Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => Gaming Discussion => Topic started by: Akalabeth Angel on June 11, 2018, 10:43:16 am
-
Anyone have thoughts on the conferences so far and what they've seen?
Of the three I thought the Xbox one was the best, they have the greatest variety and showed a few great-looking upcoming games.
EA was EA, lots of sports with a bit of whatever sprinkled in there. Hard to hate it, but hard to get excited either. Though the gamespot people I saw didn't seem to understand that the C&C game is not a C&C game but a Clash Royale competitor with C&C theming.
Bethesda is more disappointing each year, particularly as a single-player gamer. Doom looks great but it was just a teaser. A few trailers for SP games were shown, but the trailers showed less than **** (Possible SC competitor) and might as well not have had more than a verbal mention. And the new fallout game is some destiny-apeing multiplayer experience. OH wait, Rage 2 looked great. Damn show is so long I forgot about it, and I literally just finished watching it.
One thing I noticed overall is a much greater injection of women into the conferences and their games. New Wolfenstein game and Gears 5 have female protagonists. BFV showcases women a lot more, much to the ire of youtube commenters, and any live-action game vid of course has at least half the gamers represented by women. It's a good change from booth babes and Elizabeth relegated to Bioshock Infinite's back cover, but it does seem a bit bandwagon-y.
-
My current favourites:
Cyberpunk 2077 because OF COURSE:
Anthem, because a) No pvp multiplayer at launch and b) I want a Destiny in my life and since Destiny isn't that good at being Destiny, I kinda want to see what a post-BF1 lootcrate disaster Bioware can do with that formula:
Ace Combat 7 because it's ****ing Ace Combat in Strangereal:
<Video not yet posted>
-
My two cents:
1) Metal Wolf Chaos XD - While the tag line ("Mech America Great Again") might have been a lot funnier when From Software and Develover Digital probably made the deal (i.e. before 2016 US presidental election; but then again Develover Digital has made a brand of full frontal irreverence) but so much "I want this"... It might be carthartic to revel in the pulpy OTT version 'murciana japanese developers cooked up...
2) Cyberpunkt 2077 - "I would like to return your protagonist, please"; I don't know much about the Cyberpunkt-RPG liscence CD Project RED is using but to me one of the most interesting components of Cyberpunk, as a genre, is how augments/cyberspace-"stuff" allow you to get away with physical feats and intimidation without having to rely too much on conventional definitions of "powerful" or "imposing" physique ... but then we will have to wait and see, considering the inital announcement contained the promise of customizing your way to play, including sufrace level non-combatant starter kits...
3) Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice - Why is the set-up so familiar? Not in the sense that "yeah, its a new entry into the Soulsborne-subgenre from From Software" but I think I heard that exact set-up before (like it is an adaptation of something)
4) Sea of Solitude - Looks very promising...
5) Anthem - It's nice to see more of the world and set-up though nothing in the gameplay actually capitvates me - partly because how non-commital the whole approach to the Kit is (I like a bit of commitment to my bit in RPG) and because all of classes (and the combo-system ported over from Dragon Age) incooperate some of my buff or debuff-slinging gameplay preference, while non being a Full Support I would crave to play as after Destiny.
6) Fallout 76 - (Disclaimer: Not a Bethesda-fan) *the rant previously located here was cut because it was besides the point* Well, Fallout 4 set the stage for a Fallout-survival game... here it is - trailer is nice though *the sarcastic attack which previously occupied this space was removed because it didn't add anything to any possible discussion*
7) Life is Strange 2-prequel - It's going to be free and a test for if continuing on with LiS is good idea. (Before the Storm might have been excellent addition (if not outright better) but there is virtue calling something complete).
EA was the "we listen"-converence of this year's E3 ... It was always a toss-up between Microsoft and EA which one would be the more awkward one, between SW: Battelfront 2 and all moves Microsoft seems to be making to save the Xbox One (e.g. all the Gears of War)
ps. Battlefield V looks so wierd from my point of view, when you consider that I was almost part of that development as a consultant...
EDIT:
One thing I noticed overall is a much greater injection of women into the conferences and their games. New Wolfenstein game and Gears 5 have female protagonists. BFV showcases women a lot more, much to the ire of youtube commenters, and any live-action game vid of course has at least half the gamers represented by women. It's a good change from booth babes and Elizabeth relegated to Bioshock Infinite's back cover, but it does seem a bit bandwagon-y.
