For juggles, simply use a different visual cue system. For example, in the game, I assume (I haven't played GoW) the cue to attack again to keep an enemy juggled is that the character is falling and is in range to be hit. You hit him again and he goes back up. You could accomplish the same task by simply having a number on the enemy: for example, when you hit him "up", he will come back "down" in 4 seconds. Have a small clock on the person tick down from 4 to 3 to 2 to 1. You hit him again to keep him juggled at "1." We might call these "timing combos" instead of "juggles," but the effect is the same. In fact, juggles really are just timing combos, but they're given a coat of paint to make them seem like you're doing more than pressing A-B-D-A-A at specified times. In reality, that's all you're doing.
Tain said:Ignoring the fact that the visual feedback to the player is completely different and will, by attaching a rhythm to things, make the juggle easier, what if the hardware is too weak to update the sprites and counters at 60fps when three enemies are thrown into the air?
Wut??Hcoregamer00 said:As a graphics whore I must say that improvements in graphics do affect my enjoyment of the game.
I was pissed to find out that the PSP go did not offer a graphics jump over the PSP-3000 like the DSi over the DS.
Y2Kev said:How could Red Faction Guerrilla be done on an NES? Or a PS1? Or even a PS2?
yankee666 said:Wut??
I don't know if you've played Red Faction Guerrilla, but you've lost the essence of what makes the game special. Text cannot adequately capture the interactions that take place in this game. Moreover, provided it were possible to pick between an extremely large number of real objects bound by architectural design laws to specifically target them using text, I'd argue you've constructed something completely different from Red Faction Guerrilla.Opiate said:I'll one up you: I can imagine this game as a text based adventure. In fact, I've played very similar games: games which describe the surrounding environment in great detail. You can interract with virtually every single piece of the world around you.
Most of these games aren't as simple as "Destroy it!" but theoretically, they could be. In reality, these games typically have much more complex interactions. Which is to say, they're profoundly more complex than Red Faction: Guerrilla. You have two things you can do in Red Faction: 1) Leave something alone or 2) Blow it up with a gun.
You have two things you can do in Red Faction: 1) Leave something alone or 2) Blow it up with a gun.
Eteric Rice said:I think Opiate's point is that gameplay can usually be replicated on nearly anything. The method and effectiveness of their solutions may vary, but at very least the gameplay can be replicated fairly accurately.
Eteric Rice said:The DSi has like 4 times the RAM and twice the processing power of the DS Lite and DS I think.
Thats probably what he's talking about.
Kintaro said:I think the point, which he is missing is that while you can simply damn near anything to replicate it a game, it wouldn't be that game anymore. More importantly, would you want to play it? If we did, we would be.
That's why the market has continued to move. If there was no demand to move, it would not have moved.
Oh, I see. Yeah, I don't even particularly like the game...I guess I'm just more impressed by the technology. I find "groundbreaking" (it's sort of punny with this game, but it's in quotes because it probably isn't really groundbreaking and I am not ignorant to this) games often are this way...somewhere in between tech demos and good games.Opiate said:Kev, I edited the above post. I decided I don't know enough about Red Faction to comment. Sorry about that.
AceBandage said:Some info on Pokemon Mystery Dungeons for WiiWare.
http://wii.ign.com/articles/100/1003797p1.html
Seems the game will feature an online mode, new 3D graphics, unique abilities (like being able to stack your Pokemon for ultra attacks) and downloadable missions.
A game's code is the game's rules. What a machine executes, calculates, and decides. All aesthetic decisions are (at the very least) subtle mechanical ones, simply by nature of a game requiring a human being to play it. By saying that your juggle method is "more precise" (easier), you are showing clear as day that the game will cause a different reaction in the player.Opiate said:To the contrary, I would expect my system to be much more capable. If there was simply a number on the sprite of the enemy (e.g. "4!" "3!" "2!") one could time juggles much more precisely than one could by simply eyeballing it, as we do now.
You don't need to throw them in to the air, that's what I'm saying. All "throw them in the air" does is create a visual queue that says, "this guy is ready to be juggled." This could be accomplished in innumerable different ways.
Kintaro said:I think the point, which he is missing is that while you can simply [do] damn near anything to replicate it a game, it wouldn't be that game anymore. More importantly, would you want to play it? If we did, we would be.
Opiate said:We do play it. Chess is a very simple game that can be recreated on the Atari 2600 (or lower. It's just an example). I can garauntee that more people will play Chess today than will play CoD4.
Opiate said:And that is completely fine. You're welcome to your preferences. Please let others enjoy theirs.
Opiate said:How does that define the entire "experience?" Again, what if part of the "experience," to me, is playing it while on the subway? What if voice acting is completely irrelevant to me, and thus is not part of the "experience?" Are these people wrong? No. They just have different priorities and, consequently, "experience" the game differently.
