Support NeoGAF

[mclem]

Unit 13 isn't a first person shooter.

True, but many of the mechanics are similar. The most significant difference third person shooters have is that your own position (and particularly posture) is more important than in a first-person one. It is quite possible to make a shooter with a third-person perspective which plays identically to an FPS; heck, there's a non-insignificant number of FPSes that actually have third person modes; that doesn't make them different games.

In other words, third person shooters are first person shooters with extra mechanics bolted onto them. I can't think of any mechanics that exist in FPS that can't be implemented in TPS; the reverse is not true. This may well be an argument from a position of ignorance on my part, mind.

There isn't anything semantic about the concept of dual analog first person shooters. Semantic would be arguing between dual analog sticks and dual analog slidepads, not dual analog sticks and inherently different interfaces.

Then you're going to have to explain to me how dual analog affects any of the factors people are complaining about in this thread - 'cause I'm not seeing it. I think I might be missing the thrust of your argument, though.

 

[StuBurns]

True, but many of the mechanics are similar. The most significant difference third person shooters have is that your own position (and particularly posture) is more important than in a first-person one. It is quite possible to make a shooter with a third-person perspective which plays identically to an FPS; heck, there's a non-insignificant number of FPSes that actually have third person modes; that doesn't make them different games.

In other words, third person shooters are first person shooters with extra mechanics bolted onto them. I can't think of any mechanics that exist in FPS that can't be implemented in TPS; the reverse is not true.

The game design is notably different in terms of traversal, your player positioning when moving around corners for example, they're very different if done well, FPS's typically have much smaller environments, more realistically scaled. Unit 13 is crap too, so even if it had been a FPS, I would still not see how giving them this game would be beneficial.

Then you're going to have to explain to me how dual analog affects any of the factors people are complaning about in this thread - 'cause I'm not seeing it. I think I might be missing the thrust of your argument, though.

People in here have no legitimate complaints about the game, they have complaints about the studio. It doesn't look good, shock, it's a Call of Duty game, they all look like shit. People have seen the developer name, and are writing off the game on that, and that alone.

 

[TheDanger]

Looks fucking horrible and like it was made without "Love" just like Gameloft games, but even they have better visuals.

 

[PetriP-TNT]

I had some serious Counter Strike Source vibes from the trailer.

Looks pretty awful tbh.

 

[test_account]

Not necessarily. Those five Sega exclusives that Microsoft paid for on the original Xbox (JSRF, Panzer Dragoon Orta, SegaGT '02, etc) were all published under Sega if I recall correctly.

In situations like this they'd want to keep it quiet, it looks kinda desperate when it's necessary to pay for support. And then if word gets out about it, every other publisher would be wanting a similar deal where they'd get to have no risk but all the reward (like Randy Pitchford/Gearbox wanting Sony to port Borderlands 2 for them as mentioned above).

Did Microsoft fund and oversee the developement for all those games? I know that moneyhats happen, but i havnt heard that one project is completely handed over to someone else, like CoD is handed over to Sony and then Sony choose the developer and all that.

MoH:H2 on Wii had 32 players as well, like I said not a technical limitation probably.

Sure, i dont mean it like a techincal limitation of the system itself. If the PSP can do 32 players, so can the Wii, but it didnt even have 6vs6 on CoD. I'm just wondering what made them go 5vs5 and 4vs4.

 

[StuBurns]

I just played through the Resistance: Burning Skies demo, it's not good, but neither are the real Resistance games, I'd say it's more or less on par, I'm surprised it performed as poorly as it did critically.

I was impressed how well it controls though, if nothing else, it makes me confident a quality shooter can be produced for Vita, if this game will be it or not, I have no idea.

 

[SirIgbyCeaser]

This is like the first cod game not on quake engine, and will probably not be 60fps so i think it will flop.

 

[Pineconn]

People in here have no legitimate complaints about the game, they have complaints about the studio. It doesn't look good, shock, it's a Call of Duty game, they all look like shit. People have seen the developer name, and are writing off the game on that, and that alone.

Besides the fact that it looks like shit.

 

[edgardavids]

When is this actually set? Why do the weapons look straight from ww2?

 

[test_account]

I just played through the Resistance: Burning Skies demo, it's not good, but neither are the real Resistance games, I'd say it's more or less on par, I'm surprised it performed as poorly as it did critically.

I was impressed how well it controls though, if nothing else, it makes me confident a quality shooter can be produced for Vita, if this game will be it or not, I have no idea.

