chris the cynic on 20/6/2010 at 13:13
Quote Posted by YogSo
chris, my argument had nothing to do with what you are saying about the animations in Jedi Academy (if IIRC, they not only did force the third-person perspective, I'm pretty sure the developers disabled the first-person entirely when using a lightsaber; but I too would have to check that). And who is saying that you have to change perspective twice everytime you do a melee attack?
The developers. And those who have seen a demo.
Unless there is some magical way to have the game be first person, have a third person "takedown", and then be back in first person without switching perspective (twice.)
Of course that's just takedowns, which you would think make up only one part of melee combat. After all, melee (in this context) basically applies to anything where you hit someone with something. So any time you simply hit someone on the head, that's melee combat, right?
"
No, we dropped [creeping up behind people and banging them on the head]. We wanted to focus more on the takedowns."
(That said, maybe you can still walk up to the front of someone and stab them in the abdomen, but if you can do that and yet can't walk up behind them and bash them on the head that is thoroughly nuts.)
Quote:
And I guess the other mission you talk about is the one with the 'unkillable' rancor, but that doesn't count because it's a boss-like puzzle, and you could use the lightsaber (or whatever weapons you brought with you) against the rest of the enemies on that level just fine.
Don't be absurd. I was talking about the level where there are no enemies but sand worms which are entirely unaffected by the lightsaber.
Obviously any situation where you can slice someone is one where you can use the lightsaber. It doesn't mean you should, often times it's much simpler to just shoot them, but if you really want to you can use the lightsaber anytime you can get within range.
Chade on 20/6/2010 at 21:58
Quote Posted by negativeliberty
So in other words, you can't refute that this was a consequence of third-person gameplay? Because unlike what you seem to be suggesting, you have yet to make an argument against it, let alone repeat it.
Refute your argument? Your so called "argument" consists of "err, this feature wasn't in T1/2, so, umm ... I'm just going to say it was put there for 3rd person!". It's so fucking weak I can't believe you take it seriously.
Most platformers, fighting games, or pretty much anything which requires a good understanding of the space around the player use 3rd person perspective. First person perspective is generally used to draw straight lines between the player and far away objects.
There are three ways to gauge distance in games: look at the size of the object, measure the distance between two objects on the screen, or look at the relationship between the two objects and their surrounding environment. When objects are close to the player, FPP only allows you to judge their size. With third person you can still use all three.
Matthew on 21/6/2010 at 11:09
Quote Posted by chris the cynic
Don't be absurd. I was talking about the level where there are no enemies but sand worms which are entirely unaffected by the lightsaber.
Given that they were entirely unaffected physically by
any weapon, that's a strange qualifier to use.
chris the cynic on 21/6/2010 at 13:23
Quote Posted by Matthew
Given that they were entirely unaffected physically by
any weapon, that's a strange qualifier to use.
It isn't that strange when you consider that the example was brought up to point out that the game wasn't just about lightsaber duels. The fact that shooting them doesn't do anything isn't really relevant.
Also, as I recall, they could be killed using thermal detonators but it was useless because they'd respawn. As I said before, I don't have the game installed to check right now.
YogSo on 21/6/2010 at 15:09
Quote Posted by chris the cynic
It isn't that strange when you consider that the example was brought up to point out that the game wasn't just about lightsaber duels. The fact that shooting them doesn't do anything isn't really relevant.
That was a bad choice of words there: by saying lightsaber "duels" I was referring to the exclusive use of the lightsaber as a weapon (regardless of what weapons were using the opponents). I know that is not what duel means, so I apologize for the confussion caused*, but I thought in the context of my post it was clear what I was talking about (Matthew understood it perfectly). And I already said that I had completely forgotten about the possibility of using guns/grenades in the game; you can guess from that how much I used them (probably only on that 'escape' level we've already mentioned).
In any case, I think you will agree with me when I say that the high point of either Jedi Outcast/Jedi Academy never was using one of the <i>lesser</i>, <i>uncivilized</i> guns, and in fact they were severely underplayed in Academy in which, unlike Outcast, the player started with a lightsaber right off the bat.
* And now that I mention it, I want to express my gratitude to you and to all the other people in this forum with enough patience for reading my awkwardly written posts and engage in a polite discussion with me.
