i really like the whole grungy low-fantasy thing it has going but the combat was just so awful i played through the opening castle area and then stopped because i couldn't stand it any longer
i really like the whole grungy low-fantasy thing it has going but the combat was just so awful i played through the opening castle area and then stopped because i couldn't stand it any longer
You don't even need to do anything special to make it through the prologue if you've got the game set to easy. You can just mindlessly sword things to your heart's content (though it does help to roll at least a little bit). Don't need Quen or anything. I don't know if it insults some people's manhoods to play on easy or something, but everyone whining about how inaccessible the game is apparently didn't try lowering the difficulty.
I died exactly once during the prologue on easy, at the hardest part. Went, "Oh, I guess I should maybe try using some signs here," got through the segment with minimal trouble, and had no other problems. And I am no action gaming genius. If I can do it, anybody can.
I predict, however, that not only will the Prologue be toned down for any possible console versions, it'll be toned down for the PC version in an upcoming patch. CDP has a history of addressing major complaints and criticisms via free patching.
SwashbucklerXX on
Want to find me on a gaming service? I'm SwashbucklerXX everywhere.
In my opinion, this is really the way things should be done, as opposed to wasting my fucking time with concepts I already know, alá Portal 2. And I'm going to preface this by saying that I thought Portal 2 was a great game. However, about a third of that game is repetition of concepts already familiar to anyone who has played Portal 1, and thus, wasted development for any player that had bought and played the first game.
Do you mean the first chapter of the game (one-ninth of the game) where it not only introduces the concept of the gameplay to new players, but also refamiliarizes old players while simultaneously letting them revisit bits of the first game in a novel way?
Seems like good game design to me, but then again I'm probably not as pro as you
No he has a point. Even more so when you look at the Half-Life episodes.
Both of which had tutorials for things like jumping and crouching and shooting guns and switching guns etc.
Why they dropped something like the Hazard Course from HL1 escapes me. An in-universe but non canonical environment specifically designed to teach you efficiently and quickly the mechanics. Instead of integrating that shit into the main game in increasingly desperate ways (having to smack open the wrecked train doors in Ep2, using the wrench to smash the rubble in Bioshock for example), why not just detach that and have it separate?
Portal 2 mitigates the tedium of a tutorial by making it a callback to the first game. But even then for someone experienced with the mechanics, the early levels have to work doubly hard to please, because while the dialogue is funny and the environments sumptuous, the fact that I'm still being told how to use portals is taking away a lot from the fun.
The Witcher 2 was so refreshing and is absolutely the way I want things to be. Anyone who found it hard at the start got good at the game much quicker than they would have done if everything had been drip fed the mechanics one by one. Not to mention the fact that it's not hard, it's just that most games in the same space of late have been very very easy making this look difficult by comparison.
I've seen people complaining that they died once or twice in the very first fight. As though they've never had the soul crushing experience of dying permanently to that wolf in the first ten minutes of Baldur's Gate. Or the agonizing pain of vintage platformers with their pixel perfect jumps.
I mean, I hate to use this phrase, but back in 'the day', games weren't just hard, they actively tried to ruin your experience. Sure they had nice stories and pleasing environments, but the designers purposely designed these games to make it impossible for you to see them, covering up a lack of content by artificially extending gameplay through difficulty. Now a game comes along that merely plays fair and the whole internet erupts in a seething cloud of annoyance. The Witcher 2 isn't hard. It's just not easy. It balances difficulty with content, meaning neither is artificially elongated. It is the perfect balance.
Plus, The Witcher 2 has quicksave. There's no goddamn excuse for this much whining.
The_Scarab on
0
Options
ButtersA glass of some milksRegistered Userregular
Why they dropped something like the Hazard Course from HL1 escapes me. An in-universe but non canonical environment specifically designed to teach you efficiently and quickly the mechanics. Instead of integrating that shit into the main game in increasingly desperate ways (having to smack open the wrecked train doors in Ep2, using the wrench to smash the rubble in Bioshock for example), why not just detach that and have it separate?
Because in the cases of those games familiarization of mechanics was part of the initial storyline which has become a very common tutorial method.
Also, after looking at the vid that BlackDove posted this game's AI looks like total shit. Am I being misled?
Aside from instances where the AI is supposed to be dumb, for example mindless ravaging monsters, which I think is excusable, yeah, the Witcher's AI is not good. They basically just swarm you, stunlocking you to death.
A lot like Assassin's Creed 1 in a way. Sometimes curiously standing there doing nothing while you murder everyone one by one.
