Mad Max (2015)

Colonel Sanders said:
What is the "glitch" you're referring to? That quest is probably not bugged but rather it's a little confusing. You have to install all the parts that have the green dot on them in the garage; the armor isn't available yet, though. Just install the available parts with green dots and that will pop up a new quest marker on your map.
Click to expand...

Yeah, this is how I got past that quest. I had to take off my v6 I installed.
 
I think I finally hit the wall on this game. It was fun, but just got repetitive quick.

I got tired of the storms which seemed to hit every single time I went to take over a base. As a result I would either wait it out which seemed to take forever or get pretty much one shot by flying debris. I found myself no longer stopping to pick up scrap or raiding scrap spots since it seemed to be more of a time sink since even with 4 or 5 points in the scrap bonus I was lucky to get 1 extra piece of scrap. I would only stop if it had some item I needed.

The car combat got super easy once the harpoon is high enough of a level. You just pop off the tires. I would guess they ramp this up in other areas, but it felt just like more of the same. I had level 4 items unlocked while 2 and 3 on some upgrades were still locked. I never did find the way to upgrade repairs.

I shouldn't say I am surprised since I hit a similar wall on SOM and never beat it. I just got to the point where I felt there was nothing else I needed to do.
 
Well in my game all of the cars are armored so you have to either:

Shoot the armor off the tires and then kill the tire.
Snatch the doors off and then snag the driver.
Grind the 1st level of armor off so that I can grab the tire.

Personally I use my fuel to burn the cars on the left and right of me because it's awesome! Whenever I login again I'm going to put some points into fuel conservation.
 
I have come across the armored tires, but like you said it was easy just to rip the guys out.

I never unlocked the option to burn them,.
 
brennok said:
I think I finally hit the wall on this game. It was fun, but just got repetitive quick.

I got tired of the storms which seemed to hit every single time I went to take over a base. As a result I would either wait it out which seemed to take forever or get pretty much one shot by flying debris. I found myself no longer stopping to pick up scrap or raiding scrap spots since it seemed to be more of a time sink since even with 4 or 5 points in the scrap bonus I was lucky to get 1 extra piece of scrap. I would only stop if it had some item I needed.

The car combat got super easy once the harpoon is high enough of a level. You just pop off the tires. I would guess they ramp this up in other areas, but it felt just like more of the same. I had level 4 items unlocked while 2 and 3 on some upgrades were still locked. I never did find the way to upgrade repairs.

I shouldn't say I am surprised since I hit a similar wall on SOM and never beat it. I just got to the point where I felt there was nothing else I needed to do.
Click to expand...

Trust me, if you go outside of the first two regions to do more story missions rather than just trying to 100% everything right away, the difficulty will go up a LOT. Once you get up into Pink-Eye's territory shit gets a lot harder (at least the car combat.)

I was doing the "I have to 100% every little thing before I move on" tactic and that was getting boring because I had upgraded WAY beyond most of the stuff I was up against. So yeah, do more story stuff and go into the more northern regions.
 
Q-BZ said:
Great tips. I'm fairly early into things and I've done maybe 3-4 story missions.
Click to expand...

After the first area the story missions move quick. I went from Gutlash to Pink Eye to Gastown in about 4 missions. They throw you right into the heart of rank 4 enemies real fast.
 
How bad is the language in th game? Last of us I turned off because the language was just gratuitous and horrible
 
polonyc2 said:
TotalBiscuit discusses the rash of negative professional reviews for Mad Max...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJANS0VTpbY
Click to expand...

You know, I didn't have a very positive opinion of TotalBiscuit for various reasons and that video dropped it even more. If you watch until the part where he's talking about a poll about the Arkham combat system where 82% of people said it was awesome and 18% of people said it was lame, he literally goes on to say that everyone who liked it is wrong because they just don't know what good gameplay mechanics are.

Jesus Christ that guy is so full of himself it makes me want to gag.
 
The Arkham combat system kinda does suck. I've seen a video where the guy was fighting a dozen enemies and all he had to do was mash the X button or whatever. It auto targets and turns to attack new guys automatically after the current target is knocked out. It's extreme easy mode. Don't get me wrong, it LOOKS really cool, but mechanically it's extremely shallow.

Mordor is just as bad. Mad Max is actually better because it requires more input from the player.
 
