Quick Look: Receiver

I noticed Drew being hesitant to mention that the guns he have been shooting has been the AK47 and SVD Dragunov when he was training to become a sleeper agent during his trip to North Korea.

Also:

No Drew! If you teach Jeff how to use the equipment he'll have no use for you!

Patrick and.... DREW?!?!? FUCK YEAH!

Better late than never to get a QL of this game-- good stuff :)

@White_Lando said:

@Chavtheworld: There are three guns in the game at the moment, it originally released with just the 1911 which you see at the beginning of the quick look. It picks a gun at random every time you restart, he just happened to keep getting the revolver the rest of the time.

Ah right there are 3. I saw the other one, just when he said multiple I assumed like 5 or so.

@Max_Cherry said:

This was Patrick's idea? I take back every doubt I've ever expressed about him. PATRICK BELONGS ON GIANT BOMB.

Truer words were never written.

Tried this soon after it was finished. It's definitely interesting and I do feel like there's a happy medium between this and "press R to reload". I remember the FireArms HL1 mod having partially filled magazines, with the option to merge all of those together when you're in safety for a while. Stuff like that could improve tension without being all that tedious.

Has there been a joke made about Revolver Ocelot yet? If not I'm kind of interested...

@ReaganStein said:

You guys sure do quick look an awful lot of games the week after they are discussed on idle thumbs...

no man its just a coincidence...yea coincidence

it is February and there are no games out...maybe

Stop hating on Patrick!

Glad Patrick is at least curious about, if uncomfortable around, firearms. Having grown up with them (and, at my current age, spent more than half of my life cultivating experience with them), I can state without hesitation that it's one of the most valuable practical skills I have. Heavens forbid the shit ever hits the fan, I'm far more ready than most.

It's a personal opinion, and I know many might disagree, but I think everyone should take gun safety classes and get at least a solid 25 hours of shooting time in before making a decision on whether to own them or stay away. Not mandatory, but as a strong suggestion for personal betterment.

At least, everyone who's psychologically stable.

disembodied guns, meet disembodied Jeff voice saying 'hi'

@ildon said:

No Drew! If you teach Jeff how to use the equipment he'll have no use for you

Knowledge is POWER drew!

I agree with Patrick and recommend going to a firing range at least once. I started out researching guns because I was writing a script involving them and realized I knew little to nothing. So I read about them, asked my roommate some stuff because he used to be a cop, and tried a bunch on my own, including a S&W Revolver, Glock 22, and Mossberg 500 pump shotgun. Then I started becoming fascinated with them just as objects and intrigued by how all the parts work together.

I was partial to the S&W .357 revolver because with revolvers all the moving parts are clearly visible and spinning the cylinder is fun. Plus, every sound the gun makes, whether shooting, cocking back the hammer, emptying shell casings...all sound very menacing. And the first time shooting .357 magnum rounds feels "like a stick of dynamite going off in your hand," as a friend put it.

And in this game, the touch with the shell casings not emptying all at once every time is genius, great to see realistic gun stuff in a game. I don't really have anything against first person shooters, it's just that now that I know more about firearms I find it funny (yet convenient) being able to run and reload very quickly at the same time in every shooter. It's a blessing and a curse, because I love movies and games and both are dominated by guns, I don't like to be the guy to notice things that aren't realistic in entertainment, but also I'm trilled when I notice writers/directors/game designers took the time to get their facts straight. But gameplay should come first with anything, so in a game like this which is built upon realism with guns, the attention to detail is critical. In Call of Duty or something, it wouldn't work. However, they should use this model in some sort of survival horror game in the future, that would be awesome. It would add to immersion and make moments that much more tense having to keep track of remaining rounds in your head, etc.

Great quick look guys.

It's neat, but not for the price.

Drew, the LASH is for emergencies only.

It always amazes me how little actual experience most of the rest of the world has with guns.

I was born and raised in a place where people own guns. Where I live, it's a pretty good idea to have at least one. Not necessarily hand guns though, a lot of hunting rifles, and shotguns. But I also live in a place where there are wolves and bears, and if you go hiking out in the wilderness, or on one of hundreds of trails we have here, carrying a gun can be a major comfort.

I remember like seven or eight years ago a lady go mauled by a bear walking home from a local convenience store and lost her foot. It's not at all unusual to wake up in the morning and have the garbage cans tipped over and garbage all over the yard or driveway, from a bear looking for food during the night.

It makes me chuckle when I hear other people talk about guns, they always sound like such a foreign thing to people who have never been around them.

The idea of realistic gun controls in a game would be interesting, reloading, turning the safety off and what not.

@Sarumarine said:

@super2j: I just think it would be a nice restraint to have, that's all. Especially considering there are games out there that do punish you for reloading after one or two shots. Condemned is one of them I think, where you'll toss whole magazines away whether they're empty or not.

