Thanks for that. At least it's optional to ignore the Shangi-La stuff. Personally I can't stand arcade-style games and that's what it feels like...but each to their own. I find it bugging that development effort goes into stuff like this in a FPS when IMO it would be better spent on story development or more varied missions. The saving grace of FC3 and FC4 is being able to employ different ways to take over outposts. I create my own difficulty levels by restricting my weaponry and seeing if I can win with limited firepower.Originally Posted by Frag_Maniac Go to original post
Agree totally, I meant to convey that as well, but forgot. I assume by "arcade" he's referring to the AI, but in reality this is not auto detect AI like in Serious Sam or Painkiller, where you have hoards of enemies that sense where the player is and rush him. You can definitely use stealth tactics here. You can also keep the tiger near you by pointing at the ground near you when commanding him.Originally Posted by rcole_sooner Go to original post
Shangri-La is really just another environment with different enemies, weapons and optics, but pretty much the same mechanics other than that. It's not any more "arcade" than the rest of the game.
Yet they still sell enough copies to be near the top of the sales charts. It sounds like that includes you. If all these haters that gripe about what they see in the game were really so off put by what Ubi is creating, esp to the point of insisting they never listen regarding creative content, why are they even buying the games?Originally Posted by GiveMeTactical Go to original post
Again, with the award, more bitter speculation than fact. This game hasn't just been raved about a lot by critics, but players as well. You only need stray a bit from the disgruntled cult gatherings found on the official forums and certain social media sites to see that.
I'll agree with you on the Yogi and Reggie missions, they are pretty, well, junior high at best, but there's FAR more to the game than that. I can't see calling it a "kid" game based on a small percentage of childish missions. That's like calling GTA IV a "gay" game because it has a few Bernie missions. And as for Yogi and Reggie themselves, well, some parents would argue they don't want their kids exposed to pot smoking, dope shooting jokers, or a protagonist that let's them use him as their guinea pig. LOL
The bulk of the complaints targeting Ubi and Far Cry 4 specifically have been primarily regarding technical issues, not creative ones. When it comes to game design, they're well above average. If not, then well, that's your opinion, but why not just stop buying and playing their games and be done with it? Not having done so makes it kinda obvious there's that creative lure I'm talking about, even among those claiming to dislike their game design.
If you're going to claim you were mislead by the hype, sorry, I don't buy that. For one, you're talking like it's been going on for some time, so why would you trust it to be to your liking before buying? There was also literally TONS of details well before launch on the type of content and design this game has.
Nope, not even remotely close... if and when I do buy them they are bargain bin basement prices (5 to 8 cheeseburgers) and preferably used, this way Greedysoft does not get any of my mony.Originally Posted by Frag_Maniac Go to original post
My gripe is not their lack of creativeness but their lack of finishing a game... there is a HUGE difference there. And No, I don't have to cut them any slack since they don't cut me or anybody else any with the price... you want to sell a 60% finished game, sell it to me a 60% of the MSRP, 70% finish, sure, 30% less, etc, etc...
Raved about? by Whom? someone that has gotten paid by UBI to raved about it?Originally Posted by Frag_Maniac Go to original post
Game of the Year? Really? who is selecting these games... a blind, deaf and mute guy? The game launched in November and it is so great that won Game of the Year? I might have been born at night, but it wasn't last night!
This is like Harley Davidson stating on National TV that their motorcycles are made in the USA... sure, if you want to believe it, you have the right to it but it does not make it right. LOL
They are all pretty much childish but I have not played the game all that much to fully argue the point with you... just what I have seen my friend play.Originally Posted by Frag_Maniac Go to original post
Can't say anything about GTA as it never stroke me as a game I would enjoy playing and why they call it a shooter game is beyond me but hey... we are have different definitions of what a shooter game is.
I don't fully understand exactly what you want to tell me by your last sentence but if it is to tell me that they rated the game M just so parents couldn't complain well, that is just lame but ok.
Yes on the first sentence... my issue is primordially with Technical Issues and not creative ones.Originally Posted by Frag_Maniac Go to original post
Also yes on the game design and I have stated this many a times before, UBI game design and creativity is FULL OF POTENTIAL, better than CoD MW1 & MW2 (IMHO) but because of the multitude of bugs, glitches and technical issues is why I come here to gripe and bust their sacks, some of these days, they gotta hear me and if I can take 1 sale away from them, why not, it is satisfactory and makes me grin like you wouldn't believe.
Nope, not at all, if anything, go check what I said when UBI was hyping the game, I told everyone what was going to happen and pretty much everything has come true.Originally Posted by Frag_Maniac Go to original post
You are also correct, it's been going on since 2005 back when they launched the crappy versions of R6 Vegas and GR:AW, 2 of my favorite franchised and truly shooter games.
