Why Metal Gear Rising was Awful.

[rob_simple]

Not about the games I like, its about the functionality, and I get really specific (see my last post) you would need to respond to each of these points like able sea cat instead of trying to tell me off with one line.

Okay, I read your detailed post, and I have come to the conclusion that your problem is you don't want to think on your feet. I actually noticed this earlier in your posts, that one of your major problems is doing the same thing does not always yield the same results in MGR, (i.e. enemies won't always be stun-locked by specific attacks; well dodge out of your Zandatsu instead of standing there to be hit by it).

You seem to think this is bad because it means you can't rely on doing the same thing over and over again, but it could be argued that it makes the combat much more engaging because you are constantly forced to switch up tactics. Enemy didn't get stun-locked like you wanted him to? Dodge out of his attack and try something else.

It's good because it means when a particular enemy turns up you can't just go, 'oh no problem, I know this combo works on him'. You have to actually come up with tactics on the fly, which is much more engaging, realistic and adds to replay value. All that is subjective, of course, some people like when X always results in Y, and that's fair enough; some of us prefer a more dynamic experience.

Once again, it all comes back to your unwillingness to adapt and actually learn how the game works. It just doesn't do what you expect it to and so you've decided that means it is broken/bad.

 

[EHKOS]

Baiting title. You could have said why the combat in MGR is awful/frustrating. Sure the story was a bit loopy, but it did have its messages. It was an interesting political view and had a few existential questions too.
I had fun with the combat, but then again I only played on normal. The only real problem was when my checkpoint autosaved me with about one bar of health and no repair nodes on Armstrong's last form. But that was partially my inability to last long enough until they give you more health.
And I never figured out how the hell to actually dodge, so I just parried, but mostly kept on the attack and dashed around enemies.

But I had lots of fun with it, it's a fun beat n' slash title.

 

[TehCookie]

What I've read was it was awful because you couldn't parry. The difference between walking and parrying is holding down the stick in a direction or tapping the stick in a direction. I was annoyed at it at first because I couldn't parry either, I had to look up tips on how to actually do it. Once I got it down the game was great fun. Oh and if you need to end your attack animation to parry, blade mode cancel it.

Also if you know/aim your attacks, use lock on, and/or stop mashing buttons you don't zoom around everywhere. You complain there's no strategy, but you just refuse to use it. However the game doesn't tell you anything, you have to find it on your own. The stinger attack (forward, forward heavy) is a great attack to close distance, so while it does send you zooming it helps you control the battlefield. When you do a stinger if you dodge afterwards it cancels the ending animation and moves you out of harms way making the stinger a much better attack. I suck at air combat so I can't say much about it, but there's another strategy.

Yes the game is annoying since you have to be able to parry to play it properly, but if you're mashing buttons and refusing to learn the systems because it's not like another game, that's you. Not the game. Yet it still may not be your cup of tea, but you shouldn't ignorantly criticize it.

Pretty much this.

Many people have played through the game, and while you really do need to learn everything yourself, once you learn the ins and outs of parrying, dodging, blade mode cancels etc the game becomes quite fun.

And yeah, you really don't zoom around everywhere if you stop spamming buttons, and start linking combos and using specific attacks.

Plus, I don't know what you mean by "3000+ hours in fighting games", but if your talking about something like street fighter, yeah nah, completely different genres.

That would be like me saying "I can't play CoD even thought I have 3000+ hours in Starcraft 2."

Fighting games and action games with a block are very similar utilizing the blockstun/hitstun concepts.. also how can you call me ignorant when you can't deny the amount of randomly decided forward movement on most attacks and the stinger strategy would be slow and still allow for the problems of direction facing and parrying. The parrying was poorly executed it's very hard to deny that. Anyone know the difference between white flashing attacks red flashing attacks purple flashing attacks gold flashing attacks or blue flashing attacks? Which ones can I parry which are unblockable? It's poor, was fun for a bit but lazily put together not just in the lack of a tutorial but also in practice... Don't call me ignorant when I PLAYED THE GAME, it makes me as equally qualified as you...

I called you ignorant because you obviously don't understand it. I play fighting games, I beat the story mode in the first two Blazblue games and P4A, but that doesn't make me understand all the mechanics. I'm pretty shit at fighting games because I have trouble holding combos together and don't use any strategy beyond button mashing (or spamming Jin's ice car). So am I just as qualified as you to talk about fighting game mechanics because I played them? I'm pretty sure my ignorance could make your bang your head against a wall to escape it.