Most of the scores are around 60-80, which is fair for this game i'd say. Its a decent game in my opinion, but the multiplayer is too barebone. Some of the lower review scores are exagerated in my opinion, but reviews are afterall just personal opinions, so it isnt anything right or wrong in that sense.

Speaking about multiplayer, i wonder how it will be in CoD Vita. Now we're used to like 10 prestiges, unlockable titles/emblems, challenges, a lot of different modes and stuff like that. In Resistance Burning Skies there were 3 modes (death match, team deathmatch and "infected/last man standing"), there were no titles/emblems to unlock, no challenges and it went up to level 40 max, no prestige levels. I do expect CoD to be better than this, but how much better is the question.

This is like the first cod game not on quake engine, and will probably not be 60fps so i think it will flop.

The DS games doesnt use the Quake engine either as far as i know.

When is this actually set? Why do the weapons look straight from ww2?

Between Black Ops 1 and 2. So somewhere between the 1970s to 2025.

 

[Throwaway123456789]

Speaking about multiplayer, i wonder how it will be in CoD Vita. Now we're used to like 10 prestiges, unlockable titles/emblems, challenges, a lot of different modes and stuff like that. In Resistance Burning Skies there were 3 modes (death match, team deathmatch and "infected/last man standing"), there were no titles/emblems to unlock, no challenges and it went up to level 40 max, no prestige levels. I do expect CoD to be better than this, but how much better is the question.

It's got prestige, xp, killstreaks and all that.

 

[Hyuga]

Besides the fact that it looks like shit.

"Shit"? Not really....

 

[Deadly Cyclone]

I don't get why Activision didn't go all out with this game. They could have grabbed a solid market, and brought a huge shooter to handhelds with full multiplayer. They should have had Treyarch (or even IW) do it.

 

[StuBurns]

I don't get why Activision didn't go all out with this game. They could have grabbed a solid market, and brought a huge shooter to handhelds with full multiplayer. They should have had Treyarch (or even IW) do it.

Because it's going to sell like 600k worldwide, at best.

 

[test_account]

It's got prestige, xp, killstreaks and all that.

Completely forgot about killstreaks, good to hear that this is in the game, same with prestige With XP, do you mean challenges? Have you played it or did any interviews by the way?

Because it's going to sell like 600k worldwide, at best.

If they had put much more work into it, gotten it to 60fps and 6vs6, i think it could have sold more than that. But sure, it is a gamble, balancing the game budget up to what you think it would sell. But on the other hand, if you're cheap on the budget, it could also affect the sales.

 

[Nekki]

"Shit"? Not really....

I think it looks comparable to CoD2 on PC. Maybe saying it looks like shit is exaggerating a little bit, but it certainly looks quite bad compared to other games in the same platform.

I think people comparing handheld games to home-console games (most especially in the graphics department) are quite delusional.

Anyway as i said before, looks bad compared to other games in the platform.

 

[Mechanized]

In retrospect I don't think the game looks horrible or anything. But just not up to the standard I was expecting. They have to nail locked 30 for this, anything less than locked 60 is really unacceptable, but the dev is using the same engine as they did with Resistance so I'm not going in with insane expectations on that front.

4v4 is disappointing. I guess things like Ground War and Domination are out? It could make for a more tactical experience, I'm sure SnD will be fine, capture the flag as well. Will there be 8 person FFA?
They need to hit damage control on this hard. I think being silent about the game from here on out would be the worst mistake they could make.

 

[dallow_bg]

Please be 60fps.
Please.

 

[Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew]

http://i.minus.com/i6l8PzEhrV58t.gif[IMG]
"Shit"? Not really....[/QUOTE]

This gif doesn't do it any justice to it's shitiness. Watch COD trailer instead of the gif. The gun sounds are shit!

Have you played Resistance: Burning Skies?! If so, you'll know exactly how this one will play.

 

[Live Free or Die]

This will sell millions.

 

[StuBurns]

but it certainly looks quite bad compared to other games in the same platform.

No, it doesn't.

"Ehh, disgusting"

"Games are art"

 

[spats]

Please be 60fps.
Please.

That's what I'm hoping too, but it'll propably struggle to maintain 30.

 

[lowrider007]

Please be 60fps.
Please.

That would be only thing which could help forgive this mess.


Nihilistic :-(

I just don't think it's worth having a the 'Call of Duty' bullet point on your system if it's going to be such a poor game, I think it does more harm than good imo.

