Support NeoGAF

[plagiarize]

Hm, judging just from the demo race I can't see the difference. Like I said, I scored first place with times between 3:15 and 3:50.

the issue isn't the sort of times you can score first place with, the issue is how much of the race is relevant. i haven't done much testing, but the problem motorstorm had, was that a crash early on was okay, but a crash later on was devastating.

if you run a perfect race, and crash once, which lap you crash on shouldn't make any difference on your placing. the problem isn't 'is there rubber banding' so much as 'does the rubber banding make everything but the last lap of the race irrelevant?'

if it's better to hang back and build boost to charge into the finish at the end, rather than to try and stay out in front, then you've probably got issues too.

 

[jett]

Hm, judging just from the demo race I can't see the difference. Like I said, I scored first place with times between 3:15 and 3:50.

Evolution Studios doesn't care about A.I. programmers.

 

[Dibbz]

It's an arcade racer and the AI is intentionally made so that they stay close with you. I understand how some people can be frustrated by it but it never bothered me that much in the last 2 games.

BTW for those who don't have the demo yet I recorded a race (all off screen).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WNz47cycV8

 

[Ranger X]

I don't know if it's because you're on tarmak most of the time in the videos but the controls looks less slidy. I might actually love this game!
(easier + shorter + possible better controls? = sold x10)

 

[SLEEPS7ALK3R]

I don't know if it's because you're on tarmak most of the time in the videos but the controls looks less slidy. I might actually love this game!
(easier + shorter + possible better controls? = sold x10)

It is much tighter than the previous games, in that you don't have to constantly compensate for the sliding with the boost.

The game feels different in a bunch of ways, mainly when it comes to boosting. It actually feels more balanced (i.e. shorter bursts, bigger boost, shorter cooldown)

 

[Thrakier]

the issue isn't the sort of times you can score first place with, the issue is how much of the race is relevant. i haven't done much testing, but the problem motorstorm had, was that a crash early on was okay, but a crash later on was devastating.

if you run a perfect race, and crash once, which lap you crash on shouldn't make any difference on your placing. the problem isn't 'is there rubber banding' so much as 'does the rubber banding make everything but the last lap of the race irrelevant?'

if it's better to hang back and build boost to charge into the finish at the end, rather than to try and stay out in front, then you've probably got issues too.

Hm, I'm sure I crashed in the last round and near to the end as well and still managed to win, so...but yeah, it's basically the last corner which is relevant. They always came close to me again in the last corner, no matter how fast I was before.

MS1 was horrible, especally the DLC. Do you remember the buggy race vs. this "devil" buggy? That was a joke. ;D

PR was fine most of the time, I think. I think I always won when I was really fast and I even was 2 or 3 seconds ahead sometimes.

The demo of apocalypse feels closer to MS1 than to PR in regards to the rubberbanding.

 

[DeadRockstar]

I don't think they've chosen the best track to show off the game. It feels pretty tame to be honest. If I'm going to be stuck in a city, it needs to be insane and awesome and I don't think the track we got was.

As for how the racing feels. I'll agree it feels more directed, but I don't think the weight is much different to PR.

Not sure where I stand on a purchase after playing the demo. I'm assuming the other tracks will be better, but based on what I played I'm not hyped or anything like I was before.

 

[SLEEPS7ALK3R]

It's an arcade racer and the AI is intentionally made so that they stay close with you. I understand how some people can be frustrated by it but it never bothered me that much in the last 2 games.

BTW for those who don't have the demo yet I recorded a race (all off screen).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WNz47cycV8

Nice.

Coming out of the first tunnel and landing to the right side without falling off the edge on the left is always tricky with the AI slamming you.

 

[benny_a]

I've played about 8 races now. I like the supercar much better than the bike.
Conceptually I'm not a big fan of rubberbanding, but to be perfectly honest in PR I didn't like how the cars were far away from each other due to the different and wide routes.

I don't know why that was my experience if the rubberbanding in PR was supposedly worse but I felt less surrounded by enemies in that game.

Of course one has to see how the other levels turn out, but based on the low amount of alternate routes and length of those I'm quite happy with how you see enemies all the time.

