What are you playing?

[Cybernetic pig]

This is just something I have never bought.

Indeed. It's the same for aiming on Mouse vs Stick. Mouse is objectively superior but stick still works just fine if you are good.

I wonder what the angular resolution on a control stick is.

15 degree I think. Objectively superior but WASD is still usable.

Honestly in their current state both M+K and pads have their pros and cons and I see them both as equal because of this, it just comes down to personal preference.

I look forward to advancements with gaming pads, there is still so much room for improvement, but this new generation of consoles added nothing but a fucking social "share" button. Gaming has been moving in so many directions that are really undesirable for the passionate old school gamer.

[DDL]

It's the same for aiming on Mouse vs Stick.

Nah, they actually tested this (to see whether Xbox360 players and PC players could be integrated). Controller dudes vs M+KB dudes. Controller guys got utterly ruined, even when 'really good' console players were ranked up against 'mediocre' M+KB players.

Most stick-aim shooter games have aim-assist just to make it slightly less horrible, but it's still horrible.

http://www.techspot.com/news/39738-micr ... amers.html

[Cybernetic pig]

Nah, they actually tested this (to see whether Xbox360 players and PC players could be integrated). Controller dudes vs M+KB dudes. Controller guys got utterly ruined, even when 'really good' console players were ranked up against 'mediocre' M+KB players.

Indeed, because mouse is objectively superior, as I said. Though how a pad user could hold up does depend on the game. For example UT you absolutely need the precision of the mouse to compete. But if System Shock 2 for example had competitive multiplayer, nope wouldn't need it at all because it's a slow paced corridor shooter.

Most stick-aim shooter games have aim-assist just to make it slightly less horrible, but it's still horrible.

"Most".

That tells us that it isn't actually needed, it's just there for convenience. Every console shooter I have played since forever I have disabled aim assist, and if it doesn't allow this I get irritated. There are still a great number of console shooters that don't have any assist and you don't hear any complaints.

It's not "horrible", it's just not perfectly precise, but with practice you can still be pretty good that it isn't even noticable.

Mouse is objectively superior to the right stick, left stick is objectively superior to WASD. All methods are still usable, I know because I use all methods.
There are many other pros and cons to pads/M+K also. In time these cons could be eliminated. Many already are by custom hardware mind you.

[Jaedar]

15 Degrees eh. That's actually a worse resolution that I expected.

Nah, they actually tested this (to see whether Xbox360 players and PC players could be integrated). Controller dudes vs M+KB dudes. Controller guys got utterly ruined, even when 'really good' console players were ranked up against 'mediocre' M+KB players.

Most stick-aim shooter games have aim-assist just to make it slightly less horrible, but it's still horrible.

I once read an article which claimed that the 'recent' move to inaccurate guns in recent games and especially the deterioration of said accuracy when moving was largely implemented to make up for the deficiencies of dualstick run and gunning. Iirc the same article stated that shadowrun(the fps) that was on both PC and xbox and had cross platform multiplayer made it so any movement of the reticule would reduce aim because that was the only way to balance mouse vs stick.

I look forward to advancements with gaming pads, there is still so much room for improvement, but this new generation of consoles added nothing but a fucking social "share" button. Gaming has been moving in so many directions that are really undesirable for the passionate old school gamer.

To be fair, there hasn't been much of any advancement in pads since the control stick itself first got introduced. Unless you count motion controls...

That tells us that it isn't actually needed, it's just there for convenience. Every console shooter I have played since forever I have disabled aim assist, and if it doesn't allow this I get irritated. There are still a great number of console shooters that have any assist and you don't hear any complaints.

Afaik, every console shooter has some form of hidden aim assist. I think they've just gotten better at hiding it since halo.

[Cybernetic pig]

15 Degrees eh. That's actually a worse resolution that I expected.

Bear in mind I'm not 100% certain.

