Support NeoGAF

[Rudiano]

Good review and accurate. I stopped playing after 2 acts, got boring very quick and game has many stupid flaws

 

[WordsintheWater]

I can't believe people who played this game extensively are acting as though others with the opinion that the time powers are underutilized are ludicrous for saying so. I beat the game, and I felt the same damn way, and yes I used powers, no I didn't play it as a cover shooter, but if you're able to get through the game playing it as such, the way it's not meant to be played according to you all defending it, that's a flaw with the game design.

 

[7echnicolor]

I don't know how they could have made it any clearer between the tutorials, power upgrades, time shifting enemies, and scripted segments where you have to use your powers. Other than flashing on the screen "HEY USE YOUR POWERS"...or making the game just impossible (it's hard as is without using your powers) then I don't think they could make it any more evident. This is a third person shooter and by design the game has to have guns and has to have shooting so at a bare minimum it can be played like that however everything in the game is pointing you to not play like that.

Yeah exactly, there were many times where I had to use most of my abilities in combat to proceed through the game.

 

[Artvanderlay]

Huh? Asking why a review isn't int he the review thread is tinfoil? whats the purpose of a review thread if just any review can merit its own thread?



lol, ok if you need it spelled out for you, I disagree entirely that the tv show was pointless. I personally liked that it allowed me to see the story from more angles and dive a bit deeper into supporting characters than is typically done.

I loved Alan Wake and I want single player games to concentrate there time on the game itself . Its unfortunate remedy were so deep in the tv , tv ,launch that they felt they could benefit, its no accident. Its a shame the time spent couldn't have been fixated on the game itself . Annoyed by the game being held back by something which will in the future to be at best a gimmick at worst a joke.

 

[Ceadeus]

Joe gets really ennoying after 30 minutes of video. Just the way he never let his friend talk or speaks louder than him piss me off.

Doesn't seem like afinished video game though, many problem.

 

[rashbeep]

exactly. Well designed games will guide you to play the way the developers want you to play. I can't beat Dark Souls, or Devil May Cry, but just mashing the X button. If I could, would people discount that as a critique of the game because that's how I chose to play the game?

People's response in the case of QB seems to be "But look at all the cool shit you can do with the powers **insert gif**" but if none of that is necessary to play or advance in the game, what good is it?

It's an interesting point... perhaps it is a design flaw. I feel QB is a similar case to the first Crysis. The powers from the suit weren't necessarily forced on the player, and it was up to the player to use the tools given to them. It was entirely possible to beat that game without really using anything else other than armor mode.

But like the first Crysis, I can't say QB is a bad game. It's just fun when you use everything you have.. because if they're there, why wouldn't I use them?

 

[Matt]

I don't know how they could have made it any clearer between the tutorials, power upgrades, time shifting enemies, and scripted segments where you have to use your powers. Other than flashing on the screen "HEY USE YOUR POWERS"...or making the game just impossible (it's hard as is without using your powers) then I don't think they could make it any more evident. This is a third person shooter and by design the game has to have guns and has to have shooting so at a bare minimum it can be played like that however everything in the game is pointing you to not play like that.

Again, if it's "the right way to play," it should be the only viable way to play.

 

[WordsintheWater]

And how in the heck can anyone say that hip fire shouldn't of been included in this game, the time mechanics lend themselves to hip fire greatly. Many moments would have been more enjoyable if the game had hip fire. Time Rush into an enemy, knock them back, hip fire to take them out. Instead I have to take aim with a delay in order to try and kill a dude one step ahead of me, come the fuck on, it's a stupid design decision.

 

[zsynqx]

Wait so there is a "right way"?

Learning the basic combat system and how to manage stamina, knowing how to use items, levelling up your character/weapons and understanding the concept of checkpoints is all required for most people to make significant progress within the game. You will likely be punished for not learning these systems.

Even doing the bare minimum in a Souls game in terms of experimentation will still give you a deep gameplay experience.

