Did DMC1 have the level of depth that DMC3 had?

#91Gen2000Posted 12/1/2012 12:39:53 AM
Wouldn't it be better if you're controlling every action of your character, no matter how wild the situation is?


Having Bayonetta summon dragons that eat enemies all the time for instant kill on command would be kind of broken. as well as punching bosses into the sun on command

Sam drilling holes through bosses on command would be broken too.

Or maybe that's just how you want it anyways.
---
The Storm Is About To Rage.....
#92FireMage7777Posted 12/1/2012 12:47:59 AM
mmSNAKE posted...
Bypasses complex programming

When you make a game normally you don't have to create an engine from scratch. Very few companies do because it's very complicated, difficult, and time consuming. So most of the time they use an existing engine and packages for physics, animation etc.

So what they would do for a qte, is put in their animation data which the engine would render. Then they would edit it and make the QTE points as sort of play pause parts. In a lot of cases it's supposed to be plug and play sort of thing. Naturally this isn't always the case, and there is a lot of issues that can happen with animations, especially if you end up modifying the engine for your needs. The sheer amount of issue that can happen is staggering. Gimbal lock can occur (due to lack of quaternions or hardcoding math issues), ALL sorts of memory problems can occur. Etc etc.

Regardless, it's still easier than programming an environment where the user has much more freedom and a lot more input which shapes how game functions. Once you throw in a multitude of user input possibilities, the bug potential skyrockets, not to mention all those issues you could have had with just animating, those can occur now as well.

As an example. Do you see bugs in animated films? You may see occasional bloopers, but how common are those compared to gameplay bugs in games? That should give you a good comparison why that statement holds.

It doesn't really matter what kind of game you're playing.

QTE is nothing more than a "makeshift technology"


It works fine for games which I've listed. If you dislike those games that is your preference. it doesn't make the games bad.


Exactly. Take for example Asura's Wrath. Massive doesn't even comprehend the scale some things are in it, couldn't have been done without making a brand new engine...or QTE's
---
Still waiting for that comeback Sickle
#93GoldsicklePosted 12/1/2012 1:39:24 AM
mmSNAKE posted...
When you make a game normally you don't have to create an engine from scratch.

So did the developers of DMC4 & DmC.
They didn't create the games' respective engines from scratch and yet they put some effort to not stoop to QTE and keep things manual as much as possible.

It's all about effort.

If you dislike those games that is your preference.

Of course, as long as you're just looking at it from a player's perspective (especially those who are easily swayed and carried away by flashy stuff), you'll continue to support QTE and claim that they "work".

If you look at it from a programming or development perspective, you'll realize just how lazy it is and how it skips a lot of work.

Gen2000 posted...
Having Bayonetta summon dragons that eat enemies all the time for instant kill on command would be kind of broken.

Which leads to another thing with games: balancing.

Balancing is very, very difficult.

If it was any other game, Nero would probably have to wait for a "special" meter to charge to full before he can perform a Buster.
Or he can only perform a Buster when the game tells him (via QTE).

In DMC4, we can see that he can do it anytime he wants. There's a button for it mapped on the controller, as opposed to a specialized command that has nothing to do with the default scheme popping up on-screen.

However, the developers managed to balance it with a lot of natural factors like, if you're in the middle of a Buster, another enemy can attack you.
Or other things such as enemies instinctively dodging the Buster or counterattacking.
As the enemies become stronger, the conditions become strict but Nero can still use the Buster to parry, counter or just interrupt the boss in a way.

The same with Dante and his own signature moves, like how Real Impact is slow but powerful or how Kick-13 has multiple hits but has short range.

FireMage7777 posted...
Exactly. Take for example Asura's Wrath. Massive doesn't even comprehend the scale some things are in it, couldn't have been done without making a brand new engine...or QTE's

In other words, you're just giving up and resorting to QTE like the other lazy developers.

If you think hard enough, there are probably ways of turning any situation into physical, manual gameplay.

Otherwise, if some situation are beyond gameplay, just keep that s*** in watch-only cutscenes.
No need to interact with every goddamn thing.
---
There is no such thing as a "Quick Time Event done right".
A game that has Quick Time Events is a "video game done wrong".
#94mmSNAKEPosted 12/1/2012 1:50:46 AM
[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]
#95FireMage7777Posted 12/1/2012 1:50:54 AM
Again...immersion. Really that's all I need to say. You fail to understand that so *shrugs*
---
Still waiting for that comeback Sickle
#96mmSNAKEPosted 12/1/2012 1:54:42 AM(edited)
They didn't create the games' respective engines from scratch and yet they put some effort to not stoop to QTE and keep things manual as much as possible.

