PDA

View Full Version : Inconsistency and Redundancy



Jazz117Volkov
12-21-2013, 01:45 AM
Both these things should be avoided, always, but Blacklist seems to love them.

This is not a rant by any measure, just an analysis of certain issues the game has that can be filed under the aforementioned nouns. I'll be referencing the Single Player here, but Multiplayer shares many, and has a bunch all to itself, I'm sure someone else will be more than happy to share those.

I'll work my page after the order of the title:


Inconsistencies

First on my list is vertical traversal; there are two things about climbing up walls that fail the consistency test; A) the climb prompt sometimes doesn't show up, therefore sometimes you mysteriously can't climb a wall. In my experience the Active Sprint will always get you up a wall, but Active Sprint is a study in inconsistency all on its own, so unless I can beeline, I don't use it. I mentioned a solution to this in another thread:

...tie the sprint to the thumbstick (and not have it auto climb) but also up the range and notoriety of the traversal prompts; that way the player can micro where the prompt is sitting, to dictate where exactly they climb/traverse, while they're sprinting.

It's not really a consistency issue, but something definitely worth mentioning is if you're in cover, like, behind a desk or something, you'll see the 'CLIMB' graphic on the desk, but if you press 'A', Sam will cover-to-cover and change to a random corner of the desk or w/e you're sitting behind. I'd say this is due to the Left Stick being able to dictate what cover you go to... I say scrap the left stick's influence over your cover location, it's never added anything to my experience, just another variable to track in the controls that are already a huge mess.

Another more serious problem--which is still a traversal issue--is taking cover next to a ledges, 9 out of 10 times you'll fly off the ledge instead of taking cover. There is perhaps a logical explanation to this, such as camera angle, speed, and proximity, and if you conform to all the right parameters, you'll be able to use the cover and not the ledge, but that's like asking someone to pee into a straw; it's not good.

Dogs and melee; so if a dog is running for you, Sam becomes brain-dead and starts wrestling with the animal, instead of... I don't know, stabbing it; anyway, nothing you can do, you get synced into the dogs mouth, and it's button mash times; the problem is right after you get the dog off and crush its head, Sam transfers his brain-dead status to all other K9s in proximity, and is able to just boot them in the ribs. A) this is an issue because he can't normally do that, and you're left thinking "wtf", and B) I know exactly why the game does this; it's because it knows the dog's sync-bites are BS, and doesn't want the player to "put up with/suffer/contend with" anymore "frustration/annoyance/irritation" than... what? Necessary? I won't elaborate on this point any further, because my repetitious use descriptive words here should be activating alert sirens in every designers mind.

Another inconsistency is AI reaction times. If you're spotted at a corner or something, the detection arc flashes white for quite a while before the NPC can retaliate; it gives the player quite a bit of time to contain the situation... however, on occasion, if you walk out in front of an AI, or idk, jump out a window and land in front of him, in a nano-second he's firing his weapon. I don't know if this is a deliberate inconsistency, or some sort of glitch, but it impedes enjoyment, "This tactic worked over there, but the game won't let it work here. Why?" It's a problem that needs to be addressed.

The hand-to-hand system has multiple consistency issues. A) combat and stealth takedowns/abductions seems to be, on occasion, interchangeable... this doesn't bother me, really, as its really just cosmetic (though, combat abduction don't hide bodies). B) Some abductions hid both Sam and the NPC, others don't properly hide the NPC, and there's quite a few that leave Sam's head hanging out, when he could easily pull it back and not get detected. This is a pretty big consistency issue, and has lead to numerous detections which could have been avoided, had the game pick a different animation. They look great though, so my solution would be to make same undetectable passed a degree threshold while doing stealth abductions. I mean, Sam's default corner stance has his head sticking out, and no one ever sees him... C) alerted enemies are FUBAR. Game says "Kill", but Sam get's pushed away. Every. Single. Time. More than an inconsistency, this is a broken mechanic. A solution I mentioned a while ago was having your execute token meant Sam's melee's couldn't be denied. That plays into the gameplay very well, and adds a lot to the experience IMO.

This one is one of my favorites. Flash Grenades. They blind people, right? Well, actually no, a lot of the time, they don't; they're one of the most inconsistent gadgets in the game. For the Panther players, this one hurts the experience more than most of the others; you need your stun gadgets to work, and there's a cool bit of gameplay after the well placed flash goes off, you're like on a timer to take care of business and disappear before the backup arrives... there's nothing worse than dropping the flashbang, then running out of cover only to see a guy five feet from the open flash explosion start shooting at you. Conviction had a very similar issue, and on account of both game's it really only happens if the AI are alerted, or recently alerted, which unfortunately makes me wonder if this is a deliberate inconsistency. That would be a shame, and not something I would want on my resume.

I'm tempted to list the whistling/sticky-noise-maker as an inconsistency, but I kind of get why it's the way it is, and I can live with it... it does feel like a compromise; an effort to draw difficulty where other methods would have been better, but w/e. Just something I notice, and pulls me out of the experience. "So I've whistled twice in this area, right? Yeah, okay so I can attract this guy, who has no idea and nothing to do with the other guys way over there who I was whistling too. Cool, so let's... wait, he just totally flipped out... where was the border to this area again? ...oh, so that would be my quota breached... uh, I'll just shoot him before he looses it completely."

I could call the lack of a headgear customization a consistency issue, but nah... I'll file that one under stupid.

Can't put a suppressor on the AK47 in SP, but you can in MP. WTF?

Mark & Execute pistol finishers. I don't understand these at all; occasionally Sam will pull off a really cool pistol finish, like he supposed too, and other times he'll just go into that super lame neck snap thing. I feel like its a glitch, but I honestly don't know. Its annoying as hell, and every possible method of engagement has been both proven and disproven. If the neck-snap was deliberately included as an M&E finisher, please smack the person responsible.


Redundancies

This one is definitely not the same caliber of game-breakers as the last, but these are things worth mentioning. Firstly, the suit customizations; the Standard Ops Suit is a redundant piece of equipment the moment you unlock something better. On account of stealth, armor, and gadgets, it is the worst suit. Why would anyone ever use it?

The goggles too; there's like seven goggles or something, and all but the last three are just progressions towards the last two, and only the first one is relevant in Perfectionist difficulty level. Why on earth can't we assign the features to the model we like?

And the guns; certain weapons are redundant, especially the pistols, but more than entire weapons, many of the weapon mods will never be used, because they're useless/pointless.

I've never used the crossbow to fire noise makers... but that's just me, maybe other players use that one.

There's more to be said in both sections here, but I'm all typed out.

TheRealGunnut19
12-21-2013, 03:59 AM
I always thought that holding B to get into cover when near ledges, a la shooter controls in MP, would be nice.

KenTWOu
12-21-2013, 12:38 PM
M&E + helmets inconsistencies.

To notice this stuff, please, make the next series of experiments. The best way to do it is to choose Charlie's mission Pakistani Embassy on normal difficulty and the wave #11. There are only two helmet armored enemies at the beginning of the wave. So they will be very useful.

Crossbow with sleeping gas bolts:

a) KO the first armored enemy to earn M&E token, execute the second one using sleeping gas bolts, gas bolt will take his helmets off, gas will KO him;
b) shoot the helmet off of the guy's head manually using sleeping gas bolts, the first bolt won't shoot his helmet off, only the second bolt will do this and then its gas will KO him;

Pistols

Silenced PX4 without armor piercing bullets has only 3 squares of power
a) M&E: one shot to shoot the helmet off
b) manual shots: two shots to shoot the helmet off

D50 with armor piercing bullets - 14 squares of power
a) M&E: one shot to shoot the helmet off
b) manual shots: two shots to shoot the helmet off

SMGs

MP7A1 silenced without armor piercing bullets or loud with armor piercing bullets in single shot mode (4/8 sq of pow)
a) M&E: one shot to shoot the helmet off
b) manual shots: two shots to shoot the helmet off

SC400S with or without armor piercing bullets in single shot mode (8/11 sq of pow)
a) M&E: one shot to shoot the helmet off
b) manual shots: one shot to shoot the helmet off

Assault rifles

Famas without armor piercing bullets in single shot mode (9 sq of pow)
a) M&E: one shot to shoot the helmet off
b) manual shots: one shot to shoot the helmet off

SC4000 with or without armor piercing bullets and single shot mode (15/18 sq of pow)
a) M&E: one shot to shoot the helmet off
b) manual shots: one shot to shoot the helmet off

Sniper rifles

SVU sniper rifle without armor piercing bullets – 14 sq of pow
a1) M&E in the face: one shot to kill the enemy
a2) M&E from behind: one shot to shoot the helmet off;
b1) manual shots in the face: one shot to kill an enemy through helmet
b2) manual shots from behind: one shot to shoot the helmet off

SR-25 sniper rifle with or without armor piercing bullets – (15/18 sq of pow)
a1) M&E in the face: one shot to kill the enemy
a2) M&E from behind: one shot to shoot the helmet off;
b1) manual shots in the face: one shot to kill an enemy through helmet
b2) manual shots from behind: one shot to shoot the helmet off

SI-IS sniper rifle with armor piercing bullets and maximum 20 power will give the same results.

IT'S UNSYSTEMIC!!!

The main reason of this weird logic is M&E and helmets don't take weapons powers into account properly. And they completely ignore your type of bullets. That's why in most of the cases you need only one bullet to shoot helmets off using M&E and two bullets to make it manually. So it seems like helmet don't have its own life bar. Because different pistols with very different power spend two bullets. So it's gamey! Weapons of different class spend different number of bullets because devs say so. Moreover, two weapons of the same class (SMG) spend different number of bullets in manual mode even when they have the same power. And it seems that only sniper rifles could kill any enemy wearing a helmet both in M&E and in manual mode. Of course, if you'll shoot them in the face.

The number of IFs is insane! And I don't want to spend more hours to test every weapon properly with or without armor piercing bullets and/or silencers (only these upgrades affect your weapon power), especially within SMG class. Because I've already spend more than three hours and I tried to use two weapons of every class with the highest possible power and with the lowest possible power within a class. And I ignored shotguns completely.

Moreover, these rules force you to use M&E against helmet enemies. So you can't use several tactics on Perfectionist difficulty, because you need two bullets in half of the cases. the first test was already enough to demonstrate it properly. You need two sleeping gas bolts to shoot the helmet off. And that enemy must be alone so you could take this trick without any alerts. It's really hard to pull off, I'm really sad!


the Standard Ops Suit is a redundant piece of equipment... Why would anyone ever use it?
Self imposed constraints, for challenge!