The gaming industry has had historically a much larger female workforce than most people are aware ... which in part has something to do with the focus of the games press on the team leads/producers as more than public spokepersons, a hint of the western cultural prejudice towards the "solitary creative genius" and a pinch of marketing to a "core audience". Especially the last part is showing that it is past its half life in the marketing research (e.g. shifting definition of Play in the culture generally is shifting the gendered aspect of Play, e.g. which kinds of toys are approriate for girls/boys/non-binary children etc etc)...
... but the push might have hit the E3 harder than any other trade-show, mostly because it is the biggest press conference plattform all year AND located in the US.
-
Oh yeah, Sea of Solitude is definitely my winner for the most promising non-franchise title so far.
-
I personally am glad they're doing an online Fallout. The maps always seemed empty of life to me and hopefully they'll do something more like GW2 that has events running throughout the day with or without player intervention instead of a bunch of NPCs standing around waiting for someone to do something.
-
I too am looking forward to enjoy a carefully crafted Fallout experience with cool characters like _xXx_pussyripper420_xXx in it. Really fits the universe, that.
-
EA was the "we listen"-converence of this year's E3 ... It was always a toss-up between Microsoft and EA which one would be the more awkward one, between SW: Battelfront 2 and all moves Microsoft seems to be making to save the Xbox One (e.g. all the Gears of War)
What do you mean "all the Gears of War"? Gears 5 is totally expected addition to the franchise.
What was interesting is that they bought a whole bunch of studios this year. Ninja Theory? One of my fav devs is now microsoft? Hopefully they don't get screwed up or something and keep delivering phenomenal experiences like Hellblade. Still need to play Heavenly Sword and DMC from them.
-
I too am looking forward to enjoy a carefully crafted Fallout experience with cool characters like _xXx_pussyripper420_xXx in it. Really fits the universe, that.
Couldn't you name yourself something similar and run around in an evening dress and hammer hitting super mutants in the junk?
-
Fallout, to me, is a story about yourself. If you decide to run around in a tutu murdering everyone, that's your decision, your will inflicted on the world. Introducing other jackasses like you into that world breaks it, IMHO; it's no longer a Fallout game. Fallouts, to me, are single-player experiences with well-crafted, sometimes even highly reactive stories, and it is incredibly hard to do those in a multiplayer game.
-
Fallout, to me, is a story about yourself. If you decide to run around in a tutu murdering everyone, that's your decision, your will inflicted on the world. Introducing other jackasses like you into that world breaks it, IMHO; it's no longer a Fallout game. Fallouts, to me, are single-player experiences with well-crafted, sometimes even highly reactive stories, and it is incredibly hard to do those in a multiplayer game.
Also no VATs, a very green looking wasteland, what seems like no story conclusion but a perpetual world that will be online for "years to come" seems like it's basically Rust or some other survival game with Fallout theming. Hate this online **** that everyone's moving towards, I want to play games and finish them, not subscribe to them for years on end.
Seems I missed a conference yesterday too, Devolve? Too much **** to watch.
-
I'm still cleaning up from my reaction to the Cyberpunk 2077 trailer.
Also hype for Doom Eternal.
Those are the two big ones so far.
-
First, a correction to my opinion on Cyberpunkt 2077: Custmizable characters are still being teased, so ... less concerned now.
EA was the "we listen"-converence of this year's E3 ... It was always a toss-up between Microsoft and EA which one would be the more awkward one, between SW: Battelfront 2 and all moves Microsoft seems to be making to save the Xbox One (e.g. all the Gears of War)
What do you mean "all the Gears of War"? Gears 5 is totally expected addition to the franchise.
1. Gears of War 5
2. Gears of War: Tactics (aka Gears of War meets X-Com)
3. "that Gears of War-FunkoPop! mobile game"
*so much vitriol to direct at Bethesda's run with Fallout, still so unhelpful*
-
First, a correction to my opinion on Cyberpunkt 2077: Custmizable characters are still being teased, so ... less concerned now.