Again I can't comment on QB specifically as I haven't played it, but if you can progress without much if any incentive to utilize a number of the games core mechanics, it is probably the fault of the designers.

There was a post earlier from a Remedy developer who said not including hip-fire came down to time and resources (feeling that the resources could be better spent on something players would better utilize), so it seems like even Remedy would have preferred hip-fire (though obviously I can't speak for the studio).

For a game that tries to encourage movement during combat having the only means of shooting to be taking up a fairly static aiming position wasn't a good idea. If anything the game should have only had hip-fire, if they had to pick one.

Here's the quote:

Despite my problems with the game, I feel Infamous SS/First light handled this really well.

https://youtu.be/9WQ2xb04K14?t=97

 

[Alienous]

And how in the heck can anyone say that hip fire shouldn't of been included in this game, the time mechanics lend themselves to hip fire greatly. Many moments would have been more enjoyable if the game had hip fire. Time Rush into an enemy, knock them back, hip fire to take them out. Instead I have to take aim with a delay in order to try and kill a dude one step ahead of me, come the fuck on, it's a stupid design decision.

There was a post earlier from a Remedy developer who said not including hip-fire came down to time and resources (feeling that the resources could be better spent on something players would better utilize), so it seems like even Remedy would have preferred hip-fire (though obviously I can't speak for the studio).

For a game that tries to encourage movement during combat having the only means of shooting to be taking up a fairly static aiming position wasn't a good idea. If anything the game should have only had hip-fire, if they had to pick one.

Here's the quote:

Interesting fact; we actually did have a blindfire / hipfire option in the game for a very long while – to finish it would of cost X (a lot) amount of time and resource and we felt that a: people wouldn’t use blindfire (internal and external testing showed that no one used it) and b: we wanted to spend that resource on something else.

 

[WordsintheWater]

There was a post earlier from a Remedy developer who said not including hip-fire came down to time and resources (feeling that the resources could be better spent on something players would better utilize), so it seems like even Remedy would have preferred hip-fire (though obviously I can't speak for the studio).

For a game that tries to encourage movement during combat having the only means of shooting to be taking up a fairly static aiming position wasn't a good idea. If anything the game should have only had hip-fire, if they had to pick one.

Well that sucks, and exactly if they chose hip fire alone it would have also forced people to use the time mechanics way more.

 

[Pathfinder]

Jeff Gerstmann had a similar criticism and suggested they'd have been better off implementing a combo system of sorts, rewarding and encouraging players to combo abilities and not simply play it as a 3rd person cover shooter.

A combo system would definitely have made the shooting more interesting.

 

[nib95]

Personally I don't think devs should really be forcing people to play a certain way by removing features, instead they should be incentivising it through better reward or enemy AI that more intelligently counter acts un-ideal strategy. I think one of the issues I had with QB is that it breaks this rule, and does actually force you to play a certain way by taking away basic features, like a proper cover system, blind fire, hip fire, shooting behind cover or corners, ordinary melee etc. I get it, it's not really a cover shooter, but that doesn't mean essentials can't still be in there just to mix things up, and for those that prefer or want it. All they had to do was make time powers more fun and effective, and people would still use it over ordinary strategy.

Another thing I found is that even on Hard, the game is actually way too easy (probably because the Carbine Rifle is OP, and I kept it most of the second half of the game). The AI isn't actually that smart at all, and you can very easily get in to safe zones or rhythms where AI are effectively useless, especially the big brutes who you need to shoot in their backpacks. They're never actually threatening except when you first meet them because you don't yet know how dangerous they are.

Really the only part of the entire game I found remotely challenging, was the final boss, which was challenging for all the wrong reasons, and very poorly designed.

I think the removal of these basic features, coupled with the sour taste left by the final boss, probably left more of a bad impression on certain journalists and gamers than would have otherwise been the case. Personally I had great fun with the combat, but certainly would have preferred more options, even traditional cover shooter ones. Time shield pretty much is the alternative to cover, and if you're waiting for it to recharge, your only options are usually just to time dash or run, or simply take cover unintuitively using surrounding objects, so they might as well have just put proper cover features in.