I've never used the crossbow to fire noise makers... but that's just me, maybe other players use that one.
It's a very cool feature, especially in co-op, when one of the players fires a noise maker in such a way so the second player could make an abduction move. By the way, I hate you, Jazz, you forced me to spend several hours of my life to make these tests about M&E inconsistency! I wanted to play Far Cry 3 instead :(:):p

yahya_240
12-21-2013, 02:42 PM
technical issues in SP is not annoying that much
it dosent ruin the game
but im MP ?? the hell it does XD


but, the only thing i remember in the SP is when i fall on a solider (not death from above). and he fall and give me the sound of the detection but i couldnt knock him down until he stud up again. it was very wired to wait him getting up wile the detection sound was on (without being detected). and that happened to me twice. i think that ubisoft didnt think that would happen cuz they added DFA. i could knock solider by falling on them back to SC:CT. but who cares dude?.the SP & COOP is close to perfect. the only problem with this game is its MP that only need alot of patches that wont be happen -_- .

SanityAgathion
12-21-2013, 05:50 PM
Another inconsistency is AI reaction times. If you're spotted at a corner or something, the detection arc flashes white for quite a while before the NPC can retaliate; it gives the player quite a bit of time to contain the situation... however, on occasion, if you walk out in front of an AI, or idk, jump out a window and land in front of him, in a nano-second he's firing his weapon. I don't know if this is a deliberate inconsistency, or some sort of glitch, but it impedes enjoyment, "This tactic worked over there, but the game won't let it work here. Why?" It's a problem that needs to be addressed.

I am not sure if some variability of those NPCs reactions is on purpose. Time ago I was looking on some videos about blacklist from E3, various interviews from magazines and such, and in one Maxime Beland described the Perfectionist mode as having not so predictable NPC reactions compared to lower difficulties. Like if you try to lure them to your position they may actually freak out and take cover instead or even start shooting your direction. Not sure if it made to the game in this form though :) Anyway there is some period before AI gets into alerted state and starts shooting, but do not count on it.

SolidSage
12-21-2013, 08:19 PM
Blacklist is a massive leap forward in terms of quality and scope. A lot of the things OP mentioned are legitimate irritations in an otherwise excellent title. Fat that we need to trim for the next installment.

Hopefully that is how SC7 will be built, focusing on dialing in and optimizing current trajectories rather than doing another sort of rebuild.

Dome500
12-21-2013, 10:21 PM
@ Jazz => I agree on absolutely EVERY aspect except the one with the Noisemaker bolts (only there should be less ammo for them, but aside from that they are nice and I use them regularly)

@ Ken => I do SO agree. Do you know how annoying it is that if you shoot an enemy either from behind or from the side with a sniper rifle - every time the same one with the same upgrades - that it sometimes kills the enemy and sometimes just plops the helmet off? It's annoying !! It's a Sniper Rifle, and one of the strongest of the game (SC-IS), why do they not kill the enemy right away?
Why do I need 2 shots for a manual helmet shoot-off, every enemy detected me before I could kill him that way, but with M&E I do only need 1 shot? WTF?

Just bring consistency in those mechanics and elements Jazz and Ken mentioned.

Making restrictions and "special rules" like that is making it complicated and confusing. It makes the game frustrating instead of fun.

Rea1SamF1sher
12-22-2013, 04:08 AM
The most annoying to me is vertical traversal, active sprint and the melee.
Though I am having more of a problem with the melee cause it doesn't work efficient enough for a Multiplayer (as a Spy!) in my opinion. Functionality over glorious looking kills. I mean I really like the animations, but it often just takes to much time and gets you killed. Especially when you do those special kill moves on the stairs.

king of ur hill
12-22-2013, 05:53 AM
i love this post.very detailed in your thinking. you missed a lot of things but what you did cover, you nailed.

i believe a lot of what your covering could be fixed by investing time into creating different functional control schemes.

Coviction by far had the best. you could move an inch or six inches with the analog stick. and same only climbed what i wanted him to. it was perfect having LT as cover and LB as crouch. it felt so organic and fluid. But they just had to give in to the "press LT to aim" scheme which is just not needed when playing as a spy. when playing as a spy, your not so much worried about aiming quickly as you are moving with speed, precision and agility. Pressing the right analog stick to aim is awesome and just feels better.






I always thought that holding B to get into cover when near ledges, a la shooter controls in MP, would be nice.

they have that control scheme option in the multiplayer. both control scheme 2 and 3 are "hold B to go into cover." and no it is not.

when you play as a spy in multiplayer, its a pain in the *** to have to wait that extra second to go into cover. very annoying.

king of ur hill
12-22-2013, 06:00 AM
@
@ Ken => I do SO agree. Do you know how annoying it is that if you shoot an enemy either from behind or from the side with a sniper rifle - every time the same one with the same upgrades - that it sometimes kills the enemy and sometimes just plops the helmet off? It's annoying !! It's a Sniper Rifle, and one of the strongest of the game (SC-IS), why do they not kill the enemy right away?
Why do I need 2 shots for a manual helmet shoot-off, every enemy detected me before I could kill him that way, but with M&E I do only need 1 shot? WTF?


I agree completely. but with one difference. If a soldier has a kevlar helmet and is shot with a high powered sniper round or any round for that matter, a couple different things will/could happen.
1. the force of the bullet hitting the helmet is going to knock you unconscious and give you a MEAN concussion.
2. depending on the round the force of the bullet impacting your kevlar helmet could kill you.

EITHER way, the enemy is getting knocked down for the count. not just shaking it off and firing back immediately.

TheRealGunnut19
12-22-2013, 09:42 AM
i love this post.very detailed in your thinking. you missed a lot of things but what you did cover, you nailed.

i believe a lot of what your covering could be fixed by investing time into creating different functional control schemes.

Coviction by far had the best. you could move an inch or six inches with the analog stick. and same only climbed what i wanted him to. it was perfect having LT as cover and LB as crouch. it felt so organic and fluid. But they just had to give in to the "press LT to aim" scheme which is just not needed when playing as a spy. when playing as a spy, your not so much worried about aiming quickly as you are moving with speed, precision and agility. Pressing the right analog stick to aim is awesome and just feels better.







they have that control scheme option in the multiplayer. both control scheme 2 and 3 are "hold B to go into cover." and no it is not.

when you play as a spy in multiplayer, its a pain in the *** to have to wait that extra second to go into cover. very annoying.

I know about the alternate MP control schemes, and definitely don't like the extra time it takes to get into cover, but I think that if the hold could be smoothed out a bit more, (Like Conviction's press/hold for melee.) than it would be, if nothing else, a way to take cover near a ledge without as much hassle.

Press B near a ledge to go off the ledge, hold B for a bit to take cover, I think it could be a half-decent solution to the issue.

Dome500
12-22-2013, 05:04 PM
The most annoying to me is vertical traversal, active sprint and the melee.
Though I am having more of a problem with the melee cause it doesn't work efficient enough for a Multiplayer (as a Spy!) in my opinion. Functionality over glorious looking kills. I mean I really like the animations, but it often just takes to much time and gets you killed. Especially when you do those special kill moves on the stairs.

I agree on both points.

1. Sprinting and Climbing HAVE to be actively (see what I did there? :P ;) ) separated next time. Seriously.

2. Kill animations are sometimes very short, another time they take to long. That's not okay from a tactical POV, especially since split seconds can decide between life and death. So you shouldn't have kill animations with more than half a second of difference in terms of how long it takes for the kill to finish and for you to go on.


when you play as a spy in multiplayer, its a pain in the *** to have to wait that extra second to go into cover. very annoying.

Don't forget the time it takes to go away from cover again...


I agree completely. but with one difference. If a soldier has a kevlar helmet and is shot with a high powered sniper round or any round for that matter, a couple different things will/could happen.
1. the force of the bullet hitting the helmet is going to knock you unconscious and give you a MEAN concussion.
2. depending on the round the force of the bullet impacting your kevlar helmet could kill you.

EITHER way, the enemy is getting knocked down for the count. not just shaking it off and firing back immediately.

This

And the most important thing: It is NOT RANDOM. It drives you crazy not to know if he dies or if you just shoot his helmet and he detects you (across ridiculous distances btw. he knows your EXACT position.

The random effect of either having a knocked out or a killed enemy is okay, because it's a calculated risk and either way the enemy is not detecting you or shooting back.

Even then, if you want to have kills only - in the next game - you could shoot a second time and kill him with that. (If in the next game shooting after K.O. counts as kill).

EvilPixieGrrr
12-23-2013, 09:47 PM
I'm chiming in real quick to say that I really appreciate feedback posted like this. It's detailed, it's succinct, it's constructive, and it's CIVIL.

I know many of you post similarly, but for whatever reason I decided to reply to this one. Please accept this as a show of appreciation to all of you who communicate with helpful details without the swear filter having to take over to the point where the message is undecipherable.

Enjoy your holidays everyone!

Dome500
12-23-2013, 11:06 PM
I'm chiming in real quick to say that I really appreciate feedback posted like this. It's detailed, it's succinct, it's constructive, and it's CIVIL.

I know many of you post similarly, but for whatever reason I decided to reply to this one. Please accept this as a show of appreciation to all of you who communicate with helpful details without the swear filter having to take over to the point where the message is undecipherable.

Enjoy your holidays everyone!

Merry Christmas Pixie

Jazz117Volkov
12-25-2013, 06:31 AM
I'm chiming in real quick to say that I really appreciate feedback posted like this. It's detailed, it's succinct, it's constructive, and it's CIVIL.

I know many of you post similarly, but for whatever reason I decided to reply to this one. Please accept this as a show of appreciation to all of you who communicate with helpful details without the swear filter having to take over to the point where the message is undecipherable.

Enjoy your holidays everyone!Why, thank you, Pixie.
I give my sincerest, as the game really is awesome. All the criticism I dish out comes from a place of love.
I think the same can be said for many of the other guys who contribute here.

shobhit7777777
12-25-2013, 07:38 AM
Great thread!

Most of my issues with Blacklist stem from its control and character movement. The inertia of the character, the inconsistency of prompts, Spies flying up walls when you wanted to go by them....it really makes for some annoying moments.

Characters have a lot of inertia....which can be extremely frustrating in a stealth game....the contextual prompts are not as precise as in Conviction and general movement feels effed up. Sam can't drop from great heights regardless of the fact that it wouldn't kill him and trying to sneak around cover looks weird with the current crouch walk animation.

Play American consumption and try running around and up things. Climbing up to the pipes which circle the area is an exercise in frustration due to the prompts being finicky and Sam's tendecy to jump off the platform.

The cover system - because of its sticky nature now - is not something I use much...at all. It used to be awesome in Conviction but in Blacklist it simply exacerbates the sluggish character movement problems.


Ken's M&E experiment is also an important issue. M&E is such a key pillar in the game and the fact that its so inconsistent is really annoying. Helmet enemy archetypes quickly went from "Oh cool...a new enemy type! challenge!" to "Oh F. another C-block...what a chore".

The fact is that helmet wearing mooks don't really create a challenge....not the way the AI routines have been implemented in the levels....they just serve as a massive roadblock. The solution is to manually shoot the helmet off and then take em out....which isn't always the desired approach when trying to maximize your lethality in a short time.