EA was the "we listen"-converence of this year's E3 ... It was always a toss-up between Microsoft and EA which one would be the more awkward one, between SW: Battelfront 2 and all moves Microsoft seems to be making to save the Xbox One (e.g. all the Gears of War)
What do you mean "all the Gears of War"? Gears 5 is totally expected addition to the franchise.
1. Gears of War 5
2. Gears of War: Tactics (aka Gears of War meets X-Com)
3. "that Gears of War-FunkoPop! mobile game"
I didn't see that tactics trailer at all. Maybe the gamespot vid I was watching cut it out? I didn't watch it live. Weird.
I saw the FunkoPop but thought that was just advertising toys.
Anyway- tactics seems fine to me. Halo has Halo Wars and Spartan Assault, would make sense for a Gears game in another genre. FFG already has a turn-based Gears boardgame as well.
*so much vitriol to direct at Bethesda's run with Fallout, still so unhelpful*
Everyone is jumping on the multiplayer online bandwagon. Not sure if this is closer to Rust or like an Anthem/Destiny. Doesn't seem like you can play it alone though without other players on the map. Haven't played FO4 yet so- I'm not too pissed but also not an iota interested. Rage 2 is probably the game that looks the most interesting to play from the conference, looks a bit like Bulletstorm meets doom & mad max.
-
Just done with Square Enix... some interesting stuff...
1) Lara Croft and the Temple of Doom ;)
2) Babylon's Fall looks cool but I wish there was more substance, Plantinum has been hit-or-miss for me
3) Octopath Traveler ... If a Switch didn't mean 2/3s of an entire month's worth of rent and utilities, I would be so pumped...
Everyone is jumping on the multiplayer online bandwagon. Not sure if this is closer to Rust or like an Anthem/Destiny. Doesn't seem like you can play it alone though without other players on the map. Haven't played FO4 yet so- I'm not too pissed but also not an iota interested.
To be fair, my beef with Bethesda's take on Fallout is not mainly about gameplay... Despite the player freedome in Fallouts 1, 2 & New Vegas there is a (maybe two) thematic throughline to original creators' vision that Bethesda seems to be completely deaf to. But considering how these discussions tend to go (poorly), I shall hold my piece for another time and place. PM me if you want me to post the short version in its own topic.
-
Currently watching the after-action segments on Ubisoft, before watching the whole thing tomorrow...
1) Beyond Good and Evil 2 - Where did they get the footage from Guardians of the Galaxy 3? /kiding. Sorry, no gameplay here but I approve of using a planet's rings as visual analogue to drift ice. (+1 for ice being one of most beautifuly materials known to mankind)
2) Assasin's Creed: Odyssey - I've been out of love with Assasin's Creed for a while now (actually since Edward Kenway failed to capture my attention like Ezio Auditore, sea chanties or no), but this looks like a point where I might re-enter... mostly because I recently researched the Peloponnesian War as inspiration for a FS2 campaign and I am intrigued how the AC team deals with the problems on sourcing the history (Thucydides doesn't deserve a break, no matter his reputation)
(I wonder when the first inapproriate Lysistrata-joke is going to drop... anyone who frequents reddit got an ear on that?)
-
This thing from Square Enix and Platinum Games. What is it? Who knows! But Squeenix x Platinum gave us Nier: Automata, so I'm interested.
-
Cyberpunk looked great. But when the hell is it coming!
-
Cyberpunk looked great. But when the hell is it coming!
The release date is right there in the title.
-
I'm not waiting until 2077. :p
-
Cyberpunk looked great. But when the hell is it coming!
One of screens had during the press converence had a secret blink-or-miss statement in it:
When? When we told you we would only release the game when it's ready, we meant it. We're definitely much, much closer to a release date than when we were back then :), but it's still not the time to confirm anything, so patience is still required. Quality is the only thing that drives us - it's the beauty of being an independent studio and your own publisher.
-
(still haven't seen the full Ubisoft conference)
- Skull and Bones - Is it just me or is the cinematic trailer getting more incoherent as it goes on? - Game look still good though, but, catch me up here, they cut playable boarding actions?
- Ghost of Tsushima - The envoirment looks gorgeous, can't see the same for the non-cinematic camera work and non-combat animations... Colour me intrigued... (Also, "Leaves Technology!")
- Death Stranding - I've found the work of Hideo Kojima impossible to penetrate so far, and the trend continues with this ... but maybe a clean slate as compared to Metal Gear Solid might actually help...