MavericK96 said:
The Arkham combat system kinda does suck. I've seen a video where the guy was fighting a dozen enemies and all he had to do was mash the X button or whatever. It auto targets and turns to attack new guys automatically after the current target is knocked out. It's extreme easy mode. Don't get me wrong, it LOOKS really cool, but mechanically it's extremely shallow.

Mordor is just as bad. Mad Max is actually better because it requires more input from the player.
Click to expand...

To put it bluntly: If you are just mashing a single button you're playing it wrong. You can't survive bigger fights without countering and dodging. You literally HAVE to do more than just mash a single button for some enemy types, not to mention bosses. Mad Max is A LOT more mashy and much more shallow in fact. The counter timing is a lot more inconsistent than Batman or SOM and the animations are nowhere near as smooth nor do they give you the ability to cancel some moves for a counter like you can in those other games. Mad Max's combat is also a hell of a lot easier.
 
22 hours in and I just reduced Jeet's territory to 0 threat. Now need to decide whether I can be bothered working on Gutgash's area or just skip over to Pinkeye, Pinkeye is needed to get the parts to progress the story where as it seems like Gutgash can sort of just be ignored.

I've gotten to the point where I just ignore scavenging locations if they only contain scrap, they get a bit repetitive after a while.
 
Colonel Sanders said:
You know, I didn't have a very positive opinion of TotalBiscuit for various reasons and that video dropped it even more. If you watch until the part where he's talking about a poll about the Arkham combat system where 82% of people said it was awesome and 18% of people said it was lame, he literally goes on to say that everyone who liked it is wrong because they just don't know what good gameplay mechanics are.

Jesus Christ that guy is so full of himself it makes me want to gag.
Click to expand...

TB's top qualities are:
1. He holds himself to high professional ethics standards.
2. He expects other professionals to hold themselves up to high ethical standards as well and sometimes calls them out on it when they do not.
3. In all of his videos and other forms of communication, he stands up for consumers first, praising quality in games and consumer-friendly policies/decisions by developers/publishers/distributors, while criticizing poor quality and anti-consumer policies/decisions.
4. He speaks honestly and directly, not allowing popularity or political correctness to determine his publicly stated opinions both concerning gaming topics and non-gaming topics.

There are not many big-name people in his field that have these qualities, and among those that do, he is unquestionably the strongest in all four, at least from the people I have seen so far.

This has created a large amount of enemies for him, both since he has so far refused to sell out to any publishers/developers/gaming-media, and since he also refuses to bend to the will of various different groups of people with highly unethical, but still popular/loud, agendas both within the industry and outside of it.

No one is more hated than an honest, ethical person.

Naturally, this results in people constantly trying to attribute words to him that never came out of his mouth, even if the claimed words are actually in direct contradiction to the ones that were actually spoken, as is the case here.

What he said was that the Ubisoft-style combat system is not objectively better or worse, and that some people subjectively like it and some subjectively dislike it, and that there is nothing wrong with that and nothing wrong with the people on either side. All he stated was that it was objectively more simplistic compared to some other game titles that he listed, and that whether it was better or worse due to that simplicity was the point of subjectivity.

The people he said were wrong because they were ignorant of the mechanics of the various mentioned games were the people that were specifically claiming that the Ubisoft-style combat system of Mad Max and others had more depth and complexity than the following games and others with similar combat:
Anarchy Reigns
Bayonetta
Devil May Cry
God Hand
God of War
Metal Gear Rising
Ninja Gaiden Black
The Wonderful 101
 
That's cool if you like him. It's also cool that he has hasn't bent or "sold out." I still don't like him because he's an arrogant prick. Whatever sense of humility he once had is long gone.

We now return you to Mad Max.
 
Derangel said:
To put it bluntly: If you are just mashing a single button you're playing it wrong. You can't survive bigger fights without countering and dodging. You literally HAVE to do more than just mash a single button for some enemy types, not to mention bosses. Mad Max is A LOT more mashy and much more shallow in fact. The counter timing is a lot more inconsistent than Batman or SOM and the animations are nowhere near as smooth nor do they give you the ability to cancel some moves for a counter like you can in those other games. Mad Max's combat is also a hell of a lot easier.
Click to expand...

