What are you playing now? [2007-2018]
- Thread starter digitalwanderer
- Start date
- Status
Sigfried1977
Legend
The Lego games have dynamic split screens. The line dividing the screens shifts around depending on where the characters are. Both halves also merge together as soon as both characters get close enough to each other again. It's pretty fucking cool actually.
Yeah it's a great implementation, works perfectly on the PC. Just wish more games would do the same, it's not like it's hard. It's probably more work to remove that functionality from the console port!
I dont quite follow if I create a 2 monitor horizontal eyefinity group(so 2 monitors appear to the game as 1 double wide monitor) like so
and the player chars stand to the side of each other i get the left players screen on the left monitor (blue)
and the right players screen on the right monitor (red) I would get the following
But if the players chars were above and below each other I would get the following
Thats not going to work If I split the monitors up so the arnt next to each other (eg left player can only see the left screen right player can only see the right screen)
I could create a vertical eyefinity group but I would still have the same problem but reversed (ok when chars above and below each other but borked whrn they are left and right of each other)
RenegadeRocks
Legend
Was intending to play Arkham Asylum today but it keeps giving me "Securom Launcher has stopped working" appcrash !Anyone knows any fix, apparently couldn't find any onSteam forums or google searches.
So, I played some Darksiders and the game is so damn good,eventhough I have played for just 10 mins
it feels like I am gonna have a good time in it.
So, I played some Darksiders and the game is so damn good,eventhough I have played for just 10 mins
it feels like I am gonna have a good time in it.Sigfried1977
Legend
I dont quite follow if I create a 2 monitor horizontal eyefinity group(so 2 monitors appear to the game as 1 double wide monitor) like so
and the player chars stand to the side of each other i get the left players screen on the left monitor (blue)
and the right players screen on the right monitor (red) I would get the following
But if the players chars were above and below each other I would get the following
Thats not going to work If I split the monitors up so the arnt next to each other (eg left player can only see the left screen right player can only see the right screen)
I could create a vertical eyefinity group but I would still have the same problem but reversed (ok when chars above and below each other but borked whrn they are left and right of each other)
I'm not 100% sure about this, but I believe you can opt out of dynamic split screen and and choose either horizontal or vertical split screen instead.
Maybe pjbliverpool can shed more light onto the subject. I only played Lego Star Wars The Clone Wars on the PS3, and since multiple screens aren't an option there I never bothered to check.
I'm afraid there are no options to select the type of split screen, it's either that or nothing it seems.
Playing a bit of Starcraft 2, campaign is quite ok. Multiplayer is just laughable bad, just micromanagement everywhere. Probably more fun to watch, but having to do mudane obvious tasks by hand all the time sitting in front of the computer is idiotic - they where created to take over idiot tasks in the first place.
Calling this a strategy game is insulting =), but Blizzard seems to have found their pro-clientel and that would hate if strategies would matter more than execution, their expertise working around a UI that probably would have be acceptable in the mid 90s would suddenly be useless.
Calling this a strategy game is insulting =), but Blizzard seems to have found their pro-clientel and that would hate if strategies would matter more than execution, their expertise working around a UI that probably would have be acceptable in the mid 90s would suddenly be useless.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Sure but that's the same with any sport. Why sprint 100 meters when you can hop in a golf cart and drive it? Why be forced to shoot at targets unaided in cross country skiing and shooting when things to stabilise the gun are readily available. Why have an offsides rule in soccer (sorry futbol for you Euros.
). Why have so many rules in F1 racing restricting what can be done with a vehicle?Starcraft 2 is a fairly comprehensive strategy game that not only emphasises macro play but also micro play. If you fail at either then you aren't going to be a top SC2 player. Complaining about the micro is the same as complaining about the rules in any Sport.
BTW - If they were to add automation of "mundane" tasks and allowed for a toggle to turn it on or off. Someone using that automation is quite likely to lose everytime to someone skilled in micro.
And it's insulting that you think there's no strategy involved. Just watch some of the better matches and you'll see that strategy is king. No grasp of strategy and you aren't going to make it very far. And Micromanagement IS strategy. Deciding when and where to use Psi Storm or EMP grenades will win or lose you a match just as easily as having a bad macro economy, not properly scouting, not building the correct units to counter your opponent, not using those counter units correctly, and a whole host of other things.
