No, Mafia 2 is not out yet. It'll be out likely sometime in 2008, coming out for the PS3, Xbox 360, and PC, but it's trailer has already been presented and it looks impressive in the detail. Hopefully, it will have just as much of a unique storyline as the first game and maybe even having an offering of more freedom to make it feel more than just a linear crime setting experience.

As for Driver's physics, I don't really think that they've been the best so far. NFS and Burnout along with some of GT (not every aspect of it) are just able to do better in the handling of the vehicles. Also, a simulator steering wheel does make GT feel more welcome a real driving simulator. No, it isn't true that all of these franchises have perfected physics, but they sure have done a good job with it. Driv3r's physics were pretty terrible. I'd most consider Driver: You Are The Wheelman's physics as the best for a Driver game and by saying this, it's a rather shame to see no 6th generation Driver game, nor Driver 2 (a 5th generation game) beat the very first Driver game and excel in the "physics department."

quote:

Originally posted by Assault_machine:
No, Mafia 2 is not out yet. It'll be out likely sometime in 2008, coming out for the PS3, Xbox 360, and PC, but it's trailer has already been presented and it looks impressive in the detail. Hopefully, it will have just as much of a unique storyline as the first game and maybe even having an offering of more freedom to make it feel more than just a linear crime setting experience.

As for Driver's physics, I don't really think that they've been the best so far. NFS and Burnout along with some of GT (not every aspect of it) are just able to do better in the handling of the vehicles. Also, a simulator steering wheel does make GT feel more welcome a real driving simulator. No, it isn't true that all of these franchises have perfected physics, but they sure have done a good job with it. Driv3r's physics were pretty terrible. I'd most consider Driver: You Are The Wheelman's physics as the best for a Driver game and by saying this, it's a rather shame to see no 6th generation Driver game, nor Driver 2 (a 5th generation game) beat the very first Driver game and excel in the "physics department."

By Physics, are you referring to the way the car handles and shifts weight while in motion? I'd say Reflections is the king of it, easily being one of their key strengths and another reason I've been a longtime Driver fan. Driver 2 was slow, but I liked the semi-realistic physics. Driv3r's were good too, it's just that the game was a bit slow, and the steering could've been more responsive as well, especially on sportbikes.

Driv3r's physics were not very impressive, mainly because of the little improvement the game ended up as being and its glitches made it look even worse. Driver: Parallel Lines was actually a bit better, but I'd say that Driver had the best physics out of all the Driver games. And because the Driver series hasn't been pushing its features very much further, I'd say that the physics, overall, too, are one of those aspects that could've been done better. And one of the main aspects of having to do with physics I'd say is that the speed doesn't go any further than certain types of games. Of course, you do have to admit that when weather is present (usually rain) and when it is time to make a sharp turn, or even when you've got to use driving skills to help get away from the cops, Driver handles it very well. Other than that, I think that GT is the best at it because it tries more to simulate it than any other game out there. And because simulation adds even more realism, it means that the GT franchise has been doing the best at it. Besides, I don't think that we can regard any other racing game any more of an impact than the original GT game itself, which, on Game Rankings, is the highest rated racing game of all-time.

D:PL's physics were the best! They felt very realistic. Although on the Wii version, you can't hold the accelerator at a constant speed (on the PS2 and XBOX versions you can). That's because the accelerator button on the Wii version is the Z button (or C for breaking and reversing). This makes accelerating either "On" or "Off". I would've made the analog stick on the Wii the accelerator. This way the Wii version would feel more realistic, but the handbrake is more fun on the Wii version than anyother version for sure!


I don't mind if the next Driver is another "GTA Clone". In fact, I highly support that. I just hope it ain't another "GTA Ripoff". See the difference?

quote:

Originally posted by Driverman2006:
D:PL's physics were the best! They felt very realistic. Although on the Wii version, you can't hold the accelerator at a constant speed (on the PS2 and XBOX versions you can). That's because the accelerator button on the Wii version is the Z button (or C for breaking and reversing). This makes accelerating either "On" or "Off". I would've made the analog stick on the Wii the accelerator. This way the Wii version would feel more realistic, but the handbrake is more fun on the Wii version than anyother version for sure!


I don't mind if the next Driver is another "GTA Clone". In fact, I highly support that. I just hope it ain't another "GTA Ripoff". See the difference?

finally somebody gets it

One thing I really don't want to see in the new Driver: Pedestrians that make humorous remarks everytime you pass by them. It not only gets repetitive and annoying, but it's a total GTA ripoff, a bit like DPL's pedestrians. Of course, they still were better than the "hey" pedestrians from Driv3r, who pretty much kept saying "hey" every two seconds.

Hahaha. I really never noticed that about the pedestrians in D3, mainly because I don't pay attention to those things, but you can say that this was one of the things that made its AI look extremely bad.