The other factor that people who claim it's just "button mashing" or "way too simplistic" seem to ignore or don't even know about is that the system DOES have depth in terms of rewarding the player for using all the tools available. You get variety score for using all different gadgets (which each have a super-powered mode with bigger/stronger effects,) different types of takedown moves, stuns, area stuns, using the environment, and so on. If you take advantage of all these things you get a MUCH bigger XP score at the end to spend on abilities and such.

Yes you can get by with button mashing and double-tap dodging sometimes (although not during the bigger/later fights with various enemy types) but you won't get rewarded for that.

That's not to say the combat systems in games like GoW or Bayonetta aren't good - they're excellent too. But it's a different style of gameplay, for a few different reasons... chief among them being that you are playing as BATMAN who is a legendary character in pop culture (largely due to movies where he has a certain way of fighting) so it would be extremely dumb to see Batman doing Bayonetta type wacko air juggling for 30 seconds and shit like that.
 
There's a huge difference between having "depth" in terms of actually NEEDING to use it vs having "depth" becuase there's some "slight variety" that you don't-really-need-to-use but we'll give you "extra" points for using.

I vastly prefer depth when it comes to having variety that you NEED to make use of and enemy AI that is smart enough to use variety and tactics outside of "counter when the giant fucking glowy thing pops up over their head."

That is why I think Batman/AC/Mordor and similar games combat sucks. It's simple minded and very shallow focus, built around the counter (and it's not even a REAL counter, just a simplistic "symbol" based counter that counters all movies basically).

The simplistic design even goes straight into the enemy design. Where they make enemies look the same, like some retro 90's "beat em up" with the "Really big guys" that you can't counter....cause they are BIGGGG!!1"

Give me a combat system like Severance, DMC, Dark Souls, etc any day over the simplistic style of Batman and that ilk.

It doesn't meant I don't enjoy the games, but combat gets very repetitive and becomes quite dull to me after a short time.
 
Stiler said:
There's a huge difference between having "depth" in terms of actually NEEDING to use it vs having "depth" becuase there's some "slight variety" that you don't-really-need-to-use but we'll give you "extra" points for using.

I vastly prefer depth when it comes to having variety that you NEED to make use of and enemy AI that is smart enough to use variety and tactics outside of "counter when the giant fucking glowy thing pops up over their head."

That is why I think Batman/AC/Mordor and similar games combat sucks. It's simple minded and very shallow focus, built around the counter (and it's not even a REAL counter, just a simplistic "symbol" based counter that counters all movies basically).

The simplistic design even goes straight into the enemy design. Where they make enemies look the same, like some retro 90's "beat em up" with the "Really big guys" that you can't counter....cause they are BIGGGG!!1"

Give me a combat system like Severance, DMC, Dark Souls, etc any day over the simplistic style of Batman and that ilk.

It doesn't meant I don't enjoy the games, but combat gets very repetitive and becomes quite dull to me after a short time.
Click to expand...

your not wrong.
 
Stiler said:
There's a huge difference between having "depth" in terms of actually NEEDING to use it vs having "depth" becuase there's some "slight variety" that you don't-really-need-to-use but we'll give you "extra" points for using.

I vastly prefer depth when it comes to having variety that you NEED to make use of and enemy AI that is smart enough to use variety and tactics outside of "counter when the giant fucking glowy thing pops up over their head."

That is why I think Batman/AC/Mordor and similar games combat sucks. It's simple minded and very shallow focus, built around the counter (and it's not even a REAL counter, just a simplistic "symbol" based counter that counters all movies basically).

The simplistic design even goes straight into the enemy design. Where they make enemies look the same, like some retro 90's "beat em up" with the "Really big guys" that you can't counter....cause they are BIGGGG!!1"

Give me a combat system like Severance, DMC, Dark Souls, etc any day over the simplistic style of Batman and that ilk.

It doesn't meant I don't enjoy the games, but combat gets very repetitive and becomes quite dull to me after a short time.
Click to expand...

The combat system from character action games like that simply wouldn't work in these games. As much as I love what I dub Kamiya-style combat from games like DMC or Bayonetta I think it would be terrible in Batman, SOM, or Mad Max. All three games require a much more brutal and less flashy style. Something with more impact. Even something on the more mashy level like God of War style combat wouldn't really fit.

I used to love the hell out of 90s beat em ups, never got tired of them. Might be why I still enjoy the Arkham style combat. AC combat on the other hand, meh. That shit needs to change big time.
 