Stacking marks, taking weapon power into account, maybe staggering the AI so he gets knocked to the ground would all have been acceptable solutions.


And the melee denial. Wow. Denied once...k....twice...hmm.....thrice....dafuq.....fo urth time....WTF!


It is extremely disempowering and frustrating not being able to "Silence" a potential threat.....in a game centered around the Panther archetype and going off "Badass Sam" from SCC....this is not only annoying but also implausible.
I sometimes feel cheated when this happens.

Denials in Conviction served as reminders and warnings...."You are being stupid, Player....don't be stupid". In SCB they are undeserved punishment.

Right, so combine the imprecise movement and the frustrations associated with the player's offensive abilities...and you have an experience which is fragile - during high tempo sequences, Blacklist becomes a chore IMO....whereas Conviction just shifted gears into a new state.

KenTWOu
12-25-2013, 09:15 AM
Right, so combine the imprecise movement and the frustrations associated with the player's offensive abilities...and you have an experience which is fragile - during high tempo sequences, Blacklist becomes a chore IMO....whereas Conviction just shifted gears into a new state.
So, Jim Sterling was right, when he said (http://www.destructoid.com/review-splinter-cell-blacklist-260371.phtml) that Blacklist is good, but lacks Conviction? ;)

Dome500
12-26-2013, 12:38 AM
The inertia of the character, the inconsistency of prompts, Spies flying up walls when you wanted to go by them....it really makes for some annoying moments.


Sam can't drop from great heights regardless of the fact that it wouldn't kill him and trying to sneak around cover looks weird with the current crouch walk animation.


I agree



The cover system - because of its sticky nature now - is not something I use much...at all. It used to be awesome in Conviction but in Blacklist it simply exacerbates the sluggish character movement problems.

Yes, the time it takes to go into cover or out often reveals you to enemies and it's just not worth it. In multiplayer this is also a problem. That's why most hackers stay out of cover in order to be able to react faster. It just feels clumsy and takes too long.


Helmet enemy archetypes quickly went from "Oh cool...a new enemy type! challenge!" to "Oh F. another C-block...what a chore".


Indeed.

In strong contrast to snipers, which were generally liked, as well as the heavies - which were really cool - , except of course of the helmet problem itself which also applied to the heavies.


The fact is that helmet wearing mooks don't really create a challenge....not the way the AI routines have been implemented in the levels....they just serve as a massive roadblock. The solution is to manually shoot the helmet off and then take em out....which isn't always the desired approach when trying to maximize your lethality in a short time.

Stacking marks, taking weapon power into account, maybe staggering the AI so he gets knocked to the ground would all have been acceptable solutions.

Yeah, I completely agree.

But not only this is a problem, also that the manual shots need 1 more shot in some cases is annoying.



And the melee denial. Wow. Denied once...k....twice...hmm.....thrice....dafuq.....fo urth time....WTF!


It is extremely disempowering and frustrating not being able to "Silence" a potential threat.....in a game centered around the Panther archetype and going off "Badass Sam" from SCC....this is not only annoying but also implausible.
I sometimes feel cheated when this happens.

Me too bro, me too.

That's just ridiculous. AND I'm a GHOST.

If you would go ahead and make it the way K.O.s are not possible/denied but kills aren't (or are just denied sometimes 1 time (and the 2nd time you try works)) then it would be okay. It would be somewhat plausible that non-lethal measures might not be possible with an enemy which can actively fight back and is aware of your presence. But a kill denied more than 1 time? That just completely frustrating and breakes the flow and immersion of the game instantly. Panther play - depending on state of aggressiveness - becomes a pain and the frustration rises.


Denials in Conviction served as reminders and warnings...."You are being stupid, Player....don't be stupid". In SCB they are undeserved punishment.

mhm


Right, so combine the imprecise movement and the frustrations associated with the player's offensive abilities...and you have an experience which is fragile - during high tempo sequences, Blacklist becomes a chore IMO....whereas Conviction just shifted gears into a new state.

This.

SolidSage
12-27-2013, 11:08 PM
Lot of points I agree with in Shobhit's last post. So much stuff crammed in and it's great but a lot of the time the game ends up handicapping itself.

Active sprint is great but it brings it's own issues, slow out of the blocks, inertia, imprecise activation points.
Ledges next to overhead pipes are a pain, you know why.
Helmeted enemies I agree with, just let us throw 2 marks on that dude. Won't hurt Perfectionist at all.
And honestly, Dogs + RC's + Heavies + etc on Charlie mission levels are just a tad sadistic :)

king of ur hill
12-27-2013, 11:18 PM
HMMM. hey guys what about this..

instead of having a dedicated button to go into cover what if you automatically went into cover when you moved the analog stick near a wall? it makes sense. when playing as a spy walking near a wall trying to peek around the corner, you want to hug close to the wall. what if you just snugged up against when you were close without losing speed.

NOW, i dont mean every time you got close to a wall you snapped to it like a magnet, but rather fluidly streamed along side the wall like water flowing down a winding river. then when you sprinted the auto cover was disabled


just a thought. ill make a thread on this...

KevinPDZ0916
12-27-2013, 11:26 PM
I too hate the heavies... Let us mark two marks on them for a double shot execution. They are more annoying in the Grimm missions. They don't transition well with the panther playstyle. I think each new enemy archetype should be removed, snipers, dogs, and drone operators included. The drones just don't fit in the SC universe. It's so annoying how it eliminates vision modes. I'm not a fan of it.

SanityAgathion
12-28-2013, 12:24 AM
Snipers dogs and heavies are bearable, drone operators need to be re-worked. It's bogus that they jam such basic function of device as a light amplification. Yet where it makes more sense - radio communication and remote control - it has no effect. THey could serve different purpose, for example you won't be able to communicate with Paladin (and receive objective updates or so) when close to them, until you politely ask operator to turn interfering device off. Which would also mean they'd need to be quite rare. For those who do not want to take them out directly you could just blow their laptop with EMP or overload power or something, to which they'd curse a lot and become common mercenary.

shobhit7777777
12-28-2013, 12:55 AM
So, Jim Sterling was right, when he said (http://www.destructoid.com/review-splinter-cell-blacklist-260371.phtml) that Blacklist is good, but lacks Conviction? ;)

;)

Indeed




Yes, the time it takes to go into cover or out often reveals you to enemies and it's just not worth it. In multiplayer this is also a problem. That's why most hackers stay out of cover in order to be able to react faster. It just feels clumsy and takes too long.
.

Yeah. I don't use cover much in MP....just no reason to. If it had been like SCC's cover system I might have seen its benefits...but its too finicky right now with the whole sticky cover mechanics.


Lot of points I agree with in Shobhit's last post. So much stuff crammed in and it's great but a lot of the time the game ends up handicapping itself.

Active sprint is great but it brings it's own issues, slow out of the blocks, inertia, imprecise activation points.
Ledges next to overhead pipes are a pain, you know why.
Helmeted enemies I agree with, just let us throw 2 marks on that dude. Won't hurt Perfectionist at all.
And honestly, Dogs + RC's + Heavies + etc on Charlie mission levels are just a tad sadistic :)

Aaahh...the Active Sprint conundrum

On one hand I love it in SP...when it works....I just love the fluidity and the speed that it brings. It looks and feels great.
On the other hand...its a ****ing mess in MP due in part to the level design and also the core concept of completely automated climbing.

Conviction got it juuuuust right due to to the following factors -

1. Highest running speed was the default (only) one....player did not need to rely on an extra "Special" element like AS to get the maximum speed. In MP situations you're never jogging....you're either crouching or sprinting away. This leads to people shifting to AS in order to shift to the highest gear....however they also have to deal with the automated climbing

2. The prompt windows for interaction in the game are messed up in terms of where exactly you have to look at it. In Conviction, you look in the desired area...and voila you had the required prompt.
So moving around and up geometry was a matter of a single, well timed button press while looking in the right direction...for fluid traversal
In case of conflicts the game prioritized verticality....so running up to a wall (without looking all the way up) you could tap the climb button (A) and Sam would fly up the wall.

Blacklist has some fidgety interaction windows and doesn't really seem AS precise IMO. There are inconsistencies like Sam dropping down the side of the ledge where HE is facing and NOT where you're looking.....issues arise when Sam needs to go up but there is a gap in the middle allowing him to vault through (A window in a small cabin that Sam can climb - see American Consumption)
Sometimes the prompts don't even pop up.
Its inconsistent.

3. Conviction's levels seemed better designed in terms of traversal options....not many oppurtunities for conflicts or confusion...not IMO at least


You know....I think 'Active Sprint' should be a function of melee mechanics rather than traversal.

How about 'Active Sprint' being a hyper lethal 'Killing-in-Motion' element of Sam's arsenal? Instead of Sam automatically climbing up and around walls....let him automatically melee enemies (Both LTL and lethal) as you sprint towards them.
Sam would vault and jump over obstacles but not climb....and would melee enemies when in range.

Pressing execute while active sprinting should be rewarded with the sexy moz drills and finishers.


Snipers dogs and heavies are bearable, drone operators need to be re-worked. It's bogus that they jam such basic function of device as a light amplification. Yet where it makes more sense - radio communication and remote control - it has no effect. THey could serve different purpose, for example you won't be able to communicate with Paladin (and receive objective updates or so) when close to them, until you politely ask operator to turn interfering device off. Which would also mean they'd need to be quite rare. For those who do not want to take them out directly you could just blow their laptop with EMP or overload power or something, to which they'd curse a lot and become common mercenary.

Yeah

I don't mind Snipers, Heavies, Dogs and Commandos....even the Helmet guys are not a big problem. I do have issues with them having only 1-2 ways to tackle them...and gimping a prime gameplay element - M&E - to empower certain AI archetypes.

For example: An explosive mine doesn't kill a Heavy trooper. This is ****ing BS. It defies all logic and again serves as a C-block to anyone trying to use mines and lures. The heavy trooper is vulnerable to only melee, WP grenades and brute force (AK to the face)......none of which really fire the imagination IMO. It strictly limits your tactics to a frustrating degree.

Stacking Marks is a completely acceptable solution....staggering the AI, knocking it down is also a solution I would like to see in-game.

Rea1SamF1sher
12-28-2013, 03:40 PM
2. The prompt windows for interaction in the game are messed up in terms of where exactly you have to look at it. In Conviction, you look in the desired area...and voila you had the required prompt.
So moving around and up geometry was a matter of a single, well timed button press while looking in the right direction...for fluid traversal
In case of conflicts the game prioritized verticality....so running up to a wall (without looking all the way up) you could tap the climb button (A) and Sam would fly up the wall.
Actually you didn't have to look at the right direction in Conviction and that's what I liked a lot there, because I wasn't bound to look at the wall to get to the ledge. While running torwards the wall, I could also obeserve the environment (look around). So the direction of your avatar was also important in this game.




