We're having the next gen gameplay discussion again?
If we were just talking about more technologically advanced presentation, I think we'd just plainly talk about next gen presentation. So to me, the only logical definition of "next gen gameplay" must be a new gameplay paradigm or genre that was technologically impossible on previous hardware. Seems to me we've had fairly diminishing returns since the end of 6th gen as far as that's concerned.
Well, unless you own a Nintendo system, in which case most of us probably start to say "how could anyone call the Wii and WiiU next gen," and suddenly the reality that the shiny new graphics had more to do with our perceptions than we wanted to admit hits.
So yeah, this game mechanically probably could have existed two gens ago. It just wouldn't look anywhere near as good, probably couldn't have played as smoothly, or have a world anywhere near as large or detailed. And there's absolutely nothing wrong with being evolutionary instead of revolutionary, but let's not pretend an open world action game still deserves to be thought of as ambitiously novel from a technical standpoint.
That is such an odd thing to think about to me, if I'm enjoying a game, in it's current state, graphics, sound, gameplay, then entire package...why would I wonder if it could be done on an older system I owned if I take out something as important as visuals and animations?
There's no such thing as "next gen gameplay" just drop that crap. Visuals are a huge part of buying new hardware and count in any argument comparing past consoles. Why upgrade your pc/console if no one cared about visuals. Just a silly argument.
What's the rule on the expert playthough trophy? Do I need to start a new game on expert or can I switch at some point. I've put two hours into my second playthrough and don't really want to start over because of that trophy.
That is such an odd thing to think about to me, if I'm enjoying a game, in it's current state, graphics, sound, gameplay, then entire package...why would I wonder if it could be done on an older system I owned if I take out something as important as visuals and animations?
I have no clue why it's become a thing all of a sudden in this thread. I know SS in it's current state would make the PS3 explode, so it's ridiculous to even think about it. And it's not a matter of slightly reducing the graphics; you would have to make the game damn near unrecognizable to get it to run. It's silly.
Well you could expore in that game. Not on the same scale, but to be honest, once you get over the shiny graphics of Seattle, it's a pretty boring setting gameplay wise. Doesn't touch worlds like RDR or GTAV.
I have no clue why it's become a thing all of a sudden in this thread. I know SS in it's current state would make the PS3 explode, so it's ridiculous to even think about it. And it's not a matter of slightly reducing the graphics; you would have to make the game damn near unrecognizable to get it to run. It's silly.
At the end of the day, silly or not, there was a large downgrade in the scope of side missions and the length of the story. I appreciate the graphics but I would have rather had a better game and story than a prettier face.
I'm glad Sessler-itis is catching on.
How dare a game in the first 6 months of a new console just be **gasp** fun and pretty?!
Damn it all!
/s
Seriously, why does EVERY game need to "change the game," as it were? It's a ridiculous complaint of games by people that want to find something wrong with a game (for whatever reason), but can't come up with anything legitimate.
Not every game, or even half of them, are going to be as revolutionary as Super Mario 64, and not every new generation of consoles will bring a plethora of new ways to play. Sometimes a game is just a damn fine, old-school game; and that's OKAY.
At the end of the day, silly or not, there was a large downgrade in the scope of side missions and the length of the story. I appreciate the graphics but I would have rather had a better game and story than a prettier face.
I really don't think there's a huge downgrade in terms of story length. I2 could be beaten in about the same amount of time. Second Son has fewer missions but most of them are much longer than the ones in I2. Side content is no contest, of course.
At the end of the day, silly or not, there was a large downgrade in the scope of side missions and the length of the story. I appreciate the graphics but I would have rather had a better game and story than a prettier face.
I really don't think there's a huge downgrade in terms of story length. I2 could be beaten in about the same amount of time. Second Son has fewer missions but most of them are much longer than the ones in I2. Side content is no contest, of course.
