Support NeoGAF

[RRockman]

More shooters should be like Wolfenstein period.

There you are given a nifty cover system but cover is usually destructible and the enemies can alternate between fast and weak or strong but slow. It also gives them weapons to force you to MOVE since if you stay in one place for too long you'd be overrun or flanked and then die in a hurry.

 

[Croatoan]

There's a problem with this thesis. There weren't that many 3rd person shooters that didn't have cover to begin with. Other than RE4 and Max payne, most tps games had a cover system from the start.

FPS games on the other hand, hardly had cover systems and still don't.

Battlefield, arguably one of the biggest shooter series, has a cover system now. So does Farcry 3+, Wolfenstein, and I think one of the more recent call of duty games as well. PUGB (the new hotness), and Rainbow Six Siege have leaning which is the old school way to do cover. So, technically, FPS games with lean that go way back had "cover systems" if we define them as a method to peak out from cover.

So yeah, you are wrong.

 

[Osukaa]

Im gonna have to disagree I happen to really enjoy cover shooters, but whatever everyone has their own opinions.

Spoiler

even though you're wrong if you disagree with me

 

[BobTheFork]

Yes, cover. Not iron sights, secondary weapons, perks or asymmetrical multiplayer.

got it.

 

[Messofanego]

Most fun use of cover in a shooter was in Not A Hero.

I don't have as much a problem with cover systems as I used to but that's because as the video mentions, games are getting better at making you move despite the cover (Wolfenstein, Quantum Break, Vanquish, Uncharted).

 

[Croatoan]

Yes, cover. Not iron sights, secondary weapons, perks or asymmetrical multiplayer.

got it.

I will never understand why the correct way of firing a gun is frowned upon by people. Unless all you like are arcade shooters.

 

[More_Badass]

Most fun use of cover in a shooter was in Not A Hero.

I don't have as much a problem with cover systems as I used to but that's because as the video mentions, games are getting better at making you move despite the cover (Wolfenstein, Quantum Break, Vanquish, Uncharted).

My favorite cover systems treat cover as either a means for stealth or as a place to get a moment to breath, assess the room, plan your next move, and then keep moving, rather than hunkering down and popping out to shoot

However, that hunkering down aspect can be used as an advantage to make your enemies seem that much overwhelming and powerful, that their firepower and assault is so intense that you can only hunker down to survive.

 

[rodrigolfp]

ruined my 200 hours in The Division

 

[jg4xchamp]

Video nails it on all fronts. While I do dig Gears of War multiplayer, going back to these type of games after Vanquish, in single player, is an absolute bore. It's far too shallow because the mechanic is built around limiting options all together.

 

[Gbraga]

I really disagree with the idea that Uncharted is a lot more fun on easy. I'll give you that Crushing just makes it boring and discourages movement, for sure, but Hard is the sweet spot, to me.

For example, you decide to run torwards an enemy, shooting from the hip while you close that distance. On normal, two hits will kill a regular enemy, that's it, you shoot twice and they're done, but on Hard, you can hit them the 2 or 3 times you'll have time to before you get close enough to them, and that will greatly reduce their HP, just not enough to kill them. You can then hit them with the melee button, and because their health is low, you'll go straight for a finisher instead of engaging in the more lengthy combat scene. The fact that the enemies last longer make combat more mobile and engaging, while you're still perfectly fine after performing this maneuver, which wouldn't be the case on Crushing, you'd probably just die.

It's not perfect, the Uncharted games can be quite unbalanced, and you'll deal with some nasty difficulty spikes on Hard, but it's absolutely worth dealing with them in exchange for having more meaningful encounters for the vast majority of the time. On Easy you'll just shoot them and they're dead, that's no incentive to move, it just makes it easier, but it's still more practical to just hang in there and shoot them from a safe distance. If just being possible is enough incentive for you, then it's also possible on Hard, on top of having some actual incentive to move like enemies throwing grenades and flanking you.

As far as Naughty Dog games go, I think The Last of Us on Hard is still by far their most balanced and fun experience.

 

[Dlacy13g]

Could only stomach so much of that video so I may have missed a nugget or two but my two cents: cover hasn't ruined shooters. I think it created a great sub genre for shooters and gave us options to then rather boring formula of FPS games.

 

[CaptainClaw]

Well if cover systems are so bad why are a great sum of the games mentioned critically acclaimed and successful...he makes his point stating vanquish gets it right, but that isn't how those games are meant to be played, even if it seems like it puts the game on hold.