3. Conviction's levels seemed better designed in terms of traversal options....not many oppurtunities for conflicts or confusion...not IMO at least
I think this is one of the bigger contributor to the issue than some might think. There were also situations in Conviction where to much interactions were in one place and therefore made for frustrating situations. Whenever the level design had all those interactions all close up to each other you might have done something you never wanted to do. In Blacklist it's now more common because it's more tightly packed with interactions which isn't a bad thing in my opinion but it doesn't seem work that nice with the current control scheme. It works fine when everything is more apart.

SolidSage
12-28-2013, 07:39 PM
Conviction's levels seemed better designed in terms of traversal options....not many oppurtunities for conflicts or confusion...not IMO at least
I don't know, I think Conviction had it's activation prompt issues too. St Pete just before the chandelier, those pillars on the left and right were notoriously inconsistent for me. I think the reason SCC had less of these locations is simply due to there being more space between activation points than Blacklist.
Blacklist is crammed full of them, and they are very close together. I think we need more precision in the activation and more separation between active elements.



You know....I think 'Active Sprint' should be a function of melee mechanics rather than traversal.

How about 'Active Sprint' being a hyper lethal 'Killing-in-Motion' element of Sam's arsenal? Instead of Sam automatically climbing up and around walls....let him automatically melee enemies (Both LTL and lethal) as you sprint towards them.
Sam would vault and jump over obstacles but not climb....and would melee enemies when in range.
NOOOOOOoooooooOOOOO!!! No Like, no like no like.
I love being in control of the melee, so I cannot entertain any auto feature there...no more than we already have anyway. And I really do like how active sprint allows me to just haul around maps, vaulting ledges and cover, running up walls and so on. It's not broken, it just requires a lot of precision input form the Player. I mean, tbh, most of the time when i go in the office on Swiss Embassy, instead of up the wall, it's because I wasn't super accurate. I know the elements are there but I don't give them the respect they deserve.
So IMO, it's not that AS is broken, it's that it introduces such a fun full tilt option that it also introduces and inherent tendency for the Player to make marginal errors. Which is fine for the skill challenge but when you want to really embrace what AS brings to the table, it would behoove the Devs to let it shine brightly, rather than be marred by trip wire and trap activation potholes all over the maps.

Bigger maps (Swiss Embassy for example), spread out more, would allow for more spacing between active elements. Have a bigger wall space on either side of the lower level office for example.


Active Melee...lol, what are you like? Messing with me at Christmas! ;)



I like ALL AI types, I just think density is an issue in different modes. Too many RC's per wave are heinous. Too many jammers in a Sp maps remove the fun immersion aspect.


edit: Looks like I pretty much echoed Andre there. Type first, read later, that's me in a nutshell :)

talljesper
12-28-2013, 08:13 PM
I like this a lot as the drone operators ARE do stick out like a sore thumb in their current state in BL.

The upside is ofcourse they are no where near as overpowered as the dogs, which are the bane of my exsitence in Blacklist, specially with a ghost run!

Rea1SamF1sher
12-28-2013, 08:28 PM
I personal think that Active Sprint, when it doesn't work, is not the fault of the player!
The game pushes you through the game in some ways. I don't think it was an intended design decision. You barely notice those things but they all add up and eventually make for the way the people play. So the players feel like they need to use the Active Sprint feature all the time. Otherwise, especially in Multiplayer, he has a big disadvantage compared to the others.

I would suggest to seperate Sprint and Climbing as said in another thread. It worked really well in Conviction and to me the skill part would be when you are able to do Active Sprint on your own and manually. The only thing that it takes is a push of a button at the right time.

Dome500
12-28-2013, 10:36 PM
Helmeted enemies I agree with, just let us throw 2 marks on that dude. Won't hurt Perfectionist at all.

No it wouldn't, but if they don't fix the inconsistencies considering the manual shooting of helmets and if they keep throwing these helmet enemies at you if will highly influence perfectionist, because it will keep the problems that will be solved then in easier difficulties.

Fixes should include:

1. Snipers and Assault Rifles = 1 shot => kill
2. SMGs and the like = 2 shots => kill on long distances, 1 shot => kill on short - medium distances
3. Pistols = 2 shots => kill

And PLEASE, PLEASE people just remove the damn h2h frontal denials, it is horrible.
Seriously, no Panther play possible on perfectionist with the frontal melee denial.


I think each new enemy archetype should be removed, snipers, dogs, and drone operators included. The drones just don't fit in the SC universe. It's so annoying how it eliminates vision modes. I'm not a fan of it.

I can't agree.

1. Dogs => Damn annoying, but still great in my eyes. But there should be a gadget to distract them next time around.
2. Snipers => Amazing, keep them as they are.
3. Heavies => VERY good. They are slow, and if they are not too many Panther is absolutely possible. Just solve the helmet problems

1. Drone Operators => Remove them, or at least remove their ridiculous "vision jamming" and make it more of a security device that can be deactivated on a PC or somewhere, and it should only jam EMF and Sonar, not Thermal and Night Vision
2. "Normal" Helmet Enemies => Remove them, or at least let them be less numerous. And most importantly: fix the helmet inconsistencies.


How about 'Active Sprint' being a hyper lethal 'Killing-in-Motion' element of Sam's arsenal? Instead of Sam automatically climbing up and around walls....let him automatically melee enemies (Both LTL and lethal) as you sprint towards them.
Sam would vault and jump over obstacles but not climb....and would melee enemies when in range.

THIS.

But sans the automated killing in perfectionist.


Yeah

I don't mind Snipers, Heavies, Dogs and Commandos....even the Helmet guys are not a big problem. I do have issues with them having only 1-2 ways to tackle them...and gimping a prime gameplay element - M&E - to empower certain AI archetypes.

For example: An explosive mine doesn't kill a Heavy trooper. This is ****ing BS. It defies all logic and again serves as a C-block to anyone trying to use mines and lures. The heavy trooper is vulnerable to only melee, WP grenades and brute force (AK to the face)......none of which really fire the imagination IMO. It strictly limits your tactics to a frustrating degree.

Stacking Marks is a completely acceptable solution....staggering the AI, knocking it down is also a solution I would like to see in-game.

This.

Even a heavily armored bomb squat gets heavily injured when walking into a mine or being in the radius of a bomb while it goes of.

Limiting strategies to tackle an enemy TOO MUCH (meaning giving him only 1 or 2 options) in a game where gameplay is so variable and then even limiting it beyond logical explanation is not okay, it makes the game boring and frustrating at parts.

Also, the "helmet "plopping" off the head" is ridiculously gamey. Seriously, it's immersion breaking.


I think this is one of the bigger contributor to the issue than some might think. There were also situations in Conviction where to much interactions were in one place and therefore made for frustrating situations. Whenever the level design had all those interactions all close up to each other you might have done something you never wanted to do. In Blacklist it's now more common because it's more tightly packed with interactions which isn't a bad thing in my opinion but it doesn't seem work that nice with the current control scheme. It works fine when everything is more apart.

Therefore the control scheme should be changed/tweaked.


I love being in control of the melee, so I cannot entertain any auto feature there...no more than we already have anyway. And I really do like how active sprint allows me to just haul around maps, vaulting ledges and cover, running up walls and so on. It's not broken, it just requires a lot of precision input form the Player. I mean, tbh, most of the time when i go in the office on Swiss Embassy, instead of up the wall, it's because I wasn't super accurate. I know the elements are there but I don't give them the respect they deserve.
So IMO, it's not that AS is broken, it's that it introduces such a fun full tilt option that it also introduces and inherent tendency for the Player to make marginal errors. Which is fine for the skill challenge but when you want to really embrace what AS brings to the table, it would behoove the Devs to let it shine brightly, rather than be marred by trip wire and trap activation potholes all over the maps.

Bigger maps (Swiss Embassy for example), spread out more, would allow for more spacing between active elements. Have a bigger wall space on either side of the lower level office for example.

I agree on the melee part.

But I think it would be better to have active sprint be a ground-level-ability, so that you can jump over obstacles and spring, but that you have to press "climb" to climb a wall. It's not that bad actually. I mean you can't tell me that it is a big deal for you to press a second button while sprinting, as long as the time window is long enough.

To keep a feature and say "you just need to be SUPER precise" is just to not wanting to loose the benefits although the disadvantages overshadow them. It's just not good if a system is hypersensitive, and this is what AS is at the moment. Making it ground-level only would at least clear out most "misunderstanding-errors" while keeping as much functionality as possible.


I personal think that Active Sprint, when it doesn't work, is not the fault of the player!
The game pushes you through the game in some ways. I don't think it was an intended design decision. You barely notice those things but they all add up and eventually make for the way the people play. So the players feel like they need to use the Active Sprint feature all the time. Otherwise, especially in Multiplayer, he has a big disadvantage compared to the others.

I would suggest to seperate Sprint and Climbing as said in another thread. It worked really well in Conviction and to me the skill part would be when you are able to do Active Sprint on your own and manually. The only thing that it takes is a push of a button at the right time.

That's what I'm talking about.

SanityAgathion
12-29-2013, 01:41 AM
To distract dogs, Sam would be able to pick piece of steak as a gadget. Upgrade for $40k would include delicious saucy bacon.
(sorry, had to :D )

KenTWOu
12-29-2013, 10:20 AM
I too hate the heavies... Let us mark two marks on them for a double shot execution. They are more annoying in the Grimm missions. They don't transition well with the panther playstyle. I think each new enemy archetype should be removed, snipers, dogs, and drone operators included. The drones just don't fit in the SC universe. It's so annoying how it eliminates vision modes. I'm not a fan of it.
Each enemy archetype should be removed? Wow!!! I guess, I'm in minority here, but I think that every archetype is super cool. Even drone operators. For example, It's so fun to make a distraction on Site F level, hide somewhere, wait another drone and shot that drone to blow up all guards around it. The game just overuses them during Charlie's missions.

TheRealGunnut19
12-29-2013, 12:15 PM
Each enemy archetype should be removed? Wow!!! I guess, I'm in minority here, but I think that every archetype is super cool. Even drone operators. For example, It's so fun to make a distraction on Site F level, hide somewhere, wait another drone and shot that drone to blow up all guards around it. The game just overuses them during Charlie's missions.

Drones and dogs become their own kind of godly being together in Charlie missions.

Dome500
12-29-2013, 04:12 PM
Each enemy archetype should be removed? Wow!!! I guess, I'm in minority here, but I think that every archetype is super cool. Even drone operators. For example, It's so fun to make a distraction on Site F level, hide somewhere, wait another drone and shot that drone to blow up all guards around it. The game just overuses them during Charlie's missions.

Yeah, you are in the minority :p

No seriously, I do not think every archetype should be removed.

I agree with you that Snipers, Heavies and Dogs are cool (even if the dogs are very annoying sometimes).

