Death Stranding Has Gone Gold

[Mybrokenenglish]

Well, if you remember I was one of the people complaining about Rockstar's mission design and I didn't change my opinion about it, and since it's continue with RDR2, that will be probably one of my complaints as well. The first problem (regarding overly realistic animations) I remember having with Max Payne 3, which was also a Rockstar game, but maybe in the open world they won't be as much of a bother (I don't know, since I still didn't play RDR2).

You probably won't like it, then. RDR2's animations are much "slower" than in MP3. They really want the player to feel like s/he is performing that action. You also need to polish your weapons and brush/feed your horse (not really needed but recommended) and pay attention when walking down a slope (same when on horse) since the euphoria engine is applied to that as well now. And you have animations for eating, drinking, looting, interacting with every single item in shops (even buying stuff has an animation for turning page in catalogues)... Think the last 2 assassin's creed games: it's the opposite approach.

The only way to appreciate RDR2 is to totally immerse in the game and feel like you are living it, enjoying its world and nature. Being it story-driven, you also need to appreciate its narrative. Haven't heard anyone complaining about that, but there's a first time to everything.

EDIT: I'm pretty sure DS will require the player to do the same to appreciate it.

 

[Draconifors]

This thread isn't about RDR2 so please don't take it any further off-topic. RDR2 has its own thread you can use.

 

[Wenceslaus]

I'm really curious and looking forward for some more views on the game aftter some time (I only have PC so have to wait anyway).
I'm not a fan of the Kojima as people keep assuming about anyone who is positive about the game. In fact, I did not noticed his name untill people start complaining about cult or fanboyism.

But when people call the game pejoratively "walking simulator", I can't help but wonder how many of them are going to play new Diablo, CoD, Doom... ? i.e. "killing simulators". So what is the point of that? Most games are quite repetetive and people like them for it as long as another level of they gun is doing bigger bang.
What is so wierd about replacing difficulty in killing with walking in difficulty terrain? If both need some planning, calculated risk, action and it all have some backstory it could be fun no matter if I'm balancing cargo or try to move cursor over enemies heads or rolling on the ground around them...

Though I do play flight simulators so I might have different view on it.

 

[SigilFey]

But when people call the game pejoratively "walking simulator"...

This is something that's very polarizing in games. I love, and I mean looove, when games provide gigantic areas with vast, open spaces that take time to travel. In games like TW3, Skyrim, or Dragon Age, I will walk -- not jog -- around. I almost never use fast travel. I don't like it when areas feel too "populated". It's part of the experience, suspension of disbelief, and (dare I say) immersion.

For me.

I'd be willing to admit that the vast majority of people would disagree. But I used to do a lot of hiking and camping when I was younger, and I love it when games create that same sensation. That sense of wide-open, sprawling wilderness without a "point of interest", NPC, or homicidal squirrel every 20 feet.

 

[Harthwain]

But when people call the game pejoratively "walking simulator", I can't help but wonder how many of them are going to play new Diablo, CoD, Doom... ? i.e. "killing simulators".

They call it that, because the main goal will be moving across the countryside. What you're actually doing, though, is basically the Pony Express - you have to deliver your packages through the wildlands and there will be all sorts of threats waiting for you.

What is so wierd about replacing difficulty in killing with walking in difficulty terrain?

It's not like we'll have only logistic issues (although these will probably be at the heart of the game, given the theme). We know there will be stealth and combat involved. Death is not the end in Death Stranding, but there is no telling what exactly happens when you do die, so dying recklessly might have more consequences than in, let's say, Dark Souls series, where death merely put you back to the nearest [active] checkpoint.

This is something that's very polarizing in games. I love, and I mean looove, when games provide gigantic areas with vast, open spaces that take time to travel. In games like TW3, Skyrim, or Dragon Age, I will walk -- not jog -- around. I almost never use fast travel. I don't like it when areas feel too "populated". It's part of the experience, suspension of disbelief, and (dare I say) immersion.

I have to admit, the size of the world in these open world sandbox games is so big that I'd always run, unless it costs me stamina to do so (S.T.A.L.K.E.R.).

In Skyrim I was not using fast travel, but used a horse instead. This resulted in me making stops between point A and B in order to check points of interests I've spotted on the way, and had some interesting encounters with NPCs to boot. It was somewhat similar in The Witcher 3, but if I decided I traversed the area well enough, then I used a fast travel.

 

[Mybrokenenglish]

Death is not the end in Death Stranding, but there is no telling what exactly happens when you do die, so dying recklessly might have more consequences than in, let's say, Dark Souls series, where death merely put you back to the nearest [active] checkpoint.

We know now thanks to reviews.

Spoiler: Death mechanics. Not sure if it's a spoiler for someone.

In some cases you have the classic "game over" and restart from checkpoint (I'd say in case of main quest bosses or if you die falling from a cliff) or you are transferred in a submarine environment where you need to find your body (I understood the game is in first person in these moments) to come back alive. Under water you can also find items you can throw to other players who are facing a boss in order to help them (as shown in the 49min demo, you are one of those ehite ghosts). Once you are alive again, a huge crater appears where you died (void out). As a result, the map changes and you can't cross it, so you need to find a new route (this affects only your map and not everybody's).
If you kill human being (the MULEs, those guys in yellow) a void out appears as well. So you can wipe them all out, but then again the map is different and dangerous.
The real problem with the game is that it's so easy even at the highest difficulty that dying is not common, so you could never see a void out throught the game. Or at least that's what I've heard.

 

[Harthwain]

We know now thanks to reviews.

I thought it will have potentially much deeper implications, aside from that. Like, story-wise and maybe even difficulty-wise.

 

[Harthwain]

Steam has a release date:

Planned Release Date: Summer 2020

I guess this means no Epic exclusive, although the price of pre-order (called "pre-purchase" in this case) is through the roof.