The game uses colors to tell you what you can and can't parry so you don't parry impossible attacks. Red is parryable, yellow is not, and blue is if the enemy counter parries if I recall correctly. That's why I called you ignorant. You don't know what the colors mean and whine that you don't know which attacks can be parried when it's right in front of you.

Since you're a fighting game fan, only using the stinger strategy is like only using hadouken. You work it into your combos and there's some attack you do after to keep from being hit right to make the move safer right? That's what it is. As for your direction problem, that's why I said aim. You can use knowledge from previous games to help you (like crates contain items) but don't expect it to play exactly like something else.

A lack of a good tutorial is a valid complaint. I'm not saying the game is perfect, so at least complain about the actual faults.

Ok maybe I am, but there are still more technical problems I encountered even when I executed something correctly, meaning not a fault of my own but of the game. I would argue a lot of people are justifying their purchase by defending the obviously poor mechanics. Theres still more I've listed as problems which you can address, but yes i concede I cant deny my ignorance of the array of colors and their largly unexplained properties.

If you don't like it because of the actual problems, I can't say anything about that. If you don't like it because it's not to your taste, that's fine too I'm not going to force you to like it. Even if it does have perfect mechanics you can still hate the game, I despise cover based shooters. It doesn't mean their gameplay is broken.

I love fighting games, the mechanics in mgr are broken upon comparison to other functional games with similar characteristics. You like it? Great, can't deny. But, I was meaning to get into a more condenced focuses discussion and breakdown of the parrying system. (only one aspect of the game)

You already hate it and refuse to learn it and keep comparing it to something radically different. Especially when you dislike the 3rd dimension part about the game. We'll get nowhere.

Never said the 3rd dimension is the problem I play other 3d fighters and dont encounter camera and the other listed problems. I assure you these games are not radically different...combos, blocking, dodging... its all there.

Like I said we'll get nowhere until you stop expecting it to be a fighting game. Almost every action game has some form of combos, blocking and dodging but they're all different.

 

[zerkocelot]

snip

Combo length is not specificly a relevant aspect of gameplay... it's balanced within the context of the fighting system. Some games have longer combos (Mvc3) some much shorter (ssf4) the only difference is the amount of time the comboed person is waiting in hitstun. In mgr hitstun is non standardized, non effective, and sometimes non existant. All depending on the specific attacks of the specific enemies. Then you have unblockables, all while fighting multiple enemies. This makes for hundreds of thousands of combinations of defensive tactics needed to escape the situations, unlike in dark souls where chaining a couple dashes would generally keep you out of harm. MGR has people doing teleports and sonic speed dashing slashes all fucking with you directional input defense mechanism. Convoluted and not cohesive to learning.

MGR is a hack n' slash game so I would argue the parry system in context to the game is adequate and does not need to be as precise as the games you are comparing it to.

Sure, but that's just settling for worse system, they are not very different, as I've stated. Hitstun blockstun combos...etc all similarly executed concepts. That's my point as too why they are comparable.

 

[zerkocelot]

Not about the games I like, its about the functionality, and I get really specific (see my last post) you would need to respond to each of these points like able sea cat instead of trying to tell me off with one line.

Okay, I read your detailed post, and I have come to the conclusion that your problem is you don't want to think on your feet. I actually noticed this earlier in your posts, that one of your major problems is doing the same thing does not always yield the same results in MGR, (i.e. enemies won't always be stun-locked by specific attacks; well dodge out of your Zandatsu instead of standing there to be hit by it).

You seem to think this is bad because it means you can't rely on doing the same thing over and over again, but it could be argued that it makes the combat much more engaging because you are constantly forced to switch up tactics. Enemy didn't get stun-locked like you wanted him to? Dodge out of his attack and try something else.

It's good because it means when a particular enemy turns up you can't just go, 'oh no problem, I know this combo works on him'. You have to actually come up with tactics on the fly, which is much more engaging, realistic and adds to replay value. All that is subjective, of course, some people like when X always results in Y, and that's fair enough; some of us prefer a more dynamic experience.

Once again, it all comes back to your unwillingness to adapt and actually learn how the game works. It just doesn't do what you expect it to and so you've decided that means it is broken/bad.

I never complained about the lack of my or the game depth or options. Theres a bunch of options but they don't work well leading me to be punished instead of rewarded.