 

[TrojanBlade]

He is the go to review for me now as I agree with him the most among all the other reviews. The 5/10 score seems the right score for this game IMO.

Also found this:

Response to QB review

lol

 

[ResoRai]

And how in the heck can anyone say that hip fire shouldn't of been included in this game, the time mechanics lend themselves to hip fire greatly. Many moments would have been more enjoyable if the game had hip fire. Time Rush into an enemy, knock them back, hip fire to take them out. Instead I have to take aim with a delay in order to try and kill a dude one step ahead of me, come the fuck on, it's a stupid design decision.

Your'e talking about the time dodge right?
I felt that way sometimes while playing, but eh I don't think they should've. The purpose of aiming after a time dodge is to slow down time. They'd have to make time slow down automatically after every time rush, which would detract a bit of skill needed while using it imo.

I think they should've added normal melee in the game tho.

 

[Alienous]

The lack of melee was another move that made the game feel a generation behind its compatriots in terms of combat.

Using a time shield just isn't as intuitive, and it becomes another weird thing when you get close to an enemy and don't know how exactly to deal with them. Then they hit you. It's sort of ridiculous.

 

[WordsintheWater]

Your'e talking about the time dodge right?
I felt that way sometimes while playing, but eh I don't think they should've. The purpose of aiming after a time dodge is to slow down time. They'd have to make time slow down automatically after every time rush, which would detract a bit of skill needed while using it imo.

I think they should've added normal melee in the game tho.

Yeah Time Doge, sorry. Regardless that's only one example, hip fire would have helped all around. Would have encouraged more players to get out of cover, because sometimes it's down right difficult to get a bead on an enemy when you're up close, and a lot of the time mechanics lend themselves to being up close. Melee as well would have been a welcome addition.

 

[D20CritMiss]

The player should learn how to use your game systems by the time he's done playing the game. Tutorials probably aren't good enough at explaining why you'd want to combo all the abilities together or something?

Jeff Gerstmann had a similar criticism and suggested they'd have been better off implementing a combo system of sorts, rewarding and encouraging players to combo abilities and not simply play it as a 3rd person cover shooter.

LoL they do have a combo system. Maybe Jeff needed his hand held more. But yes you can combo abilities to mitigate the need to be behind cover. Its all about the focus time and managing your cool downs which cool down at same rate even when focus time is in use.. its really pretty simple, and the reward is enjoyable combat that makes you feel godly for using everything you're given to use.

 

[sbkodama]

When tps make the use of cover and blind shoot a standard, and you allow your character to cover, you can't expect some gamers to not be upset by the lack of this feature, same for melee, contextual climbing, and maybe some others.

 

[farisr]

LoL they do have a combo system. Maybe Jeff needed his hand held more. But yes you can combo abilities to mitigate the need to be behind cover. Its all about the focus time and managing your cool downs which cool down at same rate even when focus time is in use.. its really pretty simple, and the reward is enjoyable combat that makes you feel godly for using everything you're given to use.

I feel embarrassed for you.

 

[Alienous]

Despite my problems with the game, I feel Infamous SS/First light handled this really well.

https://youtu.be/9WQ2xb04K14?t=97

Yeah, Infamous/Sunset Overdrive came to mind, as they maintain fluid moment in combat. Quantum Break could have benefited from a similar approach. In QB you basically have to stand still to shoot, which is antithetical to making combat move around and flow - you have to make an effort with Quantum Break to make that happen.

 

[D20CritMiss]

Again, if it's "the right way to play," it should be the only viable way to play.

Forgetting "right or wrong", What kind of player plays a game in a way that they don't enjoy and completely fails to investigate other styles of play?

I mean, I started out playing it as a cover shooter too, when I found that I was being flanked or flushed out by heavily armored shotgunners and dying all the time I was like "hmm... what can I do to change my behavior to have more fun with this? How can I do better?"

