Perkel
Arcane
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2014
- Messages
- 15,810
Stop playing it on the Normal difficulty.
No Crysis 1 was garbage.
Stop playing it on the Normal difficulty.
Crysis Who-gives-a-fuck-they're-all-derpy-AAA-shooters.Crysis 2
Crysis is amazing
giving a fuck about plot in semi open world fps about shooting gooks and aliensCrysis is amazing
no its not.
It's poor FPS. Whole game design is basically:
get some random goals,
get some random village,
get some random military barracks villages or whatever drop player
give player gimmick to masturbate over and over again with it.
Level design is abymysal. Only like 3 first missions are great and the more you go with alien plot the worse it becomes.
giving a fuck about plot in semi open world fps about shooting gooks and aliensCrysis is amazing
no its not.
It's poor FPS. Whole game design is basically:
get some random goals,
get some random village,
get some random military barracks villages or whatever drop player
give player gimmick to masturbate over and over again with it.
Level design is abymysal. Only like 3 first missions are great and the more you go with alien plot the worse it becomes.
Hey genius, FEAR is a completely different game. Crysis is a sandbox shooter with long distance combat, vehicle, and stealth elements. It manages these things very well, with AI that prioritizes threats and disturbances, and tightly balanced powers that lend themselves well to weaving through crowded jungle environments. The aliens part is also a relatively small portion of the campaign.giving a fuck about plot in semi open world fps about shooting gooks and aliensCrysis is amazing
no its not.
It's poor FPS. Whole game design is basically:
get some random goals,
get some random village,
get some random military barracks villages or whatever drop player
give player gimmick to masturbate over and over again with it.
Level design is abymysal. Only like 3 first missions are great and the more you go with alien plot the worse it becomes.
I said: as plot progress toward hurr durr aliens game design becomes basically shit.
FEAR was better game at every aspect, better level design, better gunplay, better AI and so on.
I just watched some gameplay footage of CS:GO the other day and I seriously can't tell any difference between it and Source, apart from the fact that guns look ugly as hell because of retarded Cowwadooty weapon customization. Now compare CS 1.6 with Source and the difference is like night and day. And the best part is that there's 5 years between the release of 1.6 and Source and 8 between Source and GO. Though to be fair the Source engine is a beast and it's a lot easier to improve 1.6 level graphics than it is to improve Source level graphics. And when you think how sufficient graphics already were at that point in 2004 (Source Engine, Morrowind with mods, Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 4 etc), it just makes me mad. Think about the billions of dollars wasted at graphical arms race at the expense of gameplay. More shallow and dumbed down games that are more expensive to produce and still end up looking worse than earlier games? Mainstream games industry needs to commit seppuku.
If you're going to pick a non cell shaded console game from the 6th console generation, why Metal Gear Solid when there's Silent Hill 3 on the same console?The best looking game ever made imo is Metal Gear Solid 2, especially the HD version. Why?
For a PS2 game it has impressively good textures, the weather effects are sublime, the attention to detail in everything is ridiculous. The game also has better looking reflections, lighting and plants than most modern releases.
Looks kind of shitty here but the textures in Silent Hill 3 were really nice. Actually some PS2/Gamecube games (which were less powerful than the original Xbox, which was less powerful than PC) like Resident Evil Remake and Silent Hill 2/3 still have better looking character models and textures than some of the Xbox 360/PS3 ports of 2014/2015 games like Dragon Age Inquistion and Shadows of Mordor, which goes back to my point of modern game industry needing to commit seppuku.
I wish we'd get completely realistic graphics already. I'm thinking that way the industry would have nowhere left to go but towards stylization in order to make games stand out visually. Fvvvvkk this photorealism shit.#2 exactly.
I wish more games had vision like Alice: MR.
And fvvvvkk reviewers that bashed it for realism.
Fair enough, I have no formal training in graphics or design whatsoever, so I'm happy to concede that the art style may feature some impressive bells and whistles that my plebeian eye can't pick up on. That said, a game is not an art book, the first criterion is how the art style benefits the gameplay, just like a movie's cinematography should complement the narrative rather than just look fancy (Zack Snyder syndrome). So I don't see the point of "menus with characters whose bodies flow from one pose to another as you leaf through them". What I would find noteworthy:
- a modern stealth game that makes heavy use of dynamic lighting, realistic shadows, physically accurate reflections, but also deliberately ornate and lavish interior design, all of which can make it a lot harder for the player to move around undetected and find secrets and loot
- a Lovecraftian horror game where the art style becomes increasingly erratic, sketchy and disorienting as the player descends into madness (Malkavian run of VtMB meets A Scanner Darkly)
- a dungeon crawl through ancient ruins of a lost civilization whose rise and eventual demise is told in a completely non-verbal fashion via wall murals, sculptures, relics, fossils, and even differences in architecture, with the majority of puzzles and riddles revolving around these artefacts
Also, good art design for games doesn't need to look particularly stylish. Outcast doesn't have an extravagant or highly abstracted style, but it does an excellent job creating a cohesive yet genuinely alien world (partially due to the fact that voxel engines look very unusual to the polygon-trained eye). Alpha Centauri's eye cancer inducing color palette still effectively conveys which areas are more dangerous than others (neon purple fungus fields vs lush forest tiles with a river).
I know I'm mixing up a lot of things here that should be kept separate --- enabling new gameplay styles, effectively conveying information, art design VS graphics engine --- but the bottom line is that if Persona 5's art direction turns out to be just style without substance, then I will rank it just as low as any other AAA game that doesn't even try to look unique.