Didn't like the first two games but this one looks promising, especially after reading some reviews. I'll give it a shot since I also want to see the first real showcase of the PS4's graphics.
I don't know how much effort it takes, but I know it's not atypical for this type of game, and practically a baseline. SP is already expending some amount of effort to model a variety of cars in the first place, implement AI routing and make them interactive objects in many ways except drive-ability. Taking the extra steps of making vehicles driveable has never been something I've seen cited as any kind of significant overhead for an open-world game.
Still missing the point of a sandbox game...
This thread is a graveyard. When was the last major review thread that got too crazy? Uncharted?
I think it was GoW: Asscension. Basically any time there's a high profile a Playstation exclusive. Take from that what you will.
I don't know how much effort it takes, but I know it's not atypical for this type of game, and practically a baseline. SP is already expending some amount of effort to model a variety of cars in the first place, implement AI routing and make them interactive objects in many ways except drive-ability. Taking the extra steps of making vehicles driveable has never been something I've seen cited as any kind of significant overhead for an open-world game.
Still missing the point of a sandbox game...
Dude how often do you see spiderman or superman jump into a car to get around? It's not the focus on a game with characters with super powers (unless we're talking lego games - in which case its hilarious jumping into cars with super-powered characters).
It's also not about confining the choices to just the ones that you think almost everyone will engage in, because it defeats the purpose of providing choice to begin with.A sandbox is not about having as many choices as possible, but how those choices enhance the game and gameplay.
At least I'm honest in that regard unlike you who just keeps trying to trump up the scale of the task without providing any sort of frame of reference. How big of a deal is this really? Do you honestly have any idea? How many people would they have needed to add to the project, how much more money would they need to spend, how many additional man hours would be required?You say you don't know how much effort it takes to make have something like this in game and then go on to say that this is the baseline.
Ah, but this is a strawman, because I never said its a baseline for every sandbox game ever, just the ones that tend to focus on modern day settings. SP is welcome to come up with whatever alternate reality they choose where no vehicles exist so the creative restriction of not allowing drivable vehicles doesn't seem so contrived. But if they're going to continue the series down its current path towards a basis in more real world settings then I think they're going to increasingly lose latitude from the audience on this particular contrivance.Having a baseline like this for every sandbox game ever is stupid.
About as often as we see a good spiderman or superman game.EGM1966 said:Dude how often do you see spiderman or superman jump into a car to get around?
If you didn't like the first two games overall then honestly I would say don't go near this. It's more of the same, but even better looking (1 was drab, 2 was gorgeous at times) it feels like Infamous, and it plays like Infamous only more responsive in a firefight, and the traversal is slicker. Delsin's a better character than Cole, but I never minded Cole, he's was just a blank avatar for me to fill.
If the reasons you didn't like Infamous were just character based, then give SS a go. If the traversal and slow gaining of powers bothered you in the first games, then they have improved. If you were on the fence about Infamous because it wasn't there graphically, then go for SS. If they fundamentally were off-putting to you, then I don't think this game will change that.
Oh dang. after reading the wide range of reviews I am now in this weird limbo where the game seems to be good enough that I want it, but not so good that I feel ok dropping $60 on it. I hate when games get 80s lol.
It's pretty gross to see people trying to trash reviews that give Infamous a bad score. Take this guy deriding the 6/10 metro gamecentral review:
Well, quoting them in full without your ripping of the context away, we find:
Oh right, it was only touching upon the fact that thery're the first two important exclusives to be released and very close to each other, nothing about apples to oranges here.
Let's try adding the "context" again. What do we find?
Ah, a complaint about enemy variety given the genre.
So I take it you don't think they have ever been off the mark before?Aaaaand one final attempt to discredit the review because it gave the game a bad score.
Dead Rising 3 almost got it's finger tips on Infamous toes! We bringing you into the 70's!
The things that turned me off are what you list as things that have been improved upon. The combat and the slow gaining of powers was a bit off putting but if it's tighter now then it should be cool. I only played the first one, never tried the second one.
Haha why the hell would I want to drive a car when I can fly>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Not really. Although this thread does beat it by one page
It's also not about confining the choices to just the ones that you think almost everyone will engage in, because it defeats the purpose of providing choice to begin with.
At least I'm honest in that regard unlike you who just keeps trying to trump up the scale of the task without providing any sort of frame of reference. How big of a deal is this really? Do you honestly have any idea? How many people would they have needed to add to the project, how much more money would they need to spend, how many additional man hours would be required?
