Currently Online 
| Roronaa_chan said: Call it whatever you want, it's still not a QTE and it never will be. C. What is the goddamn point? None of what you just described is better in any way. It's worse. If there's effectively no choice, then don't freaking bother with the ilusion that you seem to like so much. Don't insult the player, just get on with it. Don't hide or mask the game's limitations. "Games are capable of so much more", yet you just described not doing more, so which is it? Are they or are they not? Give choice or don't give choice. Don't give illusion of choice, that's the worse thing a developer can do. It's cheating. And it makes you feel cheated. It is similar to how some games let you choose dialogues or make actual decisions and then they don't influence anything in any way (like some things in Telltale games). Don't freaking do that. E. Read the edit. Have a player on a more open position? Move into a more open position. The game doesn't force you to stay where that player did. The guy playing chose to do that. You're not criticizing the game, you're criticizing the player. And that's normal cause most people playing at these events are bad. The game has melee, stun ammo, cover destruction, blacksight (slow mo), there's several ways of approaching fights. If a dumb player choses to play whack a mole behind cover, blame him. Unless you want the game to force him out of that cover..but then..i'll start to get confused cause I no longer understand if you're in favor of choice or not.. The most ironic thing here is that you're trying to advocate for choice yet you're advocating against it. Choice also applies to what types of games we get to choose to play. You're displaying the same kind of narrow minded view of "what all games must be" that some critics have been so guilty of lately (DC and Forza 6 not being open world, among other things). It is elitism, it is snobism. The game doesn't seem to be for you, so forget about it? I don't go into topics of all the Nintendo games that mean nothing to me describing how i wish they were more like X or Y or more like The Order or Uncharted or any other game. You get them, good for you. Let the rest of us get this instead. We prefer it. The best thing the industry can have is variety and that can't happen when people act the way they do towards certain games. The Order included.
To conclude, I might add that I feel like gaming has never progress past the original Deus Ex...that pretty much nailed it and sealed it. After reaching that "level", it became a point of, as I say above, simply experiencing different things. No game has ever accomplished more than it and I doubt any ever will. So I want a lot of these devs to stop trying because the end result usually isn't very good. All these open games are getting really boring. There's no point in having choice OR illusion of choice if when you execute it you feel bored or like you have done it a million times (Shadow of mordor is specially guilty of this). Linear story driven games at least can more easily escape this because they are more cohesive and as such, as long as it's well done, it doesn't really feel too much like something before it. They have a stronger sense of identity. |
Semantics-shmantics. If you don't want to call them QTEs, thats fine but that doesn't make them any more interesting
C. Errr...every game has limitations. A good game hides those limitations and makes the player feel like their decisions matter. I described a game that puts the decisions on the players head and makes them feel like their decisions matter. That is the strength of games, putting the power in the players hands. Like I said, a good game, hides its limitations...once again, watch the Extra Credits videos I posted for a more in depth desription of why both agency and the illusion of choice matter, even in linear games.
E. Why would the player move into a less advantageous position? If the optimal strategy is boring, it is not the players fault for applying that strategy. As stated, in another video, the player attempted to move around, but the section was obviously designed around the player staying in their cubby-hole and they almost died.
Once again, you are misunderstanding everything I am saying about choice. CHOICE DOES NOT MEAN OPEN WORLD and it doesn't even mean just narrative choice.
Uncharted is a good example of gameplay choice in a linear game. Often it presents numerous paths that the player can take with its interesting terrain traversal and gives the player the option of playing with stealth or going guns blazing. Often the player actually has to think about where they can move and when they can move and which order to take enemies out. I rarely felt like I was playing whack a mole in Uncharted... I am not criticizing linear games, I am not criticizing cover based shooters, I am criticizing the order
@Der: it says "often", not "always"