-
Devil May Cry 5 has won so far with the sheer hype factor.
But incase you missed, the most awesome, most AMERICAN, Mech game ever is finally coming to western audiences.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_395DCBLF0
-
Nintendo just won E3
-
Smash 5: "yeah **** it you get everyone"
-
Also Ridley, because YES.
-
FIRE EMBLEM SWITCH HYPE
-
Watched all but nintendo. Sony's conference was pretty lame this year have to say, those two instrumentalists made me wish I was back at the ubisoft just dance presentation again.
Death Stranding, I mean looks intriguing story-wise, gameplay wise it looks like a walking simulator. That's the only gameplay featured, walking. I'm sure though people are losing their **** over it. The whole baby thing just seems to be a reincarnation device or something.
Control and Ghost of Tsushima looked pretty cool. Though the animation in the latter was pretty sharp at times, seemed unnatural like their blending is not working.
Square Enix was totally forgettable, might as well skipped it. Tomb Raider is great but I didn't watch that segment for the fear of spoilers.
Ubisoft was pretty fun though, didn't care too much about most of the games. Assassin's Creed I've never played even though I own a few.
PC Gaming show is getting better year by year in terms of format and presentation, Day9 and the other host were great. The games- nothing really stood out. Lots of **** I never heard of. Few cool looking ones though that I'll probably never play. That robot one might be cool for anyone with VR
- Skull and Bones - Is it just me or is the cinematic trailer getting more incoherent as it goes on? - Game look still good though, but, catch me up here, they cut playable boarding actions?
After reading Patrick O'Brian it's really difficult to take any of that **** seriously. With captains yelling "full speed ahead" and sailing ships charging each other it's beyond stupid. Full speed ahead? It's a ****ing sailing ship not a victorian-era battleship.
-
- Skull and Bones - Is it just me or is the cinematic trailer getting more incoherent as it goes on? - Game look still good though, but, catch me up here, they cut playable boarding actions?
After reading Patrick O'Brian it's really difficult to take any of that **** seriously. With captains yelling "full speed ahead" and sailing ships charging each other it's beyond stupid. Full speed ahead? It's a ****ing sailing ship not a victorian-era battleship.
While much of it artistic license for sake of gameplay (i.e. an acutal naval engagement with line-style combat at range to disable, followed by a boarding action and not sinking the enemy ship) as Skull and Bones developed from what was essentially a side activity in Assasin's Creed III and became the main draws of Assasin's Creed IV: Black Flag and Assasin's Creed: Rogue. It was meant to be short side activity you would do, if Assasin's Creed III wasn't as a whole an unattractive mess for anyone but those invested in a bad Groschenroman-version of American Revolution.
And on the technical side, a sailing ship can have remarkable control over its speed despite the wind*, by trimming the sails to the wind, which kinds of sails to set, the tension in the rigging etc etc. Even detail-oriented authors tend to leave that of the cutting room floor because it robs sailing of its romantic appeal and makes for less evocative writing. Again the whole thing is simplified in Skull and Bones to provide an acrade-like gameplay instead of the full simulation; esspecially since it is to indulge in the Hollywood-version of Piracy instead of the real thing (otherwise there would be a lot more kidnapping and ransoming)...
*Side note: the design of portugese and dutch ships, which allowed them to sail against the wind as well as with it, is often cited for the initial success along the established trading routes in the Indian Ocean and Southern Pacific.
-
- Skull and Bones - Is it just me or is the cinematic trailer getting more incoherent as it goes on? - Game look still good though, but, catch me up here, they cut playable boarding actions?
After reading Patrick O'Brian it's really difficult to take any of that **** seriously. With captains yelling "full speed ahead" and sailing ships charging each other it's beyond stupid. Full speed ahead? It's a ****ing sailing ship not a victorian-era battleship.
While much of it artistic license for sake of gameplay (i.e. an acutal naval engagement with line-style combat at range to disable, followed by a boarding action and not sinking the enemy ship) as Skull and Bones developed from what was essentially a side activity in Assasin's Creed III and became the main draws of Assasin's Creed IV: Black Flag and Assasin's Creed: Rogue. It was meant to be short side activity you would do, if Assasin's Creed III wasn't as a whole an unattractive mess for anyone but those invested in a bad Groschenroman-version of American Revolution.