Heck speaking about counter units. Good micro is key to using those effectively. Vikings being a counter to Colossus. Hence a good Protoss player will retreat his colossus slightly and let his stalkers take out the vikings if they follow. Automation would generally have the vikings follow the colossus to take them out as they are the natural Terran counter to that unit. Good micro will have the Terran player back their vikings out and attempt a flank or attempt to bait the protoss player into over-extending their colossus. On the other hand if the protoss player doesn't use his colossus to cover his stalkers, those stalkers will be quickly taken out by the Terran player. So if you have good players you'll see a lot of baiting, feinting, flanking, etc.
It's beautiful when you see good players. Just watching a good marine split when faced with a baneling charge is impressive. Or multiple drops behind enemies lines hitting multiple bases while simultaneously hitting from the front which requires a massive amount of micro but can rip apart an opponent who isn't equally skilled. Not something that can be automated as the computer wouldn't be able to think that strategicly. And if it could, why even bother playing? Just watch the computer play.
There's automation where it makes sense (healing and resource gathering) and none where it doesn't. In most cases automation only serves to reduce a persons skill level and allow for more casual people to feel like they have a lot of skill. Like target shooting with weapon stabilisation aids. Or active suspension and traction control in F1 racing.
BTW - if you have SC2 it's worth looking into the community mods. You don't even have to go to a website to see them. Just go to multiplayer and browse the games list. Any mod you don't have will automatically be downloaded. There are some fantastic mods. I'm currently playing some of the RPG focused mods as well as some co-op Survival based mods..
Regards,
SB
sure there is strategy involved, but you cant ignore the idotic choices like having to spend everything upfront, even units deep down in a queue. Just pressing 'E' dozends of times to get your probe built ASAP is retarded. If you could queue ahead of the money you`d actually have more time focussing of archiving your strategy - if you fail to toggle ahead between your base(s) and units all the time you wont win with the best strategy. And thats not even targeted at microing battles - you need to micro the UI like an idiot just to tell it what to do.
And not beeing able to zoom out more is similar retarded, what purpose does that serve? (On championships you have given hardware anyways, at home you will still be disadvantaged if you play at very low res and slow computer). No configurable minimap or even splitscreen either. you need to twitch around like an epileptic if you plan anything like a multi-pronged attack - and the key word is planning here, you know the part that makes "strategy" strategy. Everything is artificial getting in the way to please a certain crowd and their spectators who train just to archive being able to play the game.
and i have not a problem if competing in sprinting championship required training, however if you play chess and have to run 100m in 9.5 secs else you lose your current turn, then its not chess anymore - its not a competition of pure chesskills but people who are pro runners first and chessplayers second.
SC2 is a total fail as a strategy-game for certain, sure it sells well and is fun to watch - it aint fun to play.
And not beeing able to zoom out more is similar retarded, what purpose does that serve? (On championships you have given hardware anyways, at home you will still be disadvantaged if you play at very low res and slow computer). No configurable minimap or even splitscreen either. you need to twitch around like an epileptic if you plan anything like a multi-pronged attack - and the key word is planning here, you know the part that makes "strategy" strategy. Everything is artificial getting in the way to please a certain crowd and their spectators who train just to archive being able to play the game.
and i have not a problem if competing in sprinting championship required training, however if you play chess and have to run 100m in 9.5 secs else you lose your current turn, then its not chess anymore - its not a competition of pure chesskills but people who are pro runners first and chessplayers second.
SC2 is a total fail as a strategy-game for certain, sure it sells well and is fun to watch - it aint fun to play.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
The more apt analogy is that if you automated the most common opening moves since they are most commonly used (similar to automation in a computer game) then chess is longer a strategy game. You've removed the micro-management from chest in order to make it more casual friendly.
While opening moves and responses to moves by the other player are often quite common, it's the ability to micro manage and deviate from those standard openings or standard responses that differentiates a master chess player from your average chess player.
In a similar vein it's the micromanagement in SC2 that allows for strategy above and beyond what the common layperson is capable of. Without that micromanagement there would be much less strategy to differentiate a good player from a bad player.
All good sports and games require some form of tedious micromanagement in order to be good. For Poker or Black Jack it's counting cards (you notice noone likes a person who writes down every card that is dealt or discarded? Automation). For swimming it's all about finding those little things that shave off 0.001 seconds from your lap times (tedious micromanagement).