That is what these games decide to go for, cover base system...which many people like...should jrpgs lose their turn based system because gamers that play crpgs find that it puts the game on hold...NO. Again why compare Vanquish to those games when vanquish decides to be different which is fine, but other cover based games can still have that (get into cover, pop out, move into another cover space).

 

[Zvonimir Boban]

Well if cover systems are so bad why are a great sum of the games mentioned critically acclaimed and successful...he makes his point stating vanquish gets it right, but that isn't how those games are meant to be played, even if it seems like it puts the game on hold.

That is what these games decide to go for, cover base system...which many people like...should jrpgs lose their turn based system because gamers that play crpgs find that it puts the game on hold...NO. Again why compare Vanquish to those games when vanquish decides to be different which is fine, but other cover based games can still have that (get into cover, pop out, move into another cover space).

A lot of the critical acclaim for games like TLOU and Uncharted is despite the cover system, not because of it. Most people are drawn to the games for the writing, story, acting and set pieces rather than the combat.

 

[ElBoxyBrown]

Video nails it on all fronts. While I do dig Gears of War multiplayer, going back to these type of games after Vanquish, in single player, is an absolute bore. It's far too shallow because the mechanic is built around limiting options all together.

Gears multiplayer is not designed around cover. Movement is super important in Gears multiplayer. Staying in cover gets you killed.

 

[Rodney McKay]

For me there just became too many games with the same style of cover shooting. After Gears 2 I got tired of games where that was pretty much the only main gameplay style.

Even as average as the shooting was, Mass Effect 2+3 are some of my favorite cover shooters just because there was a lot of other stuff going on in the games; dialog system, RPG mechanics, exploration, etc.

My favorite games that are pure shooters are ones that let you choose how you want to play, like the new Wolfenstein's. Being able to be stealthy, use cover, or just go guns blazing was a lot of fun and varied the game up nicely. They also broke up the pure shooting gameplay with the slower story parts too so I didn't get exhausted with it.

 

[stanislavskov]

I've played some of the games the video showcased, but the most boring of them all has to be Gears of War. I played it way back when on PC and by god, was that game boring and drab. I finished it, but only because I had lots of spare time back then.

 

[More_Badass]

A lot of the critical acclaim for games like TLOU and Uncharted is despite the cover system, not because of it. Most people are drawn to the games for the writing, story, acting and set pieces rather than the combat.

Is that true or even accurate? I think people just accept the combat as is, and aren't going "I'm liking this even though there's a cover system". Plus,Uncharted incentives you to be agile and move, while TLOU is stealthy action, so staying behind cover is integrated into the core gameplay.

It isn't despite or because; it's just a part of the overall combat mechanics. Cover systems tend to mostly stand out when the gameplay is poorly designed and uses the cover as a crutch. Otherwise, cover is as natural as crouching or aiming or switching weapons, just a thing you do as part of the mechanics available

 

[Duchess O'Death]

Cover system didn't ruin anything. Games that don't need it don't have it. It depends not on how it's implemented but why it's implemented in a game. Games like TLOU would never work without the cover system. Other games like Doom would never work with the cover system. Both types of games could exist without one ruining the other.

 

[FUNKNOWN iXi]

Gears 4 multiplayer is one of the best third person cover shooters around. Not many games feel as good to play as Gears imo.

 

[Jangowuzhere]

I really hate it when Vanquish is somehow praised as the standout in cover shooters.

It may not have the exact same issues as most other cover based TPS, but it still has problems with its own. The limited energy usage really limits your creativity with the movement system. There is nothing more stupid and annoying than boosting up to an enemy, doing a power kick, and then having to roll back to get into cover and wait for your energy to recharge.

If they ever made a sequel to Vanquish, they would need to completely overhaul the energy system and the penalty for overheating before I would ever be interested. Those systems are less fun to deal with than just the typical cover based shooter problem.

 

[Skyball Paint]

Is that true or even accurate? I think people just accept the combat as is, and aren't going "I'm liking this even though there's a cover system". Plus,Uncharted incentives you to be agile and move, while TLOU is stealthy action, so staying behind cover is integrated into the core gameplay.

TLOU also punishes you if you try to play it like an Uncharted or Gears of Wars, on top of your limited health and ammo, getting hit knocks you out of the aiming animation, and enemies set up in a defensive position will tag you immediately if you peak your head out in front of them.

 

[Neoleo2143]

I really hate it when Vanquish is somehow praised as the standout in cover shooters.

It may not have the exact same issues as most other cover based TPS, but it still has problems with its own. The limited energy usage really limits your creativity with the movement system. There is nothing more stupid and annoying than boosting up to an enemy, doing a power kick, and then having to roll back to get into cover and wait for your energy to recharge.