This gets to the root of the entire discussion. Look at how you've defined "experience." The idea of what it is to "experience" a video game to you is so deeply ingrained that you cannot imagine others valuing different things. What if I valued the control mechanism the game used? That's part of the experience for me. You didn't even consider this, however, because you apparently don't care very much about it.
There is no correct, be-all-end-all definition of "Experience." You listed what makes the "experience" for you, but that is not necessarily what makes the experience for other people.
Opiate said:In your opinion. Which you are welcome to. Can I have my opinion, too, please? Without being called a moron or a troll?
How can you say that? I don't agree.Deku said:VC would be just as neat as a hex based, isometric game..
Deku said:I'm pretty sure the gaggle of SRPG gamers here would find your loose characterization of the non PS3 SRPGs 'very basic' graphically to be an insult.
I've played VC, I liked VC, but the graphics argument is really just about what is possible on the PS3 and may be possible on the PSP and less to do with the game itself.
VC would be just as neat as a hex based, isometric game. And those games are anything but basic in the AV department. People who prefer that are probably in the majority in this case.
rosjos44 said:I am glad about the platform change for many reasons. My main reason is the fact that I do not have time for console gaming anymore and handheld gaming has been my only time. I think most gamers the passed ten years have been diluted on the fact of HD audio, graphics, etc that they simply forget the soul of a video game and the enjoyment. Seriously its sad imo.
Hobbun said:I have played the older SRPGs as well and still enjoy them. FFTs is probably still my number 1 favorite SRPG.
But I would say VC's gameplay, along with it's storybook format is what truly makes it unique. And in the process of that storybook format was using the colorful graphics and well done sound (including music). And I don't say that just for me, but for most who enjoyed the game from what I have read and heard.
So I would have to strongly disagree with you if you turned VC into FFT, or Disgaea, would be just as well liked. You'd probably have a lot of pissed off people, actually. And the game would definitely no longer be Valkyria Chronicles.
Deku said:I'm pretty sure the gaggle of SRPG gamers here would find your loose characterization of the non PS3 SRPGs 'very basic' graphically to be an insult.
I've played VC, I liked VC, but the graphics argument is really just about what is possible on the PS3 and may be possible on the PSP and less to do with the game itself.
VC would be just as neat as a hex based, isometric game. And those games are anything but basic in the AV department. People who prefer that are probably in the majority in this case.
Deku said:I don't disagree there will be a lot of pissed off people. But it won't be because a FFT type VC will play any worse. It's as you say, the PS3 setting a certain standard [for the fans] but it's by no means a new breakthrough only possible on certain hardware.
And I have no problem with that. But your reference to 'very basic' graphics doesn't make sense to me. And it's not as if the current dominant style of SPRGs are somehow limited visually, stylistically or even technically from presenting an SRPG in a novel, interesting way with 'colorful' graphics.
xs_mini_neo said:Yeah, I'm not against better graphics, but I don't want other things to suffer just to have prettier graphics. I say only graphics because sound peaked a while back and can't be made much better. If many games did not get worse as the graphics got better, you wouldn't find as many people saying graphics aren't that important. Now we have games that are getting better visually but failing in other areas, and then combine that with the fanboys who act like that's great, is it any wonder why some people are fine with VC going to PSP?
Hobbun said:And I never said you couldn't, I only said the standards have been set with the first VC. If you read any of the reviews or talk to others about the game, those are many of the reasons they have stated they like it.
If you prefer very basic graphics with little sound, you are certainly entitlted to your preference. But please be aware that you are definitely in the minority.
As I said above, what I listed in what made the game enjoyable for me, is what has been listed in reviews and impressions I have read from others. It's not just the gameplay, but all of those aspects that are included during reviews.
But I am talking about what is in the game in what makes it an enjoyable experience. You make reference to real life experiences. Ok, fine then. Well, when I play my handheld games, I like to have a cup of juice and sometimes have the tv on the background. It makes the game a more enjoyable 'experience' for me. But is that something the developer can even fathom to have any control over? Same idea on that you enjoy the portability of it. And that has more to do with the actual handheld system than specifically the game itself.
It is great you enjoy playing your games on the go,
but don't confuse that with enjoyable experiences designed into the game compared to enjoyable 'experiences' you like to do in real life.
You are welcome to your opinion. But really, it's just ludicrous the argument you are trying to make in saying that Valkyria Chronicles would be the same game if you took a lot of those things you proposed out or changed the game that drastically.
To just about everyone (except maybe yourself) it would no longer be Valkyria Chronicles.
And as for calling you a moron or troll, I had never said that in my post.
Linkzg said:ok, reading a bit more, it seems like people saying technology doesn't impact gameplay are really ignoring the benefits of having strong visuals in games. The stance some people seem to be taking is breaking down a game to the bare essentials and acting like that is what matters most, saying "gameplay" matters most, as if the time spent playing the game is just the mechanics.
I'd imagine this is a problem native to Video Games because for a good long time, games were just that. If you told someone that a movie would be just as good if you removed directing, acting and just had the text of the script, that wouldn't fly.
