The_Yoda said:
midrange said:
The two bolded things are just variable speeds on paint. I referenced a paintball gun in black op 2 that does pretty much that (damages enemies and makes anything traveling over it move quicker). Transforming is pretty much increasing evasion and speed but having no fire power (with the added animation), a cool addition no doubt, but nothing that revolutionizes/saves a genre by itself. I actually have played it recently (friend's game) and I will say that it is quick yet very limited fun (poor local multiplayer especially!). Enjoyable, but nothing special when compared to team fortress/mass effect/destiny/etc.
Large budget =/= innovation, but Large budget == opportunities. These opportunities are then seized by developers that truly want to gain great reviews and breed innovation. Splatoon seems more like a budget game designed to fill in the gap between mario party 10 and mario maker (6 freaking months!!), not a game that is meant to save the shooter genre like the thread implies
|
Oh so you can make your character invisible while in the paint in BO2 ... must have missed that. The character movement (aside from jumping / teleporting to a teammate) is different than in any other shooter, it just doesn't fit your narative so you don't want to admit it.
As for your second paragraph you are moving goal posts now you said "Say what you want about these games, but there is no denying that they are more ambitious in actually innovating in the shooter genre than Splatoon (especially when looking at their budgets and reviews)."
Large budgets are going to be the death of studios. I see more innovation out of Indie studios than large studios. With a gigantic budget you about have to play it safe (i.e. less innovation) or you will sink your studio if the game flops.
Edit: I agree the Local Mulit in Splatoon is weak sauce (very dependant on weapon choice)
|
I did admit the squid transformation as unique..... I was referring to the paintball gun as having already been done. Of course the character movement is different, but that is because no 2 games will have identical movement (outside of sequels). Shooters have already applied wall clinging, double jump, vehicles, sliding, diving, gliding, and many more movement options. Why does a squid movement mechanic deserve to be called the savior of the fps genre when borderlands, destiny, and mass effect a freaking fusing 2 genres of gaming!?
I do think that the games I mentioned are more ambitious. Them having a large budget only shows the confidence the publisher had in the concepts of the game. And it payed off seeing as how highly rated games like mass effect are.
Playing it safe does not imply no creative process at all. An excellent example is Smash Bros wii u. High budget, new concepts, core mechanics in tact, a safe but rewarding improvement in almost every way to brawl (except the subspace adventure). If anything, not delaying splatoon to add more concepts, weapons, maps, local multiplayer, customizable modes, voice chat with restrictions,... all to release in May is what I call playing it safe at the expense of creativity.
Splatoon may be fun, it may be colorful, but it is in no way, shape, or form, revolutionizing or saving a genre that has been innovating and thriving without it.
Edit: Don't take this as a rant against Nintendo. I do think their Metroid Prime is more than an excellent example of a game that innovated the shooter genre with exploration, adventure, puzzle solving, and platforming. Splatoon however is Nintendo playing catch up to all the other huge mulitpplayer shooters, which is why I am surprised people are using splatoon over metroid as Nintendo's innovative shooter