I think the fun in the combat comes not so much from the smart enemies, but from the tools at your disposal to deal with them. That said, I've not played an RPG that didn't have finicky combat so I'm willing to let a lot slide. It actually gets a little better on hard because you absolutely have to start utilizing potions and the signs to win. Similar to how in Dragon Age Origins you could meatgrind your way to victory on normal, but on nightmare the combat became much more exciting because it was more a strategy game.
The_Scarab on
0
Options
ButtersA glass of some milksRegistered Userregular
A lot like Assassin's Creed 1 in a way. Sometimes curiously standing there doing nothing while you murder everyone one by one.
This is something that I don't really tolerate in games anymore so I should probably stay away from this. I understand that there's variability in enemy level and should be variability in enemy skill but if there's multiple enemies on screen in what world does it not make sense for them to at minimum gang up on a single player?
Both Dragon Age games applied that for the most part.
A lot like Assassin's Creed 1 in a way. Sometimes curiously standing there doing nothing while you murder everyone one by one.
This is something that I don't really tolerate in games anymore so I should probably stay away from this. I understand that there's variability in enemy level and should be variability in enemy skill but if there's multiple enemies on screen in what world does it not make sense for them to at minimum gang up on a single player?
Both Dragon Age games applied that for the most part.
For some reason, the AI doesn't always seem to "engage" when it should, so sometimes enemies will gang up on you from all sides and it's quite challenging, but other times they'll just stand there like statues while you fight their friends.
I didn't buy DAII but I didn't really notice that in DA:O aside from enemies being far enough away that they were (in theory) unaware of you or that they're comrades were being attacked. If they were close enough to be aware of you, they didn't just stand around. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding what you mean.
Though there are types of enemies. Some with spears, shields, full plate armour that are easier to stagger but have a ton of health etc. Others are very nimble and dodge attacks.
In my opinion, this is really the way things should be done, as opposed to wasting my fucking time with concepts I already know, alá Portal 2. And I'm going to preface this by saying that I thought Portal 2 was a great game. However, about a third of that game is repetition of concepts already familiar to anyone who has played Portal 1, and thus, wasted development for any player that had bought and played the first game.
Do you mean the first chapter of the game (one-ninth of the game) where it not only introduces the concept of the gameplay to new players, but also refamiliarizes old players while simultaneously letting them revisit bits of the first game in a novel way?
Seems like good game design to me, but then again I'm probably not as pro as you
No he has a point. Even more so when you look at the Half-Life episodes.
Both of which had tutorials for things like jumping and crouching and shooting guns and switching guns etc.
Why they dropped something like the Hazard Course from HL1 escapes me. An in-universe but non canonical environment specifically designed to teach you efficiently and quickly the mechanics. Instead of integrating that shit into the main game in increasingly desperate ways (having to smack open the wrecked train doors in Ep2, using the wrench to smash the rubble in Bioshock for example), why not just detach that and have it separate?
Portal 2 mitigates the tedium of a tutorial by making it a callback to the first game. But even then for someone experienced with the mechanics, the early levels have to work doubly hard to please, because while the dialogue is funny and the environments sumptuous, the fact that I'm still being told how to use portals is taking away a lot from the fun.
I think we may have to agree to disagree; I enjoy that gradual ramping up of gameplay, even with systems I'm already familiar with (in most cases it's been years since I played the previous game). In the case of Portal 2, I found myself completely oblivious to the fact I was being taught how portals work again due to being too transfixed by the atmosphere.
No you have a solid point. Portal is sorta the exception that proves the rule. It had the ability to make the tutorial part of the game world, in the same way the puzzles are overtly referred to in character as tests, as though no fourth wall exists at all.
They literally talk about how test subjects (ie you) need to be introduced to the portals.
You can't do that in the Witcher, because they already pulled the amnesia trick once, having Geralt have some dude say 'here's how you stab trolls' would break character. He's an immortal, unstoppable monster slayer for hire. Teaching him (ie you) how to kill would be tricky.
The_Scarab on
0
Options
KwoaruConfident SmirkFlawless Golden PecsRegistered Userregular
edited May 2011
they could have had a little box come up that says "hey do you want to be shown how to play the game before you jump into shit?"
which I think is a better solution than making you dig through the in-game codex to try and figure out how to do things or trying to fit a tutorial into the main game (especially if your character is assumed to be a bad ass)
I can relate to this comic. When I started playing the game and Roche was questioning me, I chose the dragon topic without knowing it would throw me into the game. Within 5 seconds of the checkpoint it puts you in, the flames start hurting you. I died countless times without even knowing what to do. It didn't help that, for some reason, you take fire damage wherever you are.
The controls can be somewhat unresponsive, too. Especially blocking (and yes, I know it costs vigor).