 

[test_account]

4v4 is disappointing. I guess things like Ground War and Domination are out? It could make for a more tactical experience, I'm sure SnD will be fine, capture the flag as well. Will there be 8 person FFA?
They need to hit damage control on this hard. I think being silent about the game from here on out would be the worst mistake they could make.

Groundwar is just a mix of multiply modes with 9vs9 instead of 6vs6, so that is out when there is max 4vs4. I'd be surprised if domination isnt included. Resistance Burning Skies had 8 player free-for-all, so if that is anything to go by, i'd say that this is included.

 

[dark10x]

No, it doesn't.

"Ehh, disgusting"
"Games are art"

Hmm, it really doesn't look half bad there.

I didn't hate Resistance, but it definitely felt cheap and unfinished. Glitchy, poor sound, and a lot of cut corners really hurt the experience.

Visually, this is definitely a step up from Resistance at least.

 

[Throwaway123456789]

Completely forgot about killstreaks, good to hear that this is in the game, same with prestige With XP, do you mean challenges? Have you played it or did any interviews by the way?

XP as in experience points. You unlock stuff just like in the console games.

I'm in fact sitting in the Sony press area right now after a presentation of several Vita games, including this. We were told that they couldn't answer any questions (I guess they weren't keen on what would certainly have been some pretty rough questions), and the gameplay demo we saw was a very quick 2vs2 match. It looks a bit better than what the trailer got us believing, but it's still not looking really fantastic.

The guy next to me went "this looks exactly like Resistance" and rightly so.

Throwing grenades with the touchscreen looks great though!

Please be 60fps.
Please.

Not even close by the looks of things so far. It'll probably improve though.

 

[test_account]

XP as in experience points. You unlock stuff just like in the console games.

I'm in fact sitting in the Sony press area right now after a presentation of several Vita games, including this. We were told that they couldn't answer any questions (I guess they weren't keen on what would certainly have been some pretty rough questions), and the gameplay demo we saw was a very quick 2vs2 match. It looks a bit better than what the trailer got us believing, but it's still not looking really fantastic.

The guy next to me went "this looks exactly like Resistance" and rightly so.

Throwing grenades with the touchscreen looks great though!

I understand.

Thanks for the info. I guess there are no hands-on impressions yet? I'm wondering how the controls feels. While the Resistance controls were fine for the most part, they were not as precise as CoD console controls.

Real pity if they dont match the controls, and no 60fps either. This will make the game feel different than CoD. It can still be fun, but i'd expect it to be a CoD game in gameplay, not just by name and theme. Looking forward to try it out anyway.

 

[shungokusatsu]

No hands on, just impressions on what they saw. It's not saying much, but IGN wasn't impressed: http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/08/15/the-disappointing-multiplayer-of-black-ops-declassified

 

[MeBecomingI]

In all honesty, it doesn't look that bad. Being shown along side Killzone didn't help though... It looks fairly solid in motion, but it definatly has that Resistance: Burning Skies look to it. Resistance wasn't that bad; it was actually pretty decent, but it needed a lot of polish that Nihilistic didn't give it. Hopefully they can improve the sound over their piss poor effort on Resistance and keep a smooth, high stable framerate.

Hopefully the game plays well... that is the key thing here. If they can nail the way the game feels and plays and retain all the bells and whistles of the console CoD, it might not be as bad as everyone is expecting.

The only thing I see being a big problem is the recycled content from past CoD. It screams of 6 - 12 month development time and a big rush job.

 

[Sid]

No hands on, just impressions on what they saw. It's not saying much, but IGN wasn't impressed: http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/08/15/the-disappointing-multiplayer-of-black-ops-declassified

So he is excited about the sp and the mp is BO without the player count ok......cool

 

[xJavonta]

I'm getting it.

But I'm hoping it maintains at least 45fps. That would make me really happy.

Nihilistic, now is the chance to redeem yourself.

 

[Synless]

This being developed by Nihlistic, is running off the Resistance engine, and is supposed to be out this year? Going by those gifs you can count me among the game will be shit crowd.

 

[xJavonta]

I just thought of something; maybe it's 4v4 multi for fps stability reasons? Like if it was any more the game couldn't keep a solid 30fps?

Please be true

 

[Mundharmonika]

Even the DS CODs had 3v3 online multiplayer .

 

[kodt]

I'm getting it.

But I'm hoping it maintains at least 45fps. That would make me really happy.

Nihilistic, now is the chance to redeem yourself.

