No Lock-On Is Actually Better Than Outdated Lock-On

[LeoXCV]

No difference than how people who prefer to play as Dante being also a personal preference.

If you're headed to the "there are more people who play as Dante, so more moves is better than less" direction, you'd have to actually prove to me that most people prefer playing as Dante more than Nero in DMC4.

Tell you what, prove to everyone that majority of people agree with your "No lock-on is better than outdated lock-on" argument. Since in the end this entire argument at it's core is also down to personal preference, it would be quite hypocritical to hold majority preference against a point when you yourself have supplied none for the actual topic.

 

[Goldsickle]

Tell you what, prove to everyone that majority of people agree with your "No lock-on is better than outdated lock-on" argument. Since in the end this entire argument at it's core is also down to personal preference, it would be quite hypocritical to hold majority preference against a point when you yourself have supplied none for the actual topic.

Sorry, I'm not going that route.

No offense but from my experience arguing, people who drag the "majority" to make their arguments stronger are normally those who can't argue or cowards.

There are times when majority or general consensus is relevant but for this topic, I can argue that the old lock-on is outdated and dysfunctional by listing down the flaws.

For now, all people can do to defend the forced walk is downplaying the obvious problems or giving makeshift alternatives.

I just got my hands on the MGR demo and I can say without a doubt that the forced walk during lock-on in the older DMC games are very dysfunctional.
In MGR, you can keep an enemy focused on camera without the need to keep a button held down and without your character being slowed down.

However, MGR isn't without flaws.
I was actually surprised how much flaws were piling up as I played that.
If hack and slash is a language, then the creators of MGR only knows a few basic phrases, they are not fluent in it.

 

[AlchemistFromEden]

Sorry, I'm not going that route.

No offense but from my experience arguing, people who drag the "majority" to make their arguments stronger are normally those who can't argue or cowards.

There are times when majority or general consensus is relevant but for this topic, I can argue that the old lock-on is outdated and dysfunctional by listing down the flaws.

For now, all people can do to defend the forced walk is downplaying the obvious problems or giving makeshift alternatives.

I just got my hands on the MGR demo and I can say without a doubt that the forced walk during lock-on in the older DMC games are very dysfunctional.
In MGR, you can keep an enemy focused on camera without the need to keep a button held down and without your character being slowed down.

However, MGR isn't without flaws.
I was actually surprised how much flaws were piling up as I played that.
If hack and slash is a language, then the creators of MGR only knows a few basic phrases, they are not fluent in it.

that's what happens when games get stuck in development hell even for alittle while, i feel sorry for the MAJORITY of the mgs fanboys, not the devil may cry and bayonetta fans pretending to be all of a sudden into mgs and saying "NOT ALL FANS HATE IT" they're right, its the majority that do, the people that do like it are in the loud minority

 

[Downfall]

If hack and slash is a language, then the creators of MGR only knows a few basic phrases, they are not fluent in it.

BURN. :troll:

 

[Shin Muramasa]

BURN. :troll:

Here's an image that says the exact same thing.

 

[EvilX-81]

However, MGR isn't without flaws.
I was actually surprised how much flaws were piling up as I played that.
If hack and slash is a language, then the creators of MGR only knows a few basic phrases, they are not fluent in it.

Oohh? Do tell plz. I've only heard good news about the game through and through (granted a good chunk of that is "blade mode iz awesooommmeeeee (it's not, IMO) throw dat Metal GEEEAAARRR!!!!")

 

[LeoXCV]

Sorry, I'm not going that route.

No offense but from my experience arguing, people who drag the "majority" to make their arguments stronger are normally those who can't argue or cowards.

None taken, I only brought it up because I felt it was a bit unfair for you to use a similar method to counter argue.

There are times when majority or general consensus is relevant but for this topic, I can argue that the old lock-on is outdated and dysfunctional by listing down the flaws.

I still think these flaws are subject to preference. The only flaw I agree with is why there wasn't lock-on toggle as an option. But I don't want it forced as toggle I want it to be an option so I can have it off and those who want can have it one.

For now, all people can do to defend the forced walk is downplaying the obvious problems or giving makeshift alternatives.

This again I feel is preference, as said before I think it's great for MGR to have you running whilst locked on because it suits how the game was made to be. I also feel DmC with it's current mechanics would feel really out of place to have a lock-on the same as DMC (But I think it would've benefited if it had some way of telling me what I'll be hitting). However when it does come to DMC because of the controls, mechanics and input method it makes sense to me to have it the way it is.

