Fighting Mental Muscle Memory in ‘Hybrid’

Hybrid combines the controls of a cover-based shooter with the pacing of a first-person shooter.

I like Hybrid, the new downloadable shooter for Xbox LIVE, but from the very beginning, something about it bothered me. The shooting mechanics were fine, the equipment was interesting, the various modes were all fun and different, but there was something about it, something at its very core that just nagged at the back of my mind and made it hard to play for an extended period of time. It was only after trying to explain this feeling to a friend that I was able to finally latch onto the issue: Hybrid combines the controls of a cover-based shooter with the pacing of a first-person shooter -- an awkward combination since the two genres encourage conflicting behavior.

I use cover extensively in Hybrid, but it demands I forget everything I’ve learned from playing other cover-based shooters. Most shooters like that are born from the Gears of War “stop and pop” school of thought -- with emphasis on the “stop.” These shooters teach you that cover is safe. Battles are designed to encourage you to “dig in” behind some piece of land. You stay there, in safety, waiting for your opponent to expose himself. It’s a slow kind of shooter, relatively speaking. You’re not spending a lot of time running or jumping, and your avatar is not meant to be lithe or maneuverable. When you see an enemy, you stop, and you only engage in short bursts -- the “pop.” In most cases, the more defensive soldier will be victorious.

Stopping is dangerous in Hybrid. It leaves you open to flanking. If you get in cover and no one is immediately shooting at you, you should push forward or turn around to cut off the person inevitably coming up behind you or go to the side. Just go somewhere -- otherwise, someone is going to get the drop on you. Popping is also frowned upon since gunfire is coming from so many directions that you’ll almost always receive more damage than you can put out. Instead, Hybrid encourages you to create distractions. Spawn a big Warbringer droid to draw fire and then charge your enemy, for example, or have one teammate “pop” as a ploy while others flank. In most cases, the more aggressive soldier will be victorious.

And since movement between cover is automated, the action is sped up faster than Gears of War could ever dream of being. Rather than sitting and waiting for enemies to come to me, I find myself going out and hunting the enemy. Perhaps as a result, the average lifespan in Hybrid is less than thirty seconds. This by itself makes it more akin to Call of Duty than Gears of War. Unlike most cover-based shooters, Hybrid is not methodical. It doesn’t actively reward patience and careful teamwork, though those are certainly not frowned upon. Instead it more often rewards reaction speed, instinctual movement, pure thoughtless skill as opposed to deep tactics.

Intersections are particularly dangerous since you can be hit while still crouched into a ball. This is a unique problem in Hybrid. The battlefield in most cover-based shooters is very deliberately divided between you and the enemy. You’re on this side, they’re on that side, and we face each other like two armies from the 1700s. At least until one lone wolf on your team breaks off and then everyone scatters.

By contrast, Hybrid is more like guerilla warfare. You’re attacked from the front, then the side, then from behind. You have to watch every direction while simultaneously trying to attack from every direction yourself. It’s telling that there are multiple spawn point in Hybrid. While there are usually two distinct sides on a map, those are not the only place where you can respawn. You can appear anywhere on the map, which creates a very fluid battlefield.

To its credit, Hybrid makes this weird combination work; an extra impressive feat considering developer 5th Cell has never made a shooter before. It takes a while to get used to the change, to fight off the mental equivalent of muscle memory, but that’s part of the appeal. Hybrid is definitely something different, and not just with the obvious stuff like controls. It approaches the shooter genre completely devoid of baggage and expectation. It’s not a remake or a reboot. It’s not trying to evoke or mimic another game. It comes into this stale genre free to experiment, free to throw a wrench into the gears of my brain.

I didn’t realize how conditioned I was to cover until playing Hybrid. Now that I’ve broken free from the mental muscle memory, I wonder if it will be this awkward going back to Gears of War.

So far J. J. Abrams and Rian Johnson resemble children at play, remaking the films they fell in love with. As an audience, however, we desire a fuller experience.

As recently as the lackluster episodes I-III of the Star Wars saga, the embossed gold logo followed by scrolling prologue text was cause for excitement. In the approach to the release of any of the then new prequel installments, the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare, followed by the Lucas Film logo, teased one's impulsive excitement at a glimpse into the next installment's narrative. Then sat in the movie theatre on the anticipated day of release, the sight and sound of the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare signalled the end of fevered anticipation. Whatever happened to those times? For some of us, is it a product of youth in which age now denies us the ability to lose ourselves within such adolescent pleasure? There's no answer to this question -- only the realisation that this sensation is missing and it has been since the summer of 2005. Star Wars is now a movie to tick off your to-watch list, no longer a spark in the dreary reality of the everyday. The magic has disappeared… Star Wars is spiritually dead.

Keep reading... Show less

This has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it.

It hardly needs to be said that the last 12 months haven't been everyone's favorite, but it does deserve to be noted that 2017 has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it. Other longtime dreamers either reappeared or kept up their recent hot streaks, and a number of relative newcomers established their place in what has become one of the more robust rock subgenre subcultures out there.

Keep reading... Show less

​'The Ferryman': Ephemeral Ideas, Eternal Tragedies

The current cast of The Ferryman in London's West End. Photo by Johan Persson. (Courtesy of The Corner Shop)

Staggeringly multi-layered, dangerously fast-paced and rich in characterizations, dialogue and context, Jez Butterworth's new hit about a family during the time of Ireland's the Troubles leaves the audience breathless, sweaty and tearful, in a nightmarish, dry-heaving haze.

"Vanishing. It's a powerful word, that"

Northern Ireland, Rural Derry, 1981, nighttime. The local ringleader of the Irish Republican Army gun-toting comrades ambushes a priest and tells him that the body of one Seamus Carney has been recovered. It is said that the man had spent a full ten years rotting in a bog. The IRA gunslinger, Muldoon, orders the priest to arrange for the Carney family not to utter a word of what had happened to the wretched man.

Keep reading... Show less

Aaron Sorkin's real-life twister about Molly Bloom, an Olympic skier turned high-stakes poker wrangler, is scorchingly fun but never takes its heroine as seriously as the men.

Chances are, we will never see a heartwarming Aaron Sorkin movie about somebody with a learning disability or severe handicap they had to overcome. This is for the best. The most caffeinated major American screenwriter, Sorkin only seems to find his voice when inhabiting a frantically energetic persona whose thoughts outrun their ability to verbalize and emote them. The start of his latest movie, Molly's Game, is so resolutely Sorkin-esque that it's almost a self-parody. Only this time, like most of his better work, it's based on a true story.

Keep reading... Show less

There's something characteristically English about the Royal Society, whereby strangers gather under the aegis of some shared interest to read, study, and form friendships and in which they are implicitly agreed to exist insulated and apart from political differences.

There is an amusing detail in The Curious World of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn that is emblematic of the kind of intellectual passions that animated the educated elite of late 17th-century England. We learn that Henry Oldenburg, the first secretary of the Royal Society, had for many years carried on a bitter dispute with Robert Hooke, one of the great polymaths of the era whose name still appears to students of physics and biology. Was the root of their quarrel a personality clash, was it over money or property, over love, ego, values? Something simple and recognizable? The precise source of their conflict was none of the above exactly but is nevertheless revealing of a specific early modern English context: They were in dispute, Margaret Willes writes, "over the development of the balance-spring regulator watch mechanism."

Keep reading... Show less
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.