Why does it seem like everyone hates cover mechanics in shooting games...

Why does it seem like everyone hates cover mechanics in shooting games? I feel like it makes shootouts a lot more immersive since you can use the environment

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=GWVtZJo-HqI
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

GTA IV benefitted from it greatly because it was far more organic than the "snap to cover" mechanics of most TPS's.
It also benefitted from Niko's crouch feature.

Cover systems are used to justify and make up for movement systems that are slow and cumbersome and make it difficult for the player to weave in and out of cover by simply moving his character. Such gameplay systems are inferior because they break down in close quarters combat.

Because it plays like whack a mole.

Also sucks for multiplayer and is usually disadvantageous.

>Why does it seem like everyone hates cover mechanics
CHEST HIGH WALLS AND SHOOTING GALLERIES

The truth is that older games also had cover. You just hid behind walls and crouched when you could. You didn't need to press X to stick to walls.

>they break down in close quarters combat.

Only if your cover systems suck.

Because it was implemented in every fps game for awhile and it turned everything into a prolonged session of wack-a-mole. It became tedious like anything else.

It makes the pace and rhythm of combat very slow

the majority of people who play these games also play the multiplayer and realize how wildly impractical it is relative to just standing near the wall. it only serves to slow you down when the npc/player outsmarts you (i.e. thrown objects)

>tfw there will never be an open world shooter where you can shoot through most types of cover like in Rainbow Six Siege

I dont have a problem with it. In fact I want to see it implemented more in tactical FPS games. I really liked the passive cover system in far cry 3

>You didn't need to press X to stick to walls.

You know what I like about the TR reboots? Lara just takes cover whenever you move to something. No button presses. You walk up to a wall, she presses up against it. You run over to a barrel, she crouches behind it. Naturally.

If you're trying to make a grittier, more realistic crime game that actually seems like an advantage. In reality most gunfights aren't just super quick guns blazing events, its more like suspenseful hiding behind cover until someone can get a good shot

Yeah, that's fine if it works well and isn't janky. I guess the problem was never really the wall cover mechanic. It's mostly that it gave rise to a bunch of "shooting gallery" types of games. Older games had more movement and strategy options. When chest high wall cover mechanics became the norm, a lot of games became whack a mole, like the other user said.

Cover shooting usually means that the environments are going to boil down to straight line corridors and every fight is predicted when you walk into a room full of chest high walls and the game can pad out it's length by having fights where you die in 5 hits and have to sit behind cover for your health to recharge and having fights be waves and waves of enemies coming at you
Uncharted is one of the rare times where combat is mixed with the climbing design to give you a lot more freedom while still having a cover system

>It also benefitted from Niko's crouch feature.

What about Uncharted? The actual shooting might be mediocre, but despite technically being cover-based shooters those games are as much about movement and verticality as they are sitting behind broken down cars and such.

Most players who want cover will usually figure out how to use it themselves. If the enemies somehow overcome natural barriers like doors or walls, then that's just a sign of the quality.

because it's fucking boring and usually feels like it's trying to ape gears of war, which is fucking boring

>CHEST HIGH WALLS

this is what really makes me laugh about any cover shooter, its just so dumb.

Unlike in GTAV where you can't crouch for no reason. You just tilt your head slightly.

youtube.com/watch?v=GWVtZJo-HqI

I love cover-based shooters, but I think they're at they're best when the cover mechanic is either fully fleshed out (as is often the case with tactical shooters like Future Soldier or Rainbow Six), or one part of a broader gameplay style, like with Uncharted or Vanquish.

Games that do neither can be boring. It's why I find Gears to be a little bland sometimes.

Well, personal opinion but I think Uncharted 1 is pretty trash in the shooting department.

Uncharted 2, on the other hand, has some great set-pieces and some nice movement, so they make up for the shooting gallery type gameplay. My main gripe is when is ends up being pop out and do headshots, kinda like Gears of War. I mean, a bit of GoW is fine, but the gameplay is spread pretty thin during the campaign.

Nothing quite like playing The Last of Us and entering an area that's basically an arena filled with FUCKING CHEST HIGH WALLS.

That really breaks my immersion.

>not praying to the altar of Sir Wally McChest High

>memecat
everytime.

I'm well aware, I just got a giggle from Niko being a slav and his (now unique) squatting feature.