This. The side content was a bit lacking in variety but the main story plus side stuff took me about as long as the previous games. Just because the number of main missions is lower doesn't mean it's significantly shorter.
I really don't think there's a huge downgrade in terms of story length. I2 could be beaten in about the same amount of time. Second Son has fewer missions but most of them are much longer than the ones in I2. Side content is no contest, of course.
My first time through any infamous game is always my 100% run and I recall I2 being about 15 hours while SS was about 10 hours. The only other thing that would lend to this discrepency is that I2 was the slightly harder game but I doubt that accounted for a 5 hour difference. The missions in SS are not super long affairs but I will say that they are longer than your standard mission in I2 but less than half in this scenario is a pretty big cutback IMO.
Platinumed it. Great game, lots of fun. Story was weak. Good was okay but Evil was half-assed. You could tell which side was supposed to be canon. I had fun. Gorgeous game.
I picked this up on release day but have been distracted by FFX/X-2 Remaster so I haven't worked my way through it all quite yet. Initially I was happy with the setting and getting back into the inFamous game style, plus the graphics are great and I really like the characters. However, the side-missions are easily some of the worst in the series and are absolute filler (tagging? really...). The world is so disjointed, souless and boring - I get no sense that this is a city on lock-down, under military rule and that these escaped Conduits are something of a serious threat.
The powers seem to actually take away any sense of accomplishment in traversal, so this doesn't feel like a platformer at all. When I think back to scaling the tower in inFamous - I am left disappointed in what this game brings to the table. Additionally, while the combat was initially engaging, as of the point I am at now, each engagement feels pretty much the same and the enemies that just lock on to you and shoot away regardless of your mobility (and the ones how just take tonnes of damage) are tedious and boring. I know that when you make someone super powerful you run into issues with how to make enemies threatening however, if your powers were typically more than a dodge, grenade, melee, rifle and rocket launcher then perhpas enemy design could have been a bit more evocative. Unlikely given how brain dead the enemies are...
The powers don't really seem to have alot to differentiate themselves and the inability to switch on the fly means that I am using Neon almost exlusively in order to get around the city (and then into engagements). I think I would have preferred one power explored in more depth, or that each power actually functioned in a way that reflected that power (as it is, each power just seems to do pretty much the same thing even if it makes no sense),
I have maxed out my good karma - so I imagine I am relatively near to the end of the story. I still have a few more powers to upgrade and a number of city areas to 100%, but I don't think this game is good enough to command too much more of my attention going forward. I really just don't think that SP have created something special here. Beautiful, yes, but a worthwhile entry into the genre? Not really. Maybe if they had tried a little harder at making the world cohesive and the powers meaningful (or at least logical - within the framework of superpowers that is). Many oper world games suffer from the issues present in this game, and at the end of the day, I appreciate a superhero open=world to something like GTA - however, I think that it will be very easy for another developer to surpass this entry on these new systems and the previous entries in the series are superior, even if I have to suffer Zeke.
The game is clearly lacking in scope and side missions but they completely nailed the core gameplay and that's why the game is one of the best experience I ever had. It make me think of the first uncharted where the story and structure were lacking but the core mechanics were so awesome I played through the game three times in a row in one week end.
SS is not a GTA clone, you can't find what make infamous so great in GTA V and vice versa.
This. The side content was a bit lacking in variety but the main story plus side stuff took me about as long as the previous games. Just because the number of main missions is lower doesn't mean it's significantly shorter.
This. Infamous 2 outstayed it's welcome badly towards the end of the game and SS felt no shorter than Infamous 1 to me. The only difference being I didn't spend hours running around in circles looking for blast shards in SS.
Well you could expore in that game. Not on the same scale, but to be honest, once you get over the shiny graphics of Seattle, it's a pretty boring setting gameplay wise. Doesn't touch worlds like RDR or GTAV.
It fascinates me that people talk about the bad side missions (which is true) but then use tagging as the prime example like its the unholiest of offenders. The tagging missions are the only ones that are both good and clever.
