NERDRAGE: Developers shoving their quirky controll schemes down our throats - by henke
Matthew on 23/6/2010 at 16:34
Quote Posted by EvaUnit02
Hush, back to your MMOs with you.
:( I am a socially relevant individual in my kinship
Eldron on 23/6/2010 at 18:57
Quote Posted by ZylonBane
Surprised no-one's mentioned Gothic yet.
Now that's some games I've been trying to get into, but I remember each time I tried, the controls just became a game of its own.
Nameless Voice on 23/6/2010 at 21:32
It's definitely worth it, Eld, they're excellent games. Gothic 1 and 2 and Risen, anyway. Gothic 3... not so much. Mostly due to the bugs and insane truly loading times.
The place where Gothic truly shines is the level of detail in its world, with almost every nook and cranny having something in it - small caves, lost trunks, skeletons eaten by monsters, etc.
I also love its refusal to adjust the world to the player - if you go somewhere that everyone warns you is dangerous when you're low-level, you'll die, plain and simple. It won't magically be less dangerous because you're a low level character and it doesn't want you to meet anything that might scare you (e.g. Bethesda games).
The controls in Gothic are simple enough once you get the hand of them: action+forward to do pretty much everything, action+left or action+right to do direction-centring things (like turning winches), and when you have a weapon drawn, action+direction become different combat moves.
henke on 25/6/2010 at 13:43
Quote Posted by Sulphur
henke, if you think Crysis had a weird control scheme, you've obviously not played some of the more retarded console ports on a keyboard. MGS2 and RE4 with their default controls, oh my god.
I have. Yeah consoleports often have shitty controls but that often comes from trying to translate controls that were designed for a gamepad to kb+mouse. Crysis was
designed for PC, and one of PC's strengths are that the controls should be more customizable. So I'm holding Crysis to higher standards than I'd expect from a consoleport.
I just got to the part where Prophet gets snatched up by one of those flying octopi. The iron sights toggle doesn't bother me so much anymore and I'm really enjoying the cat and mouse games I get into with enemy patrols. Still, I can not be bothered playing this game for more than half an hour at a time. :erg:
Eldron on 25/6/2010 at 14:05
Quote Posted by Nameless Voice
It's definitely worth it, Eld, they're excellent games. Gothic 1 and 2 and Risen, anyway. Gothic 3... not so much. Mostly due to the bugs and insane truly loading times.
The place where Gothic truly shines is the level of detail in its world, with almost every nook and cranny having something in it - small caves, lost trunks, skeletons eaten by monsters, etc.
I also love its refusal to adjust the world to the player - if you go somewhere that everyone warns you is dangerous when you're low-level, you'll die, plain and simple. It won't magically be less dangerous because you're a low level character and it doesn't want you to meet anything that might scare you (e.g. Bethesda games).
The controls in Gothic are simple enough once you get the hand of them: action+forward to do pretty much everything, action+left or action+right to do direction-centring things (like turning winches), and when you have a weapon drawn, action+direction become different combat moves.
I love Risen, it was extremely easy to get into, and to make myself clear, I've always found the first two gothic games to be intriguing, I just never managed to get into them yet.
You mean post-morrowind bethesda? :), but yeah, I love that too, exploring, finding something that is too hard for the moment, and having it as a goal further on.
Nameless Voice on 25/6/2010 at 15:13
Quote Posted by Eldron
You mean post-morrowind bethesda? :), but yeah, I love that too, exploring, finding something that is too hard for the moment, and having it as a goal further on.
I didn't phrase that very well. I meant that it was
unlike (post-Daggerfall) Bethesda games, which never let you meet anything too scary when you're low-level.
june gloom on 25/6/2010 at 17:48
I dunno, man, in Fallout 3 it's possible to meet Yao Guai and even Deathclaws at low levels. I once ran into a Guai at level 2 and had to run away.
Nameless Voice on 25/6/2010 at 18:20
Yeah, Fallout 3 is much more sensible about it than Oblivion was. Areas with certain types of monsters will always have those monsters.
In Oblivion, if you were really low-level, you'd often find practically no Daedra in Daedric ruins - maybe some stunted scamps. In Fallout 3, if you go into the Deathclaw sanctuary, expect to find Deathclaws...
One thing that really bugs me about Fallout 3 is the way that random places with Super Mutants tend to suddenly have Super Mutant Overlords instead of lesser Super Mutants when you're really high level. Those guys with their insane damage bonus vs player and more health than a house are just no fun.
Eldron on 25/6/2010 at 18:27
Ghoul revenant
Nameless Voice on 25/6/2010 at 19:00
Yeah, hate those guys too. Whose idea was it that a good addition to add in the expansion pack was to randomly spawn "boss" monsters so tough that you practically have to keep a finger on the "use stimpack" key to kill them? And to make them appear in places where they wouldn't normally be, based on level, yet have them appear before the "new" levels 21-30?