Man I hope Burning Skies sucked because they were focusing on CoD.

 

[Sid]

Even the DS CODs had 3v3 online multiplayer .

It has 4v4

 

[SmokedMeat]

Glad I'm not as jaded as some gamers, as I think the game looks damn good for a portable CoD game. What were some of you expecting? Carbon copy console visuals?

Gun sounds are definitely better than those in Resistance, and I'm not thrilled with only 4x4 multiplayer. Otherwise this looks really good.

 

[seventynine]

I'd certainly try it out.

 

[Karsticles]

Is the joke of the gifs that all the guys are dying, but they're rarely actually in the scope?

 

[Glix]

Graphically it doesn't look as bad as people made it out to be in the conference thread. Not great though.

Yeah, there were people saying it looked like a PSone game.

 

[a Master Ninja]

This game will greatly outsell Killzone Vita on name alone, regardless of quality.

 

[cyborg009]

This game will greatly outsell Killzone Vita on name alone, regardless of quality.

Such a shame too

also I'm more shock that the PSP metal of honor had 32 players online....

This game is hopefully 60 fps

 

[Iacobellis]

I think it looks comparable to CoD2 on PC. Maybe saying it looks like shit is exaggerating a little bit, but it certainly looks quite bad compared to other games in the same platform.

I think people comparing handheld games to home-console games (most especially in the graphics department) are quite delusional.

Anyway as i said before, looks bad compared to other games in the platform.

What other games on the platform? It looks better than Resistance and Killzone won't be out for another year, at least.

 

[Phife Dawg]

If they had put much more work into it, gotten it to 60fps and 6vs6, i think it could have sold more than that. But sure, it is a gamble, balancing the game budget up to what you think it would sell. But on the other hand, if you're cheap on the budget, it could also affect the sales.

Do we have any solid numbers on Vitas install base (no shipped numbers) it's below 1M for sure in Japan (biggest portable market) and been out there the longest. You would need a really good attach rate to even go that high, considering it'll only a sell a few tenthousands in Japan.

I don't think more effort would've fixed that.

This will sell millions.

Prepare to be disappointed I guess.

No, it doesn't.

http://i.imgur.com/iCXA4.jpg
"Ehh, disgusting"

http://www.thebitbag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/2012-05-25-173609.jpg
"Games are art"

To be fair, the scope is not comparable and GD looks a lot better in motion than in the washed out screenshots (unlike CoD) - not a technical marvel though.

 

[test_account]

Do we have any solid numbers on Vitas install base (no shipped numbers) it's below 1M for sure in Japan (biggest portable market) and been out there the longest. You would need a really good attach rate to even go that high, considering it'll only a sell a few tenthousands in Japan.

No idea, but probably somewhere around 2.5 million i would guess. But the size of the userbase doesnt always matter, what matters the most is who owns the system. And CoD games tend to sell over a long period of time as well. If CoD Vita flops sales wise, i'm pretty sure that it is mainly because of the game quality, not because of the userbase.

CoD sells very well in Japan by the way, all things concidered. Modern Warfare 3 sold about 290k with the first subbed release, and over 100k with the dubbed release. That is nearly 400k combined.

 

[dark10x]

I'm getting it.

But I'm hoping it maintains at least 45fps. That would make me really happy.

Nihilistic, now is the chance to redeem yourself.

Uhh, 45 fps would look like shit on a 60 Hz display.

 

[Phoenixazure]

well. i imagine this being the case of once again the "Vita games look like shit except on vita screen" issue that plagues nearly all these games. not to say it'll look stunning but if it looks like that at 60fps im not complaining.

 

[test_account]

Uhh, 45 fps would look like shit on a 60 Hz display.

Should work fine. God of War 3 for example is around 40-45fps, i had no problems with that.

 

[sajj316]

Uhh, 45 fps would look like shit on a 60 Hz display.

That's cause your tag didn't have 45 fps .. only 60 and 30

 

[Speedymanic]

You didn't play Resistance Burning Skies did you ;-)

I did not. So the animation and hit detection were as bad as those in the gif?

The game is out in 3-4 months. I'm not sure what you mean that the enemies arent responding to being shot though? The fall down quickly from what i can see.

Sorry, I didn't word my post properly. I meant that hit detection is pretty much non existent. The bad guys just don't react to getting shot, they stand there and then fall down.

Duke Nukem 3D had better hit detection on the enemies for goodness sake, this is just terrible form from the developer, especially so when you look at Killzone on vita.