BroloBroseidonLord of the BroceanRegistered Userregular
edited May 2011
Someone mentioned this earlier, but having a separate, optional 'Tutorial Room' that takes place outside the game continuity could have easily mitigated this.
It would quickly walk you through combat basics, quick time events, using your signs, crafting items and drinking potions, and then once it was done you'd start the actual game.
I didn't buy DAII but I didn't really notice that in DA:O aside from enemies being far enough away that they were (in theory) unaware of you or that they're comrades were being attacked. If they were close enough to be aware of you, they didn't just stand around. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding what you mean.
What I meant was that DA applied "at minimum gang up on a single player" AI tendencies.
DAII's AI is actually pretty good. It surrounds low health casters often, uses stun abilities and not overly cheaply, and ranged enemies work to stay out of harms way. Enough of DAII makes me wish I waited for a discount but for all its faults the combat is very solid. That vid of the Witcher however didn't inspire confidence and it seems the first one was even worse.
Someone mentioned this earlier, but having a separate, optional 'Tutorial Room' that takes place outside the game continuity could have easily mitigated this.
It would quickly walk you through combat basics, quick time events, using your signs, crafting items and drinking potions, and then once it was done you'd start the actual game.
One thing that didn't meet its potential in Bayonetta is the practice screen during transitions. I would have really preferred (maybe it's different on versions other than 360) to be able to stay on that screen to practice moves as long as I want before transitioning to the next area. Yeah, I get that you can do that in The Gates of Hell to try out techniques you can purchase, but I should be able to practice moves without having to look for a portal.
The combat is dangerous and fun and if you don't pay attention it can be punishing at the start. I really liked it once I got the hang of it.
But really, this game is about dialogue, characters environments and quests. If you dismiss it because of combat alone you're missing an extremely good game.
To me, this is so far the best game released this year (by far)
Someone mentioned this earlier, but having a separate, optional 'Tutorial Room' that takes place outside the game continuity could have easily mitigated this.
It would quickly walk you through combat basics, quick time events, using your signs, crafting items and drinking potions, and then once it was done you'd start the actual game.
One thing that didn't meet its potential in Bayonetta is the practice screen during transitions. I would have really preferred (maybe it's different on versions other than 360) to be able to stay on that screen to practice moves as long as I want before transitioning to the next area. Yeah, I get that you can do that in The Gates of Hell to try out techniques you can purchase, but I should be able to practice moves without having to look for a portal.
Pretty sure you can stay on that screen by pressing the Back Button.
Someone mentioned this earlier, but having a separate, optional 'Tutorial Room' that takes place outside the game continuity could have easily mitigated this.
It would quickly walk you through combat basics, quick time events, using your signs, crafting items and drinking potions, and then once it was done you'd start the actual game.
One thing that didn't meet its potential in Bayonetta is the practice screen during transitions. I would have really preferred (maybe it's different on versions other than 360) to be able to stay on that screen to practice moves as long as I want before transitioning to the next area. Yeah, I get that you can do that in The Gates of Hell to try out techniques you can purchase, but I should be able to practice moves without having to look for a portal.
Pretty sure you can stay on that screen by pressing the Back Button.
Shit, I'll have to try that.
Druhim on
0
Options
ButtersA glass of some milksRegistered Userregular
The combat is dangerous and fun and if you don't pay attention it can be punishing at the start. I really liked it once I got the hang of it.
But really, this game is about dialogue, characters environments and quests. If you dismiss it because of combat alone you're missing an extremely good game.
To me, this is so far the best game released this year (by far)
If I'm spending a majority of a game in shitty, frustrating combat I'm not going to care how good the dialogue or characters are and aren't the quests going to be primarily combat oriented?
The combat is dangerous and fun and if you don't pay attention it can be punishing at the start. I really liked it once I got the hang of it.
But really, this game is about dialogue, characters environments and quests. If you dismiss it because of combat alone you're missing an extremely good game.
To me, this is so far the best game released this year (by far)
If I'm spending a majority of a game in shitty, frustrating combat I'm not going to care how good the dialogue or characters are and aren't the quests going to be primarily combat oriented?
Now I haven't played, but my understanding of the situation is that the majority of the time spent with the game is after one could find the combat frustrating.
Wyborn on
0
Options
ButtersA glass of some milksRegistered Userregular
edited May 2011
Maybe the footage I'm seeing doesn't do it justice but Scarab and Rolo more or less confirmed my shitty AI accusation which doesn't bode well for me.
We've been having long discussions about this in the Witcher threads.
