5punk

Counter-Terrierists: Dogfighter
If I even said this game's title to delightful girlfriend, she'd probably get a little tearful, because she hates to think of the hurting of hounds. But this forthcoming game isn't about two hungry dogs dropped in the pit in the back of an essex pub. No - Dogfighter's about plane-shootiness. It'll be out on [...]

Author: Kieron Gillen
Category: RockPaperShotgun Dark Water Studios Dogfighter
Publish Date: Mon, 17 May 2010 10:24:33 +0000



If I even said this game's title to delightful girlfriend, she'd probably get a little tearful, because she hates to think of the hurting of hounds. But this forthcoming game isn't about two hungry dogs dropped in the pit in the back of an essex pub. No - Dogfighter's about plane-shootiness. It'll be out on June 14th on Steam for twelve quid. Since it's an unproved dev, I wouldn't normally post about it pre-release... but its trailer is actually really quite nifty, showcasing its arena-set flight-lunacy. Not as mad as Illusion Softwork's great-lost-game (NOT REALLY!) Flying Heroes because there's no teapots of death, but it's giving it a good shot in a Crimson-Skies-kinda-way.

(more...)



Read more... - Read comments...

Source: Rock, Paper, Shotgun

And I can already tell from that clip that it'll have the rubbish arcade control system that combines roll and pitch to go left and right rather than giving the player full independant control over pitch/yaw/roll like Crimson Skies did.

Therefore even for £12 I won't buy it.

I will.

buzzmong wrote:And I can already tell from that clip that it'll have the rubbish arcade control system that combines roll and pitch to go left and right rather than giving the player full independant control over pitch/yaw/roll like Crimson Skies did.

The video makes it clear up-front that it's arcadey and yet you still manage to moan about it. Well done.

Criticism != moan.

I suppose what I'm saying is in my opinion, Crimson skies got the controls bang on with it's (simplified) independant pitch/roll/yaw and I can see of no reason why games can't use it more often.

The reason why I critise is that although CS was arcadey it allowed you a lot of control over the plane. These incredibly arcadey ones essentially ignore the fact that pads/keyboards/joysticks can use all 3 and treat the controls like cursor keys by only having 2 functions.

Hawx suffered from it as well to an extent and it just pains me as it's inferior and somewhat unnatural.

Blazing Angels is criminal for it and it makes the game so much harder as you're fighting to make it do what you expect it to do.

buzzmong wrote:I suppose what I'm saying is in my opinion, Crimson skies got the controls bang on with it's (simplified) independant pitch/roll/yaw and I can see of no reason why games can't use it more often.

This.

When I see the word "arcade", i think simple and easy, but like buzz I find the bundled together roll/pitch thing to be an utter pain to controll. The original Crimson Skies was brilliant, and I could very easily throw the plane around doing all sorts of mad stunts. Hawx had me repeatedly slamming into the ground whilst my brain tried to cope with the wrongness.

spoodie wrote:

I'm sorry, how dare I challenge your unprovoked hostility towards a member? Buzz posted some more criticism below, why not continue to try to belittle him there too? It's not like we value and encourage peoples' opinions, after all.

Buzz did you ever play Freelancer? I think if the controls are like Freelancer's then it will be pretty good.

deject wrote:Buzz did you ever play Freelancer? I think if the controls are like Freelancer's then it will be pretty good.

Freelancer was different though. There's no concept of up in space really and it was not a normal flight game. But yes, that mouse driven control did work pretty well in that.

Then again, Freespace 2 used the yaw, roll and pitch in space iirc. That was grand as well.

@Doggers. It's alright, Spoodie was right as my first post did seem a bit moany, hence my longer explaination afterwards.

buzzmong wrote: @Doggers. It's alright, Spoodie was right as my first post did seem a bit moany, hence my longer explaination afterwards.

Hey, stop being reasonable you! I demand a fight! BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD!

I need a lie down.

Dog Pants wrote:I'm sorry, how dare I challenge your unprovoked hostility towards a member? Buzz posted some more criticism below, why not continue to try to belittle him there too? It's not like we value and encourage peoples' opinions, after all.

I took your reply as an argument in semantics, which I don't really care to get involved in. Hence the smiley.

I'm not trying to belittle anybody. Buzz has expressed an interest in seeing more realism in games, to the extent I would see them as inappropriate. That's kind of what I was commenting on. I've not played any of the games mentioned here so my personal insight is limited.

Calm down :tinywinkemote:

Alright, seems I misundersood. It just looked unnecessarily bitchy to me, but if you didn't mean it like that and Buzz didn't take it like that then no harm done and I apologise for my zeal.

Joose wrote: BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD!

SKULLS FOR THE SKULL THRONE!

.

amblin wrote:It's a shame, because I do think the playstation controller lends itself well to the multiple controls needed for flight sims.

Only if you have the hands of a small handed Japanese girl with exceptionally small hands.

Aah, the best kind of hands to make things look bigger...

.

Ive also got quite large hands, but ive never had issue with the playstation controllers.

Out of interest, when you both say "large hands", are you talking generally big, or gangly big, or chunky big? Mine are far from small, but they are long and thin rather than chunky and wide. Im wondering if thats what makes the difference.