I just got my hands on the MGR demo and I can say without a doubt that the forced walk during lock-on in the older DMC games are very dysfunctional.
In MGR, you can keep an enemy focused on camera without the need to keep a button held down and without your character being slowed down.

However, MGR isn't without flaws.
I was actually surprised how much flaws were piling up as I played that.
If hack and slash is a language, then the creators of MGR only knows a few basic phrases, they are not fluent in it.

Yeah I played the demo too. I can only agree with that to a certain extent. It was actually the lock-on that was my main issue whilst playing. Hell at one point my camera got stuck at the bottom right of Raiden looking up at him at practically point blank range, also back/forward and rotating stick inputs look a bit stupid unless buffered into, and have a tendancy to target the wrong guy if also not buffered into.
This is somewhat why I still believe we aren't ready for these kinds of lock-ons just yet. I played a lot of games with this kind of lock-on and each have had annoying issues. ZotE being one of the only exceptions, but that's due to it's style of combat being somewhat easy to work around with a camera, even so it had a few flaws still (If I remember correctly).

EDIT:

that's what happens when games get stuck in development hell even for alittle while, i feel sorry for the MAJORITY of the mgs fanboys, not the devil may cry and bayonetta fans pretending to be all of a sudden into mgs and saying "NOT ALL FANS HATE IT" they're right, its the majority that do, the people that do like it are in the loud minority

I got a bit of an issue with this. The way you put it makes it sound like all MGS fans are hating MGR, and the only people that like it are people that are 'fake' acting like a fan of MGS and MGR to boycott DmC. That's not really the case, I'm a huge fan of MGS, played all of 'em and I love the story. I also actually like what they are doing with MGR, and really you shouldn't feel sorry for MGS fans that hate MGR, they'll be getting Ground Zero and The Phantom Pain. (Which look pretty awesome too might I add)

 

[Dante47]

It's hard to believe such a subjective subject has sparked so much discussion.

In the end, you either like lock-on, or you don't.
I'd love it DmC2 incorporated a system where you could lock-on to enemies.
But if you choose not to, it allows the current auto lock-on feature in DmC.

 

[Goldsickle]

Oohh? Do tell plz. I've only heard good news about the game through and through (granted a good chunk of that is "blade mode iz awesooommmeeeee (it's not, IMO) throw dat Metal GEEEAAARRR!!!!")

First, the auto-panning camera.

Move left or right and the camera turns automatically for you, making it easier to lose your bearings and will also hide enemies unless you're locked on.
It's a downgrade, after how previous MGS games, such as MGS3 (Subsistence version), MGS4 & MGS: Peace Walker had fully manual camera.

This was also a problem in DmC but it seems to pan much faster in MGR.


Another thing about the camera is how it's too close to Raiden.
Try playing DMC4, DmC or Bayonetta and observe how the camera zoomed out a bit more, allowing you to have a better look at your surroundings, as well as the surrounding enemies.

Add the fact that the camera pans quickly on it's own and that your view is cropped down, enemies get hidden much easier.


If you try to perform Raiden's "Stinger" attack towards a locked-on enemy, there's a 50-50 chance that the camera will spin for no reason.

I thought this was one of those glitches when you're trying to pull some maneuver in tight corridors but it seems to occur even in the battle against Blade Wolf, which took place in an open street.

All this random spinning of the camera makes it harder to parry an opponent, since you're required to tilt the analog stick towards the enemy.
If Blade Wolf manages to shove you to some awkward camera angle, it can totally get free hits unless you know exactly which direction he's coming from.

 

[LeoXCV]

It's hard to believe such a subjective subject has sparked so much discussion.

If a subject wasn't subjective, discussions would be pretty boring and one-sided logically.

 

[Dante47]

If a subject wasn't subjective, discussions would be pretty boring and one-sided logically.

In the end, it does come down to personal preference.
Some people will like no lock on better.

 

[LeoXCV]

In the end, it does come down to personal preference.
Some people will like no lock on better.

I know, which is why I'm trying to put across why, for me personally, I like lock-on, to someone that thinks otherwise; in hopes that maybe I can learn a bit more why they don't, and hopefully show them why I do (This is why I join a forum after all). Just so happens that a lot of views can come from this because lock-on is such an integral part for a lot of games, it goes a little more in depth than "You either like it or you don't".