 

[Nieroshai]

What I've read was it was awful because you couldn't parry. The difference between walking and parrying is holding down the stick in a direction or tapping the stick in a direction. I was annoyed at it at first because I couldn't parry either, I had to look up tips on how to actually do it. Once I got it down the game was great fun. Oh and if you need to end your attack animation to parry, blade mode cancel it.

Also if you know/aim your attacks, use lock on, and/or stop mashing buttons you don't zoom around everywhere. You complain there's no strategy, but you just refuse to use it. However the game doesn't tell you anything, you have to find it on your own. The stinger attack (forward, forward heavy) is a great attack to close distance, so while it does send you zooming it helps you control the battlefield. When you do a stinger if you dodge afterwards it cancels the ending animation and moves you out of harms way making the stinger a much better attack. I suck at air combat so I can't say much about it, but there's another strategy.

Yes the game is annoying since you have to be able to parry to play it properly, but if you're mashing buttons and refusing to learn the systems because it's not like another game, that's you. Not the game. Yet it still may not be your cup of tea, but you shouldn't ignorantly criticize it.

Pretty much this.

Many people have played through the game, and while you really do need to learn everything yourself, once you learn the ins and outs of parrying, dodging, blade mode cancels etc the game becomes quite fun.

And yeah, you really don't zoom around everywhere if you stop spamming buttons, and start linking combos and using specific attacks.

Plus, I don't know what you mean by "3000+ hours in fighting games", but if your talking about something like street fighter, yeah nah, completely different genres.

That would be like me saying "I can't play CoD even thought I have 3000+ hours in Starcraft 2."

Fighting games and action games with a block are very similar utilizing the blockstun/hitstun concepts.. also how can you call me ignorant when you can't deny the amount of randomly decided forward movement on most attacks and the stinger strategy would be slow and still allow for the problems of direction facing and parrying. The parrying was poorly executed it's very hard to deny that. Anyone know the difference between white flashing attacks red flashing attacks purple flashing attacks gold flashing attacks or blue flashing attacks? Which ones can I parry which are unblockable? It's poor, was fun for a bit but lazily put together not just in the lack of a tutorial but also in practice... Don't call me ignorant when I PLAYED THE GAME, it makes me as equally qualified as you...

This is just about where you tone it down, or the thread jumps on you just because you're irritating them. Even if a fight was picked with you, keep the fists down. It's safer for all of us.

 

[bfranciscop]

Also, after reading my post, I realized it may have sounded somewhat aggressive. Please allow me to apologize if it did, it was not my intention.

My intention is purely positive, I believe that like my Dark Souls buddy, you can greatly enjoy the game and appreciate all the good things about it, if you'll just drop the preconceptions you seem to have brought into it.

 

[zerkocelot]

Also, after reading my post, I realized it may have sounded somewhat aggressive. Please allow me to apologize if it did, it was not my intention.

My intention is purely positive, I believe that like my Dark Souls buddy, you can greatly enjoy the game and appreciate all the good things about it, if you'll just drop the preconceptions you seem to have brought into it.

Haha not at all, just your input was a retread so i did not address it.
that's a retread not retarded. lol

 

[rob_simple]

I never complained about the lack of my or the game depth or options. Theres a bunch of options but they don't work well leading me to be punished instead of rewarded.

Um, you complained several times about how the parrying system is broken because it doesn't have the exact same outcome every time you do it...But let's ignore that and instead focus on 'Theres a bunch of options but they don't work well leading me to be punished instead of rewarded'.

I think they work fine. I never felt like I was being punished when I messed up, and when there were times I did think the game was being unfair, I consulted Youtube and discovered where I was going wrong. I adjusted my approach and I was rewarded for it by becoming a better player.

Do you still not see how all of this is completely subjective?

 

[zerkocelot]

I never complained about the lack of my or the game depth or options. Theres a bunch of options but they don't work well leading me to be punished instead of rewarded.

Um, you complained several times about how the parrying system is broken because it doesn't have the exact same outcome every time you do it...But let's ignore that and instead focus on 'Theres a bunch of options but they don't work well leading me to be punished instead of rewarded'.

I think they work fine. I never felt like I was being punished when I messed up, and when there were times I did think the game was being unfair, I consulted Youtube and discovered where I was going wrong. I adjusted my approach and I was rewarded for it by becoming a better player.

Do you still not see how all of this is completely subjective?

My arguments are objectivly stronger due to the existance of evidence and a video with timemarked instances of these poor quality mechanics in a video with highest level play.