It also seems like people think that it's one or the other; strong visuals or mechanic importance.
can't relate to the luddite beliefs in this thread since I try and think about how to keep making games better while still enjoying what I currently have. Solid mechanics are imporatant to me, but so is the game having a rich atmosphere
Opiate said:I don't mind if I'm playing new games, 10 year old games, or 10000 year old games. It is irrelevant to me.
Tain said:A game's code is the game's rules. What a machine executes, calculates, and decides. All aesthetic decisions are (at the very least) subtle mechanical ones, simply by nature of a game requiring a human being to play it. By saying that your juggle method is "more precise" (easier), you are showing clear as day that the game will cause a different reaction in the player.
Even if you define "gameplay" as nothing but what the player inputs (which you are doing),
calculations go into what the game demands the player presses. You can't calculate the physics of a car hitting a garbage can which then clips someone and causes them to stagger backwards off of a ledge. You can try to 100% accurately break this scenario down into a logic demo, but at some point, you're going to have to change collision geometry or timing, and you'll be left with a fundamental mechanical change that will ask for different input by having the player deal with an enemy positioned in a different location.
Y2Kev said:Oh cmmon. I love old games and play them all the time, but I still "care" about graphics! You just have to be able to appreciate games for what they were.
I know personally I like seeing better graphics because I like seeing better graphics. I think it's important to be honest about this.
Deku said:I don't think separating people into graphics whores and whatever you want to call the rest (purists?) is productive.
okay, you got meOpiate said:You're doing this on purpose, right? This is tongue and cheek to get me going? This thread has been a little rough on me Kev, I'm doing my best to maintain a reasonable demeanor despite the slings and arrows.
Y2Kev said:okay, you got me
i don't even really know what's being argued. i'm gonna go stare at my lava lamp
SaitoH said:@Opiate - The two things I think that benefit greatly from increased processing power are AI and physics.
Consider a game completely built around physics like Littlebigplanet, or the sophisticated handling model for the cars of Forza 2, the glancing blows in Fight Night round 4 etc.
You can simplify and approximate systems like these, but that does effect gameplay.
Deku said:Back on topic. When a certian game like VC is done on a very capable machine like the PS3, it creates certain expectations and justifications for its existance. The expectations is somewhat understandable, the justifications are pretty much what you'd expect. X is on Y console because it can't be done elsewhere and thus X is special.
Opiate said:I'm definitely aware. And even more importantly, this game is on the PS3, a platform which has gone out of its way to attract graphics whores (the advertisements for the first year or two emphasized the system's computational power).
Opiate said:Let me summarize this part of your post: "You are welcome to your opinion... but you're fucking crazy."
This is exactly what I'm talking about. You do not seem to be able to accept that, for me, the quality of the game would not be changed if the PS3 had been made for the PS1. I honestly, genuinely, really mean it. I'm not crazy, or stupid or "ludicrous." It's not true for you, apparently, but it is true for me.
Opiate said:I'm not sure when people who care passionately about visuals came to such prominence. There was a time when people of your ilk were (unjustly) ridiculed: that's where the term "graphics whore" came from. It is a term intended to belittle those who care a great deal about superficial concerns like graphics or sound, and aren't 100% concerned with gameplay as "true" gamers are. Again, that was unfair, as everyone should be allowed to enjoy games their own way. But now it's done a complete 180: not only is it acceptable to care about graphics, but it's correct to care about them. People who don't care about them are obviously just DS owners, or they're morons or trolls, or their opinions are ludicrous.
Opiate said:I didn't mean to suggest you did. Several others have, that was my point.
Hcoregamer00 said:I think this is the disconnect that I have with many people who are complaining about VC on the PSP.
I may be a graphics whore, but I know that the PSP is perfectly capable of providing a perfect Valkyria Chronicles experience, assuming that the PSP sequel is given an appropriate budget to do so. The VC experience, from the cutscenes to the gameplay can be replicated on the PSP with no problems. Sure it will be a downgrade, but you can still experience Valkyria Chronicles on the PSP.
Angeles said:It's kinda awkward that all of sudden people wants the game on PSP/WII or even the freaking DS when nobody gave a fuck about valkyria chronicles on the ps3 and many of these people didnt even play valkyria chronicles yet
These people do not care about the game itself they care about the platform and call us close minded for only wanting the game on PS3 when people who actually cares about the game bought a PS3 for it and now they are asking them to buy PSP too
Linkzg said:... "revolutionary gameplay" or something, I don't remember, but it is kinda true. Valkyria takes third person shooter controls, breaks it down and adapts it to a turn based strategy game.
SaitoH said:@Opiate - The two things I think that benefit greatly from increased processing power are AI and physics.
Consider a game completely built around physics like Littlebigplanet, or the sophisticated handling model for the cars of Forza 2, the glancing blows in Fight Night round 4 etc.
You can simplify and approximate systems like these, but that does effect gameplay.
Eteric Rice said:Wait, isn't Little Big Planet being done on the PSP?