The challenge I think is more with finding a balance that the consumers enjoy. I gather that you prefer the worlds to be less littered with constant interruption and fewer activities or non-campaign related elements. I am not at the opposite end of that spectrum, but definitely of the opposing point of view. I think FC4 went a little over-board with the frequency of karma events to the point where it became hard to just wander or do something on your own without encountering an event that you had to avoid or engage with. Personally I'd rather they parse down the events and some of the activities, and replace them with stronger, more narratively influenced side missions and side-activities that feed back into progression for the rest of the game. There should still be plenty of hostile encounters in the wild, but they could definitely stand to be pulled back a bit....Originally Posted by scrapser Go to original post
I would prefer the activities available to be not so much random and of the distracting variety but more those that would be related to the mission at hand or even contributing to the overall story arc. And they could be engaged at the pace the player wishes in most cases with some being more critical to a specific mission and therefore unavoidable. Perhaps there could be a way of circumventing a challenge with less of a reward if the player chooses the easy path. My previous mention of climbing a cliff is a good example. Why not make climbing a cliff a challenge in itself...or even kind of a puzzle where the reward matches the effort. As it stands right now, cliffs are part of the QTE's and in my opinion a missed opportunity to immerse the player. I wonder if this sort of idea has already been discussed in design meetings or not?
And I agree there needs to be attention to a balance that consumers enjoy. This would dovetail nicely with realism options making the game appeal to a broader base.
Well I believe part of the appeal of side missions is the opportunity of engaging in stories or activities that are not directly related to the campaign. It stands to reason that even with the cult ruling over Hope County, that some residents would still have problems or tasks that they need help with that aren't related to the cult or their oppression. Being that throughout the game we as the protagonist are making a name for ourselves as we raise a resistance, it wouldn't be out of the question that people may look to us to help them out in certain situations, so wholly unrelated side-quests are entirely justifiable from a narrative standpoint and they've the potential to offer unique gameplay moments that perhaps would be out of place in a main story context.Originally Posted by scrapser Go to original post
I think populating the world with random enemy encounters or events is also a good thing, I just think that FC4 made the frequency of those sorts of encounters a touch to often. They are only distracting if you choose to engage with them, and even if you do most of those encounters can be dealt with in 30 seconds or less, hardly much of a distraction. Most of the time it was just a single guard walking a hostage, pretty easy to take care of that, it just happened so frequently that it became tedious. Karma events in FC4 were always completely optional, so engaging them at a player controlled pace was always how they've been handled.
How is cliff climbing a QTE? Just because the game displays a prompt to press the jump button to initiate a climbing animation does not make it a QTE. QTEs have a fail state, and are generally actions that have to be initiated within a short reactionary time frame. The way ledge climbing works in FC is just part of the standard controls scheme, you just press the jump button. What would be more immersive about climbing cliffs if you removed the ledge climbing animation? If anything, removing the ledge animation & just having to hop precariously up smaller ledges would make it seem less realistic imo... I don't know if I'm just mis-understanding what you're getting at or if you're not explaining it very well, but I don't know what all that talk is about...
I don't mind the hunting itself, but the way it works in the game is just not quite engaging, the meta against animals is to find a rock and jump on top and back while taking shots- and this directly relates to the problem I have with the AI in general, the path finding is something that would work in a closed corridor for human characters- but not in an open-world environment for units that don't have a ranged method of attack. Challenge in Far Cry 3 and beyond is based on weapon inaccuracy and low damage on the highest difficulty level.Originally Posted by HorTyS Go to original post
Head shots obviously do kill with a single shot (though this doesn't apply to heavies unless you are using sniper rifles or signature weapons), but the assault rifles have multiple degrees of dispersion even when fired when standing still, that is, first shot accuracy too, obviously- which results in infuriating moments where you are sure you were aiming at a guy's head and should have killed him, but didn't, though that is mostly a problem for stealth and long-range (if I can call the max. ~150 meter encounters long-range) gameplay, and results in you being spotted.
I just think if they broadened the scale of the fights with improved AI that actually makes sensible choices in navigation and strategy, they could make the game much more enjoyable in general. The AI doesn't work together at all, it just gives you a false impression of doing so when you have multiple types of enemies coming towards you, but there's no concept of strategy, therefore no reward for creative plays when winning tough fights. This also applies to the animals- most predators that have been in the series don't behave realistically at all, a wolf does not just smell you and run right at you and come to bite your legs off- neither does a jaguar and what ever other predators there are. I'd just prefer if the player and the individual AI were on a similar level in terms of health and weapon behavior and the AI tried to outsmart you. The AI is even stupid enough to occasionally kill each other and themselves with grenades...