And on the technical side, a sailing ship can have remarkable control over its speed despite the wind*, by trimming the sails to the wind, which kinds of sails to set, the tension in the rigging etc etc. Even detail-oriented authors tend to leave that of the cutting room floor because it robs sailing of its romantic appeal and makes for less evocative writing. Again the whole thing is simplified in Skull and Bones to provide an acrade-like gameplay instead of the full simulation; esspecially since it is to indulge in the Hollywood-version of Piracy instead of the real thing (otherwise there would be a lot more kidnapping and ransoming)...
*Side note: the design of portugese and dutch ships, which allowed them to sail against the wind as well as with it, is often cited for the initial success along the established trading routes in the Indian Ocean and Southern Pacific.
There's artistic license and then there's just plain nonsense. Yes you can adjust your speed by changing the sails, adding more, reducing some, or even dragging one in the water to slow you down. Ships are also faster or slower depending on how long they've been last in port to have their bottoms scrapped clean. And ships are of different speeds at different angles to wind, but- have two guys with the same deployment of sails go straight at each other? Nonsense. Having bow chasers take out a ship? More nonsense.
Also the combat just seems very 1-dimensional, shoot the guy, use your special abilities, board him when his hitpoints are low. Whereas in the novels, which are noted for their historical accuracy of the feel of the era, they have tactics like deploying your guys into the boats and having them approach the ship through the smoke from the guns. Or going behind the guy and devastating the ship through the unarmoured rear (raking the ship). Or shooting a guy, having his mast fall into the water and start draggin him, you catch up and open up while they're desperately trying to cut the mast free. Or fighting around the cape amongst huge waves and having a lucky hit make a ship lose control and instantly breach and below the waves.
Or even just the idea that the treasure was often not gold, but ambergris or other commodities worth a ton of money. Games are an opportunity for not only entertainment but to educate people.
-
Games are an opportunity for not only entertainment but to educate people.
Except this particular game is - despite its setting being historical - not an attempt to model reality but to re-create (!) a fantasy, which has its origin in at least two different media. And both othese points of origin didn't have a very "intimate" relationship with reality:
1) The pirate fiction of the Golden Age of Pirarcy was basicially a form of advertisment for pirate hunters and colonial ventures; As such the accounts were often comissioned to widely overstate the danger of the acutal work to convince either the royals or investors commissioning the captains and ships for more favourable pay or conditions for their contracts. And of course, not mention that many witnesses would distort their accounts for social prestige.
The A General History of Pyrates (the most known source on the Golden Age of Piracy) being a notable exception due to the strong possibilty of Jacobite (=dissident) authorship, which points a different kind of distortion for intent.
2) The modern pirate fiction in film, which sacrificed being nautrically accurate for what was the most feasible (and in many cases, cheapest) possible version to film while also being a compelling and accessible tableau for the viewing audience.
(Note: I cannot comment on Adventure Novels as much, due to the lack of insight into genre as a whole)
That being said, Skull and Bones has not just the right to be that but it might also be compelled by its nature as a game to be so.
You don't have to follow me on my views on realism as stylistic choice (tl;dr: technically impressive yet, by comparison, often low on content ), accuracy as part of artistic intent (tl;dr: the lowest form, easily overuled by other considerations), or the question if modern art works can still be complete in themselves (tl;dr: they cannot), but please hear me out on this one.
As a game it has to make its systems at least partially understandble to the player to enable an act of Play; As the game takes player input, the player has at least minimal knowledge regarding what that input is to enable an agency at Play.
One way to confer that knowledge is to reference previously known information, e.g. the way a naval combat scene in a pirate movie plays out. For this to work, of course you have to reference a piece of information that is common knowledge to be most effective, the more obscure the piece of knowledge is the less effective this strategy will be (unless of course, you laser-focus your audience). Basically, you skip a technically explaination with "you have seen this before, so you know how it goes".
The opposite is of course an option, giving the player an intricate rule book and let them run the show. However in that chase, unlike in the case state above, you are asking the player to make a time investment up front to engage with the rulebook, at least in part, before any gameplay makes sense.