As for the next Driver game being a "GTA clone," it'd have to offer lots of improvements to be sure that it would be worth buying or even playing. To me, the realistic scope for a crime setting, either being centered around a cop or a gangster just feels really weak, other than for those most successful games, such as the GTA franchise, the Mafia franchise, and even for the Saint's Row franchise. They've truly proven that being a gangster is a highly enjoyable experience. However, sooner or later, we'll need to see more of the kinds of games that are about offering you to play as both sides, good and bad, while differentiating them and making them both unique as well as lots in variety to keep you busy, both for exploring the worlds and to play through the storylines.

The crime setting in the free-roam genre has started to grow more boresome than that of the other genres, but that's not a surprise as most developers only have tried to replicate what Rockstar North's works were like (the GTA franchise) and failed to make any improvements over its formula. It's just like looking at certain movie genres, such being the buddy cop movies or even the cop movies themselves, which are sub-genres of Action. On the other hand, gangster/crime films, which set the main character(s) as being criminals, have actually continued to do well in driving the plot forward. I guess that it's just more interesting to see what a gangster is thinking than what a cop is thinking, knowing that we see cops around more often than any criminal activities. Sadly, the car chase sub-genre, too, has declined. Bullitt, The French Connection, Dukes of Hazzard, Miami Vice, and a few others, are the only really great ones that have been around. And knowing that today many movies don't involve car chases as being a large part of the movie, it makes the experience all the more repetitive. By saying this, we need not only both sides, but we need something that stretches further than your average cop or gangster. After all, there are various other ways to make a world open-ended and this can surely be done with many other genres as well. I guess one of the problems of the free-roam genre and the crime setting is that most of them take place in the modern times and nothing in either the ancient, medieval, pre-modern (after medieval times), or even any futuristic settings. In the end, developers are capable of driving a modern setting's open-ended city forward, but it's that more of a struggle for them, as they try to bring it to becoming more life-like as possible. Lets hope that we'll see other settings to be pleased with soon, other than always modern ones for this genre and that developers won't try to create realism as the main aspect for new gameplay. It needs to go further than that. Fiction, too, must be considered an option, in certain cases.

A game centered around a Driver is a good role for the game. Someone who's main goal is to drive vehicles, really well in an attempt to evade police, pursue other cars, win first place in arena racing and demolition derby.

I hope that we'll see more crime games, even free-roaming ones, in other time periods. It grows very old fast when you have so many developers working on one time period. It feels like the modern setting is the only one acceptable, but many people have different preferences. For instance, there are a lot of RPG fans, so they love either sci-fi or fantasy, two settings that are found the most common in that genre while others like Western settings, Modern settings, and so forth, and so on. But keeping only the modern setting as the focus is, in my opinion, unacceptable. I'd love to take a break from the idea of this modern era that we live in and go to a different era. It would feel more refreshing, knowing that we're just experiencing the very basic things that we have of our world today. In some instances, I actually consider fantasy and science fiction to be better than the rest of the genres for games. We definitely need another game like Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion for a fantasy open-ended game, a game like either Mass Effect or even Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic, except that the titles found in the same genre (as either being fantasy or science fiction) can really move the freedom of players forward, such that Rockstar North is capable of.

Of course driving is a good role, as is the role of being a driver. After all, that is the title of the Driver franchise. I'm just tired of so many things that we've seen from the franchise. There is hardly any improvements on either the driving or on-foot portions at all. And, usually, whenever there are any improvements, these improvements are already existing ones. Why can't we be able to see something more, such as some of the finest detail a game could ever see, along with little or no glitches at all (something that Driv3r couldn't make possible, but GT5 may indeed achieve)? Why can't the enemies be a lot smarter? I just suppose it's the fact that there are going to be a lot of problems around the Driver franchise and centered around other free-roam games (even GTA games) because free-roaming, as a genre, hasn't been around for long, nor do the majority of developers find interest in it for the time being.

I think Driver needs to be less about killing bad guys and more about great chases, in car or truck, on sportbike, and a few cool on foot chases. A little gunplay won't hurt either on foot.

The story's important, but the gameplay of Driving, is kind of like the sports genre; stock car racing, gran turismo, or open city racers like Midnight Club LA. Story comes second IMO unless they make it so good it can't be ignored.

I'm no fan of following the story either, thats why I usually only play games where you can do anything anytime. If the missions are fun, then I'm in, but the poor AI and not so great on foot controls take away from it.

One of my biggest gripes with fps games is they never seem to get the aiming right on. I don't know if its just not possible with the sticks, but I can never aim directly at what I want to shoot. Do these games take into account the short, quick tap of the R3 stick, or do they only measure the distance you moved it? It seems to be the latter.