 

[Dibbz]

Nice.

Coming out of the first tunnel and landing to the right side without falling off the edge on the left is always tricky with the AI slamming you.

I did end up sliding and knocking a guy off a bike lol.

The damage modeling on cars now is insane. Check it out at this bit when the car jumps on my back and crushes is.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WNz47cycV8#t=30s

 

[jett]

It's an arcade racer and the AI is intentionally made so that they stay close with you. I understand how some people can be frustrated by it but it never bothered me that much in the last 2 games.

BTW for those who don't have the demo yet I recorded a race (all off screen).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WNz47cycV8

The two best arcade racers this generation, Burnout Paradise and Wipeout HD, don't have rubberbanding.

 

[SLEEPS7ALK3R]

the issue isn't the sort of times you can score first place with, the issue is how much of the race is relevant. i haven't done much testing, but the problem motorstorm had, was that a crash early on was okay, but a crash later on was devastating.

if you run a perfect race, and crash once, which lap you crash on shouldn't make any difference on your placing. the problem isn't 'is there rubber banding' so much as 'does the rubber banding make everything but the last lap of the race irrelevant?'

if it's better to hang back and build boost to charge into the finish at the end, rather than to try and stay out in front, then you've probably got issues too.

I don't understand how that is a problem. It makes sense if you crash early on for you to have a good chance to recover. You're not supposed to fuck up in the last stretch anyway, and it is IMO a good thing for the game to penalize you if you do. Where's the challenge if it didn't?

 

[Discotheque]

The two best arcade racers this generation, Burnout Paradise and Wipeout HD, don't have rubberbanding.

Speaking of which where the fuck is our full retail Wipeout title for PS3? (HD could be classified as such too though, it was packed)

 

[Thrakier]

The two best arcade racers this generation, Burnout Paradise and Wipeout HD, don't have rubberbanding.

TBH, I don't care about the racing in Paradise at all. The whole game is a mess imo compared to Burnout 1+2.

Wipeout HD is a brillant game, but it also has quite a different style from MS. It's about clean and fast racing without touching anything, MS is like the opposite. Also in WHD you have a integrated rubberband because of the weapons.

 

[Blimblim]

Hm, judging just from the demo race I can't see the difference. Like I said, I scored first place with times between 3:15 and 3:50.

Well I'd say the rubberbanding is more there to make sure that you have a fair challenge whatever your piloting skills than to overtake you even if you are doing a perfect lap.

 

[SLEEPS7ALK3R]

The two best arcade racers this generation, Burnout Paradise and Wipeout HD, don't have rubberbanding.

The reason I never played Burnout to completion was because of this. Fuckboring races where you take a sightseeing tour around the city and the AI begins driving at 2MPH to let you win.

But that's not what made Burnout great. It was the aggregate of the features: the crashing, the online structure, the selection of race types (with the exception of actual races), and ofcourse the open world.

 

[PjotrStroganov]

The two best arcade racers this generation, Burnout Paradise and Wipeout HD, don't have rubberbanding.

It does. But in reverse.

After the start of a race it's impossible to get into the lead. AI in the front gets an artificial boost to get a head start and you have to close that gap before the finish.

 

[Torgo]

I played the final game last week quite a bit and I loved it. I grabbed the EU demo last night, and I'm pretty sure that it's an old build honestly (it's still really good though.) I grabbed a video of a full race last night, so I'll try to post it to Youtube tonight after I get the show edited.

 

[GrayFoxPL]

Holy shit at all the rubberbanding bitching.

98% of arcade racers had rubberbanding. Sega Rally and Ridge Racer would bomb so hard instead of becoming cult classics if we had the audience like that back day. Those games had no AI.

 

[Appollowexx]

Never had an issue with rubber banding in MS1. Once I became good at the game it was a non issue. As long as you practice and learn the tracks you kick ass whether the AI has cheat mode enabled or not.

 

[jett]

Finally got to download it.

It is NOT running in 1920x1080, it's upscaling from a lower resolution. Now to play it. Graphics, I have to say, are disappointing. What was that TTP about 3D development not affecting 2D?