It appears many reviewers just went "stupid game, argh" instead.

I feel embarrassed for you.

save it for that post.

 

[BBboy20]

There was a post earlier from a Remedy developer who said not including hip-fire came down to time and resources (feeling that the resources could be better spent on something players would better utilize), so it seems like even Remedy would have preferred hip-fire (though obviously I can't speak for the studio).

For a game that tries to encourage movement during combat having the only means of shooting to be taking up a fairly static aiming position wasn't a good idea. If anything the game should have only had hip-fire, if they had to pick one.

Here's the quote:

I was not aware just aiming alone can cost that much. Though, if they ditched ADS, it would have became Max Payne with literal bullet time.

 

[flaxknuckles]

Joe gets really annoying after 30 minutes of video. Just the way he never let his friend talk or speaks louder than him piss me off.

I don't think I've ever heard anything intelligent come out of Other Joe's mouth so it's probably for the best.

 

[dt2]

Again, if it's "the right way to play," it should be the only viable way to play.

I don't agree with this sentiment. Games are a virtual playground and thus you can play them how you want (there's not necessarily a "right way to play"). There's a preferred way to play though that the developer models their game around and provides tools to the player to utilize this preferred way. Sure you could play FEAR without using slowmo (I did for a while because I thought it was context sensitive), you could play MGS without fully utilizing stealth (I ran through MGS3 because I cared more about the story and not so much the gameplay), you could play Max Payne without the dive, you could play Crysis without using the suit powers, you could play the Division without using any skills...but why would you? Not only would you be missing out on the game experience the developers intended but you would put yourself at a disadvantage as you progressed through the game. I can understand if the preferred way just wasn't that well developed or it wasn't explained correctly but I didn't see this as the case in Quantum Break. The entire story revolves around shifting time, the powers are all introduced with a tutorial, the game puts an emphasis on upgrading your powers, enemies utilize the same powers and aggressively pressure you, progress becomes difficult without using your powers, some segments require that you use your powers, aiming loses accuracy fast as distance increases, and the game rewards you with really amazing looking action sequences. If after all that you refuse to use the powers even after the developer has given you every incentive too...then I think that mostly falls on the player. My playthrough of MGS3 wasn't as fun as it could be (dat story though...amazing) but I understand that it was completely my fault for not utilizing the tools the developer gave me.

 

[Snaggle]

I think Angry Joe is one of the best video game reviewers currently out there, these videos are usually half an hour long with him not only explaining what he thinks about the game in great details, all the highs and lows but he also shares with us some funny exploits, glitches (love Weeeee Man), along with this he provides video proof of almost everything he says.

I can understand people not agreeing with him but to write off his opinions is very short sighted. He complains about the inconsistency of doors in this game and goes on to show you about 3-4 examples and you have no choice but to agree with him because he is right. He also shows us some of the most boring CGI/cut scenes in video game history (that dude playing with that woman on the bed was cringe worthy). Also shows us video proof of what has to be the dumbest AI I've seen since ever....I don't think I could leave my game in front of any enemy for 10 minutes and not have it kill me? That was absolutely laughable. The only upside I see in this game is Dominic Monaghan is in it lol.

Still waiting for Xbone's killer exclusive and at this rate I think Cuphead will be the only one.

 

[Manus]

It's Resident Evil 6/Vanquish all over again!

Anyways, always love Joe's reviews.

 

[Messofanego]

Also shows us video proof of what has to be the dumbest AI I've seen since ever....I don't think I could leave my game in front of any enemy for 10 minutes and not have it kill me? That was absolutely laughable.

Any shooter (FEAR, RE 4, Uncharted, Vanquish, The Division, Destiny, etc), you can find cases of enemies acting dumb or oblivious. This is my issue is that people are now generalising one example of an AI not killing the player as indicative of all the enemy AI you'll ever encounter in this game.

 

[farisr]

save it for that post.

