I don't know what everyone is thinking with the cover system. It's just the hot new thing that every game is going to try even if it does'nt work good. The lean works just fine IMO.

quote:

Originally posted by snapkracklepop:
I don't know what everyone is thinking with the cover system. It's just the hot new thing that every game is going to try even if it does'nt work good. The lean works just fine IMO.

Agreed. The lean system in GR1 and GRIT was near perfect, and didn't allow you to exploit the 3rd person by seeing around cover completely without ever exposing yourself... which has always bothered me. And the cover system in GOW sucked IMO, to be honest... if your going to do that type of cover I want more control over it like RB6 Vegas... but overall I'd rather have a good lean & peak.

I think cover systems ruin CQB. It takes away the tension of not knowing whats around that next corner and makes it so the player does'nt have to use tactics. The best feature about the lean IMO is it can be used anywhere and if done right exposes less of the player than a cover system.

ya dude i thought the same thing too

I think FPV cover system would be great, really p*sses me off how *action*-focused RBS Vegas was. An option for forcing FPV-cover would have been much better. I think this sort of cover system for CQB games would be kick-a** but for long-range infantry combat games like GRAW & AATS a leaning system(easier to use than GRAW's) is fitting, a cover system for those games is a bit too much. -IMO

I might not mind a Realistic first person cover system but I still prefer the lean.

Well, snap. I suppose if it was like the original GR and your view just tilted maybe 15 degrees apposed to GRAW's seemingly 50-60. And your character's body shifter the leaning way apposed to just the head. That would be okay but not like how Devs have been doing it lately.

Yeah OGR did it about right.

No god damn yellow DOT! That just takes the whole realism away.

quote:

Originally posted by snapkracklepop:

quote:

Originally posted by Jermtheory:

quote:

Originally posted by snapkracklepop:
If they use a system similar to MOH: Airborne I hope they improve the control scheme. I did'nt even know you could move while aiming until someone on the BFS forums told me.

i think that was me.

as i said,it could definately use some tweaking.but a fluid lean(anywhere) cant be beat imo.

Yeah I Go by Random over there.

must have missed this before...

kinda figured.

i didnt relize it either(move while using sights),until Mean mentioned it.

quote:

Originally posted by Zrakin:
No god damn yellow DOT! That just takes the whole realism away.

Randy came on and addressed that a while back: no dot in the game.

quote:

Originally posted by Jermtheory:

quote:

Originally posted by snapkracklepop:

quote:

Originally posted by Jermtheory:

quote:

Originally posted by snapkracklepop:
If they use a system similar to MOH: Airborne I hope they improve the control scheme. I did'nt even know you could move while aiming until someone on the BFS forums told me.

i think that was me.

as i said,it could definately use some tweaking.but a fluid lean(anywhere) cant be beat imo.

Yeah I Go by Random over there.

must have missed this before...

kinda figured.

i didnt relize it either(move while using sights),until Mean mentioned it.

A few days after I found that out I was reading a review of it in game informer, and in the second opinion the writer mentioned that he didn't like the fact you couldn't move while aiming. I guess nobody told him.

at least we werent getting paid to know it.

Yeah, I guess somone should have done more research.