I'm exactly sure if this a RPG, but Valkyria Chronicles is certainly worth looking into. I'd also recommend Demon Souls. But I must warn you that it is a incredibly difficult video game. It's learning curve is so staggeringly steep, it would be nearly impossible to master it's combat in a single day. It's highly rewarding though, it stands as a testament from all of the spoon feeding games that have spoiled us throughout the years.
" The problem with the COD games in general, is that they're TOO scripted. Scripted to the point where progressing through the game feels like channel surfing, than entering a real breathing chaotic battlefield. The lack of any real artificial intelligence diminishes the challenge factor, meaning there's virtually no effort into tactics or skill. You either hide into cover to wait for your health to regenerate, and pray that the "A.I." doesn't randomly chuck a grenade into your position. Compared this to say, Halo. Where the game is smoothly scripted and there were dynamic A.I., to the point where I could challenge the A.I. based on cunning skill and tactics. Especially on the higher difficulties, where the games becomes more challenging, but not cheap like in the Call of Duty series. Same goes for Crysis, but that game is naturally a sandbox shooter. "
I played Reach on hard and MW2 on normal and the difficulty wasn't that different. I didn't notice a big difference in AI. "
I'm not sure if you actually played both games, because the difference in the A.I. in both games are appearent. The Elites move run sideways to avoid fire and quickly take cover for protection. In Modern Warfare 2, the enemies either stop in a open spot to shoot you or arbitrarily run for cover while I have my gun pointed at them. Not to mention Elites move from one cover to another, while the enemies in Modern Warfare 2 simply stay in one position. "
When enemy types and species are completely different it's hard to tell a difference when in Halo you pump 5 guns worth of ammo into someone and MW2's 1 bullet one kill. 2 completely different games with unnecessary hate from a silent majority. "
I don't hate the Call of Duty series. I may dislike Modern Warfare 2, but there's not a single game in the series that I despise. I actually really liked the first Call of Duty, Call of Duty 2, Call of Duty 3, Call of Duty 4, and Call of Duty: World at War. As scripted they may be, no game series have successfully capture the true frenetic pace of a real war like Infinity War does. As each game conducts memorable moments that the players can enjoy on their first play-through, and comeback again later on to re-enjoy that moment.
While you combat different enemy types in each games, Call of Duty always stands out as an example of scripted "Artificial Intelligence". Where they repeat the exact same combat patterns, who no real use of tactics. Compared to let's say, the Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter series and Crysis's Korean soldiers. They actually dynamically react in battle situations, without constantly repeating the same combat actions. They have their quirks, but it's expected from a game that actually uses non-pre-scripted A.I. like the Call of Duty series.
I actually wouldn't mind Call of Duty offering scripted A.I., if they have taken out re-spawning enemies that constantly and mindlessly charge at you most of the time.
Hearing that it isn't being developed by Monolith Studios, I've completely lost interested in this game. I doubt that Day 1 studios is capable of bringing the same palpable psychological atmosphere and the tactical combat from original F.E.A.R. that made it so good. It looks like F.E.A.R. 2 with co-op, and it's still using a rather outdated graphics engine. Even if John Carpenter is directing the horror elements of the game, I also doubt his talents would successfully translate well into a video game. Not to mention, Day 1 Studios only real great game was the original MechAssault, and that is only due to the fact that they co-developed it by FASA Studios. This would explain why MechAssault 2 wasn't as good as the orignal, as FASA had almost nothing to do with the sequel. Fracture was also another underwhelming title from Day 1, as it was a rather generic shooter with an undeveloped and interesting gimmick to deform the geography.
I predict that this shall be an even worst game than F.E.A.R. 2. Meaning it would either be average or downright poor, as I view F.E.A.R. 2 as a solid to decent first-person shooter. The original F.E.A.R. is and will always remain as the best game in the series.
" The problem with the COD games in general, is that they're TOO scripted. Scripted to the point where progressing through the game feels like channel surfing, than entering a real breathing chaotic battlefield. The lack of any real artificial intelligence diminishes the challenge factor, meaning there's virtually no effort into tactics or skill. You either hide into cover to wait for your health to regenerate, and pray that the "A.I." doesn't randomly chuck a grenade into your position. Compared this to say, Halo. Where the game is smoothly scripted and there were dynamic A.I., to the point where I could challenge the A.I. based on cunning skill and tactics. Especially on the higher difficulties, where the games becomes more challenging, but not cheap like in the Call of Duty series. Same goes for Crysis, but that game is naturally a sandbox shooter. "
I played Reach on hard and MW2 on normal and the difficulty wasn't that different. I didn't notice a big difference in AI. "
I'm not sure if you actually played both games, because the difference in the A.I. in both games are appearent. The Elites move run sideways to avoid fire and quickly take cover for protection. In Modern Warfare 2, the enemies either stop in a open spot to shoot you or arbitrarily run for cover while I have my gun pointed at them. Not to mention Elites move from one cover to another, while the enemies in Modern Warfare 2 simply stay in one position.
The problem with the COD games in general, is that they're TOO scripted. Scripted to the point where progressing through the game feels like channel surfing, than entering a real breathing chaotic battlefield. The lack of any real artificial intelligence diminishes the challenge factor, meaning there's virtually no effort into tactics or skill. You either hide into cover to wait for your health to regenerate, and pray that the "A.I." doesn't randomly chuck a grenade into your position.
Compared this to say, Halo. Where the game is smoothly scripted and there were dynamic A.I., to the point where I could challenge the A.I. based on cunning skill and tactics. Especially on the higher difficulties, where the games becomes more challenging, but not cheap like in the Call of Duty series. Same goes for Crysis, but that game is naturally a sandbox shooter. I prefer shooters where the actual challenge comes from the A.I., and not from the amount of enemies on screen at once. It what makes me admire first-person shooter like F.E.A.R., Far Cry (apart from the Trigens), Halo, and Crysis more than Call of Duty or scripted military shooters in general.
Log in to comment