game. It's not just about fun, reality has to be mis-represented for it to even be presentable. If more players thought of this as fun, the simulation genre would probably be a whole lot bigger.

Sorry, that argument is flawed. When it comes to immersing the player in a game's world, first-person is the optimal perspective. It's the one that makes you feel most like you're actually in the game.

Again, that is not objective fact. Some players will invariably find the extra presence of mind afforded by third-person to be more important to immersion than a first-person viewpoint.

Too much effort? Seriously? Holding down a key is too much effort? I think holding down Q or E is well worth the benefits leaning provides. Here are the benefits I've experienced from the games I've played:

I said this a long time ago. Leaning does not offer enough of an advantage over moving partially around a corner to be worth the effort extra keystrokes for the same effect.

While we're on the subject, we might as well cover the fact that the implemention of leaning is, near universally, very poor and unrealistic in itself. You can't switch what shoulder you're pressing the stock of your gun to in nearly every game ever, which is something real soldiers do when they lean from one direction to another. I actually can't think of any you can do it in aside from Metal Gear Solid 4, which isn't even an FPS. The fact that hitscan attacks don't usually come from where it looks like the barrel of the gun is from the first-person perspective should make this irrelevant, but all it does is add an extra psychological factor. The mechanic itself is a case where more realism would actually help it.

Of course, devs never do this because it would require more user input to switch shoulders, and I'd be willing to bet the reason why they don't think it's a viable design desicion is that the problems with leaning listed above, plus the fact that a lean function instead of a cover mechanic forces you to make a guess on exactly where your body will end up, is simply the lesser of two evils compared to the extra effort a more realistic implementation would cause.

q{You've made many claims, including a claim that enemies have ridiculously high accuracy in games.
At no point did I say this is true of every game. It is, however, a bad design decision that exists.

Your whole argument seems to be based on semantics and the flagrant misuse of the word "facsimile."

Somewhat embarrassing, but, honestly, I don't feel very broken up about having a misconception for a word in the English language. At least not when everyone abuses "irony" all the time.

This comment was edited on Oct 10, 2009, 07:45.
 
Avatar 51686
 
NOT THE BEES! NOT THE BEES THEY'RE IN MY EYES AARRGRHGHGGAFHGHFGHFG!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
83. Re: OFP Dragon Rising Out Oct 9, 2009, 18:46 Jerykk
 
That's actually exactly what I'm doing, as I've said more than once.

Wait, so you're actually admitting to basing your argument around assumptions of how leaning is implemented in games, rather than actual experience using those implementations? This doesn't help your argument.

It doesn't have anything to do with videogames, it has to do with your claim that immersion requires a presentation that adheres as closely as possible to actual reality.

Incorrect. My claim is that immersion and reality are intrinsically linked. You can certainly have an immersive game in spite of the fact that it's completely unrealistic. In these cases, great gameplay is what keeps the player immersed. However, if you look at individual mechanics and elements, you can see a very clear correlation between immersion and realism. A first-person perspective is far more effective for a horror game because it most closely resembles how we view reality. Since horror games rely on immersion in the game's world, first-person is the optimal choice. Conversely, an isometric or topdown perspective would be counter-productive to this immersion. Similarly, if I'm playing a realistic shooter, I expect to be able to do all the things I'd do in real life. Crouching, going prone, climbing over low cover, leaning around corners, etc. If you made a shooter and removed all these abilities, the game would be far less immersive. Take STALKER, for example. There are low fences all around the world and you can't climb over them, even though it would be very easy to do so in real life. This is an immersion breaker. Or take the invisible walls in Oblivion and Fallout 3. Exploring the game world and hitting an invisible wall, then seeing text appear saying "You can't go this way. Turn back." kills immersion. Why? Because it's completely unrealistic.

Your assertion that fiction does not and/or does not need to make acceptable breaks from reality to be both decent fiction and to be immersive is incorrect.