Sure if you want a casual strategy game/a casual sport then I fully agree that micromanagement is bad. If you want a competitive strategy game/a competitive sport then micromanagement is absolutely essential.
BTW - I understand it's just your opinion and that's fine, but when you try to state it as fact...
That's when I find it odd.
Regards,
SB
it makes rather easy tactics and strategies hard, just for the sake of it - devaluing that part of the game and just adding tons of needless clicks. does it really add to the game? nope.
does it create a own group of people who train 8 hours a day just to give them something to do and beeing able to buy their amphetamines - sure.
And some of the pro-replays are fun to watch. try watching a replay 1-2 leagues down from the top and you will curl in pain, and thats what most people experience.
does it create a own group of people who train 8 hours a day just to give them something to do and beeing able to buy their amphetamines - sure.
And some of the pro-replays are fun to watch. try watching a replay 1-2 leagues down from the top and you will curl in pain, and thats what most people experience.
Was intending to play Arkham Asylum today but it keeps giving me "Securom Launcher has stopped working" appcrash !Anyone knows any fix, apparently couldn't find any onSteam forums or google searches.
So, I played some Darksiders and the game is so damn good,eventhough I have played for just 10 mins
I started Darksiders and thought it was fun too. Could never get myself to pick it up again though. Right now I'm hooked on Mass Effect 2.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Sure and if you automate most things you remove most of the strategy. Which is true of anything involving strategy.
Just like if you automated most of the common moves in chess, you remove virtually all the strategy involved in chess.
Not your style of gameplay and strategy, that's fine. Just like most people don't like chess. Many people don't like SC2 multiplayer because it isn't casual enough (the multiplayer, not single player).
Strategy is all about exploiting your opponents weaknesses. The more you automate the less weaknesses there are to expose, the less strategic decisions you can make.
It's really no surprise that the best multiplayer strategy games all feature massive amounts of micro. CoH and DoW for example have even more micro than SC2. TBS (Turn Based Strategy) games feature even higher levels of micro since you can spend virtually unlimited time (like Chess) making decisions about what a unit will do although most TBS games don't bother with the macro-economy side of strategy.
Regards,
SB
No, it allows you to plan out more, if you can queue ahead... it doesnt take away ANY options or depth it actually helps managing the big picture. You might have to get your head around spending resources you dont have yet, but thats rather easy to comprehend. Supcom does this rather effortless.
And its quite easy to define "best" as most popular, MC Donalds makes the best food by that definiton.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
It allows people with little to no skill to pretend they can strategize as they can now focus soley on one or two things instead of trying to strategize on 3-4 or up to 10 different fronts all within a limited amount of time. I don't consider that increasing your strategic options. You're only limiting the options of everyone in order to bolster how good someone with little skill feels about their own ability to perform.
And I'm saying all that considering I KNOW I'm not good at competitive online RTS play. I've always been more of a TBS player. The more micro and the more options the better. It allows me to achieve feats of strategy that just aren't achieveable in more simplified TBS games or even the most complex RTS games. RTS games always trip me up because I like to think about things too much.
Anyway, you can have the last word on that as neither of us is going to convince the other.
Just as long as you realize that neither of our stands is a statement of overwhelming fact or certainty. I can respect that we have differing opinions on the matter.On to what I've been playing. Going through Deus Ex: HR (and using the inifite XP glitch so I can play it more like Deus Ex the first game.
And I'm struck by how much this game actually wants to be Thief in the future rather than Deus Ex. The whole pathological focus on stealth and removal of real freedom to proceed however a player chooses would really fit in the Thief franchise much better. Although, the focus on non-lethal and melee takedowns still doesn't really fit...but anyways...
I only thought of that as I was playing because I'd heard that they might be working on a Thief game. And that actually has me excited considering how relatively well they did the stealth elements in Deus Ex. Even if it falls apart a bit at times.
Also makes me miss the gameplay from Splinter Cell 1 and 2.
Regards,
SB
Currently playing Witcher 2 again and enjoying it more than I did last year. Went the different route in Act 2 compared to my first play through last year, siding with Roche and ending up in Henselt's army camp. Amazingly beautiful game.
itsmydamnation
Veteran
im playing GTA 1 at the moment
- Status
