So as many, MANY scenes in actual game. Does it make them bad? No. The one we saw in the gameplay video above is particular good, it would fit in the game as much as any other scripted scene it has (and at the end of a video you can actually see the scripted scene that made in to a game). There is no reason why these early parts of the game couldn't make into a game. I re-watched videos few times, I replayed the similar moments in the game and I still haven't found a damn solid reason why. It is a good content and it could be there.
So imagine you walk into a store and now the game decides to take over control from you and start a scripted sequence of you exploring the store with Elizabeth. Does that sound okay? Still in first person perspective, game moving your mouse for you.
Or the sequence where the old mans eyes glow and the combat starts. Would you be comfortable the game just taking away control from you at that point and fighting instead of you?
Because that's what scripted means. Those would be cinematics if they were in the actual game. Making them interactive would require additional work. They can't just plug them in and everything be interactive. And in my opinion those sequences just don't fit in as cinematics.
Regardless of that, art assets were probably not created for in-game, but for the demo, so they would need to redo them as well.
Some of those sequences could fit in as cinematics, but most couldn't. And as you said it some of them made it into the game, others probably didn't fit from a story perspective, but most of them just aren't cinematic material. And that means transferring them to game form requires additional work, which requires additional time and money.
Which brings me back to my original point, is that they weren't cut out, they just didn't have time/money to implement those.
So imagine you walk into a store and now the game decides to take over control from you and start a scripted sequence of you exploring the store with Elizabeth. Does that sound okay?
Sorry, but you just made it up right here. If you did bother to watch video you would see player had control in that scene most of the time. The"fluid" flow of his movements dictated by the fact it was console demo and he used gamepad, not mouse.
Quote:
Or the sequence where the old mans eyes glow and the combat starts. Would you be comfortable the game just taking away control from you at that point and fighting instead of you?
You mean like many scenes in the game where you enter into some areas and people just attack you? Precisely, all the areas where you work for/under Finkton Proper - it was one big disappointment to me, because i rememebr the game at beginning promised me the possibility to avoid battles and the area started with some neat scripted scenes between NPCs... just to devolve into battle sooner with no actual reason. Someone just attacked me and everyone else IMMEDIATELY were aware I'm the threat. I replayed it few times from the beginning thinking I'm doing something wrong. I was disappointed, but couldn't do anything - battle always starts sooner or later.
So, I'm sorry? Nothing would change.
Quote:
Because that's what scripted means. Those would be cinematics if they were in the actual game. Making them interactive would require additional work. They can't just plug them in and everything be interactive.
If you want me to take your "argument seriously - please provide the overwhelming amount of interactive, non-scritped, interesting scenes form the game. No, I'm not talking about battles, these do no count (and there are no difference from battle scenes in the actual game and these we see in demo, except AI was dumbed down).
Quote:
And as you said it some of them made it into the game, others probably didn't fit from a story perspective.
That is no explanation, that is your assumption and opinion. To me, they could work perfectly in the game, especially after some polishing and the development team had A LOT of such time for such polishing.
Note that it is not just one video we can say - yeah, it just scripted demo, even the player action were scripted. Look, it is early 2010, there was no game yet! No sir, the similar gameplay videos scattered through long period - 10-11-12 years. And many of the content we saw never made into a game. That is kind of a lot of scripted demos just for the demo purposes, don't yo think? Especially considering the amount of work that were put into, some levels we saw were bigger than anything in the final game.
I'm not sure why are you trying to devolve discussion into such mercantile unrelated conversation (excessively using exaggerations), but if you aren't really interested to talk about the subj - maybe, umm, it makes sense to avoid participating in the discussion?
So imagine you walk into a store and now the game decides to take over control from you and start a scripted sequence of you exploring the store with Elizabeth. Does that sound okay?
Sorry, but you just made it up right here. If you did bother to watch video you would see player had control in that scene most of the time. The"fluid" flow of his movements dictated by the fact it was console demo and he used gamepad, not mouse.
It's quite obvious that a lot of things in these trailers would not work if the player was in control and not in the right place at exactly the right time. For instance, when he knocks the guy off the railing and he lands perfectly on the gondola so the player can TK the vigor. What if you knocked him over a different section and he just fell out of reach? Or what about when the player is backed into that exact corner so Elizabeth can appear at that precise position to offer her help. A prime example is in the pub with the shotgun guy, everything in that scene was just set up for a script in the way the guy ran after his shotgun and fell into the piano. Even the bit on the skyline where the guy is knocked off into the building, you really think all of that was just coincidental the player was in the right place for this stuff to happen? Even when these videos were first released I knew they were scripted. It's so obvious.
