Actually, I can easily explain to you how it's immersive: Look at your Computer Screen for a long period of time, now look at your hands as they type for a while... Did that break your immersion? I hope not.Aaron Sylvester said:I have no idea how switching your eyes between two screens at different distances is "immersive" and not completely and utterly flow-breaking. Guess it's one of those things I have to play to understand?
Nah man, don't you know? Nintendo used special mystic portals for the screens on the controllers that randomly change depth with the consequence being that your depth perception is completely fucked with while looking at it and that once the day of reckoning occurs you will be blessed by being among the first to be consumed by the old ones.Mr.Mattress said:Actually, I can easily explain to you how it's immersive: Look at your Computer Screen for a long period of time, now look at your hands as they type for a while... Did that break your immersion? I hope not.Aaron Sylvester said:I have no idea how switching your eyes between two screens at different distances is "immersive" and not completely and utterly flow-breaking. Guess it's one of those things I have to play to understand?
Gratz on using a terrible example, both my keyboard and monitor are almost the same distance from my eyes.Mr.Mattress said:Actually, I can easily explain to you how it's immersive: Look at your Computer Screen for a long period of time, now look at your hands as they type for a while... Did that break your immersion? I hope not.Aaron Sylvester said:I have no idea how switching your eyes between two screens at different distances is "immersive" and not completely and utterly flow-breaking. Guess it's one of those things I have to play to understand?
Strange, I do that for the majority of the day. Maybe you are exaggerating things.Aaron Sylvester said:Gratz on using a terrible example, both my keyboard and monitor are almost the same distance from my eyes.Mr.Mattress said:Actually, I can easily explain to you how it's immersive: Look at your Computer Screen for a long period of time, now look at your hands as they type for a while... Did that break your immersion? I hope not.Aaron Sylvester said:I have no idea how switching your eyes between two screens at different distances is "immersive" and not completely and utterly flow-breaking. Guess it's one of those things I have to play to understand?
I'll give you a much better example: Look at a something with text from ~3 meters away (say, news on the TV) and then quickly look down something in your hands that has small text (say, a phone or newspaper). Now keep switching focus between the two and see how quickly your eyes can read the text from both sources. I guarantee you will take nearly half a second to focus everytime you return your eyes to the TV, unless you're Superman.
It is physically impossible to focus on two screens at the same time if there is such a huge difference in distance, the delay in focus (not to mention HEADACHE after ~10 minutes of it) = no thank you.
They do. Key word there, though, is "indie," which ZombiU is decidedly not.TyrunnAlberyn said:That said, I don't understand why/how this is lauded as a "return" to Survival Horror. Sure, Silent Hill, Resident Evil and Dead Space are not what they used to be, but don't excellent PC indie titles like Amnesia also qualify as survival horror?
It's going to be different for different people but depending on the distance between objects his statement is very true. It's all to do with how the human eye focuses on things in short and long range. This is made even worse if you are a person with eye conditions, even very common ones like long/short sightedness (most people who wear glasses have one or the other, though there are exceptions of course), which could be extremely irritating for a person, especially if they were unfortunate enough to have a prescription that would require them to completely remove their glasses to look down at the tablet and then begin wearing them again so that they can go back to looking at their screen. Not a great deal of people would be as unfortunate as my last example but it is a real problem that would be specific to this device.Revnak said:Strange, I do that for the majority of the day. Maybe you are exaggerating things.Aaron Sylvester said:Gratz on using a terrible example, both my keyboard and monitor are almost the same distance from my eyes.Mr.Mattress said:Actually, I can easily explain to you how it's immersive: Look at your Computer Screen for a long period of time, now look at your hands as they type for a while... Did that break your immersion? I hope not.Aaron Sylvester said:I have no idea how switching your eyes between two screens at different distances is "immersive" and not completely and utterly flow-breaking. Guess it's one of those things I have to play to understand?
I'll give you a much better example: Look at a something with text from ~3 meters away (say, news on the TV) and then quickly look down something in your hands that has small text (say, a phone or newspaper). Now keep switching focus between the two and see how quickly your eyes can read the text from both sources. I guarantee you will take nearly half a second to focus everytime you return your eyes to the TV, unless you're Superman.
It is physically impossible to focus on two screens at the same time if there is such a huge difference in distance, the delay in focus (not to mention HEADACHE after ~10 minutes of it) = no thank you.
You are by far the most offensive and entertaining PC elitist I've ever met.Aaron Sylvester said:It's 2012 and it mystifies me why we're still using analogue sticks to aim in first person shooters, and "innovating" touchscreens for inventory management...when a simple mouse (invented in 1970's mind you) could easily trump ALL those gimmicks. These days a console is nothing more than a simplified computer, a proprietary box you must own to play exclusives.
Apparently console designers still haven't figured out that allowing people to attach a mouse+keyboard to their consoles would solve 99.9% of all interface/control issues and challenges. On top of that, it would open up entire GENRES to be fully playable on consoles which are borderline impossible to play today purely due to lacking the the controls to pull it off - RTS games, MMORPG's, dungeon crawlers like Diablo 3, etc. It also make FPS games a fuckload more intuitive to play....so the only question which remains is "WHY?!".
