Rahdo's words - what happened here?

(Crytiqal) #601

tokamak, do you also have BRINK on a console? PS3 by any chance?

(nephandys) #602

[QUOTE=Smoochy;360786]eh??? your logic is totally flawed. how do you know you are good on a console when its not 100% you doing it!!! how can you have any gratification when the system is helping you to aim?!

pc is more skilled. if i outshoot someone its because i have outdone them. not because my aim assist worked better than yours.

with a pc mouse i can be much more manouverable than with a console pad (im not a console hater - i have a ps1,2,3 and they are good for sports and fighting and driving games and games like drake’s fortune - just poor at FPS)[/QUOTE]
True there is Aim Assist on consoles, but in Brink it is a feature you can turn off. More often than not Aim Assist winds up dragging your crosshair off the person you wanted to kill/have been dmging onto some new guy that runs in front of your line of fire. Therefore, there’s a lot of people that play with it turned off. Myself included.

(SockDog) #603

My point is that people band around the word depth in the same sense that they band around realistic. It’s a BS term that can be applied to justify all manner of stupid crap.

(Ashog) #604

LOLZ

choked on my beer when bumped into this :stuck_out_tongue:

(tokamak) #605

Okay let’s just call everything ‘fun’ then that will indeed improve any discussion.

(sereNADE) #606

I wanted to let you know about a dream I had last night where I was reading a review of an upcoming fps I was looking forward to playing. The headline was, “One Button Does Everything!” I woke up in a cold sweat. True story.

(raztaz) #607

[QUOTE=Smoochy;360747]what? so you mean you want a pat on the back for using a controller with built in aim assist? game pads dont add depth - they artificially add a useless mechanism for aiming, then have to add bigger hitboxes and give aim assist to cope with this.

using a pointer is what the sane people use to point. why not point with a cat or a dog if you want even more useless aiming method? console pads are NOT designed for FPS. they are designed for platform games and sports games.

why use a car? its a boring mechanism to get from A to B. im off to rope a wild bore and use virgin’s hair plaited to make some reigns, it will be a more interesting ride home! <facepalm>[/QUOTE]
if u have read the post instead of jumpingonthe bandwagon i did say i play console shooters w aim assist off. and i also said imo (IN MY OPINION) not once did i say it was a fact but how i felt. why use a car its a boring mechanic? I guess in ur eyes why should u get a girl whenu can play catherine? or why actually do a sit up when ur brink avatar is so buff

(Kurushi) #608

You’ve gotta love this board. Everyone’s an expert game designer :confused:

(DarkangelUK) #609

We’re all experts in what we like, don’t think anyone claimed to be an expert game designer :stuck_out_tongue:

(Kurushi) #610

Problem is people are experts in what they don’t like ;s

(SockDog) #611

Stop being so pissy. :slight_smile:

I’ve said it’s an over used and abused term not that it’s irrelevant to all discussion. Just because something is made more difficult, less obvious, doesn’t work or is just plainly annoying doesn’t mean it adds depth to the point of increasing fun. Too much stuff gets explained away as depth rather than admitting its just a poor design choice or limitation.

(SockDog) #612

NNNNNNNNNNoooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

http://armorgames.com/play/5286/one-button-bob

(tokamak) #613

I’m fascinated by game design. My study mainly comes down to policy design, sociology and planology, all the theories are hard to apply in real life because real life is already filled with complications and obstacles, making it difficult to get to where you want.

Video games however, are an ideal world. The perfect sandbox. You create a universe where all the rules are yours, no bureaucracy, conflicting stakeholders or anything, just you (or the design team and you) that start a scheme from scratch. People interact with each other according to how you want them to in order to create a thrilling and satisfying experience.

I’m not an expert game designer, the only experience I’ve ever had designing a game was helping out with a Tragedy of the Commons simulation for students. But I do think I’d do a good job at it. I wish i had the means to turn what’s brewing in my head into a game. It would be an interesting solution to the accessibility versus competition problem the first person genre seems to experience. But alas, it’s a long way to the top and there other goals.