That's not my assertion at all. First of all, I never made any correlation between realism and fun. That's what you're doing. It's entirely possible to have an unrealistic game that is fun. However, for an unrealistic game to be immersive, it has to rely on engrossing gameplay instead. Strategy games do not immerse you because they make you think that you're in the game's world. They immerse you because of the strategic depth of the gameplay.

The point still stands, because, again, it's not DOS.

Sigh. I'm not sure what point you're referring to. My point is that the hacking in Bloodlines is more immersive because it is more realistic. It doesn't have to be COMPLETELY realistic. Though, if it were completely realistic, it would definitely be more immersive. Again, I'm not saying that something has to be completely realistic in order to be immersive. I'm saying that realism and immersion are directly correlated. The more realistic something is, the more immersive it is. The hacking in Bloodlines is more immersive than the hacking in Mass Effect because it more closely resembles reality. More realistic = more immersive.

When someone playing the Sims has their sim do something that equates to work in reality, does the player actually do that work?

Oh brother. I was referring to simulations, not The Sims. You know, racing sims, submarine sims, flight sims, etc. The appeal of these games is how realistic they are. The less realistic they are, the less immersive they are to the players.

This is hardly objective fact. The argument exists, and I seem to recall an article about it linked on this very website recently, that third-person games are just as immersive as first-person games because, in sacrificing the more realistic viewpoint, they give you an awareness of what's going on around your character much closer to what you have in reality.

Sorry, that argument is flawed. When it comes to immersing the player in a game's world, first-person is the optimal perspective. It's the one that makes you feel most like you're actually in the game. The least immersive perspective would be an isometric or topdown one. In order for a game using these perspectives to be immersive, it would have to compensate with engrossing gameplay.

My original argument is that leaning does not fall under this, because it provides too little benefit (due to overall design philosophy) compared to too much effort.

Too much effort? Seriously? Holding down a key is too much effort? I think holding down Q or E is well worth the benefits leaning provides. Here are the benefits I've experienced from the games I've played:

1) Enemies are less likely to notice you when you're leaning.
2) Enemies are less likely to hit you when you're leaning.
3) Leaning makes it easier to pop in and out of cover.
4) Leaning adds immersion to a game because it lets me do what I'd expect to do in reality.

These aren't based on vague assumptions about design philosophy. These are based on actual experience playing games. You've made many claims, including a claim that enemies have ridiculously high accuracy in games. Like your other claims, this one is incorrect and doesn't appear to be based on any semblance of fact. Your whole argument seems to be based on semantics and the flagrant misuse of the word "facsimile." A facsimile is an exact copy of something else. It is the epitome of realistic. If you're trying to argue that realism has nothing to do with immersion, you probably shouldn't be using the word "facsimile."

This comment was edited on Oct 9, 2009, 18:57.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
82. Re: OFP Dragon Rising Out Oct 9, 2009, 16:31 Prez
 
Are you talking about the mission where you're stranded in a forest in the middle of nowhere and are being hunted by squads of infantry, tanks, Hinds and BMPs? If so, I loved that mission and the lack of quicksave was essential to that. Knowing that one careless move on my behalf could totally screw me over made the experience more intense than any other single-player experience I can remember. Consequences for failure are something sorely lacking these days. You guys complain about repetition but quicksave makes that all the more likely because you don't care if you die. "Oh look, a squad of enemies. I think I'll quicksave now. Whoops, I died. Quickload. Let's try that again. Damn, I died. Quickload." Conversely, if you can't save, you really have to think hard about every choice you make. Should you engage the enemies or just try to sneak by? If you do engage, how do you do it? Where do you position yourself, who do you take out first? Without quicksave, you put far more thought into your choices.

As much as I hate lack of in-game saves, the above described mission is one that I have remembered and will probably always remember as the most intense and nerve-wracking gaming experience I've ever had.

And the lack of lean is nuts. Leaning around a corner is a natural action that anyone in a firefight will instinctively do to limit their exposure to return fire. Hell, I see kids do it when they are shooting each other with super-soakers.
 
Avatar 17185
 
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
81. Re: OFP Dragon Rising Out Oct 9, 2009, 04:08 Dr. D. Schreber
 
And that analysis is based on the games you've played, unless you're making assumptions about how leaning works in games you haven't played. In either case, you haven't provided a single example of an actual game to support your position.