Though that might not be what a casual player jumping in to the game wants, so obviously it should be tied to the difficulty level. The AI never even tries to flank or surround you unless scripted mission logic or random encounters spawn enemies behind you, assuming the AI is the same as Far Cry 3 to Far Cry Primal. I can't explain why the combat feels lacking compared to Far Cry 2 in everything but stealth, but the game doesn't apply that constant pressure on you while fighting any more. You have much more information given about the environment with the tagging and all which further reduces difficulty, though I am glad they let us disable tagging in FC4 and FCP.
AI could definitely be improved, on that we can agree on. I'd say that is true for most games these days. Shooters at least. It doesn't seem to me as though there have been many big breakthroughs in AI in a very long time. I can't remember the last time I was surprised by or impressed by the AI in a game, but it hasn't been this gen that's for sure. I think as far as animal AI goes, the predators could definitely stand to use an upgrade. I think the herbivores seem to act about as should be expected. Different predators should behave differently though, and pose threats based on their type. So in FC5 for instance black bears should be a different sort of threat to you than a mountain lion. Bears should just be tanky beasts who charge you with brute force, but lions should stalk & attempt ambushes or something. Wolves have tended to hunt in packs, and run away when you take most of them out, but they should try to surround you rather than just rushing as a pack...
I think in addition to difficulty levels improving enemy AI, and to attempt to sort of get this thread back on topic, perhaps the hard difficulty should also make the crafting pouches end one level lower, so we never have as high of carrying capacities.
I have nothing against side missions that fit into the game in some way. I guess I must have some kind of rare take on these things in the game community. For example, the game creates a world where you are a stranger...you progress into the game and get involved in the fight against the antagonist. Perhaps you are currently on a mission and as you make your way you encounter somebody who asks you to make a much needed delivery of medicine or supplies. But to do that requires you to race against a timer while running some kind of course similar to a pylon race that uses colored smoke for way points. Or maybe you happen upon some guy who challenges you to shoot as many balloons as possible in a given amount of time. Things like this take me right out of the game. Am I fighting for my life and my friends or am I at the local fireman's carnival trying to win a stuffed bear for my girlfriend? That's how it comes across to me.Originally Posted by HorTyS Go to original post
Far Cry 2 is not immune completely. It has side missions given by the buddies that are not part of the main missions. But although these missions had nothing to do with the story and were sort of thin on what they did give as a benefit to the player, they at least did not cross the line into being preposterous. Completing them increased your reputation and gave you an opportunity to listen to the buddy talk about themselves. The only benefit I saw was the mercenaries in town would gradually show you a bit more respect and you got to know your buddies a little better. But it was within the realm of realism.
Cliffs. Since Far Cry 3 there has been the addition of climbing cliffs where you see a "Rope" icon, press the action key and then up or down you go with little else to be concerned with. Why not make the game work so you encounter a cliff, see the "Rope" icon and then choose where to throw a grappling hook (if the cliff is high enough) and then start climbing. Perhaps the cliff is such you need to walk to the side and start swinging to some ledge you could not see from the ground below so you can get a new vantage point and throw the grappling hook to a new spot in order to continue. Or maybe you just start climbing as a rock climber might looking for hand and footholds as you make your way to the top. In short, don't automate the experience with a climbing animation and instead make it a challenge to the player.
When you jump into the water you don't get a "Swim" prompt and then watch your character cross to the other side. So why make cliffs so simple? If it's just a short hop from one ledge to another you just jump as you do in any FPS game. My point is the game should be designed to emulate real life at the personal level. Don't press an action key and watch a little video of an enemy having his throat cut. Give the player the freedom to attack the enemy as he chooses. Freedom to play the game as you please seems to fit into the whole concept of an open world game don't you think? Add to immersion, don't take it away. Making the experience personal (by that I mean dependent on what you decide to do) is how a game draws you in as a player.
A wonderful example of what I'm talking about is crossing the railroad bridge in Half-Life 2. You must find your way across the underside of the bridge where you deal with broken and twisted walkways and must judge whether you can make the jump or not. You hear the wind whistling through the steel girders and are afraid to look down. When I play that segment my knees shake with adrenaline. Now that's immersion.
Ok, well a half second ledge climbing animation is a far cry (Originally Posted by scrapser Go to original post) from your little swimming example, which could potentially be a 20+ second animation. Ledge climb animations are nowhere near that level of automation, and are in fact more realistic to have than simply designing the mountains & cliffs in a way that do not require them. A short climb animation is necessary to represent you ascending a ledge that is higher than the character's head, how can you be against that? It is more realistic, which is what you've been asking for. Even the longer 1 second climb animation is hardly stripping away control, no more so than a reload animation does. I assume these "rope icons" you speak of are the grapple points? The grappling hook wasn't introduced until FC4, and they said back when they were promoting that game that they toyed with the idea of a free-form grappling hook system but that it sort of broke the game and wasn't worth pursuing because it would potentially enable the player to circumvent areas of the game and was ultimately detrimental to the pace & balance of the game overall.