If they ever made a sequel to Vanquish, they would need to completely overhaul the energy system and the penalty for overheating before I would ever be interested. Those systems are less fun to deal with than just the typical cover based shooter problem.

While I think Melee is a bit too cruel in Vanquish, there's still a number of useful applications. The Backhand shotgun parry, the speed of the Sniper melee kick and the HMG flip kick are incredibly useful.

The limited juice is the main challenge of the game. You're not just going to boost and smash an enemy group. You've got to be smart about it and manage that meter (and use various techniques, thus pushing players to higher level play). The granularity of the meter and how it ties into all of Sam's abilities is vital to keep vanquish interesting since the boost and slow mo are incredibly powerful abilities and would trivialize the game if they were unchecked. The harsh penalty is thus fair because it means you failed the challenge of the game and suffer a consequence as a result. It's not supposed to be fun in that sense.

 

[O Canada Our Home and Native Land]

Is that true or even accurate? I think people just accept the combat as is, and aren't going "I'm liking this even though there's a cover system". Plus,Uncharted incentives you to be agile and move, while TLOU is stealthy action, so staying behind cover is integrated into the core gameplay.

It isn't despite or because; it's just a part of the overall combat mechanics. Cover systems tend to mostly stand out when the gameplay is poorly designed and uses the cover as a crutch. Otherwise, cover is as natural as crouching or aiming or switching weapons, just a thing you do as part of the mechanics available

Uncharted threads have been a mix bag. The shooting aspects are one of the biggest frustrations detractors complain about.

I'm sure a game developer can explain better, but I would say a cover system is a game design while crouch is an additional movement and aiming is an essential function of a third person shooter. You can't have a third person shooter without aiming. Crouch and switching weapons are aspects of game design. You can't really start a genre based on crouching or switching weapons, but you can have genre of games designed around cover-based shooting. I hope that makes sense. Maybe someone can help me out by explaining it with game making jargon.

 

[Shifty]

The video comes off more as "How Vanquish Showed Up Its Parent Genre" but I can't say I disagree. Going from 90s run and gun to 360-era stop'n'pop was rubbish.

Would have been nice if RE6 got a bit of lip service though, the point of "cover is outmoded by your character kit and that's awesome" very much applies there as well.

Also what a lad. Cheeky banter lads lads lads.

 

[kubev]

Cover systems always baffled me. I never really understood what was so hard about manually crouching behind cover and leaning or popping up to fire. The fact that games with cover systems also happen to map far too much context-sensitivity to too few buttons to the point that it doesn't work consistently doesn't help, either.

 

[RedSparrows]

Yes, cover. Not iron sights, secondary weapons, perks or asymmetrical multiplayer.

got it.

This one gets it.

 

[Old Gimlet Eyes]

Leaning and crouching systems destroy s cover meachanic. Medal of Honor airborne has my favorite type of lean style cover system.

 

[Doc Holliday]

Battlefield, arguably one of the biggest shooter series, has a cover system now. So does Farcry 3+, Wolfenstein, and I think one of the more recent call of duty games as well. PUGB (the new hotness), and Rainbow Six Siege have leaning which is the old school way to do cover. So, technically, FPS games with lean that go way back had "cover systems" if we define them as a method to peak out from cover.

So yeah, you are wrong.

The point of the video was that cover ruined shooters. Yet all the games he covered were third person shooters that from start had cover systems.

Leaning in FPS is not in the same universe. leaning in FPS games are barely used, because unlike in third person perspective you can't see shit while you're in cover.

So yea I guess technically I'm wrong, but I think the point still stands.

Cover hasn't affected FPS games in any meaningful anyway and they were always there in 3rd person shooters.

I'm not a fan of cover systems, unless i'm playing a stealth game. but to say it ruined a genre that always had them doesn't sound right to me.

 

[Colocho]

I'd argue that cover systems revitalized the genre and without them, third person shooters would've died out a loooong time ago.

 

[Crossing Eden]

I'd argue that cover systems revitalized the genre and without them, third person shooters would've died out a loooong time ago.

People prop up vanquish without realizing that it's core gameplay absolutely wouldn't work in a MP context.

 

[Sir Ilpalazzo]

I really hate it when Vanquish is somehow praised as the standout in cover shooters.

It may not have the exact same issues as most other cover based TPS, but it still has problems with its own. The limited energy usage really limits your creativity with the movement system. There is nothing more stupid and annoying than boosting up to an enemy, doing a power kick, and then having to roll back to get into cover and wait for your energy to recharge.