Also, constant reloading does get me killed when I could be shooting in some games. That kind of stuff.

I miss the fear gauntlet...in any case, i say cross that bridge when you get there. if condemned has that, then don't do it in Condemned. But i feel like Im being a jerk who is super nit-picky, so I leave it at "you have a fair point".

does the music remind anyone else of Tron?

That music sounds pretty FTL-y

@algertman said:

@Bourbon_Warrior said:

@Ares42 said:

I'm not gonna complain about more content, but as they say at the start of the video this is pretty much scraping the bottom of the barrel. Makes me think it might be time to come up with a new feature to fill these dull times.

Would be a nice time for a new endurance run, would get me to subscribe again....Just saying.

Endurance Run Xenoblade

I applaud Patrick. He's the hardest working guy in the business.

Nah a ER game has to have personality.

@fiberpay said:

It's neat, but not for the price.

$5 is too much? Really?

Just a bit of info when it came to the revolver. The reason the cylinder turned when you pulled the trigger is because it is a double action. Which means when you pull the trigger it draws back the hammer and turns the cylinder CCW in one trigger pull. At the very end of the pull the hammer falls and sends the round on its way. The only advantage to pulling back the hammer manually is for a harder strike from the firing pin, ensuring a higher chance the round will go off and generally a faster trigger pull.

The more you know. :D

I like the concept in this game. I think it would be cool to have a roguelike fps on the market. Imagine something like amnesia, a scary game where you spawn into the world and is randomized every time. I can imagine something like slender but with higher production budget and having actual gameplay mechanics other than to just run around.

I'm not sure theres a real place for "realistic" gun mechanics in many games, at least not to the level of detail in reciever. However, I have always enjoyed games that have ballistic models, weapon handling and reloading that is more based in reality. For example, games like farcry 2 and stalker used those mechanisms to enhance gameplay and build tension. I have enjoyed the better feel in battlefield 3 over call of duty and wish more games would go farther with this. I was disappointed with Farcry 3 and its lack of these elements especially that all the calibers felt pretty similar and bullet drop, recoil, velocity, armor penetration, hydro-static shock etc. never felt right to me. I think if your making a game about shooting shit with guns then it pays off to make those core mechanics interesting.

In real life I like shooting .22lr and air pellet rifles. Its amazing the amount of people that are uncomfortable around firearms and think that most gun owners are rednecks and paranoid weirdos. I probably have greater chance of hurting someone while driving than accidently shooting someone.

@AlwaysBeClothing said:

I'm surprised they didn't mention when you reload a clip with bullets left in it, those bullets are just left in the clip. They don't magically transfer into your new clip like games imply. That's another reason not to reload after shooting once.

I recall when I first noticed games doing this and thinking it was so insane.

Interesting "game". Wish I Am Alive did something like this where you have limited bullets and you can cock the gun to intimidate people.

Nice FTB by Jeff there.

@guanophobic said:

Interesting choice, releasing this right after Alex's article about gun violence..

This.

@heatDrive88 said:

@fiberpay said:

It's neat, but not for the price.

$5 is too much? Really?

Yea for what it is. There are way better games available for $1. Hell there are free games that are better.

I'd love to see something like this implemented in a full game. It'd make shooters even more strategic than normal!

kinda disappointed that it's not actually Werner Herzog. oh well, maybe some day.

I also thought it would be a good idea to learn a bit about guns after all the games I've played. My uncle was the head of a firing range and let me try out a ton of different types for a day. It certainly was eye opening, they are fascinating mechanisms but they are not to be trivialized, don't think I would ever want to own one.

@fiberpay said:

@heatDrive88 said:

@fiberpay said:

It's neat, but not for the price.

$5 is too much? Really?

Yea for what it is. There are way better games available for $1. Hell there are free games that are better.

You can buy a game like Beyond good and evil on steam for 4,99. So yeah, you can spend that 5$ and get a lot more game. But for 1$/€ it'd be neat.

I'm surprised it isn't free.

@TrueEnglishGent said:

The idea of realistic gun controls in a game would be interesting, reloading, turning the safety off and what not.

Agreed.

Have it in a game that is a LA Noire esque detective game and have very limited combat scenarios.

When Patrick opens the revolver cylinder, you can totally see which bullets have been used by seeing the pin dents. He kind of plays off spinning the cylinder as a "gimmick", rather than an actual mechanic.

Another neat, cool Quick Look!

@Krixok:

Yes, moaning and sobbing. Pleading for mercy. Shouting curses. People responding with horrified shock as the realize they can't move their legs. Enemies pretending to be dead and popping out with a gun the moment your back is turned. Committing a murder suicide with a grenade. Reminding people just how savage and ugly killing is, but then again maybe people will just miss the point and shout with joy as a gutshot conscript pisses himself during the E3 reveal.

