Originally posted by H. S. 6
My point:1) Big Daddies are challenging to kill without having to respawn.
2) With respawn chambers, Big Daddies are incredibly easy.
3) Without respawn chambers, the game would actually create some kind of feeling of difficulty or tension, since Big Daddies are challenging to kill without having to respawn. (see point #1 for further reference)
Co-****ing-sign.
Originally posted by H. S. 6
My point:1) Big Daddies are challenging to kill without having to respawn.
2) With respawn chambers, Big Daddies are incredibly easy.
3) Without respawn chambers, the game would actually create some kind of feeling of difficulty or tension, since Big Daddies are challenging to kill without having to respawn. (see point #1 for further reference)
As said above, use the save points.
Furthermore, I will be willing to bet that if there were no vita chambers, you'd moan that the BDs are too hard.
-AC
The problem is that the hunting the Big Daddy video impressed a lot of peeps, myself included. I looked at everything it took to take down the Big Daddy and all I could say was "Ouch...I can't wait to be in a situation like that....wonder what I'll come up with." Then I fight my first Big Daddy and I realize the Vita Chamber bullshit...completely ruined it.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
As said above, use the save points.Furthermore, I will be willing to bet that if there were no vita chambers, you'd moan that the BDs are too hard.
-AC
Sure I could use the save points. However, I'm not judging how I personally play the game; I'm judging how the game was designed to be played. In other words, with the use of the Vita-Chambers.
Considering I have taken Big Daddies down without dying, and considering I wasn't being overly cautious in my actions while fighting them (because of the support of the chambers), I wouldn't complain with the removal of the chambers. As I've said several times before, it would be an improvement.
Also, you'd be rather a fool to place money on something I would or wouldn't do, seeing as how you know little to nothing about me, and what you do know is drawn from an internet message board. 🙄
Originally posted by Superboy Prime
The problem is that the hunting the Big Daddy video impressed a lot of peeps, myself included. I looked at everything it took to take down the Big Daddy and all I could say was "Ouch...I can't wait to be in a situation like that....wonder what I'll come up with." Then I fight my first Big Daddy and I realize the Vita Chamber bullshit...completely ruined it.
Indeed. It cheapens the experience.
Originally posted by H. S. 6
Sure I could use the save points. However, I'm not judging how I personally play the game; I'm judging how the game was designed to be played. In other words, with the use of the Vita-Chambers.Considering I have taken Big Daddies down without dying, and considering I wasn't being overly cautious in my actions while fighting them (because of the support of the chambers), I wouldn't complain with the removal of the chambers. As I've said several times before, it would be an improvement.
Also, you'd be rather a fool to place money on something I would or wouldn't do, seeing as how you know little to nothing about me, and what you do know is drawn from an internet message board. 🙄
That's why it's called a bet, genius.
Furthermore how can you say it's not about personal playing style when you're clearly choosing to abuse the vita chambers by storming into battle in a way that will quite obviously get you killed. The game sure as hell wasn't meant to be played THAT way, it's not Doom.
Originally posted by H. S. 6
Indeed. It cheapens the experience.
You cheapen it for yourself, the game was fine for me.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
That's why it's called a bet, genius.Furthermore how can you say it's not about personal playing style when you're clearly choosing to abuse the vita chambers by storming into battle in a way that will quite obviously get you killed. The game sure as hell wasn't meant to be played THAT way, it's not Doom.
You cheapen it for yourself, the game was fine for me.
-AC
This is becoming tiring. You're repeating what you said earlier; I've already explained quite clearly that I don't run into battles wildly, flailing the wrench against Big Daddies, expecting to be killed. The idea of being invincible, though--of being able to simply respawn with no penalty--still hurts the atmosphere and tension the developers worked to create.
I don't cheapen the experience for myself; the game cheapens itself because of the way it was designed, with the no-penalty death system. Sorry, but that's just the way it was made. There's nothing you can say that will change how the game was built.
