Op Ed

[Feb 11, 2012, 1:56 pm ET] - Share - Viewing Comments

truepcgaming - Developer’s Block: Quick Time Events.
Rather than making them a separate scene, it should go hand in hand with the gameplay. Quick time events should be a part of the action instead of becoming an interactive cutscene, even if it means that the developer should create a whole new set of controls for it to be possible. For example, take Kingdom Hearts’ reaction command system, also known as quick time events. They work well because they’re, for the most part, optional and you won’t lose because you missed the opportunity. In Kingdom Hearts, quick time events can only help which is how it should be done.

View

14.

Re: Op Ed

Feb 12, 2012, 22:52

Jerykk

Though i agree with you that higher damage is obviously an issue but then one simply has to make the combat system more complex - improve AI routines, implement dodges and back-jumps.. rolls and flips. But if you do that, then player skill becomes more important than his character's stats and at that point, it's more of an action game than an RPG. If First person melee is crap no matter what is tried, and i haven't seen any game where its not crap including mount and blade, then it simply has to be a 3rd person game... no point in sticking to first person when it damages gameplay and causes difficulty to at best be a totally daft enemy hp * 5 crap like it is in Skyrim. Thats not difficulty nor balanced. Except an RPG is about more than just combat. A first-person perspective is inherently the most immersive, as it most closely resembles how you view the world yourself. To sacrifice this immersion for the sake of combat doesn't seem worth it to me, though I generally play stealthy/diplomatic characters anyway. I also disagree with the notion of mage weapons. A mage's weapons are his spells. If they are balanced properly, he shouldn't need any physical weapons (which is why I didn't like the addition of staves in Oblivion). A mage should be 100% reliant on his spells during combat.

		Date	Subject	Author
	1.	Feb 11, 13:22	Re: Op Ed	Aero
	2.	Feb 11, 13:36	Re: Op Ed	PHJF
	3.	Feb 11, 15:26	Re: Op Ed	jacobvandy
	4.	Feb 11, 16:46	Re: Op Ed	eunichron
	5.	Feb 11, 18:45	Re: Op Ed	Draugr
	6.	Feb 11, 20:00	Re: Op Ed	Jerykk
	8.	Feb 12, 03:18	Re: Op Ed	eRe4s3r
	9.	Feb 12, 03:51	Re: Op Ed	Jerykk
	10.	Feb 12, 04:55	Re: Op Ed	eRe4s3r
	11.	Feb 12, 06:48	Re: Op Ed	Jerykk
	12.	Feb 12, 09:21	Re: Op Ed	eRe4s3r
>>	14.	Feb 12, 22:52	Re: Op Ed	Jerykk
	15.	Feb 13, 02:05	Re: Op Ed	eRe4s3r
	16.	Feb 13, 02:24	Re: Op Ed	Jerykk
	17.	Feb 13, 02:46	Re: Op Ed	eRe4s3r
	13.	Feb 12, 19:30	Re: Op Ed	peteham
	7.	Feb 12, 00:14	Re: Op Ed	Ant