It's kind of a lazy pseudo-1080p mode frankly, all the HUD and menu assets seem to have been made for 720p or something. There's a seriously blurry look to everything, but I'm no pixel counter but it might be using QAA.

 

[plagiarize]

I don't understand how that is a problem. It makes sense if you crash early on for you to have a good chance to recover. You're not supposed to fuck up in the last stretch anyway, and it is IMO a good thing for the game to penalize you if you do. Where's the challenge if it didn't?

i just think rubber banding should become less notable as the race goes on personally. that would keep the pack near to you for most of the race, but let you rely on your skills alone on the last lap (say).

if a perfect race is 6:00 and a crash costs me ten seconds, my time is going to be 6:10 seconds. now whether i crash at the very beginning or the very end it shouldn't make a difference really. i was equally fast, so why does one place me in first and the other place me in eighth?

i enjoyed motorstorm even with its rubber banding. i'll enjoy this one too, but i fully understand the complaint. it just seems artificially harsh that the game doesn't ever let you build up a big lead and punishes you so much for crashing.

rubber banding to keep it fun is one thing, but when it makes the game more difficult, i think it's arguably an artificial difficulty.

i think letting the player build up a lead over the pack of about 'one crash worth' before kicking in the rubber banding would be a fair way of handling it.

 

[Net_Wrecker]

TBH, I don't care about the racing in Paradise at all. The whole game is a mess imo compared to Burnout 1+2.

Wipeout HD is a brillant game, but it also has quite a different style from MS. It's about clean and fast racing without touching anything, MS is like the opposite. Also in WHD you have a integrated rubberband because of the weapons.

Thank God someone said it. Rubberbanding is OK in games like this because blowing out the AI leads to a boring ass race. Trading paint and having a crowded grid is one of the most exciting parts of any racing game IMO. The problem is extreme rubberbanding which can lead to frustration when you lose a race over one tiny mistake and the whole pack passes you.

And yeah, there were races in Burnout Paradise? I actively tried to avoid them for as long as possible in that game.

 

[NullPointer]

Rubberbanding is OK in games like this because blowing out the AI leads to a boring ass race.

True. Nothing has managed to compare to the feeling you get in the first Motorstorm, watching from the hood view as the race starts and the entire pack of vehicles in all shapes and sizes roar and accelerate like mad and kick mud in the air.

You actually feel like you're in the middle of a mechanical stampede - and the rubber banding tries to keep that stampede going.

 

[benny_a]

if a perfect race is 6:00 and a crash costs me ten seconds, my time is going to be 6:10 seconds. now whether i crash at the very beginning or the very end it shouldn't make a difference really. i was equally fast, so why does one place me in first and the other place me in eighth?

True. But we're not talking about perfect races or time trial here. This is motorstorm with lots of variables. So if the choice if to crash early and lose position or later it's preferred to be early because so you'll have statistically more time to get back in the front due to the randomness.

 

[Net_Wrecker]

True. Nothing has managed to compare to the feeling you get in the first Motorstorm, watching from the hood view as the race starts and the entire pack of vehicles in all shapes and sizes roar and accelerate like mad and kick mud in the air.

You actually feel like you're in the middle of a mechanical stampede - and the rubber banding tries to keep that stampede going.

That crowded starting line madness is one of my favorite things in racing games, period. I don't know if you've played BLUR (I only played the online multiplayer demo honestly), but that game had some fantastic 20 player bumper to bumper starting line moments. The first turns in that beta were complete INSANITY.

If Motorstorm Apocalypse can achieve that without being cheap, I welcome it wholeheartedly.

 

[Greg]

I thought the demo was awful.

The setting/events throughout the race did nothing for me, the sense of speed remains lacking, and the graphics are a step down from what I expected.

 

[dralla]

I don't know if it's just the vehicle class or the way the game is now, but the cars have no weight. I basically hold accelerate the whole race, the finesse is gone. It's less about controlling your car and more about the crazy shit that's going on around you. And it's not really that crazy, just some big explosions going off.

 

[jett]

I thought the demo was awful.