It fascinates me that people talk about the bad side missions (which is true) but then use tagging as the prime example like its the unholiest of offenders. The tagging missions are the only ones that are both good and clever.
No one asked it to be a world simulator. They gave us great gameplay but nothing interesting to do with it.
We must not be playing the same game, I play like an animal (Evil). Jumping off the tops of buildings with that slam. Flipping cars all over the place. Blowing up everything in sight. Theres some semi decent destruction in there too.
It's a riot.
Are you playing as good maybe? Having to be careful and worry about collateral damage was something I knew I wouldn't enjoy, so I went bad.
Just got the power and was coming in here to say how underwhelmed I am by it. Neon is still my favorite, but just barely. Smoke seems to have more "oomph" to it, but there's something about neon I really like. The third power just seems like it doesn't have enough to it.
"Flying" could be much cooler (and maybe it gets better towards the end of the game), but the R1 attack isn't great IMO, and the melee attack doesn't feel as powerful as its slow attack speed makes it seem.
We must not be playing the same game, I play like an animal (Evil). Jumping off the tops of buildings with that slam. Flipping cars all over the place. Blowing up everything in sight. Theres some semi decent destruction in there too.
It's a riot.
Are you playing as good maybe? Having to be careful and worry about collateral damage was something I knew I wouldn't enjoy, so I went bad.
Playing good feels severely limiting for my playstyle, but it at least means I don't have to be an insufferable dickbag. Playing as a cartoonlishly evil douchebag doesn't feel right to me.
the summoning is actually quite good if you play evil
everytime you stealth you summon 3 demons. they are great at distracting dup as well as killing the lesser dup soldiers so you can focus on the big guys.
I liked the fact that compared to smoke and neon the basic shot skill was quite damaging and even pretty destructive. I liked it way better as evil than i did playing good, loved the travel power either way. though neon on for combat is really op both good and bad.
My beef is with his AC comparison. He holds that up as some sort of next gen revelation, that couldn't be done on the PS2 apart from scaled down visuals, but when was the last time that we have had a real game changing game design, that absolutely couldn't be done on past hardware? If you want to knock SS for last gen gameplay, fine, but 99% of the games out right now fit that same bill.
I'm not holding up AC as "some kind of revalation", I was just saying that at the time it was considered by many to be a "true next-gen title". From a gameplay perspective, AC was indeed very simplistic. However, back when it first came out, there really hadn't been any other games quite like it. The setting, the free-running, the crowds and the stealth mechanics associated with them, they were all "new" and complex enough that they could not have been pulled off convincingly on PS2/Xbox.
Second Son was also considered by many to be a "true next-gen title" simply by virtue of being a PS4 exclusive, yet, in my opinion, it's nothing more than a prettier version of the previous Infamous games. It's faster, smoother and looks much better than the previous games, but that's pretty much it. If that's enough to make it "feel next-gen" for you (which is entirely subjective by the way), then more power to you, but it wasn't enough for me, and so I understand the reviews that criticise the game for not being next-gen enough.
And yeah, the last-gen gameplay thing applies to most, if not all games that have come out this gen so far, but personally I found AC4 to feel much more next-gen that SS did, despite the fact that it's a cross-gen title.
I'm coming across as a huge AC fanboy here, aren't I...
It fascinates me that people talk about the bad side missions (which is true) but then use tagging as the prime example like its the unholiest of offenders. The tagging missions are the only ones that are both good and clever.
No one asked it to be a world simulator. They gave us great gameplay but nothing interesting to do with it.
You need to upgrade it. Once you get the upgrade where
You can pull back on the analog stick while hovering to hover in place and the one where holding L2 makes you hover so you can aim and stuff without having to press x
I'm not holding up AC as "some kind of revalation", I was just saying that at the time it was considered by many to be a "true next-gen title". From a gameplay perspective, AC was indeed very simplistic. However, back when it first came out, there really hadn't been any other games quite like it. The setting, the free-running, the crowds and the stealth mechanics associated with them, they were all "new" and complex enough that they could not have been pulled off convincingly on PS2/Xbox.
