Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Urist McScoopbeard]

Ah, here's a pet peeve of mine. Not having the kind of rebinding support on consoles like PC does.

I play Rocket League with a controller on my mac, and the rebinding is so much gloriously better than the original controls. I played RL on XBone once... it was so fucking weird, I couldn't move right. Just let people rebind shit Microsoft!!!!!

[wierd]

Allowing rebinding of keys, requires that the key bindings be stored somewhere for permanence, and requires that they be loaded before play starts.

Think about this a moment on a console.  You have a system that has storage, yes-- but that storage is intended for saved game data. There is no system-wide storage medium, like say, the system registry. As such, when the game first launches, the only media it has is the game disc, which is read only.  EG, when it first powers on, it needs defaults on buttons, so that you can navigate menus, etc. 

Before you get cocky with me on this-- XBOX and pals are designed to be multi-user. saved games are already separated by which user is logged in. The system does not allow general read/write to the hard disk. (GoD containers on the XBOX are read-only as well, so dont get ideas. This is a security measure to prevent hackers from exploiting the container, and simplifies the digital signature system used to verify that a GoD container is legitimate/not pirated.) SO-- to have custom key bindings, the ONLY place you can store that is *gasp* INSIDE A SAVE FILE.

You could go about this the Capcom way-- have an annoying "system" save that on first boot, gets created, and loaded with default keybindings that the player can set later-- and on subsequent startups gets loaded immediately. (this is how Monster Hunter Tri does its thing on Wii, for instance.) but most XBOX games do not do this. Presumably this is because of the filthy casuals who just want to play immediately, and dont want to bother with remapping the gamepad, who apparently are a pretty large portion of the gaming demographic.

Just saying it is not as straightforward or simple as doing it on the PC is, where you can just write an XML file somewhere with the binding schema, and have a nearly inexhaustible supply of potential binding layouts ready to roll. (because HDD access is cheap and effective.)

When you couple that access problem, with the problem with casuals and load times, with time constraints and budget limits in game development, the use of a bog-standard set of loadouts becomes the lowest common denominator that gets used.

 

[Parsely]

Where did you learn about this?

[Zanzetkuken The Great]

Think about this a moment on a console.  You have a system that has storage, yes-- but that storage is intended for saved game data.

Curious, what are the multiple gigs of data the game installs before it becomes playable?

[wierd]

Think about this a moment on a console.  You have a system that has storage, yes-- but that storage is intended for saved game data.

Curious, what are the multiple gigs of data the game installs before it becomes playable?

Already addressed.  That is the game on demand (GoD) container.  It is created by the dashboard, is digitally signed, and after being made, is read only.

[Shadowlord]

I don't really want to argue this, but: Console (ex: XBox 360) games already manage to save your individual settings for that game, where you can have different joystick sensitivity and gamepad setup from game to game, various other settings, even character customization options (e.g. in the Halo series for MP) that aren't saved in your saved games because it turns out that it's entirely possible to have a separate save file just for your game profile stuff!

(Not to mention Halo 3+ also allow you to make modifications of maps in the Forge and save and share those - there's nothing stopping games from making additional files for storing data which aren't saved games)

[MrRoboto75]

Xbox at least had the benefit of an internal hard drive

But PS2 and before only had really tiny memory cards.  Hell, Animal Crossing shipped with a free memory card, because the game invariably takes up a whole card.  PS1 cards only had 16 slots, and most games either took multiple slots (Gran Turismo took like five), or took a slot per save game.

[SOLDIER First]

I really hate when a game places an unreasonably difficult enemy in the middle of a level just because it can. If most enemies can be killed in a few hits, but this one takes a lot of punishment before dying, and you can't backstab it or anything, and it doesn't flinch at all unless you hit it about six or seven times in a row (which is difficult because it WON'T FLINCH and proceeds to whirl around and smack you while you're hitting it, despite being in another attack animation already), and there's a non-optional part of the game that forces you to basically fight two at once if you aren't careful, it's this. I mean, for god's sake, they're practically minibosses.

Yes, I'm being salty about Dark Souls. But seriously... fuck these guys.

[SeriousConcentrate]

Which enemy/game?

[SOLDIER First]

Hollow Manservants/Jailers from 3.

[SeriousConcentrate]

Are you talking about those bullshit red-robed assholes that temporarily drain your max HP to 1 no matter what you do?

[SOLDIER First]

No, I'm talking about Hollow Manservants. I said '/Jailers' because the wiki page said jailers and I got confused. In hindsight it was probably referring specifically to the ones with cages.

[SeriousConcentrate]

Oh, the guys in the Undead Settlement. Uh, they're not too hard. Just keep in mind all of Dark Souls 3 is 'roll until there's an attack opening, smack them once or maybe twice if you're feeling ballsy and using a straight sword, go back to step one until enemy/boss/invader/etc. is dead'.

The, uh, the jailers are something else entirely, later on in the game. And yeah, they do what I said they do. They're not fun.

[SOLDIER First]

Uh, they're not too hard.

for you

[Draignean]

I really hate when a game places an unreasonably difficult enemy in the middle of a level just because it can. If most enemies can be killed in a few hits, but this one takes a lot of punishment before dying, and you can't backstab it or anything, and it doesn't flinch at all unless you hit it about six or seven times in a row (which is difficult because it WON'T FLINCH and proceeds to whirl around and smack you while you're hitting it, despite being in another attack animation already), and there's a non-optional part of the game that forces you to basically fight two at once if you aren't careful, it's this. I mean, for god's sake, they're practically minibosses.

Yes, I'm being salty about Dark Souls. But seriously... fuck these guys.

You're going to love black knights and cathedral knights, and they aren't as bad as they were in earlier games. This is to say nothing of the pale King's greatsword knights. I'm decent at the game, but I still Zoidberg my way past them when I go to his boss fight.

Hollow manservants, for reasons I don't yet fathom, will stagger pretty pretty easily from whip blows. Everything else... what SC said. They're big, dumb, and slow. Float like butterfly, sting like a bee.

Unreasonably difficult is kind of the status quo for dark souls. Now, the actual jailers SC mentioned are sort of a special case, since nothing else does what they do and they're basically a gigantical fuck-you. Heaven forbid you like large weapons in those tight corridors...