Stiler said:
Give me a combat system like Severance, DMC, Dark Souls, etc any day over the simplistic style of Batman and that ilk.
Click to expand...

All those games are sword-type combat though, I don't think any of them would port over well to a pugilist style game like Mad Max. And they aren't immune to getting a bit boring after 15-30 hours either.

I don't mind the overall style of Mad Max, it just needs a bit more depth, expand the combat beyond Y to counter and X to attack (and very rarely RB to roll away from things you can't Y).

Add a deeper combo system, expand "attack" to a couple of buttons instead of just the 1 and a bit more depth in opponents and how they need to be dealt with and it'd add the depth to keep it interesting (maybe some that need to be dealt with using fast attacks, others that need to be dealt with using heavy attacks, others that need block breakers and the harder opponents would need some mix of all of the above).
 
Tudz said:
All those games are sword-type combat though, I don't think any of them would port over well to a pugilist style game like Mad Max. And they aren't immune to getting a bit boring after 15-30 hours either.

I don't mind the overall style of Mad Max, it just needs a bit more depth, expand the combat beyond Y to counter and X to attack (and very rarely RB to roll away from things you can't Y).

Add a deeper combo system, expand "attack" to a couple of buttons instead of just the 1 and a bit more depth in opponents and how they need to be dealt with and it'd add the depth to keep it interesting (maybe some that need to be dealt with using fast attacks, others that need to be dealt with using heavy attacks, others that need block breakers and the harder opponents would need some mix of all of the above).
Click to expand...

Could really use B for kick (getting rid of the stupid quickfire shotgun that i keep doing accidently) and A for jump for Xbox controller
 
Derangel said:
The combat system from character action games like that simply wouldn't work in these games. As much as I love what I dub Kamiya-style combat from games like DMC or Bayonetta I think it would be terrible in Batman, SOM, or Mad Max. All three games require a much more brutal and less flashy style. Something with more impact. Even something on the more mashy level like God of War style combat wouldn't really fit.

I used to love the hell out of 90s beat em ups, never got tired of them. Might be why I still enjoy the Arkham style combat. AC combat on the other hand, meh. That shit needs to change big time.
Click to expand...


It's not the "Flashyness" that it needs, it's the mechanics, the depth and variety not only in what you can do, but what the enemies can do and how they do them.

Also this is one of the things I find confusing, you mention AC combat and say "meh, needs to change big time" how is it any different from Batman really?

Both games are focused heavily on the "!" counter pop up, both have you taking on huge numbers of enemies, with certain enemies (which you can easily spot because they make enemies look specific to what they do) that you can't counter or have to do "x" move against.

To me Batman is the same as AC in regards to the combat, just one uses melee weapons and the other is more bare fisted.
 
Tudz said:
All those games are sword-type combat though, I don't think any of them would port over well to a pugilist style game like Mad Max. And they aren't immune to getting a bit boring after 15-30 hours either.

I don't mind the overall style of Mad Max, it just needs a bit more depth, expand the combat beyond Y to counter and X to attack (and very rarely RB to roll away from things you can't Y).

Add a deeper combo system, expand "attack" to a couple of buttons instead of just the 1 and a bit more depth in opponents and how they need to be dealt with and it'd add the depth to keep it interesting (maybe some that need to be dealt with using fast attacks, others that need to be dealt with using heavy attacks, others that need block breakers and the harder opponents would need some mix of all of the above).
Click to expand...

I always wondered why more games that use pugilistic fighting don't borrow from boxing games.

I mean take the combat system of say, the Fight Night games:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItZoeL07o1U

That could be made to work in these kinds of games, just have you soft-lock on to enemies, have simply hooks/jabs/uppercuts and things, and then have "modifier" buttons to focus on high or low. Then have dodging and blocking, and you're already at more depth and variety then what we usually have in these dgames.

You can throw in more flair and things that are "fitting" to mad max, more brutal fighting and the occasional melee weapon or such.


The one thing I wish they would have done in this game would be vehicle traveseral. Where you can exist your car and "jump" onto others or climb around them, like int he movies.

They could have it work similar to the Shadow of the Colossus/dragon's dogma games. With a grip meter so if you are being "shaken" around you could lose grip if you aren't on a platform or don't have a foothold.

Heck they let enemies do it, so why not Max???
 