WASD is 8-way directional movement, with my guestimate of 15 degrees, stick would be 32-way directional movement. It could be more, but it's certainly not less.

To be fair, there hasn't been much of any advancement in pads since the control stick itself first got introduced. Unless you count motion controls...

Yes. From a d-pad and two buttons to what we have now, it's inexcusable that it's no longer a priority of console manufacturers because as I said, there is still room for improvement.

Afaik, every console shooter has some form of hidden aim assist. I think they've just gotten better at hiding it since halo.

Lol, where are you getting this misinformation? And why is Halo relevant? As much as I dislike that game for all the crap it popularised it wasn't the first to assist with aiming.

I once read an article which claimed that the 'recent' move to inaccurate guns in recent games and especially the deterioration of said accuracy when moving was largely implemented to make up for the deficiencies of dualstick run and gunning. Iirc the same article stated that shadowrun(the fps) that was on both PC and xbox and had cross platform multiplayer made it so any movement of the reticule would reduce aim because that was the only way to balance mouse vs stick.

I don't think that's relevant either. Aim assist or auto aim can counter the deficiencies if player skill isn't enough. Completely changing core design, gameplay pace, etc, just for this reason where there is a perfectly good solution already available for those who need it would be ridiculous. It's just because modern shooters want to be "realistic".

Personally I love aiming down the sights, and they don't have to conflict with gameplay pace. Brutal Doom and Stalker maintain a decent pace whilst featuring aim down the sights. They just make hipfire accuracy ~90%, so running and gunning still works well, but it is advantageous to ADS for long distance targets. Most other shooters are just way too excessive with hipfire inaccuracy, and it's just poor design (in my opinion), nothing more.

[Jaedar]

Lol, where are you getting this misinformation? And why is Halo relevant? As much as I dislike that game for all the crap it popularised it wasn't the first to assist with aiming.

Idk, think I read it somewhere. And Halo was just an example of a game doing aim assist and not hiding it well.

I don't think that's relevant either. Aim assist or auto aim can counter the deficiencies if player skill isn't enough. Completely changing core design, gameplay pace, etc, just for this reason where there is a perfectly good solution already available for those who need it would be ridiculous. It's just because modern shooters want to be "realistic".

The thing is that people don't like feeling that they need computer assistance. It's just how people who need tutorials the most are the most likely to skip them(they don't know how to play because they don't like learning how to play), which is why a lot of games these days have forced tutorials at the start of the campaign instead of the more reasonable models of half life and deus ex.

Changing the rules so bad people don't notice they are bad is good if you want to sell your product to said bad people.

[Cybernetic pig]

Idk, think I read it somewhere.

Well I can tell you now it's entirely false. Heck I have developed a console shooter mini-game myself which had no aim assist.

And Halo was just an example of a game doing aim assist and not hiding it well.

But there is no intention to hide anything. If there is aim assist it's always noticeable, especially with bloody rocket launchers (PC example: Duke nukem 3D RPG suicides due to aim assist. grrr).

The thing is that people don't like feeling that they need computer assistance. It's just how people who need tutorials the most are the most likely to skip them(they don't know how to play because they don't like learning how to play), which is why a lot of games these days have forced tutorials at the start of the campaign instead of the more reasonable models of half life and deus ex.

Changing the rules so bad people don't notice they are bad is good if you want to sell your product to said bad people.

I'm not buying it. The most popular game of all time (Call of Duty) has very noticeable aim assist on consoles. There is no intention to hide anything. Most console shooters have aim assist: true/false option in the menu for all to see and toggle if they so choose. A recent example would be GTAV which advertised it's options for no aim assist/full auto aim/aim assist as if it were some huge feature.

[Jaedar]

But there is no intention to hide anything. If there is aim assist it's always noticeable, especially with bloody rocket launchers (PC example: Duke nukem 3D RPG suicides due to aim assist. grrr).