How does that disprove that QTEs work in certain games? It doesn't.

They didn't put QTEs because they don't fit with the gameplay. It would feel completely disjointed. There are games as I said that have QTEs that work. The Walking Dead is the most recent example.
---
Beatings will continue until morale improves!
#97GoldsicklePosted 12/1/2012 2:05:58 AM
FireMage7777 posted...
Again...immersion. Really that's all I need to say. You fail to understand that so *shrugs*

Yeah, Simon Says is so immersing.

"A!"

"X!"

"B!"

WOW DIDJA SEE THAT I TOTALLY PUMMELED THAT CREATURE

No you didn't, the game did it for you.

And let's not forget games where missing a QTE doesn't change anything, like one of the Ace Combat games.

mmSNAKE posted...
How does that disprove that QTEs work in certain games?

When newer technology allows for more flexible interactivity than Simon Says, then you'll realize what I said was right.

Like I said, it's just a makeshift technology.
Because you can't apply controls for every situation, some lazy developers resort to QTE.
---
There is no such thing as a "Quick Time Event done right".
A game that has Quick Time Events is a "video game done wrong".
#98mmSNAKEPosted 12/1/2012 2:12:46 AM
When newer technology allows for more flexible interactivity than Simon Says, then you'll realize what I said was right.

Give examples. How does it not work in that case for a game like The Walking Dead.

All your points don't hold any ground. You ignored the examples I gave you and just keep saying the same thing. That isn't the way you prove your point.
---
Beatings will continue until morale improves!
#99FireMage7777Posted 12/1/2012 2:13:25 AM
Goldsickle posted...
FireMage7777 posted...
Again...immersion. Really that's all I need to say. You fail to understand that so *shrugs*

Yeah, Simon Says is so immersing.

"A!"

"X!"

"B!"

WOW DIDJA SEE THAT I TOTALLY PUMMELED THAT CREATURE

No you didn't, the game did it for you.

And let's not forget games where missing a QTE doesn't change anything, like one of the Ace Combat games.

mmSNAKE posted...
How does that disprove that QTEs work in certain games?

When newer technology allows for more flexible interactivity than Simon Says, then you'll realize what I said was right.

Like I said, it's just a makeshift technology.
Because you can't apply controls for every situation, some lazy developers resort to QTE.


Except you're not right...yes it IS a makeshift technology...and your point is...? It has a use, hundreds of games use them, even if you don't know it. Hell, FFVII used it for Tifa's limit break. Yes, you can't apply controls for every situation, but its more interactive than cutscenes, and isn't lazy development. You know what is lazy development? DmC
---
Still waiting for that comeback Sickle
#100GoldsicklePosted 12/1/2012 4:53:46 AM
mmSNAKE posted...
How does it not work in that case for a game like The Walking Dead.

Never played TWD. Is it full of QTE to begin or is it just full of context-sensitive actions?
People keep confusing the two, just because they both consist of button prompts popping up on-screen.

mmSNAKE posted...
All your points don't hold any ground.

Your points don't hold any ground either.

Everything you say is wrong.

I win this argument.

Seriously, do you lack the capabilities to explain?
Like why my points "don't hold any ground"?

You keep missing my point that Simon Says is not a substitute for actual gameplay.

And as I mentioned, you're all just looking at things from a player's perspective.
If you actually programmed things or worked with a programmer, you can see how QTE is nothing more than lazy program-bypassing.

If you wanna go from the "immersion" angle, then it's also stupid.
Games can't be movies.
Keep the gameplay and cutscene segments separated. No need to mix them up when current technology can only provide makeshift interactivity.

FireMage7777 posted...
It has a use,

To substitute gameplay when programmers are too lazy or incompetent to actually code things.

Hell, FFVII used it for Tifa's limit break.

You're just another of those people who don't really know what QTE is.

You call everything a QTE just because it has a button prompt.
---
There is no such thing as a "Quick Time Event done right".
A game that has Quick Time Events is a "video game done wrong".