Second Son was also considered by many to be a "true next-gen title" simply by virtue of being a PS4 exclusive, yet, in my opinion, it's nothing more than a prettier version of the previous Infamous games. It's faster, smoother and looks much better than the previous games, but that's pretty much it. If that's enough to make it "feel next-gen" for you (which is entirely subjective by the way), then more power to you, but it wasn't enough for me, and so I understand the reviews that criticise the game for not being next-gen enough.
And yeah, the last-gen gameplay thing applies to most, if not all games that have come out this gen so far, but personally I found AC4 to feel much more next-gen that SS did, despite the fact that it's a cross-gen title.
I'm coming across as a huge AC fanboy here, aren't I...
Soul Reaver was more metroidvania than open world.
I think next gen gameplay has to do with representing an evolution of gameplay more so than being impossible on older hardware. Gears of War gameplay was a new style that qualified as next gen even though it could have been done on older hardware. Another example is Warhawk which might have been doable on PS2 but it was definitely considered next gen gameplay at the time.
So regarding the third power, I'm on my third playthrough (I know, in obsessed), and for the first two I loved neon and nothing else. Now on my third playthrough,
video
is by far my favorite. Here is why:
it is probably the best for high altitude traversal and the most densely packed firefights. Staying airborne, swooping around and going invisible is the absolute best. the bloodthirsty blades are also way powerful. For example: I have a lot of fun hovering while shooting down helicopters with the bloodthirsty blades (you can upgrade it so holding L2 in the air keeps you hovering -- you're airborne forever, especially while using airwave) then comet drop on some enemies, go invisible, subdue a few guys, fly away and unleash a nasty video torrent.
Just got the plat tonight. It's my first plat, so that should tell you how much I enjoyed playing the game.
Combat/traversal is seriously amazing. The feeling of swooping in, taking out some guys, dashing up a building and dropping down on them never got old. Overall, I enjoyed the story as a hero better but evil combat was much more fun. I always played evil in the previous infamous games, so playing as a hero took a bit of self control but was very rewarding.
Mission wise, the game didn't vary enough playing as a hero vs. villain. Some of the missions varied a bit, but most of it was the same. The same is true of many of the cutscenes, which is why I feel like playing evil gives the perception that Delsin is much more bipolar than when he's a hero. I feel like much of the story was developed around being a hero, and the evil sections were kind of a second thought. That said, dat evil ending was f'ed up. Damn.
Overall, it's by far the best infamous game of the lot. Yes, it could've used more variety in the side missions and I would've liked to see more developed side-characters, but the main story is so focused, and the combat so well developed, that it's easy to look past those faults. I really look forward to seeing what SP can do in the future.
I'm not holding up AC as "some kind of revalation", I was just saying that at the time it was considered by many to be a "true next-gen title". From a gameplay perspective, AC was indeed very simplistic. However, back when it first came out, there really hadn't been any other games quite like it. The setting, the free-running, the crowds and the stealth mechanics associated with them, they were all "new" and complex enough that they could not have been pulled off convincingly on PS2/Xbox.
Second Son was also considered by many to be a "true next-gen title" simply by virtue of being a PS4 exclusive, yet, in my opinion, it's nothing more than a prettier version of the previous Infamous games. It's faster, smoother and looks much better than the previous games, but that's pretty much it. If that's enough to make it "feel next-gen" for you (which is entirely subjective by the way), then more power to you, but it wasn't enough for me, and so I understand the reviews that criticise the game for not being next-gen enough.
And yeah, the last-gen gameplay thing applies to most, if not all games that have come out this gen so far, but personally I found AC4 to feel much more next-gen that SS did, despite the fact that it's a cross-gen title.