That's actually exactly what I'm doing, as I've said more than once. Design philosophy is not magical, there are inherent trends in any generation of game development, and facets of design become very predictable.

What does this have to do with videogames? Dialog tends to be written in a melodramatic matter because that's generally more interesting. It has nothing to do with trying to be more immersive.

It doesn't have anything to do with videogames, it has to do with your claim that immersion requires a presentation that adheres as closely as possible to actual reality. Dialog is simple proof that you're wrong, because it's a clear and universal part of reality that is, by necessity, warped into something else for its presentation in fiction.

There is nothing else to say about this; you are wrong. Your assertion that fiction does not and/or does not need to make acceptable breaks from reality to be both decent fiction and to be immersive is incorrect.

Further reading:

Realistic Diction is Unrealistic, because, no, it's not written to be melodramatic, it's written to be legible.
Acceptable Breaks from Reality, including the extremely long list of them. Note that all of them have some level of presence in videogames.

I suggest you spend some time browsing this wiki, at least by plugging in the names of various works you're a fan of into the search bar. You appear to have gargantuan misconceptions about the creative process.

You sure? I seem to recall typing in commands for basic navigation too. It's like using DOS.

I checked, you're right. The difference is negligible, though. The point still stands, because, again, it's not DOS. You can't say "I know how DOS works, so I will apply those exact rules to this, and things will happen as I want them to." It's a fictional presentation of an OS that uses a facsimile of DOS. It makes you think, as you just said, "It's like using DOS." It's not making you feel that way by being DOS.


Sim fans would greatly disagree.

Again, this is just proving my point. When someone playing the Sims has their sim do something that equates to work in reality, does the player actually do that work? Does the sim actually do that work, or do you watch a highly stylized, compressed, comical representation of what that work is?

In any case, you've conveniently failed to address the matter of perspectives. First-person is the most immersive of all perspectives. I think everyone can agree on that. Why is it the most immersive? Because it most closely resembles how we actually view reality. This is NOT to say it's a perfect simulation. However, it's far more realistic than isometric, topdown or side perspectives.

This is hardly objective fact. The argument exists, and I seem to recall an article about it linked on this very website recently, that third-person games are just as immersive as first-person games because, in sacrificing the more realistic viewpoint, they give you an awareness of what's going on around your character much closer to what you have in reality. If you're making an equal trade like this, then it's a matter of preference. My original argument is that leaning does not fall under this, because it provides too little benefit (due to overall design philosophy) compared to too much effort. I even suggested a way to balance it out better.
 
Avatar 51686
 
NOT THE BEES! NOT THE BEES THEY'RE IN MY EYES AARRGRHGHGGAFHGHFGHFG!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
80. Re: OFP Dragon Rising Out Oct 8, 2009, 12:38 Jerykk
 
No, my entire argument was based on analysis of how videogames often work.

And that analysis is based on the games you've played, unless you're making assumptions about how leaning works in games you haven't played. In either case, you haven't provided a single example of an actual game to support your position.

Again, dialog is the go-to example for why hard realism is deliberately ignored in fiction. Spoken lines in fiction and in dramatizations of real events are never, ever written realistically unless the writer is consciously thinking about experimenting with going against the grain (mocumentaries deliberately put effort into subverting this, for example.)

What does this have to do with videogames? Dialog tends to be written in a melodramatic matter because that's generally more interesting. It has nothing to do with trying to be more immersive.

Look more closely at Bloodlines; the only time you type in a command is when you've found the password somewhere else and you're typing in the exact password

You sure? I seem to recall typing in commands for basic navigation too. It's like using DOS.

It's not at all more realistic than the hacking in Fallout 3, which is just clicking on stuff, but it's more immersive because the facade is more convincing.

It's more convincing because it's more realistic. It's more realistic because you actually type in commands. This isn't a difficult concept to grasp. I never said that it was an accurate simulation of real-life hacking. I said it was far more realistic than other representations of hacking in videogames and that's why it's more immersive.