Originally posted by H. S. 6
This is becoming tiring. You're repeating what you said earlier; I've already explained quite clearly that I don't run into battles wildly, flailing the wrench against Big Daddies, expecting to be killed. The idea of being invincible, though--of being able to simply respawn with no penalty--still hurts the atmosphere and tension the developers worked to create.I don't cheapen the experience for myself; the game cheapens itself because of the way it was designed, with the no-penalty death system. Sorry, but that's just the way it was made. There's nothing you can say that will change how the game was built.
Do you have trouble seeing that the way you play is what makes the game feel cheap to you? Because it is to you. You claim one thing then another, you say you're not cautious, then you're not rushing in. You're doing something poorly if you die so often.
It's not cheap to me, and if the game was inherently designed in such a way, everyone would likely experience the same thing. I don't play to abuse the vita chambers. They are used when I die. Typically, I don't try to die.
-AC
Indeed. It's a game that has a self-modifying curve.
For example; with the little sisters, you can actually kill them, and gain more power more quickly, or you can do the 'right' thing, and get the right ending.
You can 'abuse' the vita chambers, and experience a slightly poorer game, or you can try a 'perfect' run, with zero deaths.
It's all up to the player.
Not buying it. If we had a choice to select if we want the enemies to be at the same health they were before they killed us then i would agree it is the player who is deciding to cheapen the experience. As it stands we have no choice on the matter. You die. You then go back and fight the Big Daddy again. I don't try to die, but then I get killed. Do I get any penalty? Do I get to choose if I want to respawn again with my enemies having close to 0 life? No. So am I supposed to reload another file just because I don't want to cheapen the experience? Come the **** on. The developers should have realized the way Vita Chambers were designed would mess with most of the gameplay. It is actually not that hard to figure out.
Originally posted by Superboy Prime
As it stands we have no choice on the matter. You die. You then go back and fight the Big Daddy again. I don't try to die, but then I get killed. Do I get any penalty? Do I get to choose if I want to respawn again with my enemies having close to 0 life? No. So am I supposed to reload another file just because I don't want to cheapen the experience? Come the **** on.
Silliness. If the Vita Chambers were not there, that's exactly what you would have to do. You can't say you don't want to reload, then moan that you don't have to reload.
You do have a choice- reload.
All the option to allow the enemies to regain their life would be is a standard continue system.
It's part of the game though, and its the major complaint people have about Bioshock.
You cant say its not an major complaint because the developers intended for people to use the Vita Chambers and not reload.
I find it as weak arguement that people have to go against the complaint of the Vita Chambers. If you use the excuse, "well, its not a problem if you dont use them and you only reload," then you can use that excuse for any easy game, or crappy game.
Originally posted by H. S. 6
This is becoming tiring. You're repeating what you said earlier; I've already explained quite clearly that I don't run into battles wildly, flailing the wrench against Big Daddies, expecting to be killed. The idea of being invincible, though--of being able to simply respawn with no penalty--still hurts the atmosphere and tension the developers worked to create.I don't cheapen the experience for myself; the game cheapens itself because of the way it was designed, with the no-penalty death system. Sorry, but that's just the way it was made. There's nothing you can say that will change how the game was built.
The developers you speak of implemented this system fully knowing its impact; they spent God knows how much money on it, you think that people posting on a forum are coming up with brilliant points that they never thought of? Obviously they have thought of it, and the simple fact is a majority of people that pick up games won't finish every single game they purchase. If you do, then good for you, but not everyone will. They wanted people to "finish the damn game" and experience the storyline and environments in their entirety. If a game sells two million copies, that's a success. But if most people only play 40% of the game, then the company's resources that were used to make the remaining 60% of the game were wasted; if people were fine with purchasing 40% of a game, then they wouldn't need to make the rest of it. The developers are aiming for the game to not be put to waste, and for people to complete the game. If someone has a problem with the no penalty death system, then play it on hard, and save at certain points, and make your own penalties, if you really want them... or enjoy the game for what it is.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Do you have trouble seeing that the way you play is what makes the game feel cheap to you? Because it is to you. You claim one thing then another, you say you're not cautious, then you're not rushing in. You're doing something poorly if you die so often.It's not cheap to me, and if the game was inherently designed in such a way, everyone would likely experience the same thing. I don't play to abuse the vita chambers. They are used when I die. Typically, I don't try to die.
