TY
Guest
- 0
- Posts
Not breaking your legs when you fall from a high place (looking at almost every single game there is >_>)
I'm surprised people haven't said drowning in water because the main character can't swim. I'm looking at you, early Assassin Creed games...
This. Even if it's a fictional world, it's still terribly unbelievable that some average Joe can do far better than anyone else simply because they're the main character.I always hate, in games and cinema/television, that the ONE main guy happens to live through all the catastrophe. How is it that this seemingly normal person escapes every disaster while everyone else, even trained soldiers and police, seem to die? Makes no sense thematically and usually takes me out of the experience (especially in movies).
I actually find that logical. I don't know anything historically about swimming, but I would believe that people in the past didn't know how to swim if they weren't always living by the water or weren't allowed time to be a kid. The one that doesn't get an excuse is the earlier Grand Theft Autos.
This. Even if it's a fictional world, it's still terribly unbelievable that some average Joe can do far better than anyone else simply because they're the main character.
And basically most shonen anime/manga tropes.
I always felt like this about recent TES games as well.Well I immediately thought of something Bethesda RPGs do: sneak attack criticals. I don't very well understand how attacking an enemy that hasn't detected me results in a critical hit solely from the detection factor. Like if I'm going to put an arrow in someone's neck I'm going to do it anyway; it's not like they can realistically react to the thing.
I can appreciate the justification that an unalert enemy is going to be easier to land a well-aimed shot upon, and that an undetected marksman has the time to adopt a good shooting position and aim carefully. Still, it would be nice for locational damage to be a thing instead, like if my shot lands in an unarmoured part of their body, they're injured, and if it hits their armour, probably not a lot happens.
Instead, the matter is decided by some numbers, which one can't necessarily fault an RPG for, but with the combat system's move over the course of the Elder Scrolls series to a more active and skill-based style (compare melee in Skyrim to Morrowind), where and how the player lands blows seems to me like it should be more important than whether their sword is +1 or +5. It's like we're in an uncanny valley of gameplay mechanics being number-based but requiring a degree of active input none the less. Maybe that's a happy balance for many players, but I find it quite odd given thought.