I'd go as far as to say it's
good game design to include reload cancelling, in one form or another. Whether or not it was intentional in other/all games since its inception is irrelevant, as it's accepted, or even expected practice nowadays. I think any game would be remiss if it didn't have it.
EDIT: Also, it's a high-risk / high-reward mechanic, which inherently implies good design.
To say that ME didn't "innovate" with reload cancelling isn't fair. Many, many other things in the series have been fairly innovative. Singling this out for innovation would be similar to citing the lack of innovation in opening doors, or collecting ammo. There's no need. It gets the job done and does exactly what you expect it to: shorten reload time. Attempting to innovate or reinvent the wheel when it's not necessary can often lead to gimmicky crap.
There's evidence that reload cancelling was intentionally designed here (other Unreal engine games, coalesced, word of BW), and no evidence to suggest otherwise. If it wasn't intentional, it's a glitch that behaves
exactly like you would expect reload cancelling to behave, which is way more unlikely than it being designed as such. Occam's Razor and all that. So... good luck with your crusade, I suppose?
Finally, concerning immersion... if reload cancelling breaks what you consider to be "intended realism", I'm not sure how you're okay with the unlimited sprint and stamina ME3 offers over ME2, or the fact that you can spin your character 360 degrees while capping an objective... just off the top of my head. If it bothers you, don't do it? Your own immersion doesn't affect anyone else, so I don't even see how that is a valid complaint concerning design. It's personal preference.
Modifié par Janus382, 27 décembre 2012 - 03:30 .
Retour en haut
And and bandwidth isn't a resource allocated in P2P networks. Rofl hagaga
