OfficialJab said:
But...but... I want to see Erin with bits of wire in here eyes...the Hellraiser comic has turned me into a sickening monster that feeds on the pain and misery of others.
Leave Me The F**k Alone
- Thread starter The Wooster
- Start date
But...but... I want to see Erin with bits of wire in here eyes...the Hellraiser comic has turned me into a sickening monster that feeds on the pain and misery of others.
I think it's necessary to reference Assassin's Creed 2 here, where the game gave the player control of the cutscenes, but only during certain quick time events. I missed a hug from Leonardo Da Vinci for that.
In fact, cinematic moments when I'm actually supposed to do something typically go bad for me. Like in Gears of War 2, I found out that you could lose the final boss battle, to the disbelief of my friends. And in Spec-Ops: The Line, I missed the guy I was supposed to execute, making it especially awkward at the end. If a game wants me to play by its rules, I'd prefer that it took control away from me, so I don't fuck it up like I have so many times before. But if the game lets me do things my own way, then I believe in having complete control.
In fact, cinematic moments when I'm actually supposed to do something typically go bad for me. Like in Gears of War 2, I found out that you could lose the final boss battle, to the disbelief of my friends. And in Spec-Ops: The Line, I missed the guy I was supposed to execute, making it especially awkward at the end. If a game wants me to play by its rules, I'd prefer that it took control away from me, so I don't fuck it up like I have so many times before. But if the game lets me do things my own way, then I believe in having complete control.
This is exactly how I felt, when I played Uncharted 3.
You have to walk in this part, cuz it's a slow moment! Running ability removed!
You don't need to shoot anything here. Shooting ability removed!
Don't die or you'll interrupt all the in-game dialogue and our cool story!
Every 5 minutes they were yanking control away from me and forcing me to play the way they wanted, not how I wanted.
You have to walk in this part, cuz it's a slow moment! Running ability removed!
You don't need to shoot anything here. Shooting ability removed!
Don't die or you'll interrupt all the in-game dialogue and our cool story!
Every 5 minutes they were yanking control away from me and forcing me to play the way they wanted, not how I wanted.
I want to start on cutscenes; they are not the same as this at all.
A Cutscene is an obvious shift in focus - in older games, you could tell it's a cutscene because the graphics quality jumped through the roof (or in REALLY old games, arguably went through the floor).
The point is that a cutscenes stops play to run a pre-scripted sequence. This is very different to having all control removed whilst still being in game mode.
Assassin's Creed 3 is the one I saw most recently; the ship missions often turn the camera to face a new enemy, or big cinematic moment, with no consideration to the player's desire. You know, Ubisoft, telling me that there are enemies to port was more than sufficient. Had you not effectively turned off my TV screen for 30 seconds I would not only have spotted them myself, but I wouldn't have crashed my ship into the cliffs.
The most important thing for a game to do is convince us to pick up the controller and play it. The most retarded thing a game can do is take that controller off us once we've started.
A Cutscene is an obvious shift in focus - in older games, you could tell it's a cutscene because the graphics quality jumped through the roof (or in REALLY old games, arguably went through the floor).
The point is that a cutscenes stops play to run a pre-scripted sequence. This is very different to having all control removed whilst still being in game mode.
Assassin's Creed 3 is the one I saw most recently; the ship missions often turn the camera to face a new enemy, or big cinematic moment, with no consideration to the player's desire. You know, Ubisoft, telling me that there are enemies to port was more than sufficient. Had you not effectively turned off my TV screen for 30 seconds I would not only have spotted them myself, but I wouldn't have crashed my ship into the cliffs.
The most important thing for a game to do is convince us to pick up the controller and play it. The most retarded thing a game can do is take that controller off us once we've started.
This reminds me of Egoraptor's 'Yeah I Get It' graph.
I miss the days when we were allowed to figure things out for ourselves. Then again, I absolutely do not miss the days of Turok 2's 'where in the name of Christ am I supposed to go this level is huge and I can't see shit' approach.
I miss the days when we were allowed to figure things out for ourselves. Then again, I absolutely do not miss the days of Turok 2's 'where in the name of Christ am I supposed to go this level is huge and I can't see shit' approach.