I think the Wii set the bar so fucking low that Wii U looks almost godly compared to it, it seems more or less what has happened in this particular review...personally I can't wait to hear what Yahtzee has to say about this.Callate said:I wonder how long we'll have to wait before WiiU games start coming out wherein "not as annoying as it could have been" is high praise for the player's relationship with controller-interface issues?
I have no idea how switching your eyes between two screens at different distances is "immersive" and not completely and utterly flow-breaking. Guess it's one of those things I have to play to understand?
Dude are you alright? I recommend taking a breath and calming down, maybe think a bit before hitting the caps lock?WaitWHAT said:WAAAAA!! WAAAAAAAAA!!! Why can't people all like the same control system as me? Different is wrong! WROOOONG, I TELL YOU!!! CAN'T YOU SEE THAT ALL GAMES WOULD BE PERFECT IF YOU JUST DID WHAT I WANTED?!?!
MegaManOfNumbers said:You are by far the most offensive and entertaining PC elitist I've ever met.
I'm not going to get a WiiU for a year or two so will probably never play the game, but one thing I've been wondering that I haven't seen specified is was the game designed with the intent that you actually kill all the zombies, or was it more you slip past them and only use your scarce ammo when absolutely necessary? To me this is a necessary distinction to determine if the game is actually flawed or if people are playing it with the wrong mindset.jollybarracuda said:Glad to see a positive review of this game. A lot of sites do seem to be mentioning one big thing though, which is that zombies might just take too many hits to take down with the cricket bat. Though if they lower the amount of hits, it then becomes like Dead Islands zombie massacre, where slashing through zombies becomes much less stressful. So i guess there isnt much middle ground when it comes to bashing zombies, but in a day and age where zombies are considered fodder more than threats, its nice to see a game try and bring them back to being a right pain in the ass to kill, even if it does come with the caveat of making it a bit tedious with long play sessions.
If i do pick up a WiiU sometime though, even if its a year or two down the line, i will definitely be picking this game up.
Let me try and one up you here. If the mouse is the optimal control input for your right hand, but a console controller analogue stick beats out WASD controls... why hasn't anyone tried combining the two? Basically something like a Wii's nunchuk for your left hand, and a mouse for your right. Or if it would be possible having a useable analogue stick on the keyboard.Aaron Sylvester said:It's 2012 and it mystifies me why we're still using analogue sticks to aim in first person shooters, and "innovating" touchscreens for inventory management...when a simple mouse (invented in 1970's mind you) could easily trump ALL those gimmicks. These days a console is nothing more than a simplified computer, a proprietary box you must own to play exclusives.
Apparently console designers still haven't figured out that allowing people to attach a mouse+keyboard to their consoles would solve 99.9% of all interface/control issues and challenges. On top of that, it would open up entire GENRES to be fully playable on consoles which are borderline impossible to play today purely due to lacking the the controls to pull it off - RTS games, MMORPG's, dungeon crawlers like Diablo 3, etc. It also make FPS games a fuckload more intuitive to play....so the only question which remains is "WHY?!".
As sad as I am to admit it, the mouse only has 1 limitation - it needs a flat, solid surface to function on. You can't exactly jump around with it like you do while holding a controller.RandV80 said:Let me try and one up you here. If the mouse is the optimal control input for your right hand, but a console controller analogue stick beats out WASD controls... why hasn't anyone tried combining the two? Basically something like a Wii's nunchuk for your left hand, and a mouse for your right. Or if it would be possible having a useable analogue stick on the keyboard.
Seriously why hasn't anyone tried this?
Ah, I see. Yes, I suppose the AAA-market for the genre has been rather lean the last few years. It's certainly surprising to see Nintendo be the one to come out with an actual survival horror game as a launch title too.Shjade said:They do. Key word there, though, is "indie," which ZombiU is decidedly not.
Indie games have always done their own thing. This is an example of a big name making a survival horror game, which hasn't happened in a while.
And those reviewers are morons. This is clearly a survival horror game. The main focus is to survive above all else. By making even the weakness mook enemy a legitmate threat, you keep the player in a constant state of tension and awareness.jollybarracuda said:Glad to see a positive review of this game. A lot of sites do seem to be mentioning one big thing though, which is that zombies might just take too many hits to take down with the cricket bat.
That or dead island(or dead rising). Seeing as gamespot was likeBiH-Kira said:A reviewer that... realizes this is a survival horror? Am I reading/hearing this right?
Dear Tito, thanks for making my day. Finally someone who doesn't compare this game to CoD's Zombie mode.
Also in the gamespot review he said that when your character dies you can NOT retrieve your bag/items. While it is fully known(and mentioned it other reviews) that if you die and kill the zombie previous you, you can get your items back.ZombiU is a game trapped in the wrong genre...ZombiU could have been an enjoyable action game, but instead it is a poor entry in the survival horror genre
I think Jim Sterling has it nailed in his review.Idocreating said:And those reviewers are morons. This is clearly a survival horror game. The main focus is to survive above all else. By making even the weakness mook enemy a legitmate threat, you keep the player in a constant state of tension and awareness.jollybarracuda said:Glad to see a positive review of this game. A lot of sites do seem to be mentioning one big thing though, which is that zombies might just take too many hits to take down with the cricket bat.