Let's also not forget the primary reason for why fiction modifies reality like this: reality is boring.

Sim fans would greatly disagree.

In any case, you've conveniently failed to address the matter of perspectives. First-person is the most immersive of all perspectives. I think everyone can agree on that. Why is it the most immersive? Because it most closely resembles how we actually view reality. This is NOT to say it's a perfect simulation. However, it's far more realistic than isometric, topdown or side perspectives.

As I said before, a key part of immersion is meeting player's expectations. Expectations are largely defined by reality. If I'm playing a shooter, I expect to be able to lean because that's what I would do in real life.

And before you say "Yes it does, it exposes less of you to enemy fire" again, I did address that when I discussed current game design philosophy and mechanics.

You said that enemies have ridiculously high accuracy so it doesn't really matter how much of your hitbox is exposed. I disagreed because in that is not the case in 99% of the games I played. If all games were like Call of Juarez: Bound in Blood on the highest difficulty setting, I'd agree. In CoJ: BiB, enemies have 100% accuracy so if you even poke your head out, you'll get shot. In that game and at that difficulty setting, leaning isn't very useful. The vast majority of other games are not like that, however.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
79. Re: OFP Dragon Rising Out Oct 8, 2009, 07:58 Eldaron Imotholin
 
That bullshit about leaning overshadows my awesome review!

Scroll back up and just deal with it: The game sucks.
 
Avatar 15836
 
Playing: Skyrim, World of Warcraft.
Future: Dead Space 3.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
78. Re: OFP Dragon Rising Out Oct 8, 2009, 04:45 Dr. D. Schreber
 
You realize that your entire argument is based on your personal experience

No, my entire argument was based on analysis of how videogames often work. At no point did I say "in the games I've played," because my bias is no different. It is reasonable to say "some games work like this, others work like that." The only assumption I've made is in how often "this" happens compared to "that" (in this case, how often leaning provides any meaningful gain) and this is, again, based on general design philosophy as practiced by developers. You have presented no evidence to prove that this assumption is incorrect.

I disagree.

And you're flat-out wrong. Again, dialog is the go-to example for why hard realism is deliberately ignored in fiction. Spoken lines in fiction and in dramatizations of real events are never, ever written realistically unless the writer is consciously thinking about experimenting with going against the grain (mocumentaries deliberately put effort into subverting this, for example.) Most aspects of reality are simply obtrusive in a fictional context, and adapting these things into facsimiles is an integral part of content creation in any medium.

However, leaning makes the game more immersive. You can say it's a useless feature (based on your anecdotal evidence) but even if that were true, utility has very little to do with immersion. For example, in Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines, you have to actually type in commands when hacking. Is this a useful feature? Not really. Just clicking on stuff would be more efficient. However, actually typing commands is what hackers do in real life. Performing the same act in a game makes it more immersive as a result.

You've just completely proved my point. Look more closely at Bloodlines; the only time you type in a command is when you've found the password somewhere else and you're typing in the exact password. Other tactile input amounts to using the arrow keys to select from simple menu lists. This is a facsimile of reality; the game lets you provide specific inputs into the computer, but it's nothing like actually operating a computer.

The hacking function in Bloodlines consists of pressing two keys so you can watch random characters scroll in the password prompt until it either magically finds the password, or, if your hack skill is too low, turning out garbletrash. In either case, it searches for every character in the password at the same time, finds them in a different order than it should be entered, and it somehow magically knows how many characters there are in the password, too, without any indication that the user is running any kind of software to assist his/her attempt at hacking (and this is not how brute force attacks work anyway.) It's like at the end of Wargames when the WOPR is trying to hack the launch codes. It's not at all more realistic than the hacking in Fallout 3, which is just clicking on stuff, but it's more immersive because the facade is more convincing. Let's not forget that because we're dealing with fiction, we also have free reign to handwave things like this. For example, Deus Ex has hacking via progress-bar, but we know he's using a program to do it because the progress bar is dolled up as such. This fits the context of the game's setting, and therefore, at best, enhances immersion, and at worst, has no effect on immersion whatsoever.