When in a scenario that you also have to make compelling argument for spending time with your game instead of another one, the strategy that make the player invest themselves and their time more gradually probably wins out.
EDIT:
Afterthough: You can, of course, also subvert expectations which you have build up by the reference to known information; which is a point I previously left out.
-
I don't think anyone on a board for a game where spaceships use aeroplane physics gets to complain too much about realism. :p If the game is fun, that's what counts.
-
As a game it has to make its systems at least partially understandble to the player to enable an act of Play; As the game takes player input, the player has at least minimal knowledge regarding what that input is to enable an agency at Play.
Having wind play no apparent factor in a game about sailing ships is just stupid, fantasy references aside. The fact that sailing ships sail before the wind is not a complex idea, it's one that should be readily apparent for any person whose never thought of it before. Whether the game wants to ape pirates of the Carribean or not, having wind play a factor even in an arcade-y way can make the game better by giving it more depth and rewarding players who have skill in manoeuvring.
I don't think anyone on a board for a game where spaceships use aeroplane physics gets to complain too much about realism. :p If the game is fun, that's what counts.
Freespace doesn't use airplane physics because airplanes deal with lift and gravity. Freespace uses "movie physics" (Star Wars).
The difference between Freespace and Skull & Bones is that Freespace is not set in a historical era with historical ships (non-Pirate), uniforms, countries, locales. Freespace can do what it wants, while a game which places itself in history comes with certain expectations.
-
Whether the game wants to ape pirates of the Carribean or not, having wind play a factor even in an arcade-y way can make the game better by giving it more depth and rewarding players who have skill in manoeuvring.
Yeah, Sid Meier's Pirates wasn't exactly a realistic sim or a AAA game, but they still managed it alright nearly 2 decades ago. While I'm not surprised in any way that they didn't include wind management in their gameplay, a basic arcade-y implementation would have absolutely been within their reach.
-
Freespace doesn't use airplane physics because airplanes deal with lift and gravity. Freespace uses "movie physics" (Star Wars).
The difference between Freespace and Skull & Bones is that Freespace is not set in a historical era with historical ships (non-Pirate), uniforms, countries, locales. Freespace can do what it wants, while a game which places itself in history comes with certain expectations.
Imma let you finish but this is the worst possible argument you could ever make.
You'd be better off just sayin you'd love for this to be incorporated and that the game feels a lot weaker and poor for the lack of it. That's fine.
But to complain that pirates must conform to REALISMtm while FreeSpace can do whatevah because "history comes with certain expectations" is bull****. Space has always come with expectations for me because I happened to be a ****ing physics geek when I was a young boy. The fact that you are not bothered at all by "movie space physics" while being at pirates tells me only things about yourself and not the products themselves.
I was always bothered by freespace physics, but I will take the cognitive dissonance and ignore it. Just like you'll have to in this pirates stuff, if you so choose to play the game.
-
As a game it has to make its systems at least partially understandble to the player to enable an act of Play; As the game takes player input, the player has at least minimal knowledge regarding what that input is to enable an agency at Play.
Having wind play no apparent factor in a game about sailing ships is just stupid, fantasy references aside. The fact that sailing ships sail before the wind is not a complex idea, it's one that should be readily apparent for any person whose never thought of it before. Whether the game wants to ape pirates of the Carribean or not, having wind play a factor even in an arcade-y way can make the game better by giving it more depth and rewarding players who have skill in manoeuvring.
Since you implied that you have no prior knowledge with AC-games from which Skull and Bones is spun-off, I would like to direct you attention to the UI-element that is the lower right corner of the screen in the gameplay footage. In the AC games there is an UI element in the exact same position that acts as a wind gauge and mechanically, sailing with the wind confered boni with regards to speed and turning rate.
Now the visual language of that UI element has been changed siginificantly to the point that I can't read it, but assuming that is only an updated UI-element, because the AC UI design would stick out terribly, we have a hint to assume that the mechanics are still there.
EDIT: I just saw gameplay footage that had the tutorial pop-ups in it, and the UI element in the lower right is indeed a navigational aid, including a wind gauge. The tutorial pop-ups also mention that the wind affects speed.
The visual language of the UI element is based on what the game calls "wind profile", a ship specific element you can see when the ship select screen is featured in the footage.
