No, I really did want the legs mechanic, only I wanted it to be for exploration or walking around ships and stations, or doing EVA's. What I don't want is the same tired old shoot everyone you see on every planet or moon you land on. Rant over.
Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12
- Thread starter Yaffle
- Start date
-
- Tags
- star citizen
So you're saying that it is indeed pretty useless. What you actually want is agility, mobility, and just raw speed — all the exact opposites.
And the counter-point is that stance is useless unless there are sensible and worth-while mechanics to support it. Otherwise, it's just Chris wanting to spend more time in the mocap studio for no intelligent reason. Hence the question you didn't answer.
sorry, I should have said "it is usless in SC".
That’s something that’s perfectly possible, thing is in a multiplayer experience that they can’t tailor it to your needs specifically, you have to accept that there are other aspects available for other people. That’s life, a little compromise here and there
It really isn’t, see my last example
I'm not going to play the shooty bits much anyway as I play exclusively in VR. So I wait to see what additions there are to exploration.
cannot find the promised version to run...
How do you know?
But it wasn't the Jeebus patch that everyone expected, and later patches made things worse. As I understand it, and please, correct me if i'm wrong, but the best experience was before CIG started working on any of these magic techs.
Be careful man, you know how women are. She’s working and you’re here commenting on videogames all day every day during office hours. Don’t get cought buddy
Heh. It was better when she went to uni to give lectures. That way i could have speakers on instead of having to wear headphones. Now she just complains i'm not listening to her when she's trying to talk to me from the other room while i've got the headphones on.
I do have the luxury of being able to browse forums whenever i want though except when i've got lots of work on. Self-employed, so my time is my own.
Ah!! The new Lakon ship!
Thats not what I'm saying at all. Quite the opposite. When you're an infanteer in those type of combined-arms games (much like) in real life you're constrained by limitations as to how much of the things you have listed as 'wants'.
However, those limitations can be dealt with in a myriad of ways (correct loadouts for as a clearer example). The ability to adjust your stance is key to utilising the terrain to your advantage. Pretending it isn't is.. silly at best.
Incorporate better weapon stability mechanics/weapon resting.
Reduce silhouette for crossing ridgelines, using undulating terrain.
Ability to use terrain as concealment, soft or hard cover.
Minimise damage from 'shrapnel' type weapons and explosives.
That's four I've thought of, with minimal effort.
*Note: You didn't 'add' the question to your post till after I had read it. I'm not getting into an argument about 'fully fleshed mechanics' over a game which I don't own, and have barely touched outside of one free-fly event about a year ago.
Useful for ambush as well.
In the old Star Citizen days at Jump Town, would frequently go prone inside the outpost when a group of people were trying to breach and take over the building.
Actually, it is. You just happened to use a very poor illustration for what you presumably wanted to say. I say “presumably” because…
…aaaaaaand it is therefore quite useless. In those kinds of games, going prone has the exact opposite effect of the one you're describing: you just end up being easier to hit with no real benefit. Pretending otherwise is just ignorant.
Two of those aren't mechanics and aren't reliant on there being a prone position in the game.
The other two are just things that could happen, and that's just just classical begging the question.
My question is what mechanics are in the game. Since you don't know, let's just cut to the chase: you are asserting without evidence, experience, or any other support that something that requires a host of game mechanics to serve a purpose is somehow useful. So, what you're actually saying is that you have no idea whether it is useful or not, but you are assuming that it is like in other combined-arms games, where it is indeed the exact opposite of useful. It really serves no purpose that you know of other than to let Chris spend more backer money on his dreams of doing Hollywood things, like lots of mocap.
You are also skipping over a very key assumption in saying that, so let's repeat the question: describe to me, if you please, the full mechanics that determine on-foot accuracy in this marginal portion of the game…
Last edited:
Why ask me? I’m not making the game
Hey, me neither, I actually enjoy the chill parts a lot more these days.
Will ED have high fidelity elevator panels?