Nah, your post was bad. Laughing first of all and not getting the meaning of the post you're replying to. Then acting all "LOL git gud" behavior with that hand held comment, even though what the suggestion was wasn't about getting good, but rewarding good combo play. And then going on to proclaim the gameplay being the rewards like a PR/shill/fanboy line. Your post was bad and embarrassing all around.

By combo system, they didn't mean that you can't combo moves together, they said maybe having a hook/tangible reward for comboing together would've encouraged players to try comboing more. Like for instance, extra damage, or a faster meter recharge etc. Something along those lines. Not that comboing isn't possible.

 

[D20CritMiss]

Any shooter (FEAR, RE 4, Uncharted, Vanquish, The Division, Destiny, etc), you can find cases of enemies acting dumb or oblivious. This is my issue is that people are now generalising one example of an AI not killing the player as indicative of all the enemy AI you'll ever encounter in this game.

But its VIDEO PROOF!!! it has to be representative of the common play experience... It was a silly thing to put in the video and its a silly thing for people to use to judge gameplay on.

Hell, I've got Video Proof that in Destiny I can annihilate one of those Knights on the moon with a shotgun and the remaining ones on the screen will think better of it and run and hide. but it was just a fluke of the AI. I could do it 100x more and not get that result.

 

[nynt9]

But its VIDEO PROOF!!! it has to be representative of the common play experience... It was a silly thing to put in the video and its a silly thing for people to use to judge gameplay on.

Hell, I've got Video Proof that in Destiny I can annihilate one of those Knights on the moon with a shotgun and the remaining ones on the screen will think better of it and run and hide. but it was just a fluke of the AI. I could do it 100x more and not get that result.

Joe always puts random funny moments like that in his reviews. It's not specific to QB.

 

[Reg]

Those live action videos seem atrocious, what were the devs even thinking with those.

 

[Snaggle]

Any shooter (FEAR, RE 4, Uncharted, Vanquish, The Division, Destiny, etc), you can find cases of enemies acting dumb or oblivious. This is my issue is that people are now generalising one example of an AI not killing the player as indicative of all the enemy AI you'll ever encounter in this game.

Also shows us video proof of what has to be the dumbest AI I've seen since ever....I don't think I could leave my game in front of any enemy for 10 minutes and not have it kill me?

Please post some examples of a Resident Evil 4 enemy being stupid, you would get absolutely slaughtered in that game if you left your controller in front of any enemy.

The other games you listed I don't really care about as I don't like them but again some kind of proof would be great. As I've highlighted above from my original comment "I've never seen it" so please enlighten me.

Also dumb enemy AI is the least of this games problems.

 

[PrimaNocta]

One mans opinion doesn't deter me from any game but those cutscenes being 20+ mins each is not something I'm looking forward too. i'll pick up the game sometime within the next few months.

 

[jim2point0]

One mans opinion doesn't deter me from any game but those cutscenes being 20+ mins each is not something I'm looking forward too. i'll pick up the game sometime within the next few months.

Can you not skip them? Because that would be an instant deal breaker.

 

[D20CritMiss]

Nah, your post was bad. Laughing first of all and not getting the meaning of the post you're replying to. Then acting all "LOL git gud" behavior with that hand held comment, even though what the suggestion was wasn't about getting good, but rewarding good combo play. And then going on to proclaim the gameplay being the rewards like a PR/shill/fanboy line. Your post was bad and embarrassing all around.

By combo system, they didn't mean that you can't combo moves together, they said maybe having a hook/tangible reward for comboing together would've encouraged players to try comboing more. Like for instance, extra damage, or a faster meter recharge etc. Something along those lines. Not that comboing isn't possible.

lol, the tangible reward was not losing and getting mad about it.. Somehow, without any kind of counter on the screen, I managed to figure out that it was able to string the moves together. I don't think that I'm special in any way, so yea I kinda blame anyone who just went "argh dumb game" and kept playing it in a way they didnt enjoy.

Joe always puts random funny moments like that in his reviews. It's not specific to QB.