Being said that, UBI scamming marketing targets morons and people with more money than brains and the few innocent that get caught in the net so yeah, Hyping is and has always been misleading. More so when they tell you the game was made on a computer but the keyboad bind is broken, they tell you this is Next Gen tech and it does not support SLI or Xfire, and I could go on but really... why?
Also stated before, I only play Shooter Games and Campaigns, never like MP play, less so with the hackers, and technical issues so my gaming is limited to a few titles, when a few of those titles are sloppy console to pc ports and real bad at that, I tend to get a little hot and bothered with the culprit.
Eh? How can you say it's no more arcade than the rest of the game? Elsewhere in open world I can choose my weapons, my mode of attack, my timing, my terrain, exactly how I go about things and can make a tactical withdrawal to recover and/or re-arm if I want to. We'll have to agree to differ, bud. Shangri-La to me is little more than an arcade shoot 'em up.Originally Posted by Frag_Maniac Go to original post
Having limited weapons is linear vs non linear, not arcade vs tactical. For the sake of having some semblance of realism, it has to be more primitive and limited. You CAN use retreat, recover and rearm tactics though, as well as tiger, knife, bow, or elephant. And you can shoot the vase lamps and dropped hounds for an area effect. You can also use various takedown skills, like knife throw, chain, etc. There are also bushes to hide in.Originally Posted by wassupwiyou Go to original post
What it appears you are disliking is the world itself, because the gameplay thematically fits it. You're given as many tactical options as such a world can realistically use. That's what I mean by the mechanics being the same. Did you expect Shangri-La to play like a full arsenal shooter, I mean seriously? One could easily argue the ability to gather powerful weapons in the main game if anything decreases the need to use careful tactics, allowing you to Rambo it, which is very arcade.
The main difference with Shangri-La besides the more primitive setting is there's more need for stealth, but the more modern setting of the main game also enables you to overpower yourself and pretty much abandon tactics. Sure it's less linear because you have more options, but potentially a MUCH more arcade "shootem up" style. How you can even say Shangri-La is shootem up is baffling. If anything that describes Kyrat, not Shangri-La.
LOL, this is so not true. This is also indicative of what I've been saying, that there's more depth to Shangri-La's gameplay than people give it credit for. Most that struggle with it don't take the time to experiment enough to discover how it can be played. You don't have to follow the tiger. In the levels leading up to the final one you can keep it with you by pointing at the ground nearby and summonsing it there. In the final level if you simply stay on the move and distance yourself from the ground enemies, he'll follow YOU. I've battled the bird on Hard and beaten it in about 3.5 min without even getting into any ground skirmishes or having to heal once, and I never lost even one full bar of health.Originally Posted by Phenogen Go to original post
The thing to remember with any AI is there's always a way it can beaten, and quite often ways it can be so exploited that it makes it easy. The only comment I got on this video was that it looks like a boring battle, which it almost is with these tactics because it's so easy. And it certainly doesn't require youth-like eyesight, esp if you avoid ground skirmishes. I'm 57 and my eyes certainly aren't as good as they used to be. All you're really looking for is the bird's glowing open mouth, which juxtaposed to a dark background sticks out like a sore thumb. You can also hear when and where his attack is coming to ready your bow.
But you can follow the tiger, it seems to kinda know where to go, but yeah you can hang back to until the enemies are cleared ... for a bit.
Just like in the prison you could follow the smoke to find the grapple parts and to get back out .. or at least it seemed to work that way to me.
Just don't blindly follow either, gotta watch for enemies.
I figured limited weapon choice was because it was a dream sequence ... and just to force the player to adapt to a new type of reality ... so, yes, very linear.
The flying was kinda platformy so I can see the arcade play style theme there .... but really it was just another form of the wingsuit flying which is part of the main game. Just had to learn a trick or 2 in the shangri-la flying to get altitude.
I really like the Shangri-la missions. I kinda hope some DLC comes out with more of it ... especially what it was like after we defeated the boss.
The only time I ran out of ammo was fighting the boss the first time, before I realized how to beat it. Never even got close any other time.
I thought the checkpoints were pretty well spaced. And, yes, I died a few times, so I had to use a few.
I find it only makes it more difficult to let the tiger go where it want's, particularly if you follow it as well. It can easily blow any chance for stealth, and he often takes too much damage and dies. This often leaves you fending off numerous enemies by yourself if you let him make his own choices and follow him into the fray.Originally Posted by rcole_sooner Go to original post
Basically it works on Easy, but doesn't work very well on Hard, so difficulty setting needs to be part of the discussion because of that.
I don't agree with the negativity.
Because I really enjoyed the Shangri La mission I think it was nice ot have mission that are completely different from other missions.
Think it was a good add on and I enjoyed playing them.
I don't see why people complain when game developers add even more content for free.
Shangri La mission could have not been made and then the game would finish earlier.
I'm glad they made it.