 

[Goldsickle]

None taken, I only brought it up because I felt it was a bit unfair for you to use a similar method to counter argue.

The "general consensus" thing?
If something was presented as a general reception to me, then I expect citations for it.

Otherwise, what's stopping me from saying Weasel Words?

In my experience, the people around me always use the "majority agrees with me, so I'm right" or "there's more of us, so you have to shut up" reasoning.

As of now, this only has happened to me in GameFAQs.

This again I feel is preference, as said before I think it's great for MGR to have you running whilst locked on because it suits how the game was made to be. I also feel DmC with it's current mechanics would feel really out of place to have a lock-on the same as DMC (But I think it would've benefited if it had some way of telling me what I'll be hitting). However when it does come to DMC because of the controls, mechanics and input method it makes sense to me to have it the way it is.

And I have already mentioned multiple times that the only reason for the forced walk was due to the lock-on being originally a "draw gun" button, which is due to DMC being originally an RE4 beta.

There's no function or reason for this.
It was something they left in the game but forgot to take out.

From my experience arguing with people who defend old mechanics, it goes like this:

-Defenders will usually start by saying "this feature should stay because it's more realistic this way".
It didn't matter if that 'feature' is tank controls, prerendered backgrounds, overhead view, run button or stand-still-to-shoot.
The less-experienced arguer will always use the "it's more realistic" reasoning.

-The smarter ones avoid the "realistic" reasoning and try to convince me that it's a "style", "convention", "core element", "commandment", etc. of the game and must never be removed or risk losing it's "identity" or something like that.
This angle always leads to a dead end, because developers never stick to a list of commandments and do whatever they feel is right.

-When all else fails, defenders of old mechanics will try to convince me that a certain mechanic should stay for the sake of challenge and removal or replacing the feature will break the game.
This usually fails, since there are always opposing examples to their arguments.

Anyone defending the forced walk are just doing so for nostalgia.
As mentioned, I have seen this pattern repeat itself too many times.

 

[EvilX-81]

First, the auto-panning camera.

Move left or right and the camera turns automatically for you, making it easier to lose your bearings and will also hide enemies unless you're locked on.
It's a downgrade, after how previous MGS games, such as MGS3 (Subsistence version), MGS4 & MGS: Peace Walker had fully manual camera.

This was also a problem in DmC but it seems to pan much faster in MGR.


Another thing about the camera is how it's too close to Raiden.
Try playing DMC4, DmC or Bayonetta and observe how the camera zoomed out a bit more, allowing you to have a better look at your surroundings, as well as the surrounding enemies.

Add the fact that the camera pans quickly on it's own and that your view is cropped down, enemies get hidden much easier.


If you try to perform Raiden's "Stinger" attack towards a locked-on enemy, there's a 50-50 chance that the camera will spin for no reason.

I thought this was one of those glitches when you're trying to pull some maneuver in tight corridors but it seems to occur even in the battle against Blade Wolf, which took place in an open street.

All this random spinning of the camera makes it harder to parry an opponent, since you're required to tilt the analog stick towards the enemy.
If Blade Wolf manages to shove you to some awkward camera angle, it can totally get free hits unless you know exactly which direction he's coming from.

This description of the camera is giving my Bayonetta flashbacks. That thing was a crock of **** for a lock-on camera.

 

[LeoXCV]

-snip-

Quick question; I know you don't like the walking and such and you have brought up examples of games where you prefer the lock-on, but what specifically would you see a working lock-on system for DMC? As in how would it work in every aspect to cater for what you feel is right (For instance, say more than just "make movement faster" and say about how it would look/feel and play, how inputs would work, how the camera operates etc.)? I ask this because although you have said about how you would like it to be, I don't think you have at any point gone into extreme detail about your kind of dream lock-on system. So I just wanted to get a clearer view of what your really asking of the lock-on.

 

[Goldsickle]

Quick question; I know you don't like the walking and such and you have brought up examples of games where you prefer the lock-on, but what specifically would you see a working lock-on system for DMC? As in how would it work in every aspect to cater for what you feel is right (For instance, say more than just "make movement faster" and say about how it would look/feel and play, how inputs would work, how the camera operates etc.)? I ask this because although you have said about how you would like it to be, I don't think you have at any point gone into extreme detail about your kind of dream lock-on system. So I just wanted to get a clearer view of what your really asking of the lock-on.