 

[doktor_fleck]

What I read about it: very interesting story, with plot-holes size of Jupiter. Basic gameplay is walking simulator, set in very beautiful world, executed in very frustrating way.

 

[Audie_Carpenter]

I haven't played it but that's exactly what I hear. Like, it's a game that falls flat for its mediocre combat, shameless plugins of its sponsors, and its repetitive use of the familiar fetch quests. Yet it's still strangely intriguing for those playing the game and especially from those who have complaints. Gotta be that Kojima charm.

 

[lelxrv]

Checked a few gameplay videos and I have zero interest in playing that. Self-indulgence in terminal stage. Nothing about it is engaging in any way.

I also begin to hate "scanned faces" graphics. When they use real people's faces for characters.

 

[Erect_Cactus]

Checked a few gameplay videos and I have zero interest in playing that. Self-indulgence in terminal stage. Nothing about it is engaging in any way.

I also begin to hate "scanned faces" graphics. When they use real people's faces for characters.

Which is why David Beckham sporting Cossack’s tuft in TW3 Hearts of stone was simultaneously weird and annoying.

 

[CyberBobber]

Checked a few gameplay videos and I have zero interest in playing that. Self-indulgence in terminal stage. Nothing about it is engaging in any way.

I also begin to hate "scanned faces" graphics. When they use real people's faces for characters.

Its only marketting. I have never seen in my 20 year of gaming players complaining about how character face looks like, its quite strange if they start it now. If girls like David's face why not to give ti to them, maybe we get some too.

 

[Erect_Cactus]

If girls like David's face why not to give ti to them, maybe we get some too.

Most gamers are guys, hence if I wanted to see Beckham’s face I’d rather play FIFA. The point is these celebrities ruin the immersion.

 

[Sardukhar]

Most gamers are guys,

Nope. Sexist and inaccurate.

https://www.dailydot.com/parsec/adult-women-largest-gaming-demographic/?fb=ss&prtnr=nerdist https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_and_video_games

hence if I wanted to see Beckham’s face I’d rather play FIFA. The point is these celebrities ruin the immersion.

And they might ruin your immersion. I found Olgierd quite engaging, possibly the best villain of the series. His life-like features helped with that. Seeing a face that looks familiar to someone I know doesn't "ruin" my immersion in anything - that happens in real life.

In Death Stranding, I think their choice of actors that match the voice to the face is a solid one. I'd like to see more voice actors who match their faces. I have no problem using actual people to model faces - it lends a believable template.

 

[doktor_fleck]

Guy may be wrong, but to describe this post as "sexist" is too much. Using your source, Death Stranding is probably a game which will be played mostly by men. Like most of the triple A games over there.

 

[Restlessdingo32]

I found Olgierd quite engaging, possibly the best villain of the series.

1. Agreed.
2. How dare you call Olgierd a villain.
3. Gaunter is hands down the best TW3 villain.

On the topic of Death Stranding.... I'd agree slapping celebrity faces on video game characters isn't inherently bad. I can't help but think it may end up being used as a bait and switch to get people to buy shitty games though.

If game play consists of point A to B fetch quests as a UPS driver while carting around an omnipotent super baby, sneaking past spooky ghost thingamajigs and not shooting people to avoid triggering nuclear explosions to get "likes" to feel like a special snowflake it better have an epic narrative, characters and exactly zero plot holes. Otherwise it sounds like a shitty game with celebrity faces, mechanics inspired by hallucinogenic substances and a play on social media thrown in to reel in buyers.

 

[Shavod]

Which is why David Beckham sporting Cossack’s tuft in TW3 Hearts of stone was simultaneously weird and annoying.

Are you being serious?

Most gamers are guys, hence if I wanted to see Beckham’s face I’d rather play FIFA. The point is these celebrities ruin the immersion.

So you are, huh.

Despite what the meme comparisons make you believe, Olgierd von Everec design was based on Henryk Sienkiewicz' novels and Jerzy Hoffman's movie adaptations of those (in fact, Olgierd's face seems to be based on the actor who played Andrzej Kmicic in the Deluge adaptation). Even his haircut and, as you mentioned, outfit were inspired by Cossacks from one of those movies. And obviously they didn't facescan David Beckham for the role and similarities are pretty superficial.

 

[SigilFey]

On celebrities in games:

I'd say it's the same as putting celebrities in movies, or TV, or commercial spots. Once we get to know a certain face, we begin to associate that with a certain character. It can be hard for people to suspend their disbelief when seeing the same actor in a different roll. Frankly, I'd say that's part of the challenge of acting.

What I will agree with is that video games and CG productions offer a way of avoiding that, and it should really be explored, I think. I am not bothered by this myself, but I can appreciate the conscious and subconscious disconnect it may create. It's possible to really nail characters without making them too recognizable. e.g.

V
V

or

V
V

_______________


On male / female gamers:

It's irrelevant. That's like saying that more men eat cheeseburgers than women, so cheeseburgers should cater to male preferences. Really?

Majority / minority means next to nothing. Zero. Zip. Zilch. Nada. Very , veeery, veeeeeery little is determined by "majority opinion". A majority is not necessary for success, sustainability, or achievement. Quite the opposite, it's normally the unexpected minority that will take the big leap or make the critical connection that winds up becoming wildly popular. Nothing starts that way.

And anyone that tries to say otherwise is...selling something. (If you follow me. )

 

[doktor_fleck]

Well, from business point of view you should cater to your biggest consumer group. So if cheeseburger company starts to neglect their majority consumer group to cater to a minority one, it will go broke. So yes, it is relevant.

To your second part: If the minority has no majority support (even if it's a silent one), then it won't succeed.