Nonapod's forum posts

#1 Posted by Nonapod (126 posts) -

@Sin4profit said:

I think he difference should be a matter of story perspective. If your game is character driven then it should be 3rd person, if it's environment driven then it should be first person.

That's an interesting point. It's somewhat related to the "silent protagonist" in a lot of FPP games. Characters like Samus Aran, Gordon Freeman, Master Chief, and Jack from Bioshock never (or hardly ever) speak and consequently the environment becomes more of a focus in their respective games. It's probably part of the reason I find that I can tolerate the various idiosyncrasies that I dislike about first person perspective in those games, the character is overshadowed by the gameworld. That said I'd still like same damn peripherals. I hope the next gen systems support 3 monitor displays. The next PC rig I build will certainly support 3 monitors.

#2 Posted by Nonapod (126 posts) -

I've been a video game enthusiast since the mid 1980s. I've probably played thousands of games over the course of my life, and a large portion of them to completion. Over the years I've owned pretty much all the major game consoles (and some minor ones), a few portable games systems, I've also owned PCs for years, I spent many hours in arcades back in the day, and in more recent years I've played my fair share of smartphone games, online multiplayer and MMOs and the like. In short, I’ve had countless hours of experience with all sorts of games utilizing every sort of perspective and gameplay style.

Generally speaking I hate first person perspective. I feel it's over used and I've never fully understood its apparently broad appeal by both game players and designers. I’m not saying this flippantly or without consideration. There have certainly been first person games that I have enjoyed and consider excellent games, but I feel that more often than not they’re either exceptions that prove the rule or they work despite being first person perspective due to excellent design in other areas.

I remember playing Wolfenstein 3D, Doom I and II, and Quake in the early 90s. I thought they were all pretty amazing from a technical standpoint even if I wasn’t enthralled with them from an actual gameplay standpoint. When I played the original Half Life a few years later I was even more impressed with the tech. What’s more I was very impressed with the gameplay and story. Half Life was such a great game overall that I was willing to overlook the small annoyances due to its perspective like the awkward platforming sections.

Naturally I was one of the people who were extremely upset upon learning that Metroid Prime would be a first person game. But, like Half Life before it, I had to grudgingly admit that the game itself ended up being excellent. In fact I consider the first Metroid Prime game a near masterwork to this day. But a certain part of me wondered how much better it could have been if it were done right (“right” being if it was a game that was primarily 3rd person perspective switching to 1st person only for the scanning sequences and possibly some shooting sequences).

So what specifically is my damn problem with first person? Here’s a list:

1) No Peripherals. I have always hated the fact that playing in first person felt like looking through a small window, as if I was staring out a narrow viewport in a tank or some kind of medieval helmet. This is especially annoying in shooting games, particularly in multiplayer online shooting games where the ability to see an enemy in your peripherals could make a real difference. (As an aside, FPS games designed for triple monitor display could potentially alleviate this issue by expanding the players effective viewing angle)

2) Poor sense of player character position. This is related to what is technically termed “proprioception” or an awareness of physical self in an environment. Basically this issue crops up in any first person game that involves any sort of platforming or melee combat. It’s difficult to get a sense of your position in many games since often the player character is like a disembodied entity floating in space, meaning that when you look down you don’t see your character’s “feet”, just empty air. It can make platforming a headache since it’s difficult to tell your characters relative position.

3) Aesthetics. This is perhaps less of a concern that the former to points since it’s not directly related to gameplay itself, but it’s at least important to some sense of fun. Part of the fun of video games is playing a badass. It’s cool to see a character you’re controlling performing amazing feets and looking badass doing it. In first person games you generally don’t see your character at all unless you walk in front of a mirror in the game or there is a cutscene.

So that’s it in a nutshell. I know a lot of people love first person perspective since it seems more immersive, and I can understand that. But for me personally I enjoy seeing my character and (more importantly) being able to see my character in relation to his/her environment. I prefer games that are third person but can switch to first person at certain times for specific tasks like scanning or shooting.

#3 Posted by Nonapod (126 posts) -

It'd take a lot to top '98. I mean Zelda OoT, Metal Gear Solid, Half Life, Starcraft, Resident Evil 2? These are all games that went on to practically define gaming for the subsequent decade. I'm sure they'll be other great years for gaming in the future but it's unlikely that we'll see such a confluence of hugely important games within a 12 month period again.

#4 Posted by Nonapod (126 posts) -

The fun of this sort of thing is simply that it's unknown. I suspect that most people would be pretty let down to find out that it was just used for encrypted communication of simple messages for the Russian military. While that's kinda cool, it's not as neat-o as some of the wild conspiracy theories and such that have revolved around it for decades.

#5 Edited by Nonapod (126 posts) -

Distilled reality is a variation on basic escapism, the phenomenon that attracts so many people to virtual words to begin with. It's interesting to speculate how much different (better?) our lives would be if they functioned more along the lines of video game logic. What if large swaths of the boring periods in our lives could be skipped like a cutscene in a game, like the waiting in line at the DMV or the driving periods to and from work? What if our conscious brains could be turned off during such periods? What if something like learning a new language was simply a matter of purchasing the knowledge and having it instantaniously inserted into your brain? Who knows, maybe some day in the future we'll have cybernetic implants and computers in our heads that'll make that sort of thing possible

#6 Posted by Nonapod (126 posts) -

@golguin: The theorycrafters have confirmed that for now when all other things are more or less equal bows are better than xbows and 1 hander xbows. Unfortunately I can't find the post right now but the gist was that the 15% damage from the archery talent outperforms the xbows 50% crit damage at similar DPS's. Unless you get a very good deal on a crossbow with a very high damage range you should stick with bows. Keep in mind that Blizzard may make some adjustments in some future patch since I know they prefer to give players choice (avoid having a single "best build").

#7 Posted by Nonapod (126 posts) -

@daggon55 said:

@Bojangle said:

taking us back to the days when bedroom coders were kings of the industry.

Sorry, but when was this exactly? I started gaming on an NES and a PC and even back then the games I got came in boxes from stores and were created by people in offices, smaller offices probably, but they most certainly weren't hobbyists.

Not trying to harsh on your parade here, but I don't think that was ever true.

Well, to be fair, a lot of the old PC game companies back in the early 80s started off basically as "hobbyists" with very small teams and little formal funding.

#8 Posted by Nonapod (126 posts) -

It's certainly a noble idea. I'm fairly certain this isn't the first time an open source game console has been attempted. I have to wonder how they'd deal with piracy being so hacker friendly and all. I gotta believe the major developers won't be interested in producing games for a system that was too pirate friendly.

The hardware specs are a bit underwhelming. While the Tegra 3 is hot stuff in the smart device world, it's not quite at the level of a 360 or PS3 due to various constraints like memory bandwidth.

#9 Posted by Nonapod (126 posts) -

@lordofterror: In order to stop cheaters they first have to identify them. This isn't as easy as it sounds since the cheaters are constantly trying to figure out ways to circumvent Blizzards various methods of cheat detection. While it's fairly easy for Blizzard to detect any changes in the client-side game files themselves, it's a bit more difficult for them to identify automation scripts that operate outside the game program itself. They have to be able to identify repititive patterns that may indicate the automated behavior of a bot, and they have to be certain that these methods do not generate false positives and ban honest players who may have been preforming actions that appeare to be bot-like. Meanwhile, the bot writers are constantly tweaking their scripts to make their behavior seem more random and more "human like". It's a constant arms race and Blizzard has to be vigilant.

#10 Posted by Nonapod (126 posts) -

@greengbo: That sounds a bit like a PC port of Rastan II (Nastar Warrior).