I think I already specified it.

I'd like the character's speed to not be hindered when lock-on is active.

I'd like to see the lock-on activated via toggling.

 

[LeoXCV]

I'd like the character's speed to not be hindered when lock-on is active.
I'd like to see the lock-on activated via toggling.

Those aren't really the answers I'm looking for since I know you have already said these things.I want to know if speed was unhindered, how would the character move around exactly? Would it be strafe running, or would it be free running (Like MGR) or another method? How would you expect the inputs to be done based on how movement/lock-on is done? Would there still be stick inputs or would there be another method? How do the attacks target? Is the lock-on mainly for camera control or is it also used for attack direction? How would toggle work with things such as switching targets? Does one input turn the toggle on and the other turn it off for it to be reactivated, does it cycle through targets with each press, does it have both but in order to deactivate you would have to hold the input or is there another method?

 

[Goldsickle]

Would it be strafe running, or would it be free running (Like MGR) or another method?

Running while facing the enemy (as much as the body can turn).

How would you expect the inputs to be done based on how movement/lock-on is done?

I would make it so that signature moves aren't lock-on dependent.
I may consider some moves easier to input when lock-on is activated.

How do the attacks target?

One weakness of MGR is that locking-on to the enemy does not make Raiden automatically face them.
Meaning parrying and so on still requires you to correctly tilt the stick towards the enemy.
Even if you get the timing right, if the enemy forces you to some awkward angle, you're screwed.

Is the lock-on mainly for camera control or is it also used for attack direction?

Having the characters face the locked-on enemy can be helpful, like if the character wants to deflect an attack with his weapon or perform a counter attack.

Even if the enemy is large, you could make it so that you can lock on to separate parts.
For example, the final Savior battle in DMC4.
Nero can lock-on to the hands he needs to Buster, so can conveniently face it for a proper Buster counter. In Nero's case here, of course he needs to lock-off for the Buster but locking-on helps him face the hands.

How would toggle work with things such as switching targets?

Some options:

-Tilt left analog to desired target and press L3 to switch.

-Tilt to desired target with the right analog (camera control is locked to the enemy, so right analog movement is freed up for lock-on switching).

You turn off lock-on by pressing the lock-on button again.


Also, one thing that needs to be mentioned:

"Locking on to the enemy" and "camera centered on the enemy" are two different things.

Even though developers included a lock-on function, they can screw up by forgetting to add line of codes to make sure the locked-on enemy is also centered on the camera.

For example, the battle with Vergil throughout DMC3.

Even if you're locked on to him, he can still disappear off-screen.
You have no control over the camera throughout the fight and at the mercy of the awkward angles he will come from.

Sometimes, "centered on camera" is activated without the need for lock-on.
For example, the battle with Angelo Credo or Berial.
The game makes sure they stay on camera, whether you're locked-on or not.

Normally, the camera automatically centers on Angelo Agnus but when he summons other demons into the fight, the camera-assist turns off, so that you can focus on other enemies if you want.

So, for those complaining how lack of lock-on makes it harder to center the enemies on-camera in DmC, it's nothing to do with the lack of lock-on.

 

[Shin Muramasa]

Running while facing the enemy (as much as the body can turn).

I would make it so that signature moves aren't lock-on dependent.
I may consider some moves easier to input when lock-on is activated.

One weakness of MGR is that locking-on to the enemy does not make Raiden automatically face them.
Meaning parrying and so on still requires you to correctly tilt the stick towards the enemy.
Even if you get the timing right, if the enemy forces you to some awkward angle, you're screwed.

Having the characters face the locked-on enemy can be helpful, like if the character wants to deflect an attack with his weapon or perform a counter attack.

Sorry, I cut some out so the post could be shorter.

Do you mean like the lock on system found in the Darksiders series (Which hopefully it and its creator, Vigil Games, will find a new home and continue on)?

 

[Downfall]

Sorry, I cut some out so the post could be shorter.

Do you mean like the lock on system found in the Darksiders series (Which hopefully it and its creator, Vigil Games, will find a new home and continue on)?

You're a fan of both Soul Reaver and Darksiders II? You have excellent taste.

Vigil will most likely be bought by Platinum, seeing as how they're actively courting Vigil and all... :/