You know what else they haven't done besides driving mechanics? The particle physics in this new game. One of their dev videos had a snippet recently about the effort that went into their new particle engine, which required learning a whole new realm of mathematics and physics calculations that none of them had touched before. Somehow I don't think making driving mechanics work and make them fun is at all beyond this studio's capability and you should probably stop trying to sell them short that way.
Ah, but this is a strawman, because I never said its a baseline for every sandbox game ever, just the ones that tend to focus on modern day settings. SP is welcome to come up with whatever alternate reality they choose where no vehicles exist so the creative restriction of not allowing drivable vehicles doesn't seem so contrived. But if they're going to continue the series down its current path towards a basis in more real world settings then I think they're going to increasingly lose latitude from the audience on this particular contrivance.
Incidentally, complaining about having baselines when you yourself are advocating a baseline for this sort of game (sandbox superhero games shouldn't have driving mechanics) is, well, humorous to say the least.
About as often as we see a good spiderman or superman game.
Sorry, low blow. It was just too easy to drive a really big vehicle through that opening
Serious answer: Spiderman or Superman? Hardly ever. But Peter Parker and Clark Kent? Different story. Superhumans have reasons to behave like normal humans all the time. They often have alter egos expressly so they can maintain a low profile. Many do not have infinite power or powers that work constantly and consistently w/o needing to recharge - inFamous conduits have to recharge constantly, for example. Many superhumans have weaknesses that can be exploited. Etc.
Maybe if superhuman sandbox games did a better job of of capturing this dichotomy found in plenty of comic book heroes the market wouldn't be littered with so many games of this sort that have only received poor or mixed reviews.
How many times has Amir0x been banned?
What if you were going for good karma run? Would they make it easy to not run people over?to run over people with it.
It's also not about confining the choices to just the ones that you think almost everyone will engage in, because it defeats the purpose of providing choice to begin with.
At least I'm honest in that regard unlike you who just keeps trying to trump up the scale of the task without providing any sort of frame of reference. How big of a deal is this really? Do you honestly have any idea? How many people would they have needed to add to the project, how much more money would they need to spend, how many additional man hours would be required?
You know what else they haven't done besides driving mechanics? The particle physics in this new game. One of their dev videos had a snippet recently about the effort that went into their new particle engine, which required learning a whole new realm of mathematics and physics calculations that none of them had touched before. Somehow I don't think making driving mechanics work and make them fun is at all beyond this studio's capability and you should probably stop trying to sell them short that way.
Ah, but this is a strawman, because I never said its a baseline for every sandbox game ever, just the ones that tend to focus on modern day settings. SP is welcome to come up with whatever alternate reality they choose where no vehicles exist so the creative restriction of not allowing drivable vehicles doesn't seem so contrived. But if they're going to continue the series down its current path towards a basis in more real world settings then I think they're going to increasingly lose latitude from the audience on this particular contrivance.
Incidentally, complaining about having baselines when you yourself are advocating a baseline for this sort of game (sandbox superhero games shouldn't have driving mechanics) is, well, humorous to say the least.
For me it started with simply arguing against the overzealous pushback that's been happening when someone dares to wish for such a thing, like in the case of the post I was originally responding to. I don't think we need "fucking tired of this argument" when it's readily apparent that there's a sizable crowd that's interested in this sort of thing given that they keep asking for it and there's certainly precedent for why they're asking in the first place.I just realized you're arguing for having the ability to drive a car in a sandbox superhero game...
I'm more confused why this is such a black and white debate for some of you and there seems to be no middle ground.I'm confused why you want to convince people that this would be a good idea.
Plenty of similar games!? Saints Row 4 is literally add on to Saints Row the third. Does Crackdown have look and polish off Second Son?For me it started with simply arguing against the overzealous pushback that's been happening when someone dares to wish for such a thing, like in the case of the post I was originally responding to. I don't think we need "fucking tired of this argument" when it's readily apparent that there's a sizable crowd that's interested in this sort of thing given that they keep asking for it and there's certainly precedent for why they're asking in the first place.
The argument has obviously escalated from there.
I'm more confused why this is such a black and white debate for some of you and there seems to be no middle ground.
Jayu, see above.
Q: "WHEN FUCK DID I SAY SUPERHERO GAME SHOULD NOT HAVE DRIVING MECHANICS?"
A: When you were actively antagonistic to the mere mention of the idea in the first place. When you keep pushing the strawman that this is somehow such a major, wasteful investment of time, money and effort without any real evidence or citation and plenty of similar games that successfully incorporate the mechanic to the contrary.