Don't tell me, tell the people acting like its representative of typical gameplay.

 

[Ricky Ricardo]

One mans opinion doesn't deter me from any game but those cutscenes being 20+ mins each is not something I'm looking forward too. i'll pick up the game sometime within the next few months.

Can you not skip them? Because that would be an instant deal breaker.

You can skip them, and they're not cut-scenes. They're simply interactive world-builders (Your junction choices and some Quantum Ripples collected in game change their content) that give some of the secondary characters so space of their own for development.

 

[OneUh8]

He is the go to review for me now as I agree with him the most among all the other reviews. The 5/10 score seems the right score for this game IMO.

Also found this:

Response to QB review

lol

rofl

 

[CoG]

You're really not going to like the Souls games/threads.

Play a Souls game wrong and you won't progress. Play any of these other games people say "you're playing wrong" and you progress but it's not enjoyable. That's the key difference. 90% of the audience is not going to play it on hard with an internet forum prescribed style of gameplay.

 

[Myggen]

Agree with this review for the most part. Thought the story was mediocre at best, the TV show didn`t add anything and wasn`t executed very well and the combat never felt really good to me. It`s an okay game, nothing more.

 

[Alebrije]

The problem with QB is that Microsoft sold it as the next big game for Xbone, but is not a game for a massive market. It's not Halo or Gears. Its an interesting concept but not a game for all. Also the story is boring and a good one is a must on those kind of games

 

[Pathfinder]

Those live action videos seem atrocious, what were the devs even thinking with those.

"Seem"?

They're much better when you actually play the game and actively engage yourself in the story and characters.

And what was Remedy thinking? Well, if you know Remedy then you know that part of the overall story of any of their games has always taken place in the form of a story-within-the-story. In the Max Payne games, it was all the televisions scattered around the world that you could take a break to watch and get some more insight into the characters and plot in the form of silly little TV dramas. In Alan Wake, same thing with episodes of Night Springs.

If you ask me, they have been building up to this half game / half TV show format for over a decade now, and they're taking a courageous step to try something different and make it happen.

 

[R_thanatos]

But its VIDEO PROOF!!! it has to be representative of the common play experience... It was a silly thing to put in the video and its a silly thing for people to use to judge gameplay on.

Hell, I've got Video Proof that in Destiny I can annihilate one of those Knights on the moon with a shotgun and the remaining ones on the screen will think better of it and run and hide. but it was just a fluke of the AI. I could do it 100x more and not get that result.

I don't think that in RE4, Vanquish, FEAR , the division IN a battle situation , you can leave your controller alone during 10 minutes and came back virtually untouched.

And even if it's a fluke, it happenned to him and he has video proof , so you can't really argue that he is dishonnest about it , when that was playing for laughs and he himself specified that there is more to it than that

 

[D20CritMiss]

The problem with QB is that Microsoft sold it as the next big game for Xbone, but is not a game for a massive market. It's not Halo or Gears. Its an interesting concept but not a game for all. Also the story is boring and a good one is a must on those kind of games

Yea, pretty much. I personally am glad I got it, but not everyone wants something non-traditional, mass market this was never going to be.

 

[Y2Kev]

I like the TV show bits. I admit they are truly dreadful but I like them. And I don't think you can consider them wholly separate from the product that is the game itself since it really does give you information on the characters' motivations and backgrounds that really fill in missing gaps.

I really like linear cinematic setpiece gaming though!

 

[Vinland]

"Seem"?

They're much better when you actually play the game and actively engage yourself in the story and characters.

And what was Remedy thinking? Well, if you know Remedy then you know that part of the overall story of any of their games has always taken place in the form of a story-within-the-story. In the Max Payne games, it was all the televisions scattered around the world that you could take a break to watch and get some more insight into the characters and plot in the form of silly little TV dramas. In Alan Wake, same thing with episodes of Night Springs.

If you ask me, they have been building up to this half game / half TV show format for over a decade now, and they're taking a courageous step to try something different and make it happen.