 

[Able Seacat]

snip

Combo length is not specificly a relevant aspect of gameplay... it's balanced within the context of the fighting system. Some games have longer combos (Mvc3) some much shorter (ssf4) the only difference is the amount of time the comboed person is waiting in hitstun. In mgr hitstun is non standardized, non effective, and sometimes non existant. All depending on the specific attacks of the specific enemies. Then you have unblockables, all while fighting multiple enemies. This makes for hundreds of thousands of combinations of defensive tactics needed to escape the situations, unlike in dark souls where chaining a couple dashes would generally keep you out of harm. MGR has people doing teleports and sonic speed dashing slashes all fucking with you directional input defense mechanism. Convoluted and not cohesive to learning.

MGR is a hack n' slash game so I would argue the parry system in context to the game is adequate and does not need to be as precise as the games you are comparing it to.

Sure, but that's just settling for worse system, they are not very different, as I've stated. Hitstun blockstun combos...etc all similarly executed concepts. That's my point as too why they are comparable.

But to what universal quantity are you comparing? To use your temperature analogy, if we had two hot cups of tea we could measure which was actually hotter using a thermometer. How do we 'objectively' compare mechanics in games?

Also, driving a car in GTA and Forza is a similar concept yet I feel it would be unfair to criticize GTA for not having the same level of depth as Forza in regards to cars and driving.

 

[rob_simple]

My arguments are objectivly stronger due to the existance of evidence and a video with timemarked instances of these poor quality mechanics in a video with highest level play.

Alright, let's have a look at this video then. Far be it from me to condemn from ignorance.

 

[zerkocelot]

My arguments are objectivly stronger due to the existance of evidence and a video with timemarked instances of these poor quality mechanics in a video with highest level play.

Alright, let's have a look at this video then. Far be it from me to condemn from ignorance.

I kept telling you to read the older posts as it was already posted and discussed.

 

[zerkocelot]

snip

Combo length is not specificly a relevant aspect of gameplay... it's balanced within the context of the fighting system. Some games have longer combos (Mvc3) some much shorter (ssf4) the only difference is the amount of time the comboed person is waiting in hitstun. In mgr hitstun is non standardized, non effective, and sometimes non existant. All depending on the specific attacks of the specific enemies. Then you have unblockables, all while fighting multiple enemies. This makes for hundreds of thousands of combinations of defensive tactics needed to escape the situations, unlike in dark souls where chaining a couple dashes would generally keep you out of harm. MGR has people doing teleports and sonic speed dashing slashes all fucking with you directional input defense mechanism. Convoluted and not cohesive to learning.

MGR is a hack n' slash game so I would argue the parry system in context to the game is adequate and does not need to be as precise as the games you are comparing it to.

Sure, but that's just settling for worse system, they are not very different, as I've stated. Hitstun blockstun combos...etc all similarly executed concepts. That's my point as too why they are comparable.

But to what universal quantity are you comparing? To use your temperature analogy, if we had two hot cups of tea we could measure which was actually hotter using a thermometer. How do we 'objectively' compare mechanics in games?

Also, driving a car in GTA and Forza is a similar concept yet I feel it would be unfair to criticize GTA for not having the same level of depth as Forza in regards to cars and driving.

There are many aspects of one mechanic that would take a year of studying. But the main one is functionality as discussed befoe. Does it do what it set out to do? We compare to see its temperature (or worth) by comparing it to another cup of tea and how it functions.

 

[rob_simple]

My arguments are objectivly stronger due to the existance of evidence and a video with timemarked instances of these poor quality mechanics in a video with highest level play.

Alright, let's have a look at this video then. Far be it from me to condemn from ignorance.

I kept telling you to read the older posts as it was already posted and discussed.

Sorry, I just figured it would take less time for you to re-post the link you obviously have rather than expecting me to comb back over five pages of posts.

Then again, I forgot you have to be confrontational about pretty much everything.

 

[zerkocelot]

as for the cars forza and gta are different genres with similar specific mechanics, they serve different purposes. Forza the driving is the main focus and the mastery of which is the ultimate goal, gta it serves as an ancillary mechanic so the comparison is diffiuclt. MGR and other fighting games involve blocking and dodging to avoid damage. same purpose..