Let's also not forget the primary reason for why fiction modifies reality like this: reality is boring. Real hacking is not something you want to do when you're trying to enjoy a videogame, because it involves a lot of concentrated effort. Flying a plane is much more complicated and involves a lot more work than in any non-sim air combat game, and even some, if not most of the sims don't make you go through the exhaustive checklists any real pilot goes through before they take off.

So no, leaning is not immersive just because it's realistic. Immersion in videogames will run into problems if you're sacrificing functional use for presentation, and you've said nothing to prove that leaning, more often than not, has a functional use. And before you say "Yes it does, it exposes less of you to enemy fire" again, I did address that when I discussed current game design philosophy and mechanics.
 
Avatar 51686
 
NOT THE BEES! NOT THE BEES THEY'RE IN MY EYES AARRGRHGHGGAFHGHFGHFG!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
77. Re: OFP Dragon Rising Out Oct 8, 2009, 03:44 Jerykk
 
Your personal experience is not inarguable fact because I can't trust that how you perceive something isn't causing inaccuracy.

You realize that your entire argument is based on your personal experience of leaning in the games you've played, right? For example, you say that enemies in most games have ridiculously high accuracy. In the games I've played, the exact opposite is true. Enemies have ridiculously low accuracy. Similarly, you say that leaning doesn't protect you more than standing next to a corner with your body exposed. Again, this is based on your personal experience. In the games I've played, leaning around cover definitely offered more protection than exposing my whole body. Your "technical" points are purely anecdotal.

Immersion and realism are not irrevocably connected.

I disagree. If a game seeks to immerse you in its world, it shouldn't defy your expectations. If I'm playing a realistic shooter, I expect to lean around cover because that's the logical thing to do. Now, I'm not saying that a game can't be immersive at all without leaning. However, leaning makes the game more immersive. You can say it's a useless feature (based on your anecdotal evidence) but even if that were true, utility has very little to do with immersion. For example, in Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines, you have to actually type in commands when hacking. Is this a useful feature? Not really. Just clicking on stuff would be more efficient. However, actually typing commands is what hackers do in real life. Performing the same act in a game makes it more immersive as a result. Contrast this to other games where hacking consists of a dice roll, watching a progress bar or playing some random minigame that bears no semblance at all to actual hacking. These things are not as immersive because they are completely detached from reality. Hell, look at perspectives. First-person is the most immersive perspective because it most closely resembles reality. Conversely, isometric or topdown perspectives are the least immersive. This is not to say that games using those perspectives can't be immersive. Rather, such games are immersive in spite of those perspectives.

So yes, immersion and realism are intrinsically linked.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
76. Re: OFP Dragon Rising Out Oct 8, 2009, 02:52 Dr. D. Schreber
 
And following "that" with "I had this experience" is, again, opinion. Anecdotal evidence is not evidence. The plural of "anecdote" is not "data." You're not making any technical arguments against my points about game mechanic and how a game environment intrinsically effects certain things differently than in real-life. Your personal experience is not inarguable fact because I can't trust that how you perceive something isn't causing inaccuracy.

In fact, I'll add some more. You say that leaning isn't required for an immersive experience but it really is. In real-life, people lean. Why? To reduce the exposure of their bodies to enemy fire and also make them less conspicuous. A guy poking half of his head around a corner is far less obvious than a guy standing there with half his body exposed. If I'm playing a shooter that's supposed to be somewhat realistic, I expect to be able to lean. It's only natural.

Oh god, no. Immersion and realism are not irrevocably connected. This is arguably more important in video games than in non-interactive fiction. If you can't be immersed without realism, how has any game ever been immersive for you when no spoken dialog in any medium is ever written based on how people actually talk in reality?

A facsimile of realism is far more important to immersion, and leaning is not integral to that.

This comment was edited on Oct 8, 2009, 02:57.
 
