Any PC Gamers Around?

[Clipdat]

What game are you describing here?

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

Gaming rant of the day.

I'm tired of open world games that use arena type battles for major battles of the game (looking at you AC: Odyssey). It's one thing to have a roman-type arena for historical accuracy and as a place to make some quick money/caps/feathers/other currency, and have it be optional.

It's another to have major "boss" battles where this supposed great warrior who understands the value of stealth, intelligent fighting from cover, the courage to run away when it aids the battle, yet when the warrior is hunting down a massive beast or mythical creature is willing to stand in the middle of an empty field with no cover and just shoot a million arrows at a foe until they are dead, even though 2 feet away there is cover, or cliff walls to fight from, etc.

After the first 20 seconds of the battle, there is no real strategy, just run, shoot, shoot, run, etc. There's no valuable challenge in it and frankly it's boring, and not just a little boring, it's boring to the point that I've just gone to changing the difficulty level from the hardest level to "easy" just for these parts of the game to get past it, not because I couldn't grind it out, but because I don't want to do that.

OK, I'm done now. Thanks for listening.....

[Jordanwolf]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

The gameplay should at least be consistent with the rest of the game. In AC:Odyssey if you are in a "normal" battle with overwhelming odds, you can use stealth, climb buildings hid in cover, attack from multiple angles, even call in help.

I've beaten level 99 opponents this way when I was level 50 on the hardest settings. It took time, planning and knowledge of my surroundings but its worth doing and I can do it without suffering one death.

Yet, here I am facing some big ass minotaur thing 3x my size in a pit of lava throwing lava balls at me and I apparently can't climb the walls and pummel him from above? Makes no sense.

You're not going to be okay with the future of gaming in general then. Big boss is most of future gaming is going to be. You can blame games like monster hunter and darksouls for bringing in that sort of popularity that is more than likely here to stay.

Me personally, I don't exactly have a problem with the big boss archetype, but it is getting a little over done with every single game incorporating it. Especially so many games now where the final story boss may as well just be a cinematic regardless of difficulty.

Mind you, I think DUELIST bosses and not arena big bosses are actually waaaaaaay better. When I say duelist, think of something very close to size of your character and rivaling in ability, but of course they have more. Those are much more enjoyable to me than big bosses, but I think this attributes somewhat to my strong preference for competitive pvp games as well. Love me a good ol 1v1.

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by Jordanwolf

You're not going to be okay with the future of gaming in general then. Big boss is most of future gaming is going to be. You can blame games like monster hunter and darksouls for bringing in that sort of popularity that is more than likely here to stay.....

,,,,,Mind you, I think DUELIST bosses and not arena big bosses are actually waaaaaaay better. When I say duelist, think of something very close to size of your character and rivaling in ability, but of course they have more. Those are much more enjoyable to me than big bosses, but I think this attributes somewhat to my strong preference for competitive pvp games as well. Love me a good ol 1v1.

Yea, I prefer what you describe, the DUELIST, as long as it isn't a restricted space and i can use the same skills I used throughout the game. I don't even mind the Big Boss, as long as I can attack him using the same skills and mobility I had in the rest of the game.

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by Clipdat

What game are you describing here?

Pretty much any open world game that uses a restricted "big boss" battle space, but this particular rant is aimed at AC: Odyssey.

[Captain Snooze]

Good ol' internet has come to the rescue. I learnt about a second config file to alter. I now have all key bindings to my satisfaction. I actually got quite excited when trying out the game after configuring.

Here is what I don't understand. Given the relative ease in which the config files could be altered what's the rational behind the developer not making key bindings available in the settings menu? Why hard bind the F key but allow other keys to be re-mapped?
The rationale is beyond my understanding.

[soundman98]

Originally Posted by Captain Snooze

Good ol' internet has come to the rescue. I learnt about a second config file to alter. I now have all key bindings to my satisfaction. I actually got quite excited when trying out the game after configuring.

Here is what I don't understand. Given the relative ease in which the config files could be altered what's the rational behind the developer not making key bindings available in the settings menu? Why hard bind the F key but allow other keys to be re-mapped?
The rationale is beyond my understanding.

my layout is the best layout. why would you need any other layout?

[raises mouse with left hand]

how'd you flip your thumb to the other side of the mouse?

[Jordanwolf]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

Yea, I prefer what you describe, the DUELIST, as long as it isn't a restricted space and i can use the same skills I used throughout the game. I don't even mind the Big Boss, as long as I can attack him using the same skills and mobility I had in the rest of the game.

The space restriction is a hard point. In regards to only open world games, 'instanced' (phased/encounter) zones exist everywhere and range in complexity, especially for unique or boss encounters. If the boss was a part of the story, I can understand the limitation of not allowing the player to leave said instance until either winning or losing as that opens the door to tons of exploits.

One of the easy things to do in so many games is to abuse the barrier between encounter zone and safe zone, so many games, not even limited to open world, always seem to have this issue where you can literally stand right beside an enemy outside of the encounter zone and they won't attack you.

The restriction to your abilities on the other hand, is really just a pain point for players, makes no sense, and is a poor decision by developers. Why take away abilities if it's not a story driven handicap. I also have a gripe with getting your best ability for only the last boss of a game for it to never be used again.

[Captain Snooze]

lolol
I have just discovered a stat of mine: I've played for 40 hours and completed 1.2% of the main story. lol

[Jordanwolf]

Originally Posted by Captain Snooze

lolol
I have just discovered a stat of mine: I've played for 40 hours and completed 1.2% of the main story. lol

Did you finish the heist quest yet? I haven't even done that.

[soundman98]

gifted myself a logitech g29 wheel, pedals, and shifter. rediscovering forza horizon 3 while also trying to figure out what combination of control tweaks feels most natural.

so far, can't get past the pendulum effect at speed. tail of the car starts coming out in a turn, and i just can't get it under control again like i can with a game pad or keyboard.

[Captain Snooze]

Originally Posted by Jordanwolf

Did you finish the heist quest yet? I haven't even done that.

Yeah, I've done that.
I'm now at 2.4%

I'm struggling to think that the main story can be done in 30 hours. How could one not be distracted?

[x808drifter]

30 hours if you literally ignore EVERYTHING else, skip through all the conversations, and choose the first response every time.

[Jordanwolf]

Originally Posted by x808drifter

30 hours if you literally ignore EVERYTHING else, skip through all the conversations, and choose the first response every time.

Don't forget difficulty on easy.

[Dadhawk]

I've never completed a game in anywhere near the given time. Basically, I do the opposite of a speed run, more like a crawl.