But Drone Operators and Helmet enemies should be either tweaked and changed a lot or completely removed. In case of the drone operators I would even say removed, but if they absolutely want to keep them they should:

1. Make the drones less gamey
2. If the drone operator detects you make EITHER him attack you OR his drones attack you, not both
3. Remove the jamming of the goggles, or at least of the Night Vision Goggles.

4. Tweak the Helmet shot mechanics, so there are no "special" rules for everything. (Manual Shots) Normal Pistols/SMG's/Assault Rifles => 2 Shots, Armor Piercing SMG's/Assault Rifles = 1 shot, Snipers = always 1 shot. Something like that. We need consistency. Also, staking marks for the M&E/KIM players, I can imagine it's very annoying how the things are at the moment.

5. Make the heavies die or at least be knocked out from mines, grenades, etc. and make the same rules apply to them as to the helmet enemies in terms of shooting the helmet.

6. Give us a way to distract dogs temporarily.

omally72
12-29-2013, 05:21 PM
I agree with just about everything the OP said. I'm scouring the forums right now because this broken cover system is ruining the game for me (along with the dogs and the ridiculously short detection timer on some enemies). Every time I hit Q to try and snap to cover if I'm currently moving, I vault over the cover and die or get detected, having to restart the checkpoint. This is just crazy, and only appears to affect keyboard users - UBI, why can't you fix this???

iLLusi_Lord
12-29-2013, 06:33 PM
Another inconsistency is AI reaction times. If you're spotted at a corner or something, the detection arc flashes white for quite a while before the NPC can retaliate; it gives the player quite a bit of time to contain the situation... however, on occasion, if you walk out in front of an AI, or idk, jump out a window and land in front of him, in a nano-second he's firing his weapon. I don't know if this is a deliberate inconsistency, or some sort of glitch, but it impedes enjoyment, "This tactic worked over there, but the game won't let it work here. Why?" It's a problem that needs to be addressed.


Let me ask your something important. Let's say you're a security guard in some high end store and you're on high alert for a certain person. Let's say you see someone waiting at a corner in the store who looks like this person. You're not sure, so you have to look at this person for a while to fully recognize him. Now let's say this person instead just passes directly in front of you. You clearly recognize him. You don't even need to make sure. You know it's him and you react immediately. Same thing in blacklist.

Your concern of "This tactic worked over there, but the game won't let it work here. Why?" is flawed because it does not take into account awareness and reaction time. Depending on the situation and how much of you is exposed, the enemy is slower/faster in recognizing that you are the enemy.

To put it in perspective, the AI in BL would be broken if I was hiding, but someone was coming my direction because he saw eyes staring out of the darkness. How does this person know that those mysterious eyes belong exactly to the person he was hired to kill? He would become suspicious first, then once he could confirm that it was the target, then he would react appropriately. What you're saying is equivalent to, "it doesn't matter if you're in disguise, once you're recognize for the first time, you're recognized forever," or something like that.

SanityAgathion
12-29-2013, 08:25 PM
Also, the "helmet "plopping" off the head" is ridiculously gamey. Seriously, it's immersion breaking.


I'd like to voice my opinion on this: it may look gamey, but it's the best that can be done in this situation.
1. If you wanted it to be more realistic, you'd need to shoot twice to the same spot, else you'd just create another hole, and another, and another.
2. Enemies with or without helmet offer instant visual and audible recognition and you choose your tactics according to it. That's the main purpose IMO. Yes sure you can mark them to see but what if you are out of marks? If helmet pops off in one stage and for some reason you "do not finish the job" momentarily, when you return to him he's without helmet and you know where you stand at.

king of ur hill
12-29-2013, 08:45 PM
the helmet thing is just stupid and unrealistic. i dont care how stong of a helmet you are wearing.. if you get shot in the head while wearing ANY kind of helmet, you are OUT for the count. youll be knocked out with a pretty narly concussion.

the whole shoot his helmet off and shoot his head again before he fires back at you is bogus. yeah itll make alot of noise and attract attention but the guard will not just shake it off...

Dome500
12-29-2013, 11:14 PM
1. If you wanted it to be more realistic, you'd need to shoot twice to the same spot, else you'd just create another hole, and another, and another.

Not really. 2 shots and he is K.O. That's how I would do it.


2. Enemies with or without helmet offer instant visual and audible recognition and you choose your tactics according to it. That's the main purpose IMO. Yes sure you can mark them to see but what if you are out of marks? If helmet pops off in one stage and for some reason you "do not finish the job" momentarily, when you return to him he's without helmet and you know where you stand at.

Problem is the following:

I don't use M&E.

So I have to shoot him manually.

This is what happens:

1. I shoot
2. Enemy gets hit, helmet sometimes plops of, sometimes not
3. If it plops off, I have to shoot him again. Problem? He already detected me

Seriously, try shooting him twice, he just ducks after the helmet plops off an you miss.

Also, regarding the gamey, the person does at least get a serious concussion from 2 shots, if not even from 1 shot.


yeah itll make alot of noise and attract attention but the guard will not just shake it off...

This.

So either remove the damn helmets or find another way.

If Sam shoots a helmeted enemy in real he would also not know which one it was an where he is at with him later.

It's just totally immersion breaking for me. I can't stand it. Every time the helmets "plop" I have to roll my eyes.

It's better then - in my opinion - to just let Sam shoot him twice and the enemy dies, no matter if you hit the exact same spot or not.
It's equally unrealistic but not as immersion breaking.

SanityAgathion
12-30-2013, 02:32 AM
I still think it was done more for the visual feedback rather than making it gamey. Of course I am not opposed to any other forms of obliterating helmeted opponents, King's point about putting him into concussion, giving you few seconds to finish him before he detects you does not sound bad.

BTW what do you think about introducing different kinds of enemies resistant to certain attacks, for variety? Like some wearing masks so they are immune to sleeping gas only but other methods work. Those would need to be deployed in appropriate environments where it makes sense, as you normally do not run with mask.

Or special trained guys with skills similar to yours, able to climb, crawl and chase you where normal enemies do not go so you cannot hide above and perch them easily. Could also be tasked differently ie. not killing you but get to certain distance for capture using LTL or combat takedown, still offering you a chance to shake them off. I could imagine it in one of final missions instead of shootout.

Jazz117Volkov
12-30-2013, 02:41 AM
Let me ask your something important. Let's say you're a security guard in some high end store and you're on high alert for a certain person. Let's say you see someone waiting at a corner in the store who looks like this person. You're not sure, so you have to look at this person for a while to fully recognize him. Now let's say this person instead just passes directly in front of you. You clearly recognize him. You don't even need to make sure. You know it's him and you react immediately. Same thing in blacklist.That's... cool, I guess. But it does nothing to address the inconsistency. This is a game, the player must be able to anticipate the AI reactions in the game, if he/she can't, then the game is inconsistent, and needs work.


Your concern of "This tactic worked over there, but the game won't let it work here. Why?" is flawed because it does not take into account awareness and reaction time. Depending on the situation and how much of you is exposed, the enemy is slower/faster in recognizing that you are the enemy.Uh, it takes exactly that into account. Your reasoning for the issue is only relevant for a very specific situation, and still not good in terms of video game AI.


"it doesn't matter if you're in disguise, once you're recognize for the first time, you're recognized forever," or something like that.Wait, what? That's really not what I'm saying.

I'm saying that the AI identifies you, and opens fire on you, at different speeds in different unpredictable circumstances.
Its a consistency issue that detracts from my gameplay experience, reality notwithstanding.

aznassassin159
12-30-2013, 03:02 AM
I'm fine with most of the archetypes. A few need some balancing and tweaking, but most of them are okay. Most.

Those drone operators have got to go. Seriously, an elite soldier huddling in a corner and piloting RC cars with Christmas lights on them is something I can no longer take seriously. That gimmicky crap is something that would fit Toyman or Tinkerer's MO, but not some military technician. Oh, and the fact that they disable the night-vision goggles for no bloody reason is just icing on the cake. This isn't an issue of them being difficult or anything; it's an issue of them being just dumb.

Dome500
12-30-2013, 04:44 AM
BTW what do you think about introducing different kinds of enemies resistant to certain attacks, for variety? Like some wearing masks so they are immune to sleeping gas only but other methods work. Those would need to be deployed in appropriate environments where it makes sense, as you normally do not run with mask.

Rather not.

Not that I would be against ALL forms of new archetypes or enemy types in general, but we need to look that there are not too many, otherwise the player looses oversight and the whole thing will be a "special rules everywhere" mess. So we should keep the uniformity of enemies in terms of resistance mostly, although special types are nice they should be used scarcely and carefully.


Or special trained guys with skills similar to yours, able to climb, crawl and chase you where normal enemies do not go so you cannot hide above and perch them easily. Could also be tasked differently ie. not killing you but get to certain distance for capture using LTL or combat takedown, still offering you a chance to shake them off. I could imagine it in one of final missions instead of shootout.

Yes, in a special mission I wouldn't mind them, but only 1 or 2 of them, not like a whole battalion or group.

If they are Splinter Cell -like they should be single enemies just like you are alone, and they should really be special, meaning they should only appear in 1 or 2 missions.

@BossFight => Everything is better than a bossfight.


That's... cool, I guess. But it does nothing to address the inconsistency. This is a game, the player must be able to anticipate the AI reactions in the game, if he/she can't, then the game is inconsistent, and needs work.

This,

Realism vs playability. Playability wins.


Uh, it takes exactly that into account. Your reasoning for the issue is only relevant for a very specific situation, and still not good in terms of video game AI.

Not only that, but if the enemy is unaware and just has to protect and area he will shoot at every unknown individual cowering behind creates. So your argument only counts for people looking for YOU and only if they know people or suspect OTHER people to behave like that and hide behind crates, which is very unlikely.


Wait, what? That's really not what I'm saying.

I'm saying that the AI identifies you, and opens fire on you, at different speeds in different unpredictable circumstances.
Its a consistency issue that detracts from my gameplay experience, reality notwithstanding.

Inded.

And even reality is not really exactly like that, like explained above.



Those drone operators have got to go. Seriously, an elite soldier huddling in a corner and piloting RC cars with Christmas lights on them is something I can no longer take seriously. That gimmicky crap is something that would fit Toyman or Tinkerer's MO, but not some military technician. Oh, and the fact that they disable the night-vision goggles for no bloody reason is just icing on the cake. This isn't an issue of them being difficult or anything; it's an issue of them being just dumb.

And gamey.

This.

KevinPDZ0916
12-30-2013, 06:51 AM
I still hate the enemy archetypes. They were fun during the Toronto demo, but the more time I've spent sneaking / KOing / killing the dogs, snipers, armored guys, helmeted guys, the more annoying its become. Sometimes my stealth playstyle instantly becomes panther and assault because I have no other options left. I don't know... I just don't care for them as much as other people do. If every enemy was like the ones in Conviction (except without the cussing!) then I'd be fine, because you could easily take down each enemy the same way.