Avatar 51686
 
NOT THE BEES! NOT THE BEES THEY'RE IN MY EYES AARRGRHGHGGAFHGHFGHFG!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
75. Re: OFP Dragon Rising Out Oct 8, 2009, 02:25 Jerykk
 
If you're not actually going to read what I write, that's fine, but just respond with "tl;dr" instead of "here's more of my opinion instead of actual counter-arguments."

Ahem. I think you must have forgotten to read everything I wrote above the sentence you quoted. Here it is again:

"I don't know what games you've played but leaning has been very helpful in the ones I've played. For one, enemies are less likely to notice me when I'm leaning. It also means that I can very quickly return to cover by simply releasing the lean key, whereas I'd have to actually move my character back into cover without it. Even if I choose to remain leaning, the likelihood of enemies hitting me is reduced because my hit box isn't as exposed."

That = counter-argument.

In fact, I'll add some more. You say that leaning isn't required for an immersive experience but it really is. In real-life, people lean. Why? To reduce the exposure of their bodies to enemy fire and also make them less conspicuous. A guy poking half of his head around a corner is far less obvious than a guy standing there with half his body exposed. If I'm playing a shooter that's supposed to be somewhat realistic, I expect to be able to lean. It's only natural.

This comment was edited on Oct 8, 2009, 02:31.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
74. Re: OFP Dragon Rising Out Oct 8, 2009, 02:22 Dr. D. Schreber
 
If you don't like the default key assignments for leaning, that's fine

I'm not sure what this has to do with anything. I never said I cared about key assignments, since, you know, I can change them. I said the feature is useless because the act of pressing an additional key, no matter which key it is, is too much effort for too little payoff. I added a mapping option that, as far as I can tell, does not exist that would greatly fix this problem if it were implemented. This has nothing to do with default key mappings.

If you're not actually going to read what I write, that's fine, but just respond with "tl;dr" instead of "here's more of my opinion instead of actual counter-arguments."
 
Avatar 51686
 
NOT THE BEES! NOT THE BEES THEY'RE IN MY EYES AARRGRHGHGGAFHGHFGHFG!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
73. Re: OFP Dragon Rising Out Oct 8, 2009, 02:12 Jerykk
 
Especially in single-player games where the enemy has unrealistic accuracy at ludicrous distances and leaning doesn't even help anyway.

I don't know what games you've played but leaning has been very helpful in the ones I've played. For one, enemies are less likely to notice me when I'm leaning. It also means that I can very quickly return to cover by simply releasing the lean key, whereas I'd have to actually move my character back into cover without it. Even if I choose to remain leaning, the likelihood of enemies hitting me is reduced because my hit box isn't as exposed.

In a realistic tactical shooter, this amount of finite control is important. If you don't like the default key assignments for leaning, that's fine. Just don't try to discount the merits of the feature itself.

Not in High Stakes mode.

What's that? A multiplayer mode? In High Stakes mode, does the camera still switch to third-person when you're behind cover, allowing to see things that you shouldn't be able to see while behind cover in a first-person game?

Yeah I was gonna say, I was never able to aim around cover.

In High Stakes or in general? In R6:V, you still have the reticule while behind cover. You place the reticule over an enemy's head, pop out from cover, click and boom, instant headshot. That = aiming while behind cover.

Edit: After doing some research on High Stakes mode, it sounds half-decent. Cover system still sucks but at it limits what you can see. If they had made both games like the High Stakes mode, they would have been much better.

This comment was edited on Oct 8, 2009, 02:26.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
72. Re: OFP Dragon Rising Out Oct 8, 2009, 01:54 Dr. D. Schreber
 
How is leaning useless? It lets you take shots around corners with minimal exposure.

Except not. It's functionally the same as edging around the corner, especially in first-person shooters where your weapon's position in the first-person perspective isn't necessarily relevant to whether or not the wall will block the shot, so long as it's not blocking the crosshair. Depending on the game, it may or may not provide less exposed collision boxes, but even then, the difference is negligible and not worth having to press another button for it. It's an attempt at realism that, because of the way videogames tend to work, becomes laughable. Especially in single-player games where the enemy has unrealistic accuracy at ludicrous distances and leaning doesn't even help anyway. Bonus points to Dragon Rising for averting that BS. On top of all of this, because you can never have control over how much to the side you're leaning, it may be necessary to adjust your position via strafing tiny amounts anyway, just like slowly moving around the corner without leaning to begin with.