It should be relatively easy to quickly tap the button and have the cursor aimed at the enemy, while running any direction. At least thats what I think. I've never shot a real gun, but this is a game and it should be easier to aim. Not too easy.

quote:

Originally posted by PennySillin:
I'm no fan of following the story either, thats why I usually only play games where you can do anything anytime. If the missions are fun, then I'm in, but the poor AI and not so great on foot controls take away from it.

One of my biggest gripes with fps games is they never seem to get the aiming right on. I don't know if its just not possible with the sticks, but I can never aim directly at what I want to shoot. Do these games take into account the short, quick tap of the R3 stick, or do they only measure the distance you moved it? It seems to be the latter.

It should be relatively easy to quickly tap the button and have the cursor aimed at the enemy, while running any direction. At least thats what I think. I've never shot a real gun, but this is a game and it should be easier to aim. Not too easy.

A few games offer the option to control the sensitivity of vertical, horizontal motion with a parameter bar. Auto targeting is a tough one, as most games screw it up somehow. A game should definitely offer FPS view along with the option to aim over the shoulder, or in 3rd person for the best gamer response.

GTASA and under never got the auto aiming right without a gun fight turning into a frustrating mess at times when too many enemies showed up.

It seems like changing the sensitivity never does anything though. Halo was pretty good with auto-aiming, but I think it should be easy to do on your own still.

I forgot too, a big problem is that most games don't let you turn fast enough anyway. In real life you could do an about face in a split second, in a game you can get lit up in the time it takes.

Also, another thing I hate is when the enemy gets too close, they're standing on almost the same spot your character is on, and you can't aim at them. OOH I hate that! It sucks worse in first person mode because you can't see them anymore. This is a problem I see in nearly every game, whats up with that? This should have been fixed long ago.

Back to look sensitivity, when I want to turn really fast, I toggle to that side as hard as I can. If theres a way to measure how much force is behind a toggle, and then translate that to the game, that would be the best I think.

Yeah, games often just put in a flat movement with maybe two levels of set points that automatically go from slow to fast: walks to runs for example.

Better sensitivity on the analogs would improve control.

GTA1 was pizza topping. Driver1 was actual driving and Driver2 added the walk. GTA3 brought weapons and Driver3 did eventually bring them too. Now they are the same. So whos copying who.

Physics, escpecially cars clearly go to Driver. As well as overall graphics. On foot controls and AI are pretty horrible in both. Driver gets the score of "civilized and good tasted story and gameplay" GTA is too humorous and unrealistic. Only thing i want to "cloned" is The Radio and then take it further with TVs, conversations, abilility to sit...

To me, GTA is not very far ahead of Driver in fun. Really when you look at it, theres not a whole lot more interaction going on in GTA, theres just more stuff. More stuff to collect, more vehicles (wider variety) to drive, and thats all good, but it will only get you so far.

Every game just adds more stuff, but theres nothing any more interesting to do with it than the last game

quote:

Originally posted by PennySillin:
To me, GTA is not very far ahead of Driver in fun. Really when you look at it, theres not a whole lot more interaction going on in GTA, theres just more stuff. More stuff to collect, more vehicles (wider variety) to drive, and thats all good, but it will only get you so far.

Every game just adds more stuff, but theres nothing any more interesting to do with it than the last game

Great point. I'd say we need more opportunities for stunts as a start. More chances to hit ramps that launch you clear over heavy traffic while the cops get stuck behind. More driving excitement, less GTA "junk".

Can Reflections make the chases in Driver so intense, they get your heart pounding? That's the kind of gameplay excitement I'm hoping Reflections delivers this time.

On the whole ramps, I want ramps that go over small rivers, or like the Stuntman bridge ramp (give us a corkscrew or ten)

Thats a tough one (heart pounding action). If it can be done (probably), I'd say go for it. But for me, when I'm playing any of these games, I've rarely felt my heart pound for more than a few beats, maybe the games just aren't that intense, but I think it would be really hard to have that come across in a videogame constantly.

I think when everything's on the line, and you know you HAVE to escape, things get intense. Take the last mission in Driver 1 for example. You had to reach the garage on the other side of NYC. The lightning fast, super ramming cop cars had an unfair advantage. If you made it farther than you got before the 100th retry, I remember my heart beating faster, thinking "This could be the time I finally finish this ridiculously cheap-shot mission!". But it was exciting nonetheless.

I'd like the cops to be tough through speed and smarts, not through super-powered cop cars. In other words, they could have a car just as good as your own, but still be tough to shake.

Well sure, in undercover mode it is way more nerve racking (If I was rich I would've smashed a lot of TV's and PS1's)

But how do you bring that intensity to free roam?

The only way that ever happens for me is if I've got a perfect chase going on, sliding around corners, narrowly missing light poles, traffic, cops on my tail the whole time nearly pitting my car.

So the cops would need to be really close. I'd say the overpowered cop cars make it more interesting actually, because you never know which one is gonna ram you big time, you're just hoping its not the one 2 feet off your bumper.