The game is actually piss easy from beginning to end, it's just that you as the player need to figure shit out yourself as opposed to being led by the hand to the glorious serenity that is knowing how to click the left and the right mouse button in conjunction with the space bar. I guess holding the control key and selecting a magic power is the advanced course for the ubermench intellectuals of the high order of.... seriously.
[...]
what
that is bullshit
game mechanics are not "common sense"
there's nothing at all wrong with telling your player how your game works in a fun way
much like "security through obscurity" is bullshit, difficulty through obscurity is also bullshit.
this one just seems as if it's breaching some unspoken contract which stipulates that the player can not and should not do anything outside of what they're being told.
How like life...
sips macchiato
Saint_Dipset on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
0
Options
cj iwakuraThe Rhythm RegentBears The Name FreedomRegistered Userregular
edited May 2011
Personally, I cleared the prologue by hitting and running from everything. Agni, run, recharge, repeat.
What occured to me fairly suddenly during a Dragon Age 2 playthrough (which also throws people into the deep-end, albeit to what sounds like a much lesser extent) is how often I just play a game despite the lack of any kind of guidance
Team Fortress 2? Shipped with no manual and no tutorial, you just picked a class and hoped for the best
And when I think about it... damn, that's not a very friendly practise from the point of view of people new to the genre
I used to love scouring through manuals before installing games on my computer. And, as is the stereotype, my friends with consoles would just stick new games in and start playing, and I'd be all "hey, what about the manual?" But they wouldn't care and just planned on learning the game as they went, while I sat down and flipped through the thing, learning how to do stuff that they didn't encounter ingame.
Now I tend to just throw the game in, too. Part of it is changing tastes on my part, but the manuals have changed too. More technical, less flavor text and fluff to make it interesting, fewer pictures. One of those things that's fallen on the wayside, as most people didn't care much about it.
Posts
steam | xbox live: IGNORANT HARLOT | psn: MadRoll | nintendo network: spinach
3ds: 1504-5717-8252
Scientifically speaking, it is buttloads better
steam | xbox live: IGNORANT HARLOT | psn: MadRoll | nintendo network: spinach
3ds: 1504-5717-8252
Keep that in mind if you die horribly and know that it gets easier
HOLD CTRL, SELECT "QUEN", PRESS Q, WIN GAME
If you're still dying when you have a shield that makes you invincible then you might be terrible at this game.
and add it to the stack of games I haven't gotten around to playing yet.
kingworkscreative.com
kingworkscreative.blogspot.com
I died exactly once during the prologue on easy, at the hardest part. Went, "Oh, I guess I should maybe try using some signs here," got through the segment with minimal trouble, and had no other problems. And I am no action gaming genius. If I can do it, anybody can.
I predict, however, that not only will the Prologue be toned down for any possible console versions, it'll be toned down for the PC version in an upcoming patch. CDP has a history of addressing major complaints and criticisms via free patching.
DCS's A-10C is somewhat complex as well. A-10C Startup Tutorial
That's part 1 of 2 on "how to start the aircraft".
oh you got to the tutorial, jesus dude
I still haven't figured out how to make the game start without crashing
This appeals to me a lot.
No he has a point. Even more so when you look at the Half-Life episodes.
Both of which had tutorials for things like jumping and crouching and shooting guns and switching guns etc.
Why they dropped something like the Hazard Course from HL1 escapes me. An in-universe but non canonical environment specifically designed to teach you efficiently and quickly the mechanics. Instead of integrating that shit into the main game in increasingly desperate ways (having to smack open the wrecked train doors in Ep2, using the wrench to smash the rubble in Bioshock for example), why not just detach that and have it separate?
Portal 2 mitigates the tedium of a tutorial by making it a callback to the first game. But even then for someone experienced with the mechanics, the early levels have to work doubly hard to please, because while the dialogue is funny and the environments sumptuous, the fact that I'm still being told how to use portals is taking away a lot from the fun.
The Witcher 2 was so refreshing and is absolutely the way I want things to be. Anyone who found it hard at the start got good at the game much quicker than they would have done if everything had been drip fed the mechanics one by one. Not to mention the fact that it's not hard, it's just that most games in the same space of late have been very very easy making this look difficult by comparison.
I've seen people complaining that they died once or twice in the very first fight. As though they've never had the soul crushing experience of dying permanently to that wolf in the first ten minutes of Baldur's Gate. Or the agonizing pain of vintage platformers with their pixel perfect jumps.