The setting/events throughout the race did nothing for me, the sense of speed remains lacking, and the graphics are a step down from what I expected.

It just looks incredibly bland to me. First game had a unique aesthetic to it, which was lost in MS2 and this one just looks even worse. Split Second is much more interesting visually. It also did the whole destruction thing better.

 

[Loudninja]

It just looks incredibly bland to me. First game had a unique aesthetic to it, which was lost in MS2 and this one just looks even worse. Split Second is much more interesting visually. It also did the whole destruction thing better.

You really think that's the full effect of the destruction are you kidding me?

 

[jett]

You really think that's the full effect of the destruction are you kidding me?

I can only judge by what I've seen. I judge by this demo and all the videos and trailers I've looked at.

 

[Totobeni]

It's an arcade racer and the AI is intentionally made so that they stay close with you. I understand how some people can be frustrated by it but it never bothered me that much in the last 2 games.

BTW for those who don't have the demo yet I recorded a race (all off screen).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WNz47cycV8

Rubberbanding is OK in games like this because blowing out the AI leads to a boring ass race.

Again,it's not about "arcadey" style, Rubberband AI is pure bullshit, it's like giving the AI invincibility in fighting games Like VF or MK just to match your skills, or stop your gun for few mins in Contra just because you are way too good for the shitty AI.

It's just lazy programming, simple and clean, Arcadey or not, This Rubberband AI method don't reward your driving skills, in a freaking racing game, I like MotorStorm but This is unacceptable and I will not buy the game because of this and because the developers ignored all the complaints.

 

[Madman]

It just looks incredibly bland to me. First game had a unique aesthetic to it, which was lost in MS2 and this one just looks even worse. Split Second is much more interesting visually. It also did the whole destruction thing better.

By unique aesthetic you must mean everything being a shade of brown, because graphically MS2 easily looks better than 1 both technically and art wise.

 

[~Devil Trigger~]

Not the best demo, i can sense the Motorstorm in there but.... i dunno

-The destruction/mid-race route changes did nothing for me really.

-The people on the road throwing stuff n gettin hit also not need, i find it really cheap addition to the series "Ooh look U can hit random Peoplez, iz nt it Fun", and its really not fun.

-Have'nt played the beta obviously but i can see this game heavily favoring Race cars and bikes, still think there's not enough variety on the road surfaces.


I still might buy this but, im leaning more on rent now...

 

[jett]

There's something weird with the sound design, everything sounds "wrong" in my headphones.

By unique aesthetic you must mean everything being a shade of brown, because graphically MS2 easily looks better than 1 both technically and art wise.

Well I never played much of MS2 only the several demos they released, but I still like MS1's visuals better. Yes everything's brown , but I love the lighting in that game and the mud effects are excellent. In contrast stuff just looks "flat" in the sequels.

 

[plagiarize]

I thought the demo was awful.

The setting/events throughout the race did nothing for me, the sense of speed remains lacking, and the graphics are a step down from what I expected.

these comments about the sense of speed have me shaking my head, but then i remember not everyone is playing this in 3D.

 

[SLEEPS7ALK3R]

i just think rubber banding should become less notable as the race goes on personally. that would keep the pack near to you for most of the race, but let you rely on your skills alone on the last lap (say).

if a perfect race is 6:00 and a crash costs me ten seconds, my time is going to be 6:10 seconds. now whether i crash at the very beginning or the very end it shouldn't make a difference really. i was equally fast, so why does one place me in first and the other place me in eighth?

i enjoyed motorstorm even with its rubber banding. i'll enjoy this one too, but i fully understand the complaint. it just seems artificially harsh that the game doesn't ever let you build up a big lead and punishes you so much for crashing.

rubber banding to keep it fun is one thing, but when it makes the game more difficult, i think it's arguably an artificial difficulty.

i think letting the player build up a lead over the pack of about 'one crash worth' before kicking in the rubber banding would be a fair way of handling it.

I see. At times it feels like the game "scales" the AI in accordance to how well I perform. I understand how that may seem cheap and infuriating, but personally, it doesn't put me off from the game completely.

