Next gen consoles and still when you skin an animal nothing happens.It just stays there like you didn't just take the whole skin and a big chunk of meat of the animal's corpse.This just sucks and is so stupid to me.Why can't you do it like it's supposed to be?That was even in Assassin's Creed III why not on your newest,best looking game ever not to mention it's on the next gen consoles.I think a PS4 and XOne can handle this little thing.
In Assassin's Creed III, the screen turns white and fast forward time while you skin. The same applied for Assassin's Creed IV, but instead of the screen turning white, it turned black. In Red Dead Redemption, you cannot see the animal being skinned because they are outside of the screen. Also, you can't even skin animals in multiplayer in Red Dead Redemption.Originally Posted by CRYPTO196 Go to original post
Do you know why? It's because both Ubisoft and Rockstar didn't develop actual skinning, instead they just replaced the textures in a short span of time. You don't see it at all, and skinning would take an awfully long time if it's realistic. In Far Cry 3 and Far Cry 4, it's in a first person perspective. It wouldn't make sense to fast forward in the middle of battle, or see a complete animation. You'll notice the machete, or the kukri slicing the animals off screen, even in a first person perspective.
Also if they wanted to do it properly the animals would have to die at a specific pose every time, or would have to move to that pose before the skinning happens- and that wouldn't be good. Obviously then the animation would be implementable, but it'd still be fairly time consuming for such a small detail... I'd just like skinning to give you skin, not a chunk of flesh...Originally Posted by KrAzY1337 Go to original post
Because I would like the next gen game to feature things that last gen couldn't feature.What's the point of buying the game on next gen if there aren't any next gen things troughout the game?Also it doesn't make sense.You have just skinned the animal and receive it skin,pelt and meat while it stays there untouched.Doesn't that make no sense to you?Originally Posted by WniO Go to original post
Aesthetically yes, it is distracting in a sort of realistic first person shooter.Originally Posted by CRYPTO196 Go to original post
It would take a gargantuan amount of time and effort for a few guys to put that into the game, when its maybe 2 quick seconds of animation that is not needed.
Personally, (next gen wise) I put more emphasis on needing new gameplay mechanics that were not implemented in previous iterations, before any talk of graphics. I can see people being upset at that lakes water texture, since it appears to be a downgrade.
Read what I wrote.Originally Posted by CRYPTO196 Go to original post
See this doesn't make sense either.I'm not upset over this stupid little thing I'm upset that they aren't taking advantage of the next gen.My question is again what's the point in next gen when we won't see anything next gen?Maybe the developers are still getting used to the new consoles but Ubisoft already worked on an next gen title(Watch Dogs).Shouldn't they have a little more experience this time?
Yes i read what you wrote and it makes more sense now.Thanks!Originally Posted by KrAzY1337 Go to original post