This is certainly true for me as well, but I found that far too often while climbing in Infamous that Cole wasn't doing what I wanted him to do, or even what I thought he should be doing based on the direction I was holding. A lot of the time it seemed like it was almost over correcting for any slight inaccuracy in what direction I was holding. And this drove me absolutely bonkers by the end since climbing was such a huge part of getting around all of the time. On the other hand, I went through Uncharted 2 and Assassin's Creed 2 with the controls failing me so little that I could probably count the number of times the game misread my intention without running out of fingers to count on. I don't expect perfection, but I do have some really high standards when it comes to controls, and they especially get on my nerves when I'm still putting up with the same mistakes and problems at the end of the game that I was dealing with at the start. Controls are the players connection to the game world and their character after all, and I shouldn't have to be fighting them for the entire game.Originally Posted by Loony BoB
I will readily admit that the number of enemies in games like Uncharted or Call of Duty aren't very high. I think they do have more variety than Infamous did, but we may be talking double that at most. The reason that low enemy variety isn't quite as important in those games though is that there is a lot more variety to the environments. Granted, this is largely because they're not sandbox games, but the levels in each can vary radically, and while they may utilize many of the same basic gameplay mechanics in each level, they put them to work in a lot of different combinations, and usually try to throw in something that will make encounters later in the game somewhat novel compared to earlier levels. So rather than relying solely on enemy variety to vary the combat experience, they can vary the level design.People keep bringing up the "same, same, same" opponents but... every game is like that. You fight the same guys over and over. This is normal. Are there actually games where every other enemy is that different? I wonder how many different enemies there are in, say, Uncharted or Batman: Arkham Asylum. Even in games like Call of Duty, which I've personally not played.
To take the original Modern Warfare as an example, you move from levels made up of very tight enclosed spaces (such as the opening tanker level) to wide open farm fields dotted with small villages, to half destroyed urban warzones and even some fairly intact but deserted cities. And within the spaces of these levels you may end up in situations where it's better to take cover and open fire on enemies as they come at you in waves, provide sniper support, or in some cases use stealth to make it through unseen. And on top of that, many areas have multiple possible paths through them. When fighting in urban areas for instance, you're sometimes left to choose whether you stay at street level with your squad and deal with enemies firing at you both from the street and from the top floors of buildings, or you may choose to duck inside the closest building, go up to the top floor and take the high ground.
The problem with combat in Infamous is that the majority of it takes place either at street level or on the roof tops, or a combination of the two. And combat plays out in almost the exact same way every time because of it. There are no grand strategies to employ because combat in itself wasn't that complex and terrain was rarely a factor in it. The only time I'd usually find myself considering it was if I had to run away for a minute, but even then it was just a question of do I run around the corner, to the next building, or climb? So while enemy variety in Infamous may be somewhat comparable to other games, it's level variety isn't. Now for the record, I think this is a problem with almost any sandbox game out there, but I'm not sure it would have to be if Cole had more combat oriented powers that let him use it to his advantage.
Reply With Quote