Point for fixing this; let me map leaning to my mouse wheel's left/right tilt, and the minimal effort involved will go a long way to making me care about it. Are there any games that let you do this?

I've said it before, I'll say it again; leaning is not a hallmark of PC gaming absolutely required by any game wanting to call itself "deep" or "immersive." I'm not the only one who's pointedly ignored it when it shows up in the config menu for the last fifteen years. The amount of complaining done about the lack of this feature is like what I would expect if a game's mapping menu didn't allow you to map anything to just fire your gun.

As for how Dragon Rising compares to Arma 2, rather than rehash all the back-and-fourth, I'll actually add something; there's no goddamn Microsoft Sam in Dragon Rising. Winner by default.

This comment was edited on Oct 8, 2009, 01:56.
 
Avatar 51686
 
NOT THE BEES! NOT THE BEES THEY'RE IN MY EYES AARRGRHGHGGAFHGHFGHFG!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
71. Re: OFP Dragon Rising Out Oct 7, 2009, 19:42 Eldaron Imotholin
 
Ok I've tried OFP.

I'm not sure I'll restart this game. It's fucking horrible. The tutorial is hideous! They tell you to do shit, but you have no idea how the fuck to do it. Did the devs realise it's not a tutorial if it's not said HOW to do the shit they ask you to do? Seriously, it's absolutely crap.

After that they tell you to call in fire support at some place. I had no fucking idea how to do that cuz of course the tutorial didn't explain this to me. So I took the time to go to the main menu, check the controls. Guess what? COULDN'T FIND IT! You know why not? Because in the controls it's called "Call Combat Support" while the tutorial asks you to "Call Fire Support". It's those tiny things that make you wonder if this game is really quality and not crap.

Worst of all: Team mate. They act like complete retards. I didn't want to drive the car because it's horrible (you can't look around while driving, apparently the OFP soldiers have some physical issue that once they sit the fuck down behind a wheel their neck gets so freakin' stiff they can't turn it. So anyway, I'm riding shotgun and tell my driver to go *that* way. The fact that there was a freakin' ROCK between me and *that* way I realised. Guys.....

...guys.. this is going to be scary.. listen up...

...the guy behind the wheel was so freakin' excited to follow my order, he drove right into the fuckin' rock!!! I'm not kidding!!!

I was about to alt-F4 out of the game but I thought "Oh hell, this game is supposed to be great. A few more minutes."

So there I was, manually guiding the tards their every move. Giving the driver checkpoints over the map to make sure he wasn't gonna bump into shit. Then, suddenly.. soldiers on the road! They run into the grass for cover and I jump out of the car while issueing my gunner to mow them the fuck down. For some reason the driver just kept driving back and forth like it's some kid's mother who's so fuck-scared she completely lost her mind, and the gunner decides to just let those guys walk. So I was like, "Guys?! Help me out here!" while hiding behind a bush. Knowing that the bush would probably have no clipping didn't bother me. I couldn't see through it, so they couldn't see me either. Thank god... some time to try to knock some sense into my zombie-friends having some retard-party in the shaking car.

...and then I was dead. The fuckin' enemy soldiers have x-ray vision while my soldiers where having fun getting their stumachs messed up in the car!

...horrible.

PS: The OFP world is made out of chocolate.
 
Avatar 15836
 
Playing: Skyrim, World of Warcraft.
Future: Dead Space 3.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
70. Re: OFP Dragon Rising Out Oct 7, 2009, 17:11 Verno
 
Yeah I was gonna say, I was never able to aim around cover.  
Avatar 51617
 
Playing: Divinity Original Sin, Infamous Second Son, Madden
Watching: Spartan, Possible Worlds, The Changeling
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
89 Replies. 5 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 ] Older >


footer

.. .. ..

Blue's News logo