I was curious has anyone approached the turrets/drones with a holstered weapon?

@RedRavN said:

I like the concept in this game. I think it would be cool to have a roguelike fps on the market. Imagine something like amnesia, a scary game where you spawn into the world and is randomized every time. I can imagine something like slender but with higher production budget and having actual gameplay mechanics other than to just run around.

I'm not sure theres a real place for "realistic" gun mechanics in many games, at least not to the level of detail in reciever. However, I have always enjoyed games that have ballistic models, weapon handling and reloading that is more based in reality. For example, games like farcry 2 and stalker used those mechanisms to enhance gameplay and build tension. I have enjoyed the better feel in battlefield 3 over call of duty and wish more games would go farther with this. I was disappointed with Farcry 3 and its lack of these elements especially that all the calibers felt pretty similar and bullet drop, recoil, velocity, armor penetration, hydro-static shock etc. never felt right to me. I think if your making a game about shooting shit with guns then it pays off to make those core mechanics interesting.

In real life I like shooting .22lr and air pellet rifles. Its amazing the amount of people that are uncomfortable around firearms and think that most gun owners are rednecks and paranoid weirdos. I probably have greater chance of hurting someone while driving than accidently shooting someone.

Far Cry 2 realistic? What? Incredibly fun game, but no where near "realistic". Ubisoft Montreal definitely put a ton of work into all the jamming and reloading animations, but your praise comes out unwarranted.

For starters, lets take the Carl Gustav 84mm (US designation MAAWS). For a recoilless rifle, it fires like a wire-guided missile when it actually fires a large shell. You can move it around with the scope and a large black smoke trail follows it. It's odd how Ubisoft got that wrong when everything else about it is right. The G3 is woefully under powered considering it uses the same ammunition (7.62x51mm) as the other rifles like the FN FAL and AR-18. In addition, all rifle and pistol ammo are interchangeable in the same weapon class. This includes the Makarov, Star 1911, Desert Eagle, and the G3, AK-47, AK-47S, FN FAL, AR-18. I'm not sure about the ballistic models in FC2 and STALKER, I do know that the ARMA/VBS games simulate that.

Far Cry 3 is a great game. It's not a simulator, it's an open-world shooter. You're criticising the game for what it isn't and not for what it is.

@Alorithin said:

Idle Thumbs

Yep. Someone at GB is definitely listening to it...

And some may say it's slow games week for them to be doing a QL of this, but take a look at Steam.

Retrovirus, Omerta - City of Gangsters, Dungeonland and No Time to Explain are all recent releases that I would love to see QL of and each looks really interesting too.

A disappointing lack of Warner Herzog.

@needforswede said:

I was partial to the S&W .357 revolver because with revolvers all the moving parts are clearly visible and spinning the cylinder is fun. Plus, every sound the gun makes, whether shooting, cocking back the hammer, emptying shell casings...all sound very menacing. And the first time shooting .357 magnum rounds feels "like a stick of dynamite going off in your hand," as a friend put it.

Sure, anything with such a small gun and oversized round will feel like that. 9x33mm qualifies as an intermediate cartridge for rifles as 7.62x33mm is used in the M1 carbine and 7.92x33mm in the STG44. Small arms are nothing compared to the power of cannons/artillery.

Today, people who work for the Internet don't know how guns work. More at 11.

@SnowyPliskin: I hope you're just being facetious. I really do.

@peritus said:

@fiberpay said:

@heatDrive88 said:

@fiberpay said:

It's neat, but not for the price.

$5 is too much? Really?

Yea for what it is. There are way better games available for $1. Hell there are free games that are better.

You can buy a game like Beyond good and evil on steam for 4,99. So yeah, you can spend that 5$ and get a lot more game. But for 1$/€ it'd be neat.

Except for the part where Beyond Good and Evil is incredibly boring (YEAH I SAID IT), but that is neither here nor there.

Yes, I understand the subjectivity of placing a dollar value for what you appear to get in return, but what I'm trying to establish is that $5 in itself, is not a ton of money for most people, even in a world of full retail Steam games that go on sale on a day-to-day basis.

Comparitively on a side-by-side basis, sure, it's a little more than you think. But it's still just $5, and I subjectively think that value is in the fact that no other game does what Receiver is trying to do. I'm also fairly positive the developer is still working on this game, rolling out new features piecemeal.

@m16mojo2 said:

When Patrick opens the revolver cylinder, you can totally see which bullets have been used by seeing the pin dents. He kind of plays off spinning the cylinder as a "gimmick", rather than an actual mechanic.

Watch the rest of the quick look, as they eventually figure that out.