 

[Able Seacat]

snip

Combo length is not specificly a relevant aspect of gameplay... it's balanced within the context of the fighting system. Some games have longer combos (Mvc3) some much shorter (ssf4) the only difference is the amount of time the comboed person is waiting in hitstun. In mgr hitstun is non standardized, non effective, and sometimes non existant. All depending on the specific attacks of the specific enemies. Then you have unblockables, all while fighting multiple enemies. This makes for hundreds of thousands of combinations of defensive tactics needed to escape the situations, unlike in dark souls where chaining a couple dashes would generally keep you out of harm. MGR has people doing teleports and sonic speed dashing slashes all fucking with you directional input defense mechanism. Convoluted and not cohesive to learning.

MGR is a hack n' slash game so I would argue the parry system in context to the game is adequate and does not need to be as precise as the games you are comparing it to.

Sure, but that's just settling for worse system, they are not very different, as I've stated. Hitstun blockstun combos...etc all similarly executed concepts. That's my point as too why they are comparable.

But to what universal quantity are you comparing? To use your temperature analogy, if we had two hot cups of tea we could measure which was actually hotter using a thermometer. How do we 'objectively' compare mechanics in games?

Also, driving a car in GTA and Forza is a similar concept yet I feel it would be unfair to criticize GTA for not having the same level of depth as Forza in regards to cars and driving.

There are many aspects of one mechanic that would take a year of studying. But the main one is functionality as discussed befoe. Does it do what it set out to do? We compare to see its temperature (or worth) by comparing it to another cup of tea and how it functions.

The video I posted earlier showed a player defeating bosses without taking a hit and utilizing parries effectively, how is this not evidence that the parrying in the game can function?

If your argument is that it does function but not well, we come back to what measurement or quantity you are comparing this to?

 

[zerkocelot]

snip

Combo length is not specificly a relevant aspect of gameplay... it's balanced within the context of the fighting system. Some games have longer combos (Mvc3) some much shorter (ssf4) the only difference is the amount of time the comboed person is waiting in hitstun. In mgr hitstun is non standardized, non effective, and sometimes non existant. All depending on the specific attacks of the specific enemies. Then you have unblockables, all while fighting multiple enemies. This makes for hundreds of thousands of combinations of defensive tactics needed to escape the situations, unlike in dark souls where chaining a couple dashes would generally keep you out of harm. MGR has people doing teleports and sonic speed dashing slashes all fucking with you directional input defense mechanism. Convoluted and not cohesive to learning.

MGR is a hack n' slash game so I would argue the parry system in context to the game is adequate and does not need to be as precise as the games you are comparing it to.

Sure, but that's just settling for worse system, they are not very different, as I've stated. Hitstun blockstun combos...etc all similarly executed concepts. That's my point as too why they are comparable.

But to what universal quantity are you comparing? To use your temperature analogy, if we had two hot cups of tea we could measure which was actually hotter using a thermometer. How do we 'objectively' compare mechanics in games?

Also, driving a car in GTA and Forza is a similar concept yet I feel it would be unfair to criticize GTA for not having the same level of depth as Forza in regards to cars and driving.

There are many aspects of one mechanic that would take a year of studying. But the main one is functionality as discussed befoe. Does it do what it set out to do? We compare to see its temperature (or worth) by comparing it to another cup of tea and how it functions.

The video I posted earlier showed a player defeating bosses without taking a hit and utilizing parries effectively, how is this not evidence that the parrying in the game can function?

If your argument is that it does function but not well, we come back to what measurement or quantity you are comparing this to?

I already talked about some unavoidable flaws in the video. The quantity is the comparison, I posted a great deal on this.

 

[Angelblaze]

lemme sum up a big problem we've discussed: a well timed parry is a counter (sometimes, depends on attack) a block is a badly timed parry and helps only sometimes (very rare agaisnt bosses) its not standardized and leads to trial and error instead of mastering a thought out system

Actually, I found the parry to be an incredibly well thought out system with easy switching from attacking to blocking - its not just you 'parrying' its you parryng and flicking the directional control in the direction of which the attack is coming from.

Sure, Trial and Error at first maybe but its so easy after you get basic directions down pat.

 

[zerkocelot]

lemme sum up a big problem we've discussed: a well timed parry is a counter (sometimes, depends on attack) a block is a badly timed parry and helps only sometimes (very rare agaisnt bosses) its not standardized and leads to trial and error instead of mastering a thought out system

Actually, I found the parry to be an incredibly well thought out system with easy switching from attacking to blocking - its not just you 'parrying' its you parryng and flicking the directional control in the direction of which the attack is coming from.

Sure, Trial and Error at first maybe but its so easy after you get basic directions down pat.

yea... we got that bit.