Stiler said:
It's not the "Flashyness" that it needs, it's the mechanics, the depth and variety not only in what you can do, but what the enemies can do and how they do them.

Also this is one of the things I find confusing, you mention AC combat and say "meh, needs to change big time" how is it any different from Batman really?

Both games are focused heavily on the "!" counter pop up, both have you taking on huge numbers of enemies, with certain enemies (which you can easily spot because they make enemies look specific to what they do) that you can't counter or have to do "x" move against.

To me Batman is the same as AC in regards to the combat, just one uses melee weapons and the other is more bare fisted.
Click to expand...

Arkham and AC feel completely different when you're playing it. There is actual variety in Arkham combat. AC every single battle is the same. There is never any threat, never any change. Nothing about it feels good like Arkham style. There is no substance or style to AC combat, nothing to even make it look interesting. Fighting off 50 people in AC feels dull and annoying, everyone comes one at a time, it's busy work. The only challenge is staying awake through endless waves. 50 enemies in the Arkham games would require you to do a lot of moving around, changing up button prompts, paying attention to which type of enemy is attacking you as well as paying attention to the environment so you don't get blind sided by someone picking up a gun or something to throw at you. A 50 person fight in Arkham feels more rewarding, there is more of a chance of dying, more danger to it, more things you can do. Not to mention there has been how many AC games with the exact same system versus four Batman games and one SOM that do it well. The Amazing Spidy games felt like shit when fighting and Mad Max is simply "okay", much closer to being as simple as AC.
 
Derangel said:
The combat system from character action games like that simply wouldn't work in these games. As much as I love what I dub Kamiya-style combat from games like DMC or Bayonetta I think it would be terrible in Batman, SOM, or Mad Max. All three games require a much more brutal and less flashy style. Something with more impact. Even something on the more mashy level like God of War style combat wouldn't really fit.

I used to love the hell out of 90s beat em ups, never got tired of them. Might be why I still enjoy the Arkham style combat. AC combat on the other hand, meh. That shit needs to change big time.
Click to expand...

Agreed and agreed.
 
Derangel said:
Arkham and AC feel completely different when you're playing it. There is actual variety in Arkham combat. AC every single battle is the same. There is never any threat, never any change. Nothing about it feels good like Arkham style. There is no substance or style to AC combat, nothing to even make it look interesting. Fighting off 50 people in AC feels dull and annoying, everyone comes one at a time, it's busy work. The only challenge is staying awake through endless waves. 50 enemies in the Arkham games would require you to do a lot of moving around, changing up button prompts, paying attention to which type of enemy is attacking you as well as paying attention to the environment so you don't get blind sided by someone picking up a gun or something to throw at you. A 50 person fight in Arkham feels more rewarding, there is more of a chance of dying, more danger to it, more things you can do. Not to mention there has been how many AC games with the exact same system versus four Batman games and one SOM that do it well. The Amazing Spidy games felt like shit when fighting and Mad Max is simply "okay", much closer to being as simple as AC.
Click to expand...

This too
 
Derangel said:
Arkham and AC feel completely different when you're playing it. There is actual variety in Arkham combat. AC every single battle is the same. There is never any threat, never any change. Nothing about it feels good like Arkham style. There is no substance or style to AC combat, nothing to even make it look interesting. Fighting off 50 people in AC feels dull and annoying, everyone comes one at a time, it's busy work. The only challenge is staying awake through endless waves. 50 enemies in the Arkham games would require you to do a lot of moving around, changing up button prompts, paying attention to which type of enemy is attacking you as well as paying attention to the environment so you don't get blind sided by someone picking up a gun or something to throw at you. A 50 person fight in Arkham feels more rewarding, there is more of a chance of dying, more danger to it, more things you can do. Not to mention there has been how many AC games with the exact same system versus four Batman games and one SOM that do it well. The Amazing Spidy games felt like shit when fighting and Mad Max is simply "okay", much closer to being as simple as AC.
Click to expand...


You realize a lot of that stuff was changed in the later AC games right?

Heck in AC3 I remember getting attacked by multiple enemies, some of which use range attacks (the riflemen for instance) , they even make it a point to show you how to block it (by grabbing someone else as a shield).

It's really not that much different, see the symbol pop up over their head? hit the counter button. The guys a large man? Break his guard before you attack.