Except they couldn't have hip fire because they were low on resources, and yet they invest resources into the tv shows that SEEM mediocre. Is that not a valid concern we should be able to have before plunking down 60 dollars cash money? Also, is it not a valid concern that this of us who are cable cutters who seek only TV productions worthy of our time judge the TV show portion of this game with those same critiques we use to filter our other shows with?

The game doesn't look anything like it did when they had that awesome reveal. And even then I had concerns when they mentioned tv integration. When I saw the screens and gameplay of the final product, via Gaf I might add, I immediately thought it actually looked boring. I suspected that those awesome powers might be pointless. And on normal it seems they can be.

Now with all the media and games to divide my time I now know the lackluster fringe-sequel tv show might be a pain and I'll need to play on hard to git good. That has a lot going against it with how much energy I'll need to muster to enjoy this game when I do eventually get it.

The defense force in this thread has done more to damage the game for me than Joe ever could in that review.

 

[Bornstellar]

Well, I think it shows an exmaple of precisly what he is tlkaing about: brain dead AI.

You getting angry doesn't refute that.

That's tantamount to having a single cowering grunt on the run in Halo, taking cover behind something, then saying Halo has bad AI because said grunt does not proceed to murder you. It's disingenuous at best.

 

[D20CritMiss]

I don't think that in RE4, Vanquish, FEAR , the division IN a battle situation , you can leave your controller alone during 10 minutes and came back virtually untouched.

And even if it's a fluke, it happenned to him and he has video proof , so you can't really argue that he is dishonnest about it , when that was playing for laughs and he himself specified that there is more to it than that

I bet ya in the Division I could if I was just in a regular street battle and I had whittled it down to just one marksman type. take standing cover and they'll bang away at it or make insignificant position adjustments till the end of time from what I've seen. Likely more easily reproduced than what Joe showed.

Point is, anyone with enough time and the desire to do so can mess around with a game enough to find a place where the AI breaks down somewhere. In no way does that mean its representative of the typical experience.

 

[Snaggle]

Too low on resources to include a basic game mechanic like hip fire but they got enough money and time to hire fairly well known actors and spend 20 minutes or more on drawn out cutscenes? hahahahahh

That's tantamount to having a single cowering grunt on the run in Halo, taking cover behind something, then saying Halo has bad AI because said grunt does not proceed to murder you. It's disingenuous at best.

If I remember correctly the enemy in Angry Joe's video was trying his best to kill the player (for 15 minutes lol) and not running off and cowering in a corner somewhere. It looked pretty bad.

Point is, anyone with enough time and the desire to do so can mess around with a game enough to find a place where the AI breaks down somewhere. In no way does that mean its representative of the typical experience.

There was no 'desire' or 'time' on Joe's part, the game created the situation itself. All I hear are empty words but no one coming up with any sort of proof of this happening in other games lol. Also when Joe rounded the corner after killing that dumb grunt there was a whole battlefield of enemies who did nothing except wait for Joe to come out from behind his rock. Dumbest enemy AI I've seen in a long time, that's for sure. Seems to have been created with zero passion for exciting gameplay, just cannon fodder by the numbers.

 

[nynt9]

I bet ya in the Division I could if I was just in a regular street battle and I had whittled it down to just one marksman type. take standing cover and they'll bang away at it or make insignificant position adjustments till the end of time from what I've seen. Likely more easily reproduced than what Joe showed.

Point is, anyone with enough time and the desire to do so can mess around with a game enough to find a place where the AI breaks down somewhere. In no way does that mean its representative of the typical experience.

The Division is an open world game so it makes sense that the AI would be rough at spots and not be designed for every environment. This game is linear. Did you know that in FEAR they designed the AI uniquely for every single encounter? That's why that game is still renowned for its AI.

Too low on resources to include a basic game mechanic like hip fire but they got enough money and time to hire fairly well known actors and spend 20 minutes or more on drawn out cutscenes? hahahahahh

.