Now this is hyperbole and you know it. Completely ignore the medium? Did you play MGS before? I assure you that the franchise is more in depth and refined in its gameplay than most of the "proper" games are whatever they are. Please take a closer look before dismissing something as garbage.grigjd3 said:
I find it annoying when people talk over films, let alone telling me to watch what I'm ALREADY WATCHING! At work I go into the staff room at lunch and usually I don't mind talking to others that are in there but, if it's empty, I use the time to read a book. When people come in I say hi but most people leave me to the book but there's one guy who will talk to me anyway and it's really annoying when the book's getting good and he's trying to make small talk.
They do the same thing in High Moon Studios' Transformers games. At some points in a level, you can press the Select or Back button to have the camera focus on some character or something in the background, because your objectives involve them somehow.Jodah said:
It depends on the cut scene, sometimes they work well as area transitions and such, or for specific plot moments, but for the most part they do tend to be overdone. I tend to feel that if there is a chance of us missing something cool without the developers taking control of the camera, they are doing things wrong. Simply put if they make a cool explosion and I miss it, that typically means they didn't make it cool enough for me to notice or care, their bad. Not to mention that a lot of this stuff is kind of yawn-worthy, big explosions being one of those examples since simply put I've seen so many cool explosions nowadays where I expect them, and don't consider them a major highlight.
What's more I find it ironic when they turn the camera to show cinematic destruction, having your character typically turn around basically. Especially seeing as IRL most people would want to shield their face from this kind of thing.
That said if someone does another video game parody at some point, it might be amusing to have a bit where as a joke your macho-marine puts explosives in a base, runs out side, turns around to set them off and see the explosion and the last thing they "see" is a bunch of shrapnel hitting them in the face and poking out their eyes. You know "reality meets fantasy". Of course doing that "right" in a game and having it continue would be tricky.... of course I suppose they could always have the game pull a "Bill The Galactic Hero" schtick and have the character get increasingly mismatched replacement parts from the military due to mishaps at the game moves on.
I'm probably alone in thinking a game where someone gets mauled for behaving like a video game character usually does (but continues to survive) would be amusing though.
What's more I find it ironic when they turn the camera to show cinematic destruction, having your character typically turn around basically. Especially seeing as IRL most people would want to shield their face from this kind of thing.
That said if someone does another video game parody at some point, it might be amusing to have a bit where as a joke your macho-marine puts explosives in a base, runs out side, turns around to set them off and see the explosion and the last thing they "see" is a bunch of shrapnel hitting them in the face and poking out their eyes. You know "reality meets fantasy". Of course doing that "right" in a game and having it continue would be tricky.... of course I suppose they could always have the game pull a "Bill The Galactic Hero" schtick and have the character get increasingly mismatched replacement parts from the military due to mishaps at the game moves on.
I'm probably alone in thinking a game where someone gets mauled for behaving like a video game character usually does (but continues to survive) would be amusing though.
OMG You missed such a great opportunity in the last panel and you were so close to doing it! The "dev" should have been holding Erin's eyelids open with his fingers so that she physically couldn't stop watching. It would look weird but it would definitely fit the manic nature of the dev character.
Part of my love for video games is playing them a second time and finding new things.kailus13 said:
Games that hand me everything ruin the experience for me :/.
How the hell is a tutorial in the beginning of a game that teaches the player what the controls do equal to "hand-holding"? So a person is expected to play a game they've never played before without knowing how to play it, what the rules are, and what they need to do to try and win? Because if you've played it, then everybody on the planet Earth must have played it, right?Robetid said:
Y'know, I never really understood the need for cutscenes. I mean, if the game is an interface for the player to control the player-character in the game's story, then why is the player being forced to lose control, but not the player-character? It's almost as if the p-c has developed a brain, central nervous system, and kidneys of his/her/its/? own, and wrested control of its own fate, for a brief period of time.
A far better method, in my opinion, is the one used in the Half-life series (and Portal, I believe) where the player is in control of the character at all times, everything is rendered ingame, and the only times you actually lose control are reasonable instances-like the pc being knocked out, or held up by physical restraints, which therefore make control moot anyway.
Of course, I could be reading far more into this than I ought, but hey, what do I know?
A far better method, in my opinion, is the one used in the Half-life series (and Portal, I believe) where the player is in control of the character at all times, everything is rendered ingame, and the only times you actually lose control are reasonable instances-like the pc being knocked out, or held up by physical restraints, which therefore make control moot anyway.
Of course, I could be reading far more into this than I ought, but hey, what do I know?