Well, this is why companion are optional. I, for example, hate challenging games. I like to be entertained, not overcome challenges - I have enough challenges IRL. This is Far Cry, after all, not Dark Souls.Originally Posted by GameGuru2018 Go to original post
No, to give player another aspect of gameplay - commanding the team. For me, companions in FC5 was really nice addition and it is very bad that this feature was downgraded in FC6, if everything I have heard about this game is true.Originally Posted by GameGuru2018 Go to original post
Bad idea, in my opinion. Completely breaks immersion. I prefer to be commander, not demon who possesses other people.Originally Posted by GameGuru2018 Go to original post
Originally Posted by Wild-Recon Go to original post
Everyone prefers to be a commander.....to be a king.....to be a noble knight.
No one wants to be a peasant, dishwasher or a slave.
But these people were always in the majority.
Even when people start talking about their "past lives" - "In my former life I was a princess..... noble warrior....and so on".
Strange that no one was a dirty prostitute.
I say this in general.
Why not to see the situation as a whole?
In all its glory.
You want to be king? Very good.
But don't forget to be a slave too.
Two sides of a coin.
Without it the picture will never be complete.
You want to command......very good.
But you should also feel someone else commanding you.
Some fool, for instance.
You have to be in the shoes of many people.
We have to be in the shoes of different people.
Different social groups, different characters, different genders.......by destinies found themselves together, in a certain period of time.
They're so different but they have to do one common thing.
Individualism vs Collectivism.
When one begins to harm the other.
Eternal question.
That squad or team shouldn't look like special forces.
It should be closer to Far Cry.
Every member should have its pluses and minuses.
The more valuable specialist he is - the greater some kind of flaw he must have.
For instance, he can be a talented car mechanic......but fond of alcohol. With all its consequences.
We'll have to put together that Puzzle of people's skills and characters.
Every member of a team should have its own interests and preferences.....its own issues.
From music to cooking.
For instance, one of the members may prefer music of the 80s.
He may prefer to appear or come in to the songs of that time.
Something like this.......http://youtu.be/YrLTBJj26gs
So on and so on....
Playing for one character we make the game much poorer.
Moreover, the most important - members of the team must have ability and opportunity to die.
That's the point.
They should die not because of scenario but because of our mistake.
We must be responsible for their death.
Their death must be on our conscience.
We have ourselves to blame.
May be we didn't equip them enough or we have chosen the wrong strategy for the attack......It must be our fault.
We must have a huge sense of guilt.
Otherwise their death has no sense.
It's important for us, first of all.
Important to save them.
To save everyone.
But developers should do it the way that to save them all should be just impossible. Very hard.
We should put our heart and soul into the development of each character.
.............and lose it.
With the death of the character some part of us will die as well.
And in the end of the game there should be a scene......
Where we're all together again.
We're laughing, joking.....
Some flashback or some kind of "dream" scene...
Something like this........http://youtu.be/0v-L-b3wF0g
Entertainingly enough, when FC5 eliminated the pinnacle climbing framework, unexpectedly a lot of fanatics of it rose up out of the woodwork to mourn the misfortune, despite the fact that up to that point it'd be an apparently all around despised component that I not even once saw guarded.
Yes, because it is a game - entertainment product.Originally Posted by GameGuru2018 Go to original post
Why I should pay for a game where I can do just the same work as IRL? For example, if I wanted to be a dishwasher - I would have find a job as a dish washer and I will be paid, not paying for it.Originally Posted by GameGuru2018 Go to original post
Because people see all that situation IRL 23/7 and they want to became a someone else in the game they have paid for?Originally Posted by GameGuru2018 Go to original post
What for?Originally Posted by GameGuru2018 Go to original post
There is always someone who is commanding you - game designer who made quite clear rules of what you need to do to win this game.Originally Posted by GameGuru2018 Go to original post
You have never worked with professionals, right?Originally Posted by GameGuru2018 Go to original post
No. This is proven fact since Pacific Strike made by Origin in 90s. Reason is simple: it will be a very stupid and frustrating experience when teammate dies because of bug or AI limitations. This is a game, after all, not real life.Originally Posted by GameGuru2018 Go to original post
Technically it's not really gone, prepper stashes and treasure hunts are introduced for platforming and puzzles.Originally Posted by Wild-Recon Go to original post
Originally Posted by Wild-Recon Go to original post
Yes. But this is a coin that has two sides.
The seeds of a good game lie in reality.
Without a relationship with reality, without this mirror, the game will never be really interesting.
Because we've come from real life.
Our brain is rooted in reality.
We've come to virtual reality from real reality, real life.
The game where your companion can die will be more exciting than the game where your companion is just immortal robot.
It applies to many things concerning the connection between real life and a game.
Implementation of this is not so impossible.