Didn't Sam Fisher switch from left to right handed in Splinter Cell? Or did the camera just look over a different shoulder?
The Leftorium
- Thread starter SubtleMockery
- Start date
Recommended Videos
The character model changed, but it was so he could look either way around a corner. It was never much of an issue in shooters and action games anyway, as I'm always paying more attention to the baddies than the character. It's the RPG territory where my grains get irked. BTW, why the HELL can you only be a white male in Fable?
Lack of foresight beyond Peter Molyneux's rampant boasting?
If you are irked about purported "complete" character customization, that lacks basic structuaral things like ethnicity, handedness, gender, then you're probably not looking at the best examples of character creation (although it still makes sense to do that, since the majority of anything isn't likely to be good when there are as many things out there as video games).
If you are irked about purported "complete" character customization, that lacks basic structuaral things like ethnicity, handedness, gender, then you're probably not looking at the best examples of character creation (although it still makes sense to do that, since the majority of anything isn't likely to be good when there are as many things out there as video games).
For consoles, certainly, and even more so when they don't offer lefty-control schemes, or better yet, fully customizable control schemes. But, when it comes to PCs, most control schemes are ambidextrous, even without the game necessarily offering fully customizable control schemes. As you say, albeit inaccurately with regards to PCs, the "more coarse controls" are placed on the keyboard, and the things requiring "accuracy, quick movements" are placed on the mouse. Lefties are perfectly capable, and quite likely, to be using their left hand for the same accurate, quick movements that you are using your right hand for, because mouse placement is by user's preference.LordOmnit said:
Also, to the argument that highly customizable games don't need to include lefty/righty/amby choices because they would only represent a minority of game players, I must say that I think it's silly. If a game is aiming for customizability, it makes perfect sense to allow a choice of dominant hand. Heck, if we're talking about humans in an RPG, shouldn't we be granting bonuses for certain hand dominance? And as mentioned by Dectilon, wouldn't it make sense to grant bonuses to off-hand dominant people in certain fight scenarios? (Princess Bride reference for the win, btw) And to all of your wonderful, logical analysis of L and g, while I certainly wouldn't argue against it's validility for deciding how many left-hand dominant individuals will play the game, I WOULD argue that it is irrelevant in determining whether or not a hand-dominance customization is worthwhile in said game.
Most Likely. But Mass Effect, Oblivion, Morrowind? WoW especially gets me because if you're going to make a game about equipment, then bloody well let me swing Zinroch with my left hand.
Why I bring it up is that (now, I'm no game developer) in the games I've played it doesn't look like it'd be AWFUL hard to switch the sword shape to the other half closed fist, y'know? You wouldn't even have to put in character creation or anything permanant like that, just.....stick the sword in the left hand slot. I've actually had games MOVE the equipment to the right hand when I stick in the left. Like...."No you retard, that doesn't go there."
Becuase white is the superiour race! Hail!McWipp said:
I kid, I kid. I sure that will change with Fable 2. Mass Effect, Oblivion and some others let you change skin tones.
Actually, if it wasn't in initial creation and was a choice through the game like you said, then that would imply that the characters were ambidextrous to begin with rather than anything else, because you could just flit back and forth between the hands all you want.
True, true. I guess I was just thinking of a design solution. But yeah, when playing D&D, you can't switch your main and off-hand constantly, and that's your imagination! So maybe it should be at character creation.
Link is left-handed or ambidextrous in all Zelda games with the sole exception of Twilight Princess' Wii version, and deliberately so: the Wii remote's sword-swinging was designed around the concept of holding the remote itself in the right hand.
Also, I'd like to think Samus Aran is left-handed, for obvious reasons. Her gun arm may be her right, but she only uses that hand for "pull trigger" and "switch weapon". All her fine-manipulation is in her left hand.
Again, those are action-adventure games.
In RPGs, it's a matter of animations. When a character is defending, they raise their left arm. When attacking, they raise their right arm and swing, and so on. All those skeletal animations which can be used on all equivalent characters, regardless of their outer model and texturing. In order to be left-handed, they can't just "mirror" the animation - skeletal animations don't work like that! They'd have to re-make every single animation used in combat or otherwise for a left-handed person... doubling the number of effective animations!
While I'm totally in agreement with you that a high-quality developer WILL justify this extra effort... when they're running behind schedule because of the animation department and the leap in debugging and testing those animations, you'll know what the problem is...
Not to mention, the moment the studios relent and allow left-handed characters, people will ask for ambidextrous characters. And then you've either got an unrealistic world where everyone can switch hands at will, or some complex "handing-weightedness" maths which inevitably leads to min-maxing in favour of a single arm or 50/50 balance. The extra programming work is notable too.
It's a more complicated issue than you think... and to satisfy a small proportion (7 to 10 percent) of their audience. Yes, that's still 700,000 to 1,000,000 people for WoW. It's rather expensive and time-consuming to satisfy just 1/10 people and not affect the remaining 9/10 in any way other than delaying the game and potentially introducing game-damaging mechanics.
Also, I'd like to think Samus Aran is left-handed, for obvious reasons. Her gun arm may be her right, but she only uses that hand for "pull trigger" and "switch weapon". All her fine-manipulation is in her left hand.
Again, those are action-adventure games.
In RPGs, it's a matter of animations. When a character is defending, they raise their left arm. When attacking, they raise their right arm and swing, and so on. All those skeletal animations which can be used on all equivalent characters, regardless of their outer model and texturing. In order to be left-handed, they can't just "mirror" the animation - skeletal animations don't work like that! They'd have to re-make every single animation used in combat or otherwise for a left-handed person... doubling the number of effective animations!
While I'm totally in agreement with you that a high-quality developer WILL justify this extra effort... when they're running behind schedule because of the animation department and the leap in debugging and testing those animations, you'll know what the problem is...
Not to mention, the moment the studios relent and allow left-handed characters, people will ask for ambidextrous characters. And then you've either got an unrealistic world where everyone can switch hands at will, or some complex "handing-weightedness" maths which inevitably leads to min-maxing in favour of a single arm or 50/50 balance. The extra programming work is notable too.
It's a more complicated issue than you think... and to satisfy a small proportion (7 to 10 percent) of their audience. Yes, that's still 700,000 to 1,000,000 people for WoW. It's rather expensive and time-consuming to satisfy just 1/10 people and not affect the remaining 9/10 in any way other than delaying the game and potentially introducing game-damaging mechanics.
Yeah, I totally agree. I've done some work with basic 3d modelling, and even that's a pain to fix/upkeep. That's why I said earlier I'm not expecting it to change. That'd be unreasonable.