If they ever made a sequel to Vanquish, they would need to completely overhaul the energy system and the penalty for overheating before I would ever be interested. Those systems are less fun to deal with than just the typical cover based shooter problem.

Vanquish is balanced in such a way that melee is a really powerful and devastating attack that will kill or severely damage nearly any enemy you hit it with. So the strong restrictions on melee make sense - it's something you're supposed to use to finish off enemies when you know you can recover safely afterwards, not something you haphazardly throw out to take out grunts.

 

[Skux]

So many exceptions. It's as if the quality of a game was actually about the execution of the gameplay qualities of its genre, rather than simply being based on the genre itself.

 

[RPGam3r]

I'd argue that cover systems revitalized the genre and without them, third person shooters would've died out a loooong time ago.

I agree with this far more than what is presented by the OP.

 

[dragonzdogma]

Just finished watching it. I despised cover shooters already but this made me dislike them even more. I don't remember trying a single cover based shooter that was actually fun to play.

I remember trying to cover in vanquish when a robot blew up the whole barrier with one shot....my first reaction was to rocket slide and make a run for it, as soon as I was at a safe distance I slow down time and noticed a big red light behind the enemies back. I knew then, that vanquish was mocking cover shooters.

 

[Fisty]

Good video. It made me pine for Vanquish as a BC title though lol

Cover in Vanquish is a trap... using it will get you killed much faster than staying mobile

 

[CassidyIzABeast]

More like how ballooning budgets, sales expectations, and increased risk mitigation ruined shooters.

 

[Dwight Schrute]

I liked Killzone 2

 

[Gaogaogao]

I agree with alot of what this video has to say. Ive probably been coddled by cover systems, so when a game like vanquish asks you to come out and play Im not ready. was pretty disappointed by max payne 3 for adding cover where you didnt need it before.

slow motion is such a more attractive mechanic than cover system. if gives you the time you need without tying you down. it also looks way cooler.

 

[Chaos2Frozen]

If the problem is that it slows down the pace, then the solution should be to speed up the movement of everything else.

You don't need slow-mo for that- I'm thinking of something snappy like how fast you duck from cover to cover in Persona 5. Slow-mo is always a very cool mechanic but it would limit it to only single player games.

 

[Gaogaogao]

If the problem is that it slows down the pace, then the solution should be to speed up the movement of everything else.

You don't need slow-mo for that- I'm thinking of something snappy like how fast you duck from cover to cover in Persona 5. Slow-mo is always a very cool mechanic but it would limit it to only single player games.

I think its more about the lack of mobility and options when you are tied to one location. like the video says, people want more time to aim because analog sticks are imprecise. I would rather spend that time out of cover, in slow motion, to aim well.

 

[Sweet Bellic]

Yes, cover. Not iron sights, secondary weapons, perks or asymmetrical multiplayer.

got it.

What's wrong with iron sights or secondary weapons?

With respect to cover systems, I think they're great. Even a cover system as wonky as GTA IV's managed to end up being one of my favorite QOL improvements for the franchise. Loved having the mechanic in Max Payne 3 too. I'm not always in the mood for run-n-gun gameplay.

 

[RPGam3r]

I think its more about the lack of mobility and options when you are tied to one location. like the video says, people want more time to aim because analog sticks are imprecise. I would rather spend that time out of cover, in slow motion, to aim well.

If people want more time to aim, than why do FPS with no cover mechanics do just fine or even excel with analog sticks?

 

[Gaogaogao]

If people want more time to aim, than why do FPS with no cover mechanics do just fine or even excel with analog sticks?

I think they excel in spite of their analog sticks, not because of them. cover system isnt a necessity, obviously. but it was a concession that came from wanting more time. in first person games tailored for consoles, they end up slowing mechanics down. and when you try to speed the mechanics up, like with call of duty, you have the crowd that complains and begs for 'boots on the ground'. I loved how fast advanced warfare was, but I think thats mostly because I played on pc.

 

[papertoonz]

i feel like this video is just another reason for this guy to praise Vanquish again

like i under stand some of the points he is making with how a game can't just be a cover shooter with nothing else but the idea that the best cover shooter is a game that is a game that actively encourages you to get out of cover and dash around the field? i'm sorry but that isn't a cover shooter no matter how much you want to say is

 

[Fisty]

i feel like this video is just another reason for this guy to praise Vanquish again

like i under stand some of the points he is making with how a game can't just be a cover shooter with nothing else but the idea that the best cover shooter is a game that is a game that actively encourages you to get out of cover and dash around the field? i'm sorry but that isn't a cover shooter no matter how much you want to say is

Yeah I'll agree on that, Vanquish is a cover shooter like Bayonetta is an ARPG

 

[Im_So_Pringles]

I agree wholeheartedly with this sentiment. Uncharted is an exponentially more fun experience on the lowest difficulty levels where you can run around like a madman fist fighting people in the middle of a gun fight only to turn around and headshot somebody quickly afterwords. I hate it when games punish a player for changing position or moving around the encounter space.