KenTWOu
12-30-2013, 08:49 AM
But Drone Operators and Helmet enemies should be either tweaked and changed a lot or completely removed.
Tweaking is the right way to fix it. And helmets live they own life in Blacklist, that's why I don't threat helmet guards as another AI archetype.


Seriously, an elite soldier huddling in a corner and piloting RC cars with Christmas lights on them is something I can no longer take seriously. That gimmicky crap is something that would fit Toyman or Tinkerer's MO, but not some military technician... This isn't an issue of them being difficult or anything; it's an issue of them being just dumb.
RC cars look like that because cameras already have 'Christmas lights' on them. And both features really need these 'Christmas lights' because it's really hard to notice both things, because the game has fast paced stealth. It will become infuriating and frustrating without these lights, especially when the game doesn't have quicksave/quickload feature. So there is no inconsistency there. Moreover, Chaos Theory UAV drones also had these 'Christmas lights' (http://youtu.be/UYaKrN13GII?t=13m00s).


I still hate the enemy archetypes. They were fun during the Toronto demo, but the more time I've spent sneaking / KOing / killing the dogs, snipers, armored guys, helmeted guys, the more annoying its become. Sometimes my stealth playstyle instantly becomes panther and assault because I have no other options left. I don't know...
Man, even primitively looking snipers have lots of very smart nuances in their behavior that could help you to avoid them. It seems like you just don't want to learn each archetype and figure out how to avoid them all. I guess, they should make little virtual tutorials in the next Splinter Cell game for players like you. The same way Assassin's Creed series did when you learn how to use your gadgets or to fight different type of enemies.

aznassassin159
12-30-2013, 06:20 PM
RC cars look like that because cameras already have 'Christmas lights' on them.
It's not just the fact that they shine so brightly that they make JJ Abrams cover his eyes. It's the fact that they're RC cars...designed to do nothing else but bum-rush and blow people up. The concept alone is just stupid. I remember first seeing an explosive RC car being a killstreak in Black Ops and Black Ops 2 and I thought to myself "You know, that crap wouldn't fly in a Tom Clancy game." I'm glad to see my faith in the gaming industry rewarded.


And both features really need these 'Christmas lights' because it's really hard to notice both things, because the game has fast paced stealth. It will become infuriating and frustrating without these lights, especially when the game doesn't have quicksave/quickload feature. So there is no inconsistency there.
So the high-pitched whirring sound and the fact that those drones move slower than a crawl isn't enough? Furthermore, do they HAVE to make it such a condescendingly bright beacon? Going back to COD BO/BOII, at least those games had the decency to put a very small light (http://www.charlieintel.com/wp-content/gallery/bo2-review-3/rcxd-121110-c.jpg)on the RC-XD that was noticeable if the player was observant. And that game is blindingly more fast-paced than Blacklist, so "pace" isn't an excuse to blanket those drones with BF3-levels of lens flare.


Moreover, Chaos Theory UAV drones also had these 'Christmas lights' (http://youtu.be/UYaKrN13GII?t=13m00s).
Which is why Seoul was probably my least favorite mission in Chaos Theory, since those spotlights broke immersion and the drones themselves forced me to keep moving. Even then, those spotlights make a tiny bit more sense since the UAVs were aerial enemies and their sightlines and angles were harder to predict. Plus they're North Korean, so I expect them to be kooky.

Dome500
12-30-2013, 06:26 PM
RC cars look like that because cameras already have 'Christmas lights' on them. And both features really need these 'Christmas lights' because it's really hard to notice both things, because the game has fast paced stealth. It will become infuriating and frustrating without these lights, especially when the game doesn't have quicksave/quickload feature. So there is no inconsistency there. Moreover, Chaos Theory UAV drones also had these 'Christmas lights'.

Yeah, but I would wish they would make the lights simply white. That would make it not that terrible.

Also, if the drone operator detects you eye-to-eye they should not let him AND the drone attack you, but only one of the two (in this came him would be more realistic).

Also, Dogs shouldn't telepathically transmit your location to everyone, the only time you are detected should be when a dog barks or attacks you and an enemy comes to check what's up and sees you standing there or fighting with the dog. Because as far as I know a dog can't really use radio-chat. Correct me if I'm wrong...

The helmets have to be tweaked A LOT, the heavies have to be tweaked as well (they have to die or at least be K.O. from explosives like mines, grenades, etc.).

Also, drone operator "jamming visions" => REMOVE it.


Man, even primitively looking snipers have lots of very smart nuances in their behavior that could help you to avoid them. It seems like you just don't want to learn each archetype and figure out how to avoid them all. I guess, they should make little virtual tutorials in the next Splinter Cell game for players like you. The same way Assassin's Creed series did when you learn how to use your gadgets or to fight different type of enemies.

Sounds to me like he wants the archetypes to not come into the way of the "Panther Flow", and honestly I can understand him. But I think that's just an addition to the "planning phase" of the Panther playstyle, you have to take into account heavies and snipers when doing stuff. I don't see a big problem here, as long as the location of those archetypes are not extremely unfair in singleplayer (in 4E I want random A.I. Doesn't matter if it's sometimes unfair, that's not really frustrating if you know the patterns are random and you get a different pattern each time, promotes improvisation as well).

I don't really need them, in fact I think no one does.

But I wouldn't mind them.

As long as they are optional.
Could be little videos you can access aboard the paladin in the "training section".

SolidSage
12-31-2013, 02:35 AM
I like the AI archetype variety. I think they are ALL good and pose decent challenge variety. Some tweaking might improve them and how they get stacked in Charlie Mission waves would decrease frustration levels. not that it's not fun but sometimes, homing missile dogs+magnetized drones (even when the Operator that JUST launched them is bleeding into the dirt from his throat right in front of me) can be a real pizzwasser.

And correct me if I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure we already have AI that are just wearing gas masks and can be taken down every other way except with GAS. No helmet or nothin. Is that Transit Yards with Briggs again? Sure I just saw em last night, chucked a sleeping gas at one, he no go nite nite and then I see the gas mask like, "oh right, lead sleeping pill instead".

TheRealGunnut19
12-31-2013, 04:31 AM
I like the AI archetype variety. I think they are ALL good and pose decent challenge variety. Some tweaking might improve them and how they get stacked in Charlie Mission waves would decrease frustration levels. not that it's not fun but sometimes, homing missile dogs+magnetized drones (even when the Operator that JUST launched them is bleeding into the dirt from his throat right in front of me) can be a real pizzwasser.

And correct me if I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure we already have AI that are just wearing gas masks and can be taken down every other way except with GAS. No helmet or nothin. Is that Transit Yards with Briggs again? Sure I just saw em last night, chucked a sleeping gas at one, he no go nite nite and then I see the gas mask like, "oh right, lead sleeping pill instead".

Hmm, I've never seen a gas-mask only enemy before, but perhaps they are there somewhere.

SanityAgathion
12-31-2013, 04:02 PM
Heavies, but maybe those "scientists" at water plant in American Consumption or London. They have hazmat suits and masks but are not heavies.

Dome500
12-31-2013, 06:31 PM
Heavies, but maybe those "scientists" at water plant in American Consumption or London. They have hazmat suits and masks but are not heavies.

Those are the only gas-mask-without-helmet guys.

The others are the guys in Russian Embassy with Gas Masks AND helmets (basically heavies but without the speed limitation).

SolidSage
01-01-2014, 03:19 AM
^ Pretty sure Transit Yards has them too, with the bombs.

sgt_brent
01-01-2014, 04:49 PM
I think the Blacklist archetypes is a cheap way of blinding us to the fact that they aren't really all that different -- to me, at least.

I would prefer to have levels of intellect, instead of levels of abilities (archetypes).

- Guard
- Cop
- SWAT
- Army
- Spec Ops

Guard is a basic, average joe type of guy who knows how to hold a pistol, and thats about it. Opposing end of the spectrum is Spec Ops, who posses quick thinking, sharp hearing and sight, faster movements, perfect teamwork, etc.

I picture the guard the type of NPC that would be afraid to enter a dark room, but would guard the doorway until another NPC arrived. The Spec Ops would breach the room, clear it properly and professionally.

I still think you can introduce a bit of challenge with their equipment, too. Guard should be almost a one-shot kill. Spec Ops has tons of armour, making them almost as strong as the SCB heavy. Perhaps gas-mask should be placed on RANDOM NPCs, and not a certain archetype.

TheRealGunnut19
01-01-2014, 05:23 PM
I still think you can introduce a bit of challenge with their equipment, too. Guard should be almost a one-shot kill. Spec Ops has tons of armour, making them almost as strong as the SCB heavy.

The higher-skill enemy types should be a bit hard to kill, even as far as armor goes, but not necessarily always so. A lightly or moderately armored Spec Ops should be the norm for that kind of enemy type, IMO, anywhere from normal SCB guard to SCB commando with max armor. The various levels of armor themselves can be possible for every enemy type, guards, spec ops, everything. A guard can be a behemoth of a dude but still be prone to whimpering in a corner and firing wildly into the dark, and a commando/spec ops can be wearing the armor equivalent of a t-shirt and jeans but still own you with duck-and-rolls and related tactical prowness. The enemies should be unique in their behavior and approach to combat/searching, (The guys who learned to fire an Uzi last week don't all have to be doing thorough cover-pie'ing and covering each other, for example.) even deviating in these ways in the same class of dude, and the armor should be an element of that.

Speaking of, enemies equipping bigger guns and armor if alerted needs to happen in SC7.

SanityAgathion
01-01-2014, 05:26 PM
I would welcome civilian workers too, can alert other types of your presence but are without a weapon.

Edit: Yes, armor type and possibly "skills" could increase depending on alert level, they put vests etc. on plus call for reinforcements.

Jazz117Volkov
01-01-2014, 05:34 PM
I think the Blacklist archetypes is a cheap way of blinding us to the fact that they aren't really all that different -- to me, at least.

I would prefer to have levels of intellect, instead of levels of abilities (archetypes).

- Guard
- Cop
- SWAT
- Army
- Spec Ops

Guard is a basic, average joe type of guy who knows how to hold a pistol, and thats about it. Opposing end of the spectrum is Spec Ops, who posses quick thinking, sharp hearing and sight, faster movements, perfect teamwork, etc.

I picture the guard the type of NPC that would be afraid to enter a dark room, but would guard the doorway until another NPC arrived. The Spec Ops would breach the room, clear it properly and professionally.

I still think you can introduce a bit of challenge with their equipment, too. Guard should be almost a one-shot kill. Spec Ops has tons of armour, making them almost as strong as the SCB heavy. Perhaps gas-mask should be placed on RANDOM NPCs, and not a certain archetype.Blacklist also only manages to have the AI working as a bunch of scattered individuals, when I'm fairly sure a trained team would stack in pairs, and hold down at good cover a lot more.

