KaiaSowapit Posted November 3, 2003 Share Posted November 3, 2003 Originally posted by babywax Addressing the "use your mouse to control your saber" comment, you won't look around. You decide to either attack and control your saber or look around and move, in real life people don't go running around strafing and swinging swords, fencing doesn't work like that. I'm not a fencer, but to the best of my knowledge, fencers don't stand in place indefinitely swinging their foils around either. Besides, you do appreciate there are other styles of sword fighting besides fencing, right? An extended discussion of this is perhaps best left for another thread, but I'm not convinced a "move or fight" system would work. In fact, I fear it would create more problems than it would solve. Hypothetical Example... Player A: Hey come over here I want to kill you! Player B: No, you come over here so I can kill you! Player A: No way d00d! You'll just slash at me soon as I get close! Player B: No I won't. Promise! Player A: Okay! (Player B slashes Player A immediately after he gets in range.) Player A: LAMER!!! There's virtually endless variations on this theme; immobile players would be more vulnerable to saber throw, blaster fire, etc. An alternative would be to have three independent controls; one for movement, one for attacking, and one for looking around. Good luck making that work - even if you could devise a control scheme, I doubt most people could get past the disorientation to actually conduct a reasonable fight. Frankly, I think it's just adding a level of sophistication to a game that doesn't need it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samuel Dravis Posted November 3, 2003 Share Posted November 3, 2003 If you want to have a mouse-controlled saber, just move the mouse around for looking, and if you want to slash with it, press an attack key (mouse1). It should be kind of like DBTS's mouse control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaiaSowapit Posted November 3, 2003 Share Posted November 3, 2003 Originally posted by Samuel Dravis If you want to have a mouse-controlled saber, just move the mouse around for looking, and if you want to slash with it, press an attack key (mouse1). It should be kind of like DBTS's mouse control. Okay if you use the mouse strictly for looking, how would you turn? If you use the keyboard for turning, then how do you strafe? If you use the keyboard for turning, moving AND strafing... sorry I just ran out of fingers. (Besides, that sounds awkward as hell - perhaps it works for tank simulation, but a fast-action melee? I don't think so, not for the average Jane/Joe.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TiE23 Posted November 3, 2003 Share Posted November 3, 2003 THIS ENGINE SUCKS CHICKEN WINGS!!!!! One word.... Bump mapping....... <Oh wait< TiE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acdcfanbill Posted November 3, 2003 Share Posted November 3, 2003 that kind of control was being implimented in Masters of the Force notice i said was, but it may yet be again, not sure what Razor is working on lately tho Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IG-64 Posted November 3, 2003 Author Share Posted November 3, 2003 Originally posted by Tie 23 THIS ENGINE SUCKS CHICKEN WINGS!!!!! One word.... Bump mapping....... <Oh wait< TiE Bump maps r your friend and reflections! Quake 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
txa1265 Posted November 3, 2003 Share Posted November 3, 2003 Originally posted by cheeto101 haha the sims?? Man thats the brittney spears of gaming, all the teenie boppers are the ones buyin it. Not to defend the Sims on its' own merits, but it has sold millions upon millions of copies ... and largely to 'non-gamers'. People who hate the tension and violence of FPS, the D&D-ness of RPG's, the pace of RTS, and on and on ... So rather than deride it - like people do with pop music, or the music industry did with the pirate programs - learn from it. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
txa1265 Posted November 3, 2003 Share Posted November 3, 2003 More on topic now ... I find the graphics in Jedi Academy wonderful, the environs engaging, and the combat exciting. I have played worse games with prettier graphics. And I will do so in the future. I have played worse games with nicer environments. And I will do so in the future. I have played worse games with better physics. And I will do so in the future. I have played worse games with better implemented weapons. And I will do so in the future. I have played worse games based on better graphics engines, and better physics engines, with better cutscene graphics. And I will do so in the future. Dark Forces and Jedi Knight are still better games than 99% of what you will find on the shelves of your local EBGames - and the graphics engine, physics realism and collision detection has nothing to do with that fact. It is the game and the gameplay. I have heard people say that good Ragdoll Physics can 'make or break a game'. What crap. These are the reasons we keep getting shorter games that are derivative (e.g. Call of Duty - not to say it isn't a good game) - we have to have the latest features, best graphics, cool physics, and it needs to play on my '486 ThinkPad, by the way. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
txa1265 Posted November 3, 2003 Share Posted November 3, 2003 - I think a couple of people were confusing Elite Force 1 and 2. Elite Force II would be the comparison point for Jedi Academy. When I compare them, it is not for the player model, as the game really is 1st person and I have no idea why they put in a 3rd person camera. Looking at the enemies and NPC's (yes, there are quite a few), and the overall environments, I think EFII has a slight edge in quality over JA. - But that is yet another example of what many of us are talking about - EFII's graphics are a bit prettier, it has Enterprise exploration and dialogue interaction (RPG-lite) and yet I don't imagine that if anyone here had to choose between JA and EFII to play they would choose EFII. I know I wouldn't. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrotoy7 Posted November 4, 2003 Share Posted November 4, 2003 As cool as EF2 is, the storyline, the exploration etc, I still love the ACTION of JA much more. Just look at it this way. Ive had EF2 for about 3 months, still havent gotten around to finish it, where I have played JA almost nonstop since sep19...... It all comes down to....the saber ! that's the *fundamental* difference for me....especially the saberstaff for me.... MTFBWYA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butt_Whisper Posted November 4, 2003 Share Posted November 4, 2003 Originally posted by KaiaSowapit I think Raven should come up with a cure for cancer while they're at it too - and in time for Christmas!!! LOL, and throw in world hunger and peace, for problems to solve, while they are at it!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
txa1265 Posted November 4, 2003 Share Posted November 4, 2003 Originally posted by Astrotoy7 As cool as EF2 is, the storyline, the exploration etc, I still love the ACTION of JA much more. Just look at it this way. Ive had EF2 for about 3 months, still havent gotten around to finish it, where I have played JA almost nonstop since sep19...... It all comes down to....the saber ! that's the *fundamental* difference for me....especially the saberstaff for me.... MTFBWYA Oh, I definitely agree - that's what I said. EFII has many nifty things about it, but I (and many others) definitely like Jedi Academy much better. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toms Posted November 6, 2003 Share Posted November 6, 2003 The Q3 was a great engine, for close quaters, fast battles. Unfortunately it wasn't a great choice for the huge, open levels that JK was famous for. The JK engine wasn't as good as Q2 (which came out a week later) but could render open spaces and numbers of enemies that would have brought the Q2 engine to it's knees. In the same way, I feel that maybe the Lithtech Engine would have been better suited to JO. The characters might not have bben quite as detailed, but the levels would have been much more open and varied and hopefully this would have allowed the level design to be better. I played AvP2 about 6 months after JO and I thought the graphics in AvP2 were much better. THe levels were much bigger and more open and there seemed to be opportunities for many more touches and ingame cinematics that just made the atmosphere so much better. The missions that had you walking around on top of the 10 storey high observation pods with the wind whistling past reminded me of the cool days of JK. I couldn't help but imagine how cool JO would have been if these guys had made it. Having said all this, SP is much more important to me than MP and I suspect that the MP code is one of the great strengths og the Q3 engine. I do feel that Lucasarts has the financial backing to allow them to concentrate on making great, unique games that enhance the genre (or licensed property). But recently they do seem to have decided to just crank out generic, middle of the road games at high speed and slap a SW license on them. I wouldn't have thought they needed to do this. KotOR is the first SW game in a while to capture the FEEL of SW properly. (JO missed it. XWA could have had it, but was rushed out and unfinished). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.