@heatDrive88 said:

@peritus said:

@fiberpay said:

@heatDrive88 said:

@fiberpay said:

It's neat, but not for the price.

$5 is too much? Really?

Yea for what it is. There are way better games available for $1. Hell there are free games that are better.

You can buy a game like Beyond good and evil on steam for 4,99. So yeah, you can spend that 5$ and get a lot more game. But for 1$/€ it'd be neat.

Except for the part where Beyond Good and Evil is incredibly boring (YEAH I SAID IT), but that is neither here nor there.

Yes, I understand the subjectivity of placing a dollar value for what you appear to get in return, but what I'm trying to establish is that $5 in itself, is not a ton of money for most people, even in a world of full retail Steam games that go on sale on a day-to-day basis.

Comparitively on a side-by-side basis, sure, it's a little more than you think. But it's still just $5, and I subjectively think that value is in the fact that no other game does what Receiver is trying to do. I'm also fairly positive the developer is still working on this game, rolling out new features piecemeal.

Of course $5 is not a ton of money. But when purchasing anything be it a dollar or 30k humans always evaluate what you get for the price. And I guess being a business owner I probably look at the more than most people.

@deathstriker666 said:

@RedRavN said:

I like the concept in this game. I think it would be cool to have a roguelike fps on the market. Imagine something like amnesia, a scary game where you spawn into the world and is randomized every time. I can imagine something like slender but with higher production budget and having actual gameplay mechanics other than to just run around.

I'm not sure theres a real place for "realistic" gun mechanics in many games, at least not to the level of detail in reciever. However, I have always enjoyed games that have ballistic models, weapon handling and reloading that is more based in reality. For example, games like farcry 2 and stalker used those mechanisms to enhance gameplay and build tension. I have enjoyed the better feel in 3 over and wish more games would go farther with this. I was disappointed with Farcry 3 and its lack of these elements especially that all the calibers felt pretty similar and bullet drop, recoil, velocity, armor penetration, hydro-static shock etc. never felt right to me. I think if your making a game about shooting shit with guns then it pays off to make those core mechanics interesting.

In real life I like .22lr and air pellet rifles. Its amazing the amount of people that are uncomfortable around firearms and think that most gun owners are rednecks and paranoid weirdos. I probably have greater chance of hurting someone while driving than accidently shooting someone.

Far Cry 2 realistic? What? Incredibly fun game, but no where near "realistic". Ubisoft Montreal definitely put a ton of work into all the jamming and reloading animations, but your praise comes out unwarranted.

For starters, lets take the Carl Gustav 84mm (US designation MAAWS). For a recoilless rifle, it fires like a wire-guided missile when it actually fires a large shell. You can move it around with the scope and a large black smoke trail follows it. It's odd how Ubisoft got that wrong when everything else about it is right. The G3 is woefully under powered considering it uses the same ammunition (7.62x51mm) as the other rifles like the FN FAL and AR-18. In addition, all rifle and pistol ammo are interchangeable in the same weapon class. This includes the Makarov, Star 1911, Desert Eagle, and the G3, AK-47, AK-47S, FN FAL, AR-18. I'm not sure about the ballistic models in FC2 and STALKER, I do know that the ARMA/VBS games simulate that.

Far Cry 3 is a great game. It's not a simulator, it's an open-world shooter. You're criticising the game for what it isn't and not for what it is.

Well actually I never claimed that farcry 2 was realistic I only said that some of the mechanics are more based in reality. If you read what I wrote and contend the issue then I'm afraid you are sorely lacking in reading comprehension. Also note that I put realistic in quotation marks to signify that its use in games and real life are two different concepts entirely; a point that quite simply everyone over twelve should be able to understand. I understand the difference between a simulation and an open world action game. My point is that I appreciated farcry 2's inclusion of certain elements that made things feel a bit more grounded in some semblance in reality and that I felt farcry 3's direction was a step back. I, as in my opinion, I feel like there is a nice middle ground between laborious simulation and fun action gameplay.

Im confused as to why you admit that Ubisoft put a ton of work into reloading and jamming in farcry 2 and then go on to list a whole spectrum of obvious technical weapon details with the apparent point of saying how silly farcry 2 is. Then you designate farcry 3 as not a simulation but as an open world shooter. So why is it a problem for you if many details are off in farcry 2 but farcry 3 gets a free pass? After all, they are both very similar games so why the apparent double standard?

I think maybe your problem is that you are trying to apply some sort of logical argument against my opinion, without considering that I am entitled to have an opinion its cool if you have a different one. I think farcry 3 would be more fun for me if the ballistic model was improved and mechanics from the previous game was left in and expanded on. Thats it. I'm not sure what that thinking has to do with me allegedly not understanding the difference between a simulation and an action game or how that would somehow make my opinion irrelevant in the first place.