@Vynce You did read the polygon link right? I mean unless you’re not a fan of the Uncharted games there is no reason not to be hyped for a Visceral made Star Wars.
@Sonichuman right after I repost the rumor BAM! you post the gaf leak confirming it.
Wait…so did Amy Hennig lie to Polygon? I’m really confused, Visceral Games isn’t big enough to develop a BF and SW game simultaneously right?
I highly doubt Amy Hennig would go on record and lie to a big media outlet like Polygon…does anyone have any thoughts? The BF: Hardline reveal is super confusing.
Because these niggas (Microsoft and Sony) promised a bunch of shit they couldn’t deliver on. They were talking like we were going to see a jump like from the NES to the Super NES, and what we have so far has been more akin to popping a 32X into a Genesis*(albeit with shittier frame rates and graphical fidelity)*…
Stop giving these companies passes for this shit, and they’ll stop doing it.
I’m waiting on confirmation of an actual lie before I go all Po Pimpus on her ass.
Chances are she didn’t lie, and was hired to work on a SW game and then the hire ups canned the project. That’s not her fault. I dunno man, you seem so intent on trying to prove something about other people as of late that your beginning to be as dumb as the people you keep trying to rally against. Just stop giving a fuck man.
-Says he doesn’t care much about story.
-Was able to tell me a lot of story related and character related things about Ike from Fire Emblem, to argue why he is not another generic anime swordsman.
Beta, my dear boy, I said story is the LAST thing I care about, not that I don’t care at all.
Seriously, the overemphasis on non-RPG story elements is part of what’s fucking everything up. Niggas are plotting the script before they even know what kind of game they want to make, or how it should play…
It’s just how some people work Po. I have a lot more of the story and world stuff for my game planned out at the moment then I do a lot of game mechanics and enemies because those characters are also enemies or other characters and help influence the gameplay of the game. It’s easier for me to build a boss and have that boss be memorable if I know what kind of person the boss is. Their personality could help influence if they are a rush down boss, or a wait and see type, or a reactionary boss. The history that springs up around the character can help influence the type of fight they are going to be.
Like the other night while developing a character I got the idea that they would be a hunter, one who pursues their target, and from that got the idea it would be someone that you could run into multiple times during the game, maybe even randomly to drive home the danger of the character. That they are smart and wont pounce on you predictably each time you play the game but will be a random wandering element. While developing this character it lead to developing a faction that directed me to another character who would be a guard character a tank-ish boss that you need to over come that perhaps guards the entrance to this factions HQ.
I dunno man, by developing the world and characters and their personalities, game play ideas spring to mind and flesh out from there and I feel I can deliver a more rewarding experience if the way the characters move and fight springs from the personalities they already have. It’s much harder for me to go "This character is aggressive and have moves A. B. and C. and then try to force a worth while character into that archetype.
That’s just how I work. World, characters, and narrative are just as important to me as gameplay and can have the power to create a longer lasting playability then just “Here’s game and mechanics with a ham fisted wrapping we forced in, enjoy.”
I think this is why Dark Souls 2 is less compelling to me then Dark Souls 1, the world is really plain and boring, and the characters didn’t spring from the world organically but where forced in. The game came first and everything else was just made to go around the game instead of two elements being treated as equals. Neither part is more important then the other.