As for the takedowns,I believe they enable the player the freedom to attack how they choose. The way you spoke of them sounded like you feel the opposite is true. How do takedowns prevent you from playing the way you want? To suggest they remove or change the takedowns? That is crossing a line sir! Takedowns are one of the best additions to the franchise, so to suggest they restrict character choice in some fashion? I say quite the contrary, they are a way to provide another method of play that was previously not a viable option. Takedowns provide more player choice, not remove or restrict it. How can you even think that? That makes no sense.
I played HL2, and that sequence to me was no more harrowing than climbing a tower in the FC games...
We are actually closer to describing the same thing than how we are wording our thoughts. So for cliffs, what I'm trying to say is the whole experience should be scale-able (no pun intended). If it's a hop or a short climb just above your head then you see a "climb" icon (maybe not even needed really). If the distance is greater than that then go to something animated as you pointed out. But if you are facing a real climbing challenge of height and complexity, here is where you make use of grappling hooks and rope or maybe have the choice of free-climbing if you choose. I think that would be a nice touch. Using grappling hooks, the player would look up and a cursor would appear and as it passed over areas of rock that could be hooked, the icon would change to the hook icon and you could throw and begin climbing. If free-climbing the same scanning system would be used but now you would be looking for hand and foot holds.
I'm sorry for hitting on the take downs but I really enjoy sneaking up on an enemy and hitting them in the head, the body, the legs...whatever and having my attack either be silent and successful or maybe not so successful with the enemy crying out and alerting the camp. Automated take downs cannot provide this. How many times in Far Cry 2 have you attacked an enemy only to hear him cry out in pain and scream, "Someone help me!" and the camp then knows its under attack? It just seems closer to reality for me.
And yes, climbing the towers is also nerve rattling for me, too. I get weak at the knees as I approach the top even though I'm sitting in a chair. LOL
Ok, that really helps me get a better picture on what your describing on the climbing bit, and that sounds pretty cool actually. I think they could find a way to make that work if it was basically done in a way that you're getting those grappling points in a dynamic way, yet still in specific areas right? So rather than the grappling hook working on any surface, it just works on multiple surfaces, but of a limited area right? At specific climbing zones. If they're going through and having to designate where the grapple icon appears, than that is a very deliberate & specific integration of the climbable areas but also provides players with the ability to have choice and freedom to approach the situation from more angles. I like it.Originally Posted by scrapser Go to original post
For me, FC2's "melee system" (I struggle to even call it that it was so utterly basic) was flawed in that you never took down an enemy in one hit even when you had the complete drop on him. The takedowns in FC games are the reward you get for getting within range to do them without detection. To me it makes sense that when you have the drop on an enemy, that you can take him out without alerting the surrounding hostiles. They may be a bit over the top, but to me thats part of the fun. Clearing an outpost as fast as you can with takedown only is a fun challenge.
By the time I was playing FC4, climbing the towers to me just felt sort of brainless and uninteresting. I was never worried about falling and the fact that there was just one way up made them linear and tedious to me. They were so simple and uncomplicated that I lost interest in them. I don't really have anything against them per se, but I think finding an alternate way to accomplish what the purpose for them was I think is nothing more than a reaction to getting a lot of hate from the wider gaming community. The towers are almost always cited when talking about the negative & recycled gameplay features in the series.
You're right about how FC2 melee's often result in needing more than one strike but it does happen. In my experience it appears to be a sort of Goldilocks zone (not too far and not too close). If you get it just right you take them out with one strike. They may cry in pain but the camp is not alerted. Sometimes the enemy might be alerted to you and as you try to hit him he pushes you away. The first time this happened for me I was quite surprised because I had played the game many times without seeing. Another rare event is catching an enemy by surprise with your weapon raised and the enemy raises his hands in submission. That also was fun to see the first time. It seems the developers have made efforts to inject realism here and there in close combat but seem to get lost with how to bring it to a conclusion. Perhaps this was part of the reason to switch over to take downs. It would be nice to get the straight dope from them at some point.Originally Posted by HorTyS Go to original post
I didn't mind the towers in FC3. My gripe was the zip lines at the top going off in several directions and the tangents they created pulling you off in new directions and the accompanying side missions. I know why they did this but it just made the game even busier than it already was. I don't think we will see this in FC5 from the looks of things. Having lived in Montana it doesn't seem like it fits. But then again I lived there before smart phones were invented. LOL
Here in the east there are areas where cell towers have been decorated to look like giant pine trees. They look bizarre.