-AC
I've said neither that I'm overly cautious or that I run in not caring if I die. I lie somewhere in between, I'd say. That's besides the point, though; Knowing that you are invincible is enough the cheapen the experience.
On another note, a majority of people that play this game bring up the flaw with the death system. That, to me, means there's a flaw--albeit perhaps not a major one--but still a flaw with the design.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
The point is, I never experienced the problem cos I'm not shit at games.There.
Whenever I did use them, it was a relief, and usually left me worse off than when I started the fight.
-AC
They were a relief, but they left you off worse than before? I don't follow.
Originally posted by JKozzy
The developers you speak of implemented this system fully knowing its impact; they spent God knows how much money on it, you think that people posting on a forum are coming up with brilliant points that they never thought of? Obviously they have thought of it, and the simple fact is a majority of people that pick up games won't finish every single game they purchase. If you do, then good for you, but not everyone will. They wanted people to "finish the damn game" and experience the storyline and environments in their entirety. If a game sells two million copies, that's a success. But if most people only play 40% of the game, then the company's resources that were used to make the remaining 60% of the game were wasted; if people were fine with purchasing 40% of a game, then they wouldn't need to make the rest of it. The developers are aiming for the game to not be put to waste, and for people to complete the game. If someone has a problem with the no penalty death system, then play it on hard, and save at certain points, and make your own penalties, if you really want them... or enjoy the game for what it is.
As I've said before, I'm not judging the game on how I could play, I'm judging it on how it was designed to be played.
As I've also said before, I am "enjoying the game for what it is." I think it's an excellent game, but that it isn't perfect. The death system is the most obvious flaw in the game, I believe, and even it isn't anything more than a shame, really, that the tension is dampened.
Originally posted by Smasandian
It's part of the game though, and its the major complaint people have about Bioshock.You cant say its not an major complaint because the developers intended for people to use the Vita Chambers and not reload.
I find it as weak arguement that people have to go against the complaint of the Vita Chambers. If you use the excuse, "well, its not a problem if you dont use them and you only reload," then you can use that excuse for any easy game, or crappy game.
That is part of the game, storyline-wise. The fact remains that I don't personally have a problem with the way they have set it out, so it's not an objective problem, it's just a personal gripe some people have.
It's easily gotten round- don't use them.
In No Mercy on the N64 (and previous games in the same series) there was the option to waggle the stick and build up your spirit bar. Many people that I played with didn't like the feature, so we just didn't use it.
You also got people saying 'It's there to be used'.
Originally posted by H. S. 6
That's besides the point, though; Knowing that you are invincible is enough the cheapen the experience.
You are 'invincible', though, within the game's storyline. Maybe you should play a different game.
Originally posted by H. S. 6
On another note, a majority of people that play this game bring up the flaw with the death system. That, to me, means there's a flaw
You are happy to take majority opinion as fact. Worrying.
Originally posted by H. S. 6
I've said neither that I'm overly cautious or that I run in not caring if I die. I lie somewhere in between, I'd say. That's besides the point, though; Knowing that you are invincible is enough the cheapen the experience.On another note, a majority of people that play this game bring up the flaw with the death system. That, to me, means there's a flaw--albeit perhaps not a major one--but still a flaw with the design.
Why do you keep insisting that as if it's a fact? It's not a fact, because it doesn't apply to everyone and isn't inherently true. The game suffered no cheapness to me because I don't die a lot. You obviously do, that's due to your style of playing.
Originally posted by H. S. 6
They were a relief, but they left you off worse than before? I don't follow.
Meaning you don't have to start from miles away if you done a lot of work, but similarly, you're normally short on ammo, so even the work you have left can be harder.
Originally posted by H. S. 6
As I've said before, I'm not judging the game on how I could play, I'm judging it on how it was designed to be played.As I've also said before, I am "enjoying the game for what it is." I think it's an excellent game, but that it isn't perfect. The death system is the most obvious flaw in the game, I believe, and even it isn't anything more than a shame, really, that the tension is dampened.
The tension was damaged to you and others, not to me. Stop acting as if the tension is factually lacking in this game.
-AC