Comment with Facebook
Click connect and comment instantly!
|
Comment with Dtoid
New? SIGN UP - it takes 5 seconds
|
Comments policy
Destructoid is an open discussion community. You don't need to "audition" to post a comment - just speak your mind. We respect differing opinions on the site, so have at it. Be smart, funny, insightful, clueless, or cute -- but back it up with substance. Keep your cool, keep it fun. We only ask that you act respectfully and above all: don't be a troll and ruin it for everyone else. Don't bring down gamers or we'll, you know, gently shoot you in the face and stuff you into a flaming mailbox. Each comment is your opportuntity to make this community awesomer. Is that even a word?
Avoiding the banhammer only requires common sense: spamming, trolling, racism, NSFW stuff, and other forms of sucking will not be tolerated. If anyone is griefing please report abuse. Be good. Don't suck!
Follow
RSS
Contact
Lots of games adopted the Halo system, only hold a couple guns at a time, get rid of the health packs, etc.
I can already tell you Far Cry 2 doesn't have the cover system (I played it!). Not sure on Fallout3 and doubt it in Mercenaries 2 (especially since everything can get blown the fuck up).
As long as the system is half decent, requires a button to use (unlike Kane and Lynch) I'll use it.
Now, I might the only person who thinks this, but I think Army of Two did cover really well, it wasn't perfect, but it was a step in the right direction as far as cover goes. Your characters automatically adjusted to cover based on the height, and whether you were on the left or right side of it, and aiming caused you to pop up to shoot out from it. So it was all done automatically, and you were never stuck to it.
Also, I think MGS4's cover was more of a wall press for hiding than it is cover, because as a cover system, I agree it kinda sucked. It's easier to manually crouch behind things and shoot, I thought the same for GTA4 as well.
I'm not a big fan of regenerating health as well, it makes less sense than health packs in most cases, and those make no sense at all. I love the thrill of finishing a hard boss battle with a sliver of health left.
Here here! :)
I agree that cover seems the new standard, much like the over the shoulder camera is in third-person-shooters. I really like this system as it adds a (slight) level of realistic thinking to how you play instead of Halo where if you want to take a shot at someone you have to be out in the open (i.e. a sitting duck).
Welcome to destructoid :D
Also, Welcome to Destructoid :)
I like the button press for cover, it's easy and effective, it ensures you wont stick to anything accidentally as you run past it and it means you are in control of the character ALL of the time; automatic shit pisses me off, I'm still waiting for a game where I get to reload using the analogue sticks/mouse to simulate emptying and loading my gun.
First person shooters I don't think so much, the 'peek' function is a favorite of mine, I think that works better than a pop and shoot cover system would work in a FPS. Being locked to a position in FPS mode would just feel a little weird to me.
And thats my 2 cents.
and @ Kinji
I feel the same way, I miss having next to no health at the end of a boss fight :(
It is interesting to note how one person's favorite cover system could be someone else's least favorite. Some liked Army of Two some hated it and the same could be said about almost any of them. Although I haven't heard any comments about Rainbow Six Vegas' cover system..yet. These developers must have a hell of time trying to build game play mechanics that appeal to a broad range of people.
Ah, too bad all forum conversations couldn't be like this were people can still disagree but still respect each other's opinions...:/