 

[SLEEPS7ALK3R]

It just looks incredibly bland to me. First game had a unique aesthetic to it, which was lost in MS2 and this one just looks even worse. Split Second is much more interesting visually. It also did the whole destruction thing better.

I fail to see what Split/Second does "better" in the destruction. Enlighten me, please.

Again,it's not about "arcadey" style, Rubberband AI is pure bullshit, it's like giving the AI invincibility in fighting games Like VF or MK just to match your skills, or stop your gun for few mins in Contra just because you are way too good for the shitty AI.

It's just lazy programming, simple and clean, Arcadey or not, This Rubberband AI method don't reward your driving skills, in a freaking racing game, I like MotorStorm but This is unacceptable and I will not buy the game because of this and because the developers ignored all the complaints.

Damn. I'll see if I can upload some videos so you guys can pick apart all this rubber-banding nonsense.

 

[~Devil Trigger~]

There's something weird with the sound design, everything sounds "wrong" in my headphones.



Well I never played much of MS2 only the several demos they released, but I still like MS1's visuals better. Yes everything's brown , but I love the lighting in that game and the mud effects are excellent. In contrast stuff just looks "flat" in the sequels.

PR had better mud effects, hell PR had better everything, but MS1 had better motion blur.

More importantly, PR had better variety, visually and gameplaywise

 

[Thrakier]

Well I never played much of MS2 only the several demos they released, but I still like MS1's visuals better. Yes everything's brown , but I love the lighting in that game and the mud effects are excellent. In contrast stuff just looks "flat" in the sequels.

Then you know nothing. Some of those PR tracks look outstanding, even though I like the look of MS1 as well. How someone can critisise the lack of speed (use hood view!) is beyond me. I think it's quite fast. It's also not a full throttle game at all.

 

[Madman]

Well I never played much of MS2 only the several demos they released, but I still like MS1's visuals better. Yes everything's brown , but I love the lighting in that game and the mud effects are excellent. In contrast stuff just looks "flat" in the sequels.

I'll agree that MS1 looked excellent, and pretty much holds up to this day.

However, after extensive time with both games (all golds in MS1, near all golds in MS2) there is no doubt 2 was a great improvement over 1 in just about every way possible. The graphics in the demos are surprisingly flat, but the full game looks incredible and performs better than 1.

 

[plagiarize]

I fail to see what Split/Second does "better" in the destruction. Enlighten me, please.



Damn. I'll see if I can upload some videos so you guys can pick apart all this rubber-banding nonsense.

i played it a few times last night after the PSN maintenance, and when i swung by the house for lunch i also had a quick game. i don't think the rubber banding is ruining the game, i just understand the complaints. i mean, i think it's a valid complaint, it just isn't an issue that bothers me personally.

at least not based on a handful of goes on the demo.

 

[-Amon-]

Well I never played much of MS2 only the several demos they released, but I still like MS1's visuals better.

You should have played MS2 in full before making comparisons

 

[MMaRsu]

Will I finally be able to select what songs I wanna hear?

That that I'll buy it cause of rubberband AI. Retarded developers :\.

 

[Ranger X]

Woaa wait, there's a demo? PSN+ ??

 

[Thrakier]

Just replayed MS1 and MS2 for comparison. MS3 holds up pretty well in regards of everything. It's fast, the tension and immersion are high. Especially MS1 is slow and almost boring in comparison. Physics are also better now. Can't wait for retail release. Sometimes you just need to refresh your memory a bit.

 

[newjeruse]

Woaa wait, there's a demo? PSN+ ??

Yurup.

 

[lowrider007]

wow @ the rubberbanding hate, I personally love it, it helps keep you in the action at all times otherwise you end up just leading the pack to easily and gets boring.

Anyway I enjoyed the demo, though tbh I didn't think much of the destruction, maybe that gets better in other tracks but the actual racing was fun and personally I thought the sense of speed was pretty good.

 

[StuBurns]

Woaa wait, there's a demo? PSN+ ??

It's not PSN+, it's on the UK store, don't know about elsewhere in Europe.

 

[Ranger X]

Oh snap, gotta grab this!!