I like your concept here, Brent, but something I'd suggest is for different archetypes to have different specializations, a gradient just in terms of search and destroy proficiency is too linear, and technically inaccurate. Like, SWAT would outclass all the others with room clearing, because that's one of their fields, whereas I think Spec Ops (being a rather liberal term) operatives would be better at hunting you down, after the initial alert has calmed. Army would serve as roided up Guards, and instead of cops you could have Security Specialists, who are basically just normal sentries, but with better gear, like lights, guns, and Kevlar.

Something I really like in Blacklist is the Commando archetype. He's quick, lethal, and has more capabilities then the standard guys, but they never feel overpowered to me. I would really enjoy a Commando type enemy that didn't have the thermal, so he'd be a more lethal normal guy, essentially allowing you to play more traditionally around him, but still let him have that "group badass" vibe.

Dome500
01-01-2014, 05:50 PM
Blacklist also only manages to have the AI working as a bunch of scattered individuals, when I'm fairly sure a trained team would stack in pairs, and hold down at good cover a lot more.

I like your concept here, Brent, but something I'd suggest is for different archetypes to have different specializations, a gradient just in terms of search and destroy proficiency is too linear, and technically inaccurate. Like, SWAT would outclass all the others with room clearing, because that's one of their fields, whereas I think Spec Ops (being a rather liberal term) operatives would be better at hunting you down, after the initial alert has calmed. Army would serve as roided up Guards, and instead of cops you could have Security Specialists, who are basically just normal sentries, but with better gear, like lights, guns, and Kevlar.

Something I really like in Blacklist is the Commando archetype. He's quick, lethal, and has more capabilities then the standard guys, but they never feel overpowered to me. I would really enjoy a Commando type enemy that didn't have the thermal, so he'd be a more lethal normal guy, essentially allowing you to play more traditionally around him, but still let him have that "group badass" vibe.


MY opinion is there should be both.

1. The archetype of the enemy (sniper, heavy, normal, etc.)

2. The CLASS of an enemy (worker, (nightshift) cop, security guard, mercenary, "Standard" Terrorist, SWAT, PMC Mercenary, Military Spec Ops).

The "Classes" would determine the equipment of the enemies, their reaction times and their moves, while the archetypes manage their field of work.

Cops or Security Guards for example will not have Heavies and Snipers, while Mercenaries, SWAT, Military or Spec Ops might have them. Another difference.

The Workers for example, if in a security building, might carry either a tazer gun or a pistol, based on where they are stationed, or the carry absolutely nothing (Civilians more or less) and call for the guards when they see you.

Important is that it seems PLAUSIBLE.

I don't want to meet terrorist or PMC Mercenaries or Spec Ops in a bank, or in an Embassy, security guards and SWAT (if alerted) might be there, maybe a sniper or 2 outside (Military).

sgt_brent
01-01-2014, 07:08 PM
I like your concept here, Brent, but something I'd suggest is for different archetypes to have different specializations, a gradient just in terms of search and destroy proficiency is too linear, and technically inaccurate. Like, SWAT would outclass all the others with room clearing, because that's one of their fields, whereas I think Spec Ops (being a rather liberal term) operatives would be better at hunting you down, after the initial alert has calmed. Army would serve as roided up Guards, and instead of cops you could have Security Specialists, who are basically just normal sentries, but with better gear, like lights, guns, and Kevlar.

Yes, that's definitely a point I overlooked. SWAT would definitely be better at "clearing".

I think what I was getting at is that Spec Ops would basically just be harder to kill. They would tend to utilize all the skills of the previous types.

As for the naming I employed on these types ---- meh. It was just basic terms to get my point across.

Here's a tiny elaboration of the concept I had in my head.

Level 1: Guard: No armour, basic weapon, and not an accurate shooter. Tends to be fearful of dark/unknown places, and extremely easy to kill/KO. Quick to use his radio to call in Level 2 backup;
Level 2: Security Specialist (aka cop): Simple bullet proof vest (light armour), basic weapon and flashlight with professional shooting accuracies. Very basic teamwork when searching for a target.
Level 3: Merc (aka SWAT) : Mid-range armour, mid-range weapons with professional shooting accuracies. Tend to be aggressive when flushing out a target. "Trigger happy" with mid-range teamwork.
Level 4: Active Military : Advanced armour, weapons and gadgets. Likes to suppress and overwhelm targets with heavy fire. Excellent at taking up defensive/offensive positions to cover areas. Sensitive to sight. (Ability to posses advanced gear)
Level 5: Special Operative : Advanced armour, weapons and gadgets and IR/sonar vision modes. Sensitive to sounds. (Ability to posses advanced gear)

A point to make, relating to the "ability to posses advanced gear".... I am envisioning the NPC equipment to be random, and dynamic. For instance, not all Level 4 guards may employ gas masks at one time. Also - I made note of "anti-shock garments". Could be a cool new feature for NPCs to posses. Clothing that diminishes the amount of electrical shock, basically.

Also, I think there should be stages of alarms. So on a Level 1 alarm, the NPCs may change their outfitting. Level 2 alarm, and they start to get beefier. A combination of these things I think would be great.

Dome500
01-02-2014, 03:29 AM
@Brent => yeah, something like that.

I imagined them like the guys from CT.

The point is to have different types of enemies which deal with threats differently.

If you are in a company building you don't want to battle fully trained Terrorists or Mercenaries, you are up against "Guards" or "Security Specialists".
If you are on an Airport you don't want Spec Ops or Active Military, you want also Guards and Security.

If you are in a military camp or bunker however "Active Military" is just right.
If you are in a place where your enemies meet to talk about plans, then Mercenaries might guard them.


Actually, a very awesome thing I thought about Paraguay was that the guys were Mercenaries there, no terrorists.


And those different types of enemies should react differently and have different gear.

KevinPDZ0916
01-02-2014, 04:22 AM
I really like the concepts of different enemy classes being brought out upon each alarm raise like in CT. That would go better than the new enemy archetypes imho. Seriously, I just don't like them. They break up the panther flow for me. Sure, I have to strategize around them and come up with different tactics, but sometimes the hit detection is way off for the armored guys. One time I was literally behind an armored guy, I pressed X, and immediately the armored guy suddenly turned around and the automatic melee denial occurred. I was like WTF. It was so aggravating. I died right on sight.

I'm all for different classes having different weapon sets. It seems like the developers purposely made Sam have to encounter these enemy archetypes just to have a different experience. Sometimes they don't transition well with the gameplay.

Also, the Charlie missions that have armored guys, helemeted guys, and drones in later rounds are difficult, sure, but they are also unbalanced imho.

TheRealGunnut19
01-02-2014, 06:54 AM
Sure, I have to strategize around them and come up with different tactics, but sometimes the hit detection is way off for the armored guys. One time I was literally behind an armored guy, I pressed X, and immediately the armored guy suddenly turned around and the automatic melee denial occurred. I was like WTF. It was so aggravating. I died right on sight.

Yeah, the hit detection is unfortunately wonky on the higher difficulties, what's worse is that the enemies will only shove you if you attempt to melee them, meaning that the "kill" prompt is effectively a "Get owned" button.

SanityAgathion
01-02-2014, 10:36 AM
Armored ... meh. But if regular guy in robes repels you 4 times in a row there is something to be desired about Sam's combat skills :( One time is believable, maybe he got lucky with defense, but next 3 attempts? Detection is punishing enough for this kind of encounter.

Dome500
01-02-2014, 11:32 PM
Armored ... meh. But if regular guy in robes repels you 4 times in a row there is something to be desired about Sam's combat skills :( One time is believable, maybe he got lucky with defense, but next 3 attempts? Detection is punishing enough for this kind of encounter.

Yeah I agree.

The autmoated frontal melee denial on realistic/perfectionist has to go.

It completely destroys your Panther flow.

I sometimes even have situations where I take someone from behind and press X to melee and he just turns around and denies it because I stood not EXACTLY behind him, around 3 or 4 too much left. That's ridiculous.

But also if you are attacking as Panther. If I kill an enemy in front of another and he is like "WTF?" because I have the surprise element and he then reacts instantly and shoves me back that is kind of unrealistic. I mean, there came a dude and stabbed your partner about 2 or 3 meters in front of you, you should be shocked, or fire your weapon, but a melee denial ? Meh....

It just doesn't work.

If Heavies deny melee, sure, that's okay, but if normal enemies all deny your melee you kind of feel like Sam fisher can not even handle a normal 1vs1 CQC.

Shoving me back 1 time giving you the sub-message "you are acting stupid player" like it was in Conviction, sure. You would take damage, but you could win the battle by pressing melee a second time. Afterwards you would tell yourself "well, I could have made that one better". But if you are denied 10 times (yeah, I really managed that one time) and try to shoot the enemies head in between because he denies all your melee it becomes kind of ridiculous.

If I surprise 3 enemies which are only around 2 to 3 meters away from each other I should be able to chain-kill them.
About that way:

I appear and stab enemy NR. 1, in that moment enemy number 2 is in shock he reaches for his weapon but can't fire because I already pressed the melee again to get him, the third guy should have seen me by now and started shooting shortly before I get him with my knife. He (the third enemy) would be going backwards trying to avoid my melee and if I wasn't fast enough I would die, if I was fast enough I get him 1 or 2 seconds before I would die.

Then LKP would appear and all guys would know where I am, because the guy Nr.3 obviously detected me and radioed me in before I could kill him.

But until the other enemies are there I would have disappeared already.

There is one description for that kind of situation:

Aggro Panther Strike => APS

That should be possible.

With 3 guys if you are skilled, with 2 guys if you are "okay" in playing Panther.


I understand that if you an enemy detects you in the second you want to melee him he might shove you back, ESPECIALLY if you wanted to knock him out, but a K.O. should be at least possible after a second attempt, and kills should be possible without "melee denial" if you surprise your enemies.

They should tweak this.

SolidSage
01-03-2014, 04:04 AM
Agree. Even in Perfectionist, average guards should get smashed in their faces with their own guns when trying to deny Sam's CQC attacks. MAYBE one gets lucky every now and again with a defensive move but in general, front of chump or rear of chump, Sam kicks their tail. It gets pretty irritating after a minute. Mr Systema can't beat up a dude with a crummy AK and flip flops?

Dome500
01-03-2014, 05:31 AM
MAYBE one gets lucky every now and again with a defensive move but in general, front of chump or rear of chump, Sam kicks their tail.


This

shobhit7777777
01-03-2014, 11:15 AM
Was playing on rookie.....it seems that the mooks melee deny you on that difficulty as well....repeatedly

Jazz117Volkov
01-03-2014, 03:00 PM
Was playing on rookie.....it seems that the mooks melee deny you on that difficulty as well....repeatedlyI've said it before, mechanically, the hand2hand in Blacklist is the most broken and dysfunctional melee system I've ever experienced; it contradicts years of learned gaming behavior, and destroys the core player fantasy most other aspects of the game try so hard to build.