I don't knowwhy would you want to drive in a super hero game that has super speed as a power
That's the thing, I wouldn't use it just like I hardly ever drove in SR4. If I have a power like Super speed driving just feels too cumbersome and a waste.What if you were going for good karma run? Would they make it easy to not run people over?
Man you're so full of shit.I think it was GoW: Asscension. Basically any time there's a high profile a Playstation exclusive. Take from that what you will.
Clearly you and I are on completely different page on this. You are also talking about teams of 200 to 1000 people working on a game versus a team of 80 people. BTW, I will be disappointed if you don't come to Watch Dogs thread and ask about planes.Yes, plenty. Let's not act like other sandbox games like GTA or the first three SR games are so far removed from inFamous just because they don't expressly incorporate superpowers. They swap superpowers for instant access to a massive arsenal of weapons and gadgets, keep some of the superhuman resistance to damage and health regeneration. End result is that you're never really playing a character that isn't at least moderately superhuman in any of these games, so let's not overplay the distinctions here.
Sitting at work, copy of inFAMOUS unopened on my desk. I have 3 hours and 45 minutes until I get off. Then, its a 6 minute carpool ride home. LONGEST FRIDAY EVER.
It's also not about confining the choices to just the ones that you think almost everyone will engage in, because it defeats the purpose of providing choice to begin with.
At least I'm honest in that regard unlike you who just keeps trying to trump up the scale of the task without providing any sort of frame of reference. How big of a deal is this really? Do you honestly have any idea? How many people would they have needed to add to the project, how much more money would they need to spend, how many additional man hours would be required?
You know what else they haven't done besides driving mechanics? The particle physics in this new game. One of their dev videos had a snippet recently about the effort that went into their new particle engine, which required learning a whole new realm of mathematics and physics calculations that none of them had touched before. Somehow I don't think making driving mechanics work and make them fun is at all beyond this studio's capability and you should probably stop trying to sell them short that way.
Ah, but this is a strawman, because I never said its a baseline for every sandbox game ever, just the ones that tend to focus on modern day settings. SP is welcome to come up with whatever alternate reality they choose where no vehicles exist so the creative restriction of not allowing drivable vehicles doesn't seem so contrived. But if they're going to continue the series down its current path towards a basis in more real world settings then I think they're going to increasingly lose latitude from the audience on this particular contrivance.
Incidentally, complaining about having baselines when you yourself are advocating a baseline for this sort of game (sandbox superhero games shouldn't have driving mechanics) is, well, humorous to say the least.
About as often as we see a good spiderman or superman game.
Sorry, low blow. It was just too easy to drive a really big vehicle through that opening
Serious answer: Spiderman or Superman? Hardly ever. But Peter Parker and Clark Kent? Different story. Superhumans have reasons to behave like normal humans all the time. They often have alter egos expressly so they can maintain a low profile. Many do not have infinite power or powers that work constantly and consistently w/o needing to recharge - inFamous conduits have to recharge constantly, for example. Many superhumans have weaknesses that can be exploited. Etc.
Maybe if superhuman sandbox games did a better job of of capturing this dichotomy found in plenty of comic book heroes the market wouldn't be littered with so many games of this sort that have only received poor or mixed reviews.
Did you really just write a novel because a superhero game doesnt have driveable cars? You do know you have these things called "powers" that allow you to have the same level of traversal, if not more, then of a car.
driving cars define open world games? since when?I believe the point here is that for a next-gen "open-world" game - it is lacking in many of the features that pretty much define it since way back in GTA3. It's not about having driving cars that is the issue just like it's being inconvenient to ride a train on GTA3 doesn't nullify the world the developers created it.
An open-world game by next-gen standards is not having the density and fidelity to support it making it just another stage back-drop than an actual interactive world. If the excuse of budget is the main issue, than the developer has set themselves up to scrutiny for not living up to the standards of what a next gen open-world should be. It's bad enough that most, if not all open-world titles, rely on copy/paste missions to pad length and now it can't even meet the base requirement that should've been expected from a new generation title.
driving cars define open world games? since when?
I don't know how much effort it takes, but I know it's not atypical for this type of game, and practically a baseline. SP is already expending some amount of effort to model a variety of cars in the first place, implement AI routing and make them interactive objects in many ways except drive-ability. Taking the extra steps of making vehicles driveable has never been something I've seen cited as any kind of significant overhead for an open-world game.
Still missing the point of a sandbox game...
I think you're missing the point of a sandbox game where you're a bloody superhero!