No, It's not. See there's aim assist where it helps you move your crosshair correctly, and then there's aim assist where it just fudges your crosshair and considers you to be aiming correctly even if you're not. The first is very easy to notice, the second is almost impossible.

[Cybernetic pig]

You speak anecdotally, not for everyone. For me it is very easy to notice no matter the platform or game.

[CrocMagnum]

Shadowrun Returns Dragonfall

God knows how much I liked the original, but the DLC was unputdownable! Whereas in the first you hired nobodies most of the time, in Dragonfall you have a real shadowrunning team. They are believable and have a strong personality. More than that: they are some of the most memorable characters I've met in a videogame. If you take your time to know more about them regularly, prepare yourselves to be stunned. Curioulsy enough that aspect of Dragonfall makes the Dead Man's Switch (the first campaign) very bland in comparison.

The Dragonfall story is amazing, and the writing is unbelievably good. It's really like reading a good Shadowrun novel like the old days.

As far as the gameplay is concerned it's decent but nothing earth-shattering. Truly this is not the greatest turn-based tactical.

To sum it up Dragonfall is a memorable game. Not for the gameplay (average/good) but for the story and the writing which are splendid, especially if you've read the Shadowrun novels.

Anecdote about the French Shadowrun Novels:

Back in the day I bought like 20 of them. The French paper versions. I read them like pulps and liked them very much, but I always felt they were rushed, especially their endings. Years later I learned why:

Fleuve Noir, the Publisher, decided that for this collection each book shouldn't exceed 250 pages! (g*****m marketing). Many novels were butchered to death, often the French translations were missing like 50 / 70 pages!! Sometimes when I think about it it puts me in red anger. ( they did the same for the Earth Dawn French collection too).

[Jaedar]

I too prefered dragonfall to the original campaign. I really hope they make more, in 1 or 2 more they should have something that is truly an RPG for the ages.

[Jonas]

I've been working on a scenario for Shadowrun Returns actually, using assets from both campaigns.

I've been working on it for about 10-12 days so far, and I'm about half way done. The plan is for it to have 6 missions, and at the moment I'm finishing up the third mission, and the hub areas are all done of course. Probably... 5-6 hours of gameplay, when it's done.

Anyone up for testing it when it's finished?

[Jaedar]

I've been working on a scenario for Shadowrun Returns actually, using assets from both campaigns.

I've been working on it for about 10-12 days so far, and I'm about half way done. The plan is for it to have 6 missions, and at the moment I'm finishing up the third mission, and the hub areas are all done of course. Probably... 5-6 hours of gameplay, when it's done.

Anyone up for testing it when it's finished?

Hells yes mr jonas.

[Jonas]

Awesome.

Anyway I did like Dragonfall a lot better than Dead Man's Switch as well. It had a hub, it had actual characters, it had some choice and consequence, and the story didn't devolve into save-the-world bullshit with boring monsters and a special gun that punished characters without Rifle specialisation. In fact the ending of Dragonfall was really compelling, since the main antagonist turned out to have very understandable motivations (if still wholly despicable methods).

One other thing I noticed about Dragonfall which I haven't seen anybody remark upon yet is that being set in Germany, it actually had a cast of Germans. Since it's made by Americans I was fully expecting the game to feature a full cast of Americans going to Germany to save the day. I'm very positively surprised at how respectful it ended up being, even down to featuring a Turk and a Roma as the Token Minorities.

[fantsu]

Started Deus Ex.
Will play it through on realistic, without breaking any boxes (to cut down the stuff i get) and saving only after a load.
Won't use computer skill and I won't use any deadly weapons or weapon skills.

Should do it in 2 or 3 days.
Thats what my last like 15 or so playthroughs have taken.

Also just finished a console game (I rarely play console games), well actually handheld game. Zelda: Link's Awakening DX.
Its pretty good, not bad not fantastic. Not an fan of Zelda games but this was worth it I guess, much better than Link to the Past at least.