I'm coming across as a huge AC fanboy here, aren't I...
Soul Reaver was more metroidvania than open world.
i don't think you will find a true next gen game this generation then if this is your standard. i can't think of a single game that can't be done on PS3 and Xbox 360 if you sacrifice the graphics.
but to say that AC can't be done on Xbox or PS2 ? why not ? sacrifice the graphics and you have a winner. GTA Vice city is an open world as AC. isn't that your standards ?
Next generation to most means better sound, better graphics, better lighting, texture etc.
you keep mentioning AC. AC was an innovation. that was done on PS360. thats all to it. nothing to do with " can't be done on X system"
I'm about 3 hours in and with the second power. Maybe it's because I've played Prey and know better what to expect from these games, but I'm okay with the lack of GTA style sandbox gameplay. It's pretty good so far, and being so heavily narrative driven helps a lot. The lighting, smoke etc effects really lift the graphics to nextgen awesomeness.
Are the faked reflections in the puddles annoying any of you as much as they're annoying me?
I've noticed that the water reflections in areas with a major landmark seem to reflect the actual buildings nearby, but if you're on a rooftop or on a sidestreet, the puddles reflect some ugly, generic reflection map. At one point I was on a rooftop, and the puddle was reflecting a streetlight. There's also some bright red sign that keeps showing up over and over again, as well as some jaggy looking pine tree.
I just got the Platinum earlier today, and here's how I rate the powers based on how I played.
Good:
Neon (Dat time slow) > Video > Smoke
Evil:
Video > Smoke > Neon
Video was completely out of the blue and instantly became my favorite power. I think it's much better as a villain power though, because of the summoned demons and upgraded R2. Smoke is also so much better as a villain. It has much more power with it's charge R2, as well as you not needing to care about civilian casualties. Neon is really great as a hero though with it's amazing time slow abilities.
It fascinates me that people talk about the bad side missions (which is true) but then use tagging as the prime example like its the unholiest of offenders. The tagging missions are the only ones that are both good and clever.
.
yeah tagging is really clever use of ds4. its fun and all but still a gimmick wouldn't call that a side mission. and this game definitely lacks in side-mission department.
I think next gen gameplay has to do with representing an evolution of gameplay more so than being impossible on older hardware. Gears of War gameplay was a new style that qualified as next gen even though it could have been done on older hardware. Another example is Warhawk which might have been doable on PS2 but it was definitely considered next gen gameplay at the time.
i don't think you will find a true next gen game this generation then if this is your standard. i can't think of a single game that can't be done on PS3 and Xbox 360 if you sacrifice the graphics.
but to say that AC can't be done on Xbox or PS2 ? why not ? sacrifice the graphics and you have a winner. GTA Vice city is an open world as AC. isn't that your standards ?
Next generation to most means better sound, better graphics, better lighting, texture etc.
you keep mentioning AC. AC was an innovation. that was done on PS360. thats all to it. nothing to do with " can't be done on X system"
Yes, maybe my standards are too high or I've become too jaded after over 20 years of gaming. I'm not about to give up hope just yet, though. Witcher 3 looks like it could be the first truly next-gen game for me.
And yes, Vice City does fit my standards, or rather GTA3 does; they were some of the first games that "felt next-gen" in the PS2/Xbox era.
I just got the Platinum earlier today, and here's how I rate the powers based on how I played.
Good:
Neon (Dat time slow) > Video > Smoke
Evil:
Video > Smoke > Neon
Video was completely out of the blue and instantly became my favorite power. I think it's much better as a villain power though, because of the summoned demons and upgraded R2. Smoke is also so much better as a villain. It has much more power with it's charge R2, as well as you not needing to care about civilian casualties. Neon is really great as a hero though with it's amazing time slow abilities.
Because ut's not really unfinished at all if you're using it fully upgraded. It's actually one of the better powers in the game and it's disappointing they didn't allow us access to it sooner.
