Senior Member
i think the bottom line is for a lot of us here on this hijacked thread is that whatever system you'd prefer - snap to cover or lean - it isnt here. not as far as we can see.
thats the worse issue.
GRWL is a realistic shooter depicting real world operatives that are supposed to act and look the part. this isnt saints row or mass effect or star wars - this is a game where the player is supposed to portray a 20th century soldier and act accordingly.... and without any real way to fire around a corner (be it by a cover system or any other way of leaning) the only solution the player seems to have is to strafe.... and strafing is not how a contemporary operator would negotiate cover or a fire fight. it goes against the theme of the game.
thats the main issue. if GRW would have had a cover system like GRFS or GOW or practically any shooter these days, Those OG GR gamers wouldnt LOVE it but would accept it, since its expected. but this game doesnt seem to have any system to help fire around corners without over exposing ourselves so our minds are going out of their way to wonder why not. why would we need to resort to arcade tactics in a semi-realistic shooter?
we can argue until the earth heats up and explodes about which system is better, but its all hypothetical because if we get neither - does it matter what none-existent solution we didn't get? :P
For me - no lean and no snap-to-cover is a deal breaker. it might sound a little harsh but there is nothing that looks particularly good about GRW and the lack of any lean\cover system is the nail on the coffin. if, by release, i dont hear i am wrong and there IS some sort of "cover" mechanics than im gonna wait a while before getting this game, because it hasnt even come out yet and it already looks dated to me, mechanics wise.
is there anyone else who kinda feels the same?
Senior Member
Agreed.
If neither option is available, combat in this game is going to be laughable, and I'd avoid ever doing a head-on confrontation. Without the capacity to use cover properly, stealth is the only reasonable option.
Unless, of course, they've made the player a bulletproof tank. Which will just make combat in general boring as hell.
Senior Member
You're a decade late bud ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)Originally Posted by topeira1980 Go to original post
Unrealistic strafing wouldn't be a problem if the movement mechanics were done right. That's not possible for the devs though, not enough motivation or something, and that's why the leaked gameplay footage looks as funky as it does.
Senior Member
lol. so true :POriginally Posted by Sp--pyBrown Go to original post
p.s. - what leaked footage?
all i saw was a lot of E3 coverage which was pre-alpha and i tried convincing myself that it looks as bad as it is because of how unpolished the game was.... i hope things changed.
like.... for the better...
Senior Member
Originally Posted by topeira1980 Go to original post
That might actually be something they'll be actively changing into the open betalpthwhatever. We'll see. The movement does seem kinda jerky as is, because the character doesn't seem to have any weight to it.
Banned
Why is cover so important for you guys in TPV? It seems like a waste of time for me when you can see pretty much everything>. Part of the why I can't take this game so seriously with TPV or even consider the word tactical (again, in SP/solo) if I have an advantage of everything around a corner w/o the need to expose my long finger nails or my pink tutu let alone now that we will have even faster regen and people talking about the amount of shots needed to take down a person.
Member
Cover is important because it "feels" good and it looks cool. This is a video game, after all. As unrealistic as past cover systems may have been (so they say), it's not more unrealistic than the body counts, semi-intelligent A.I. that makes it possible for a group of 4 men take out dozens of enemies every mission. It's not more unrealistic than a drone flying a mere meters above the enemy and not being noticed. It's not more unrealistic than regenerating health, whether that's automatic or requires a health kit that instantly restores a near-dead, just-took-5-shots-to-the-chest soldier to full health.Originally Posted by GiveMeTactical Go to original post
Member
Games evolve. The original GR games SUCKED. Boring as heck. GRAW revived the franchise, Future Soldier took it to the next level. Sounds like Wildlands is evolving for all the wrong reasons. I'm just so desperate for a 3rd person military shooter that I've no choice but to buy this one. The 3rd person aiming would've been the last straw for me if they didn't have it. Also thankful that this doesn't require an online connection for single player. Yay I can still own my game!Originally Posted by GiveMeTactical Go to original post
Banned
And you still did not answer my question... awesome!Originally Posted by FighterForJC Go to original post
I did not say that it was uncool and that it felt bad... I said you don't really need it because in TPV you can easily see what's around the corner even a few feet from the edge of the corner but ok, now I understand that you are not really looking for a tactical shooter but more for a cosmetic shoot-em-up game and that is ok too. Unfortunately for both of us UBI doubled talked us yet again since you thought you were getting one thing and I other.
Here I am just going to say that we will agree to disagree because I don't have the grammar or vocabulary to try to explain why I think you are wrong and even if I did... it wouldn't do me any good since you have clearly stated before that all you want is to look cool and feel good games.Originally Posted by FighterForJC Go to original post
Senior Member
Cover is important because it helps make you not-dead. Yes, using cover can make you look awesome. But I frankly can't remember the last time I took cover in a shooter and stopped to admire how awesome I looked. I might, afterward, get giddy over how bad *** it was that I pulled it off, but at the time my only concern is putting fire on the enemy.