But more than sabotaging the emotions of the experience, it's a classic case of taking away one of the player's abilities in the instance in which they need it the most, in an effort to produce difficulty or inspire adaptation, which is an inherently flawed concept. Similar to helmets being implemented to force creativity via means of restricting player options; restriction is the antonym of freedom, therefore helmets serve as more of an anti-inspiration. The same can be said for the dogs.

sgt_brent
01-03-2014, 03:34 PM
It is my understanding that the enemies only counter when they're in an alerted state, and from head-on - unless a heavy (they do it no matter what).

Although I think that any man would have even the most basic flinch defence against any full-frontal hand-to-hand attack; I don't think any man could completely deny Sam Fisher the win. So for that reason, I think the game could benefit from either removing the counter move completely..... Or implementing some small version of the "struggle mechanic", (like the pistol to Sadiq's shoulder). I say "small" version, specifically, because it wouldn't take Sam long to subdue an alert enemy. I hate spamming one button, but maybe a "tap X to kill/KO" might solve it, and after 1 second. In reality, Sam WOULD have to work a bit harder, so why shouldn't we?

Reminds me of Hitman Absolution -- Didn't the player have to tap a button repeatedly to KO an opponent every single time?

I completely understand why the devs put the counter move in the game, and I agree with the choice. It forces the player to attack from behind.... Which is what I always tend to do in every Splinter Cell game anyway. However - from a Blacklist perspective; it doesn't exactly fit properly...... The whole "everybody can beat Sam Fisher" thing doesn't sit well - proved by this thread.

Rea1SamF1sher
01-03-2014, 04:30 PM
Enemy archetype: When it comes to the difficulty I don't mind any of those guys. Personally I only would take away the drone guy because it's just not plausible enough to have such an enemy archetype in a Splinter Cell game. The others need some tweaking. Like the guys with helmets... you should still be able to give them a headshot when you are not shooting at their helmet. You should be also able to mark two guys with helmets, either alone or with a partner (even though you have only three marks). The heavies who have their whole head covered should be also able to get killed when shooting in their face.

Enemy Counter: Make it like Conviction or like Brent suggested, have an animation where Sam struggles for a moment. Make the melee time based. From behind you will need the least amount of time and from the front, you will need a lot more time.
The problem for me is not that they are able to deny front attacks. It's that they sometimes deny them even though I am actually behind them.

Jazz117Volkov
01-03-2014, 06:36 PM
Reminds me of Hitman AbsolutionIndeed, it was lolbad... but it was still functional.
That's more than I can say for Blacklist.

It forces the player to attack from behindI'd much prefer the game's incentive system to coax the player into playing smart, using things like audibility and duration to encourage an approach that avoids the AI's line of sight. I'd liken the system to car design; even if you crash, it does its best to keep you in one piece. How it is now is like a car that actually tries to kill the driver if the speed-limit is breached.

SolidSage
01-03-2014, 07:55 PM
I don't think the frontal denial is terrible throughout, I don't seem to run into it too often on Rookie/Normal, although it has happened.
The main difference being that if you get denied in one of those difficulties, a quick Zap from my stun gun is a way out. On Perfectionist you get denied and then, more often than not, the denier shoots Sam before he can get a good shot off.

Like WHO are these low level dudes that are being employed to wander around Middle Eastern villages? Where did they get their training cuz 4E needs to know apparently! ;)

Thankfully Sam's abilities do make him mobile enough to get around guys in a pinch a lot of the time and I do understand the desire for motivation to attack from the back. We wouldn't want players dominating the leader boards just by running through the maps and running up to guys from the front smashing them in the face (ahem,..Conviction). So I guess I would rather have it than the alternative but I'm sure there is a way to achieve a similar result without having Sam look like such a chump in those moments. It's just not right man.

Maybe lower level guys cause a struggle when detected or just don't do multiple rejections. 1 and done would be more than enough.


Other than that though, I think Blacklist's melee action is still superior, it's so fun even if it does make me play a little smarter than I would like some times :)

aznassassin159
01-03-2014, 10:35 PM
Was playing on rookie.....it seems that the mooks melee deny you on that difficulty as well....repeatedly
Hah, I forgot who it was, but I remembered back in September or so when someone was all "Hurr if you don't like melee denials, then play on Rookie".

Think it was either Frag or FighterforJC.

SanityAgathion
01-04-2014, 12:06 AM
They definitely deny you on Rookie too. But so far it was when I did something really crazy like running straight into them when they were shooting at me.

Dome500
01-04-2014, 01:33 AM
But more than sabotaging the emotions of the experience, it's a classic case of taking away one of the player's abilities in the instance in which they need it the most, in an effort to produce difficulty or inspire adaptation, which is an inherently flawed concept. Similar to helmets being implemented to force creativity via means of restricting player options; restriction is the antonym of freedom, therefore helmets serve as more of an anti-inspiration. The same can be said for the dogs.

I agree mostly.

Restrictive elements should be introduced carefully and there should be multiple ways to deal with it for you.

(It's kind of ridiculous that it is easier to K.O. a helmet enemy from a distance than it is to kill him (shocker = 1 hot, shots to torso = 5 shots).



Although I think that any man would have even the most basic flinch defence against any full-frontal hand-to-hand attack; I don't think any man could completely deny Sam Fisher the win. So for that reason, I think the game could benefit from either removing the counter move completely..... Or implementing some small version of the "struggle mechanic", (like the pistol to Sadiq's shoulder). I say "small" version, specifically, because it wouldn't take Sam long to subdue an alert enemy. I hate spamming one button, but maybe a "tap X to kill/KO" might solve it, and after 1 second. In reality, Sam WOULD have to work a bit harder, so why shouldn't we?


No, but how about the enemy shoving you back only SOMETIMES and the enemies if they are "surprised" not giving you resistance and after or during they shove(d) you back you can press "X"(melee) again to "counter the counter" and finally kill him.

It's a penalty because it takes more than double the time to kill/K.O. him, time in which other enemies can shoot you. And the most important thing, it is not as annoying as a "mash X" or "aim with pistol" or something similar.


Personally I only would take away the drone guy because it's just not plausible enough to have such an enemy archetype in a Splinter Cell game.

This.


The problem for me is not that they are able to deny front attacks. It's that they sometimes deny them even though I am actually behind them.

Yeah that's a situation that just happens over and over and it's annoying and frustrating.


Like WHO are these low level dudes that are being employed to wander around Middle Eastern villages? Where did they get their training cuz 4E needs to know apparently!

This.

As for the gun method, it's a possibility which is very difficult. To get shoved back multiple times and to try to attack over and over because you know you have to aim at the head to shoot them and as long as you are in the "melee loop" they don't call in the others so you attack them over and over again to slowly rise your pistol and aim at the head to finally kill them that way and be done with it. It's a mess and it's ridiculous and it's frustrating.

Also, Panthers don't want to stun, that's not what Panthers normally do.


I'm sure there is a way to achieve a similar result without having Sam look like such a chump in those moments. It's just not right man.

This,

Weagles_Fan
01-04-2014, 05:38 AM
Honestly, I'm having a hard time figuring out what you're all doing.

Are you trying to takedown from cover, or just out in the open? Because cover takedowns rarely get denied by normal enemies, even from the front.

TheRealGunnut19
01-04-2014, 07:16 AM
Honestly, I'm having a hard time figuring out what you're all doing.

Are you trying to takedown from cover, or just out in the open? Because cover takedowns rarely get denied by normal enemies, even from the front.

On Normal and Realistic, being denied from cover is more likely than being denied from freestanding, in my experience.

If you attack a previously unalerted enemy that says "I think he's over there!" from freestanding when he goes to check where he thinks you are, you will rarely get denied, lest you're on Perfectionist, AFAIK. If you attack from cover, you will always get denied if he's facing you, but when the game forces you to leave cover and stand up after this denial, you can usually melee the enemy anyway, again, lest on perfectionist.

If you second guess yourself realizing this, you can look at another, really unrealistic, side of things.

Say your in combat against enemies, you get an LKP and take cover behind a car or sandbags around 30 feet in front of it, enemies approach the LKP and get into your melee range as they run. You press X, and the enemy denies your melee.

But, if you are running about while enemies shoot at you, and get close to an enemy, most of the time, you get the kill, lest on Perfectionist, of course.

You get denied setting up an ambush from cover on enemies investigating an LKP, but don't get denied running headfirst at an enemy that currently sees you, and is killing you with bullets. There's a blatant flaw in that.

Dome500
01-04-2014, 05:39 PM
If you attack a previously unalerted enemy that says "I think he's over there!" from freestanding when he goes to check where he thinks you are, you will rarely get denied, lest you're on Perfectionist, AFAIK. If you attack from cover, you will always get denied if he's facing you, but when the game forces you to leave cover and stand up after this denial, you can usually melee the enemy anyway, again, lest on perfectionist.

In my experience Helmet enemies and armored enemies deny more often than normal enemies.

But however it is, it is way too annoying to be good for the player.

Oh and yes, unless the enemies are unaware of your presence you get denied almost EVERYTHING frontal in perfectionist.
Especially in the Charlie Missions and similar scenarios.


Say your in combat against enemies, you get an LKP and take cover behind a car or sandbags around 30 feet in front of it, enemies approach the LKP and get into your melee range as they run. You press X, and the enemy denies your melee.


EXACTLY.

In pefectionist even if he has his back towards you and runs past you, if you want to make an abduction sometimes, having moved away from your LKP and waiting for an enemy to pass by and then cover,abducting him from behind he turns around and denies your melee. I mean how ridiculous is that.


But, if you are running about while enemies shoot at you, and get close to an enemy, most of the time, you get the kill, lest on Perfectionist, of course.


You get denied setting up an ambush from cover on enemies investigating an LKP, but don't get denied running headfirst at an enemy that currently sees you, and is killing you with bullets. There's a blatant flaw in that.

Another point.

Inconsistency and non-logical behavior.

Weagles_Fan
01-05-2014, 04:13 AM
Hmm, maybe it's something to do with the difficulty level. I only touched Realistic on my first playthrough of the SP part. Other than that, Perfectionist only.

You would think that the higher difficulty would be more likely to deny though. :/

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying I can take heavies front on, they'll always deny that. But I can honestly say that I've never had a WTF moment with it.

Dome500
01-05-2014, 05:40 AM
Hmm, maybe it's something to do with the difficulty level. I only touched Realistic on my first playthrough of the SP part. Other than that, Perfectionist only.

You would think that the higher difficulty would be more likely to deny though. :/

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying I can take heavies front on, they'll always deny that. But I can honestly say that I've never had a WTF moment with it.

I and aside from Coop I am playing perfectionist only as well...