There are some slight differences, and yes teh batman combat feels more "frantic" and fasterin terms of enemies attacking, but to me at least, it doesn't feel like much of a difference.


When i think Lord of the Rings, Mad Max, and Batman, I do not think of them as "Feeling" the same when it comes to combat.

I picture LOTR with large forces in siege warfare, group combat mechanics legolas with his fast archery, magic.

Mad Max? I picture: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3P4LUt0qcX8

The game, although fun, doesn't "feel" like Mad Max when it comes to combat. I never pictured Max running around suplexing people and doing WWE wrestling moves. I would picture more quick brutal moves, climbing around on large vehicles (which baffles me why you can't do that yet enemies can) and such. Also in the movies, although it is the post apocalypse melee combat isn't a "HUGE" part of them. I just watched fury road (Amazing on blu ray) and there's hardly any melee combat in the entire movie. In all the mad max movies it's that way, melee combat is a very very small part compared to the game where it's vastly teh majority instead.

I think games need to just stop trying to "copy" other games combat and try to capture the feel and what works for their games , find something that's fun and that seems fitting for your character and lore and don't just shoehorn in the "FOTM" combat system.
 
Anybody know if there's been a fix for the Harpoon?

I run Surround/Eyefinity 5760 x 1200 and the Harpoon wont work, simply won't fire in that resolution.

The only solution I've found is to change to single screen 1920 x 1200 for that part, use the Harpoon to pull down a tower or whatever and the change back to my Surround.

It essentially alters gameplay such that after the first mission or two, I loose a valuable weapon or downsize the whole game to a single monitor.:(
 
Derangel said:
Arkham and AC feel completely different when you're playing it. There is actual variety in Arkham combat. AC every single battle is the same. There is never any threat, never any change. Nothing about it feels good like Arkham style. There is no substance or style to AC combat, nothing to even make it look interesting. Fighting off 50 people in AC feels dull and annoying, everyone comes one at a time, it's busy work. The only challenge is staying awake through endless waves. 50 enemies in the Arkham games would require you to do a lot of moving around, changing up button prompts, paying attention to which type of enemy is attacking you as well as paying attention to the environment so you don't get blind sided by someone picking up a gun or something to throw at you. A 50 person fight in Arkham feels more rewarding, there is more of a chance of dying, more danger to it, more things you can do. Not to mention there has been how many AC games with the exact same system versus four Batman games and one SOM that do it well. The Amazing Spidy games felt like shit when fighting and Mad Max is simply "okay", much closer to being as simple as AC.
Click to expand...

This. Batman fighting system is very engaging compared to the competition.
 
atrance5 said:
This. Batman fighting system is very engaging compared to the competition.
Click to expand...

I don't see a difference. Sure AC combat can be easy (which has been largely changed since AC3 to be more difficult) but Batman is essentially the same as the competition. About to get hit? Tap Y to counter. Hit X to hit hard, hold X to hit harder, X X Hold X for combo. You have only have a few kits like smoke bombs, hook, batarangs which feels just like AC to me.
 
NickJames said:
I don't see a difference. Sure AC combat can be easy (which has been largely changed since AC3 to be more difficult) but Batman is essentially the same as the competition. About to get hit? Tap Y to counter. Hit X to hit hard, hold X to hit harder, X X Hold X for combo. You have only have a few kits like smoke bombs, hook, batarangs which feels just like AC to me.
Click to expand...

AC3, 4, and Unity combat is just as mind numbingly dull as all the previous games. No one is arguing that Arkham combat is deep or overly complex but it feels good and that's the key. AC combat feels terrible, it isn't fun. Arkham combat isn't a ton more complex but it feels better and works better. When playing AC I don't feel like an assassin while in combat. In the Arkham games it feels more like you are playing Batman and it feels right for the character. Black Flag is the only game where it's combat system seems to make sense as Edward isn't a trained assassin.
 
Asylum on it's first go is still far superior to any of the 9+ asscreed game's mechanics. Shadow of mordor first attempt was close but you become to op to quick.

It's like comparing the mechanics of DMC to GoW. If you can't tell the difference you're playing it wrong.
 