 

[RPGam3r]

I think they excel in spite of their analog sticks, not because of them. cover system isnt a necessity, obviously. but it was a concession that came from wanting more time. in first person games tailored for consoles, they end up slowing mechanics down. and when you try to speed the mechanics up, like with call of duty, you have the crowd that complains and begs for 'boots on the ground'

This in spite thing I don't buy. Their exist many gamers who are perfectly comfortable or even prefer analog sticks as input. There are too many data points to come a conclusion that cover mechanics are in place due in part to analog controls and people wanting more time to aim.

 

[Gaogaogao]

This in spite thing I don't buy. Their exist many gamers who are perfectly comfortable or even prefer analog sticks as input. There are too many data points to come a conclusion that cover mechanics are in place due in part to analog controls and people wanting more time to aim.

would you like to name these 'data points'? I have alot of respect for players that perform well with analog sticks, but I think most people would be better off with a mouse or more advanced motion controls in the future.

 

[Jangowuzhere]

While I think Melee is a bit too cruel in Vanquish, there's still a number of useful applications. The Backhand shotgun parry, the speed of the Sniper melee kick and the HMG flip kick are incredibly useful.

The limited juice is the main challenge of the game. You're not just going to boost and smash an enemy group. You've got to be smart about it and manage that meter (and use various techniques, thus pushing players to higher level play). The granularity of the meter and how it ties into all of Sam's abilities is vital to keep vanquish interesting since the boost and slow mo are incredibly powerful abilities and would trivialize the game if they were unchecked. The harsh penalty is thus fair because it means you failed the challenge of the game and suffer a consequence as a result. It's not supposed to be fun in that sense.

I get that managing meter is part of the game, I simply take no joy in doing it. The energy meter shouldn't be tied to all the major abilities in the game. I find myself playing in a very safe manner to avoid overheating.

A game like Max Payne 3 is also all about meter management, but that game doesn't come to a complete stop when you run out of bullet time juice. You can still use the slow mo jump to try and end a fight quickly or fall back to a safer location.

Vanquish is balanced in such a way that melee is a really powerful and devastating attack that will kill or severely damage nearly any enemy you hit it with. So the strong restrictions on melee make sense - it's something you're supposed to use to finish off enemies when you know you can recover safely afterwards, not something you haphazardly throw out to take out grunts.

That's not fun

And it leads to me never using the attack at all.

 

[More_Badass]

I've always found some of the criticisms of cover kind of blown out of proportions. Yes, it sucks when you have blatantly shitty level design that just throws down waist high walls in a room and shitty combat design that just has enemies pop up and down for you to shoot

But that's when cover is used as a crutch.

Let's not forget that Gears of War was praised for being revolutionary in its combat design, not just because of how smoothly you could move between cover, letting you flank and outmaneuver enemies, but also because enemies would take advantage of you staying in place, throwing grenades, trying to flank, and rushing at you.

Much like the jump scare in horror movies, the cover system isn't inherently bad. It's bad when it's poorly implemented and diminishes the action rather than serving to an extension of your tactical options. Games like Vanquish, Quantum Break, Tomb Raider, and Uncharted (especially the first two) use cover not as something for you to huddle behind indefinitely but to stop, assess, plan, and keep moving. Uncharted did that as well after the first game, using lobbing grenades, rushing enemies, and shields in a similar manner as Gears.

Furthermore, context matters. I don't tend to mind cover in military and crime-themed games (ie Spec Ops, Ghost Recon, Rainbow Six, Kane & Lynch. etc.) because of course soldiers are going to be staying behind cover in combat, as are criminals and mercenaries ala Heat. The image of the hero staying behind cover shooting bad guys, blinding firing, running to a better position, is ripped straight from the visual language of action movies and thrillers.

But the best way to sum it up is this. Cover didn't ruin shooters. Cover evolved shooters, by introducing a different way to approach the genre. You can have your in-your-face combat like Doom and Dusk, you can have your slower cover-based battles like Gears, you have an wide spectrum of variety in between from the hectic momentum of Vanquish and Quantum Break to the either-way effectiveness of Uncharted.