[QUOTE=SockDog;360828]Stop being so pissy. :slight_smile:

I’ve said it’s an over used and abused term not that it’s irrelevant to all discussion. Just because something is made more difficult, less obvious, doesn’t work or is just plainly annoying doesn’t mean it adds depth to the point of increasing fun. Too much stuff gets explained away as depth rather than admitting its just a poor design choice or limitation.[/QUOTE]

Depth is an excellent word to justify things. Especially because making things more challenging doesn’t always add to depth. Trick-planting is a nice example, it makes defusing a bomb more challenging by undercutting the normal game mechanics of defending a charge all at a relatively low cost.

Anyway describing something as ‘depth’ always begs an explanation as to why it adds to the gameplay and the lack of this explanation may be what annoys you about it.

(Crytiqal) #614

[QUOTE=SockDog;360830]NNNNNNNNNNoooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

http://armorgames.com/play/5286/one-button-bob[/QUOTE]

553 clicks on first try

EDIT: 294. Really gets on your nerves!

(SockDog) #615

No the frustration with it’s use is due to the subjective nature of those explanations. Saying being unable to identify classes adds depths isn’t incorrect, hey it also adds realism! Does it make the game more fun though?

(zenstar) #616

This is an inherent problem with internet arguments. The real problem is any “fuzzy” word which someone may define one way and someone else may define another way.
Compounded with the fact that generally people either argue badly, are stubborn and refuse to give an inch when they are obviously wrong, or are morons who should not be allowed to operate something as complicated as a fork and you have for some very… unique online conversations.

As for the whole “we’re all expert game designers”: we may not be experts but most of us have plenty of experience in playing games. Start us at the begining of the cycle and we may not know what to do, but give us a finished product and we can feel if there’s something we like / don’t like.

The same way football fans can shout at a coach / player for making a stupid play but that same fan wouldn’t know wtf to do if he was put on the field - we know what we like and have opinions on it.

In fact: the extreme rage on one side and fanboyism on the other at least indicates that the game has people emotionally invested. Better that than passing by completely unnoticed. At least in 2 years time you’ll remember the name of the game unlike that average shooter with the vehicles and the guns that was released 2 years ago that you meant to play but didn’t get around to because none of your friends played it and then you forgot what it was called and so didn’t buy it in the end.

OK. Enough waxing philisophical. Challenge time: If you really are an expert game designer how would you expertly work a farmyard animal into Brink while keeping the story canon and making it an integral part of either a level or the entire game as a whole?
(And to keep this on topic: I challenge Rahdo to show off how he’d do it too.)

(Crytiqal) #617

Euh, you could have the resistance trying t take over the farm animal to consume it, while the security thinks long term and try to use the (eggs/milk/DNA to clone more of them/etc) of the farm animal instead of killing it immediatly for eating.

EDIT:
Yes, all that in 2 minutes :stuck_out_tongue:

(tokamak) #618

Well I’m with you on realism as it’s not a factor of gameplay (immersion is) but depth IS a facet of gameplay and can’t be discarded so easily.

Your example is open to argument as well. I know you maybe able to dig up a better example, but the fact that many of the depth arguments are open to discussion makes it a relevant point whenever you discuss features.

You can’t just say ‘x adds depth’ you’ll have to support that claim. If you say ‘being unable to identify classes adds depth’ would require you to explain where that depth exactly lies. In my opinion it doesn’t really add depth as it takes away the player’s choice in which targets to pick. Trying to figure out what class each guy is would prove to take so much effort that it would drain the player’s mental facilities elsewhere. In other words, the mini-game is too difficult to add to the gameplay.

Again, I totally agree that you can’t use ‘it adds depth’ as an argument in and of itself. But as for the rest it’s one of the single most interesting things to discuss.

(light_sh4v0r) #619

If this happens you won’t hear me complain :slight_smile:

(DarkangelUK) #620

I like to play all my games with Nvidia 3D Vision… it adds depth

sorry