Derangel said:
AC3, 4, and Unity combat is just as mind numbingly dull as all the previous games. No one is arguing that Arkham combat is deep or overly complex but it feels good and that's the key. AC combat feels terrible, it isn't fun. Arkham combat isn't a ton more complex but it feels better and works better. When playing AC I don't feel like an assassin while in combat. In the Arkham games it feels more like you are playing Batman and it feels right for the character. Black Flag is the only game where it's combat system seems to make sense as Edward isn't a trained assassin.
Click to expand...

What exactly is it that makes you feel Arkham is significantly better? As far as I know there's no difference in the two. Combat initiates, the enemies circle you, they come at you usually 1 or so at a time and you can either block or use the counter mechanic. I honestly don't see the difference. And how would an assassin normally fair in combat? The objective should be to remain in stealth and complete everything silently.
 
NickJames said:
What exactly is it that makes you feel Arkham is significantly better? As far as I know there's no difference in the two. Combat initiates, the enemies circle you, they come at you usually 1 or so at a time and you can either block or use the counter mechanic. I honestly don't see the difference. And how would an assassin normally fair in combat? The objective should be to remain in stealth and complete everything silently.
Click to expand...

If you want you can dumb down any combat system with simple explanations. It's clear you don't like either system and simply can not see or feel the difference between them. You can't explain "feel" with a discussion of mechanics. You can have the deepest, most complex combat system in the world but if it doesn't feel right then it's worthless. The reason why the best character action games stand the test of time isn't due just to the mechanics of them, it's also due to how good it feels to fight, how rewarding those fights feel, and how much it feels like you are in control of the character you are playing. Breaking down a system into it's base mechanics is a terrible way to describe things in a medium that is so incredibly reliant on the player having an emotional reaction of some kind.

PS: The stealth in the AC games isn't exactly great either.
 
NickJames said:
What exactly is it that makes you feel Arkham is significantly better? As far as I know there's no difference in the two. Combat initiates, the enemies circle you, they come at you usually 1 or so at a time and you can either block or use the counter mechanic. I honestly don't see the difference. And how would an assassin normally fair in combat? The objective should be to remain in stealth and complete everything silently.
Click to expand...

What Derangel said.
Although on the surface both systems seem similar, it is hard to explain but they are not.

I agree that for the Arkham games, I feel like Batman when I fight. Whether it is predator style (stealth) or all out brawl.
In Shadow of Mordor, the combat felt even better IMO, due to the protagonist using a sword, and due to the enemies being orcs (awesome brutal finishes with heads being cut off and everything).
It is true that if you do too many side quests, you become OP and the rest of the campaign feels a little too easy.

In Mad Max, the combat system is similar, but much slower, feels less responsive and having Max not being able to jump from one enemy to the next (which makes sense) makes the experience less fun.

In the AC series, the combat uses a similar system, but it's pure garbage and isn't fun AT ALL.
It's hard to explain exactly why, but it is what it is.

To someone like you, they are all the same, and that's fine. To the rest of us, we see the differences and nuances from one game to the other and thoroughly enjoy some and dislike the others...

Also an assassin is not the same thing as a Ninja. An assassin's first and foremost goal is to kill, not necessarily remain unseen. My 2 cents :)
 
Guess we have to agree to disagree about Arkham/Mordor combat vs. Mad Max.

In Batman, sure, if you do more "stylistic" moves you get a better score, but you can still succeed in multi-opponent combat by just mashing the button because it auto-combos and auto-targets a new enemy once you've knocked out the current one. Go watch the Worth a Buy video about Batman combat, he literally has a camera on the controller of him mashing the same button and NOTHING ELSE and beats up half a dozen guys...I think he maybe gets hit once or something. I played through Asylum and some of City and that was more or less my experience as well.

In Mordor, which I also finished, it was a little better but still became absurdly easy, even against 100+ enemies at once. As long as you hit the counter button at the right time you were invincible.

In Mad Max, it's a bit slower and there is no auto-targeting of new opponents. Also, the counter move can be touchier than in the other games, whereas it's VERY forgiving in Batman and Mordor. If you miss a counter you can very easily get hit multiple times, and you can get more than one guy coming at you at once with only the ability to counter one (unlike Mordor where you can counter two and they never seem to come at you more than two at a time).

As far as how difficult the combat is, I'd have to say from my experience that it's Max followed by Mordor and then Batman as the easiest. I don't think I ever died once from Batman combat in the time that I played those titles.

Assassin's Creed combat is just obnoxious, I guess we can agree there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top