Last edited by stemot on Mon, 1st Apr 2013 20:12; edited 1 time in total
Remember other overambitious projects like Alan Wake or the scripted early demo of HL2? Ambitious developers like to show a lot of cool footage early and they hope that they can pull off a full game on that level. But at the end, sacrifices have to be made to get a game finished. Would you have preferred them to keep the game secret until it is finalized almost finished like Rockstar does with their GTA games?
Levine himself said they cut "5 games worth of content" from the final product, so i rly doubt that all these previews where just for show, there are enough indications that somewhere around late 2011 some serious reconstruction of the game took place for example se
Last edited by tet666 on Mon, 1st Apr 2013 20:26; edited 1 time in total
The trailers shown is a publisher "Demo". It's an extremely scripted sequence made very early in development of the game. Even the mouse movements in that demo are likely scripted. The graphics are pumped up and the demo is not played, it is rendered. It is nothing more than a cinematic made with an early version of the engine. Maybe even not the same engine the actual game is made on, but a prototype while another team is working on the actual game.
That means almost nothing in those demos can be used in the actual game directly. First of the graphical assets would likely need to be scaled down, second and more important since everything in the demo was scripted, actually implementing each piece of such gameplay is quite an effort.
So I wouldn't even say it was "cut out". Due to time/money constraints they were just not able to create the game that manages to recreate such demo in its entirety.
(They're doing the same thing with Watchdogs trailers)
No these demos were being played live with a gamepad on a PC, we've had confirmation about that back in the day. But just because some dude learned to react to the scripts doesn't mean you are any less spot on.
TWIN PEAKS is "something of a miracle."
"...like nothing else on television."
"a phenomenon."
"A tangled tale of sex, violence, power, junk food..."
"Like Nothing On Earth"
Remember other overambitious projects like Alan Wake or the scripted early demo of HL2? Ambitious developers like to show a lot of cool footage early and they hope that they can pull off a full game on that level. But at the end, sacrifices have to be made to get a game finished. Would you have preferred them to keep the game secret until it is finalized almost finished like Rockstar does with their GTA games?
obviously yes, if not having useless trailers means better game quality, who would say no to that?
stemot
The skyline part with lift up and following cart usage is indeed a made up scene and if you played it differently you would miss the opportunity, yes. But so is in the game, I missed a lot of opportunities like in some places you could wash away enemies into the blue sky if you play the battle sequence correctly. This is just optional things that can be used in battle like the oil puddle or eater puddle (which I never used because I failed t lure enemies in there - they always kept distance and would never leave their cover).
As for Elizabeth appearance - I'm not even sure why did you mentioned it. You played the game, right? You do know she has magical teleportation ability? She always with you if there is something she can/had to interact with. Sometimes this feature has funny glitches and 2 times she appeared on the roofs where even I can't stand due to limitation of the level design.
me7 wrote:
Remember other overambitious projects like Alan Wake or the scripted early demo of HL2? Ambitious developers like to show a lot of cool footage early and they hope that they can pull off a full game on that level. But at the end, sacrifices have to be made to get a game finished. Would you have preferred them to keep the game secret until it is finalized almost finished like Rockstar does with their GTA games?
I already mentioned it and answered to the similar question - the game was in development for years. We know only about 4 years prior announcement. They had plenty of time and budget. And we aren't talking about simple monster, we are talking about big parts of the game that were technically playable, unlike some skeleton of the ship level from HL2 that fans had to put shitloads of effort to restore and look somehow representable.
stemot
The skyline part with lift up and following cart usage is indeed a made up scene and if you played it differently you would miss the opportunity, yes. But so is in the game, I missed a lot of opportunities like in some places you could wash away enemies into the blue sky if you play the battle sequence correctly. This is just optional things that can be used in battle like the oil puddle or eater puddle (which I never used because I failed t lure enemies in there - they always kept distance and would never leave their cover).
As for Elizabeth appearance - I'm not even sure why did you mentioned it. You played the game, right? You do know she has magical teleportation ability? She always with you if there is something she can/had to interact with. Sometimes this feature has funny glitches and 2 times she appeared on the roofs where even I can't stand due to limitation of the level design.
.
No, my point was that the whole thing was set up for the script to take place in that exact space. As if the player had deliberately backed into a script. The way the enemy horde was clumbed together and the positioning of Elizabeth scream scripting. It's not just them though is it? there are many places in these videos that wouldn't be possible if the player hadn't been standing in exactly the right place doing exactly the right action. Surely you can see the whole thing is a live played script a thon?