I don't think anyone on a board for a game where spaceships use aeroplane physics gets to complain too much about realism. :p If the game is fun, that's what counts.
Don't you dare shut down this discussion! - We haven't even gotten to the part on how a realistic-style supports and promigates the existing marginalsation of historically marginalised segments of the population!
;)
-
All that realism in sailships talk is important, but make way for HYPE
-
Freespace doesn't use airplane physics because airplanes deal with lift and gravity. Freespace uses "movie physics" (Star Wars).
The difference between Freespace and Skull & Bones is that Freespace is not set in a historical era with historical ships (non-Pirate), uniforms, countries, locales. Freespace can do what it wants, while a game which places itself in history comes with certain expectations.
Imma let you finish but this is the worst possible argument you could ever make.
You'd be better off just sayin you'd love for this to be incorporated and that the game feels a lot weaker and poor for the lack of it. That's fine.
But to complain that pirates must conform to REALISMtm while FreeSpace can do whatevah because "history comes with certain expectations" is bull****. Space has always come with expectations for me because I happened to be a ****ing physics geek when I was a young boy. The fact that you are not bothered at all by "movie space physics" while being at pirates tells me only things about yourself and not the products themselves.
I was always bothered by freespace physics, but I will take the cognitive dissonance and ignore it. Just like you'll have to in this pirates stuff, if you so choose to play the game.
You're in the minority because most people don't give a toss about sci-fi physics as demonstrated by the fact that the two largest franchises, Star Wars and Star Trek have next to no physics in them. But movies or games set in the WW2 era come with a certain set of expectations that is generally conformed to for both technology, how it operates, composition of the armies (see Battlefield V controversy), etcetera
There has in recent years been a greater emphasis on realism in science fiction, but it hasn't detracted from the unrealistic franchises, nor have they reached the same level of popularity.
EDIT: I just saw gameplay footage that had the tutorial pop-ups in it, and the UI element in the lower right is indeed a navigational aid, including a wind gauge. The tutorial pop-ups also mention that the wind affects speed.
The visual language of the UI element is based on what the game calls "wind profile", a ship specific element you can see when the ship select screen is featured in the footage.
Yes this video says that wind is a factor and that it behaves as one might expect to, at least on a basic level, so maybe the game will be cool after all (at the 6:15 minute mark)
https://youtu.be/HgBlDixCHKQ?t=6m15s
-
...and why would I give a toss about what the "majority" cares? I care about my experience, not yours.
My point was precisely that what constitutes a cognitive dissonant experience is in the eyes of the beholder, and not this objective statement that you tried to make.
Again, make the case that you'd love for them to incorporate this because it would be really cool and would add to your experience. But trying to turn this into a "this genre can have cognitive dissonant elements and that one can't because HISTORICAL REALISM" is so cognitive dissonant in itself that we enter inception levels of gNAaRRH.
It also reminds me of the Battlefield debacle and the misoginerd horde's resentment at watching a woman in the middle of a battlefield COZ IT BREAKS MAH REALIST EXPERIENCE.
-
...and why would I give a toss about what the "majority" cares? I care about my experience, not yours.
Because it's central to the discussion.
It also reminds me of the Battlefield debacle and the misoginerd horde's resentment at watching a woman in the middle of a battlefield COZ IT BREAKS MAH REALIST EXPERIENCE.
So you're comparing me to misogynists now?
Here's another argument for you, one you'll understand.
Adding wind to a sailing game makes the experience more interesting because it can confer advantages or disadvantages for players based on their skill or position.
Adding newtonian physics to a starship combat game makes the experience more BORING, because real space physics and space environments are BORING. In fact a realistic space game would be so boring that you'd never play it, because a fully realistic game would have AI controlled ships not ships with living pilots.
-
I was making an analogy, not an indictment on your thoughts about women, for crying out loud, I'm not throwing you onto that bunch at all.
See those two paragraphs at the bottom that you wrote? That's EXACTLY how I said you should argue. So, I guess, thank you for finally catching up to what I said?
Have a nice weekend!
-
See those two paragraphs at the bottom that you wrote? That's EXACTLY how I said you should argue. So, I guess, thank you for finally catching up to what I said?
Both arguments are equally valid, the fact you only choose to endorse one of them doesn't change that fact.
-
We'll just disagree forever on that one :D