I mean, I hate to use this phrase, but back in 'the day', games weren't just hard, they actively tried to ruin your experience. Sure they had nice stories and pleasing environments, but the designers purposely designed these games to make it impossible for you to see them, covering up a lack of content by artificially extending gameplay through difficulty. Now a game comes along that merely plays fair and the whole internet erupts in a seething cloud of annoyance. The Witcher 2 isn't hard. It's just not easy. It balances difficulty with content, meaning neither is artificially elongated. It is the perfect balance.
Plus, The Witcher 2 has quicksave. There's no goddamn excuse for this much whining.
Because in the cases of those games familiarization of mechanics was part of the initial storyline which has become a very common tutorial method.
Also, after looking at the vid that BlackDove posted this game's AI looks like total shit. Am I being misled?
A lot like Assassin's Creed 1 in a way. Sometimes curiously standing there doing nothing while you murder everyone one by one.
I think the fun in the combat comes not so much from the smart enemies, but from the tools at your disposal to deal with them. That said, I've not played an RPG that didn't have finicky combat so I'm willing to let a lot slide. It actually gets a little better on hard because you absolutely have to start utilizing potions and the signs to win. Similar to how in Dragon Age Origins you could meatgrind your way to victory on normal, but on nightmare the combat became much more exciting because it was more a strategy game.
This is something that I don't really tolerate in games anymore so I should probably stay away from this. I understand that there's variability in enemy level and should be variability in enemy skill but if there's multiple enemies on screen in what world does it not make sense for them to at minimum gang up on a single player?
Both Dragon Age games applied that for the most part.
For some reason, the AI doesn't always seem to "engage" when it should, so sometimes enemies will gang up on you from all sides and it's quite challenging, but other times they'll just stand there like statues while you fight their friends.
I think we may have to agree to disagree; I enjoy that gradual ramping up of gameplay, even with systems I'm already familiar with (in most cases it's been years since I played the previous game). In the case of Portal 2, I found myself completely oblivious to the fact I was being taught how portals work again due to being too transfixed by the atmosphere.
Perhaps I am easy to please
They literally talk about how test subjects (ie you) need to be introduced to the portals.
You can't do that in the Witcher, because they already pulled the amnesia trick once, having Geralt have some dude say 'here's how you stab trolls' would break character. He's an immortal, unstoppable monster slayer for hire. Teaching him (ie you) how to kill would be tricky.
which I think is a better solution than making you dig through the in-game codex to try and figure out how to do things or trying to fit a tutorial into the main game (especially if your character is assumed to be a bad ass)
The controls can be somewhat unresponsive, too. Especially blocking (and yes, I know it costs vigor).
http://www.fallout3nexus.com/downloads/file.php?id=16534
It would quickly walk you through combat basics, quick time events, using your signs, crafting items and drinking potions, and then once it was done you'd start the actual game.
What I meant was that DA applied "at minimum gang up on a single player" AI tendencies.
DAII's AI is actually pretty good. It surrounds low health casters often, uses stun abilities and not overly cheaply, and ranged enemies work to stay out of harms way. Enough of DAII makes me wish I waited for a discount but for all its faults the combat is very solid. That vid of the Witcher however didn't inspire confidence and it seems the first one was even worse.
Too bad I was starting to get interested.
One thing that didn't meet its potential in Bayonetta is the practice screen during transitions. I would have really preferred (maybe it's different on versions other than 360) to be able to stay on that screen to practice moves as long as I want before transitioning to the next area. Yeah, I get that you can do that in The Gates of Hell to try out techniques you can purchase, but I should be able to practice moves without having to look for a portal.
But really, this game is about dialogue, characters environments and quests. If you dismiss it because of combat alone you're missing an extremely good game.
To me, this is so far the best game released this year (by far)
Pretty sure you can stay on that screen by pressing the Back Button.
Shit, I'll have to try that.
If I'm spending a majority of a game in shitty, frustrating combat I'm not going to care how good the dialogue or characters are and aren't the quests going to be primarily combat oriented?
Now I haven't played, but my understanding of the situation is that the majority of the time spent with the game is after one could find the combat frustrating.
what
that is bullshit
game mechanics are not "common sense"
there's nothing at all wrong with telling your player how your game works in a fun way
much like "security through obscurity" is bullshit, difficulty through obscurity is also bullshit.
How like life...
sips macchiato
I'm sure I was doing it wrong, but hey.
Team Fortress 2? Shipped with no manual and no tutorial, you just picked a class and hoped for the best
And when I think about it... damn, that's not a very friendly practise from the point of view of people new to the genre
Now I tend to just throw the game in, too. Part of it is changing tastes on my part, but the manuals have changed too. More technical, less flavor text and fluff to make it interesting, fewer pictures. One of those things that's fallen on the wayside, as most people didn't care much about it.