No, I still don't understand what is your point. There were a lot of similar moments is in the game (hall of heroes, Slate, the first gate you can't open is a perfect example, then in goes forward in simialr set up as well) as well, so I'm completely lost at what are you implying. These old scenes would fit in game well (even if with some minor changes).
Problem is that they were there, they were developed and made and they were damn good. But then they were removed for no apparent reason. I'd rather play the game with some neat cutscenes with nice storytelling - for example, in that 9:00m gameplay video Elizabeth asking DeWitt to kill her in case bird finds them. It happened after they managed to avoid being discovered by Songbird in that shop and it was damn atmospheric and eerie. And in the actual game? It happened when I asked her to lockpick one of the gates that leads to Combstock's house and I didn't even pay too much attention to the scene because I just finished the battle and my mind were busy thinking where can I spent money/refill resources and where to go first. I almost missed that scene and it didn't have such impact as different approach in that video.
No, I still don't understand what is your point. There were a lot of similar moments is n the game (hall of heroes, Slate, the first gate you can't open is a perfect example,the in goes forward) as well, so I'm completely lost what are you implying. These old scene would fit in game well (even if with some minor changes).
Problem is that they were there, they were developed and made and they were damn good. But then they were removed for no apparent reason. I'd rather play the game with some neat cutscenes with nice storytelling - for example, in that 9m long video Elizabeth asking DeWitt to kill to avoid catching the bird. It happened after they managed to avoid being discovered by Songbird in that shop and it was dam atmospheric and eerie? And in the actual game? It happened when I asked her to lockpick one of the gates that leads to Combstock's house and I didn't even pay too much attention to the scene because I just finished the battle and my mind were busy thinking where can I spent money/refill resources and where to go first. I almost missed that scene and it didn't have such impact as different approach in that video.
I am saying that these scripts wouldn't work if the player decided to play different to the exact way the developer played these scenes. If the player didn't follow the exact movements of this video the illusion would fall apart because they need the player to be in an exact position at the right time. The are absolutely no scenes that require this in the finished version, Elizabeth will help no matter where on the map I'm stood and I am not required to attack specific NPC's with an exact move at exactly the right part for the scene to continue forward, which would be necessary in the example of the guy getting knocked over the railing and landing on the gondola. There's a difference in a scene that requires you to do an action to proceed (the vigor required locked gate) and one that would be broken if the player decided not to strictly adhere to a scene that would only work if the player was in one precise position when they could be anywhere because it's a combat situation.
See 00:53, it starts there. I remember there was 4-5m of gameplay video with shooting scenes where Eli helps you, then handyman appears, duo defeats them and at the end there is Songbird you can actually fight with (!).
See 00:53, it starts there. I remember there was 4-5m of gameplay video with shooting scenes where Eli helps you, then handyman appears, duo defeats them and at the end there is Songbird you can actually fight with (!).
Anyone know the video what I'm talking about?
Here it is. Elizabeth obviously had a very different set of powers in this earlier iteration of the game. The moral choice system was also supposed to be using or not using her super powers since they made her very weak.
I've just had a fight wirh Elizabeths mother. How far into the game am I? I'm starting to find the constant confrontations and combat tedious so if I'm not almost done I think I'll just quit playing.
I've just had a fight wirh Elizabeths mother. How far into the game am I? I'm starting to find the constant confrontations and combat tedious so if I'm not almost done I think I'll just quit playing.
2 more fights with mommy dearest after that. I think perhaps 2 or 2½ hours remain of gameplay depending on how you proceed if I recall correctly. ^_^
I've just had a fight wirh Elizabeths mother. How far into the game am I? I'm starting to find the constant confrontations and combat tedious so if I'm not almost done I think I'll just quit playing.
As Prefetian mentioned above, you have to fight with her twice more, after that you
Spoiler:
go to Comstock house, scene changes, you are in some kind of labaratory inside his house, it will take a hour, then you have to assault his ship - it will take ~1h too, then you have to defend it, it will take 30~ and that is, ending scene.
I've just had a fight wirh Elizabeths mother. How far into the game am I? I'm starting to find the constant confrontations and combat tedious so if I'm not almost done I think I'll just quit playing.
Spoiler:
The other two confrontations with her are less tedious because you fight next to an ammo vending machine. You can buy as much ammo for your favourite weapon as you want.
Don't quit playing
Signature/Avatar nuking: none (can be changed in your profile)
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
. Ah well gonna play rest of the game today ;<
