SD, take note from DICE fans

(Seatsniffer) #21

[video=youtube_share;WMcM7OpC2dI]http://youtu.be/WMcM7OpC2dI[/video]

(H0RSE) #22

I rarely played games like Quake and UT online since they didn’t offer enough substance. I like games with classes and actual objectives. Besides, even if I did suck at MP, what exactly is your point? I mean, what is it about someone sucking at MP that is so funny that in warrants an all caps “LOL?”

(INF3RN0) #23

I was pointing out that you can beat mindless bots in SP without it, but it’s somewhat crucial in MP; ie you must suck at MP if you don’t think it’s important to the game play and that’s the entire basis of your statement, ie that was really not a very intelligent or valid thing to say, ie you missed the point of the video, ieieieieie. Wait have you ever tried the MP or watched professional matches??? I don’t understand what point your trying to make, and so I laugh at your ignorance sir.

You can’t really be saying that??? Seriously please never be allowed to influence game development ever.

(tokamak) #24

That’s how I play Raven Shield. I once brought down an entire team by myself.

(king_troll) #25

quakewars looks better with its 512x512 textures

(H0RSE) #26

Just gonna stop you right there because I was talking about single player, as was that mock video, since he was playing single player in it. Did you even read what you quoted?

The video displays some impressive moves, but it’s all just flash that isn’t needed to play, beat or even enjoy the game.

How do you “beat” multiplayer? You can’t - because I was speaking for single player.

You can’t really be saying that??? Seriously please never be allowed to influence game development ever.

lol, yes, my opinions on specific games in a specific genre should bar me from any and all influence I may have on any game’s development in any genre - brilliant…I think games like Quake and UT are simpleton games, because they include generic gametypes like TDM and CTF and don’t have classes or actual objectives. The “skill” in Quake and UT are based on mainly on reflexes, movement, twitch skills and aiming, and little on working as and supporting a team. I like games where teamwork is the main aspect and the twitchy reflex skills come second. A game where a player can go 0-20 and still be MVP or where they don’t have to go around killing bad guys and instead can concentrate on supporting there team.

I play games games for fun, not for the competitive aspect or the challenge or for how much skill is involved, or how many neat little tricks I can discover. I simply have more fun playing team-based class objective games over standard FPS - you can’t really argue with me or belittle me for that.

(tokamak) #27

I almost completely agree with H0RSE but what redeems these quickplay videos is that old school games do track your completion and your time, so this would be akin to doing some ridiculously hard achievement and setting a new high score, similar to modern games.

Because you know, strafe jumping is not dead.

//youtu.be/gUK3M1jEvAc

(INF3RN0) #28

I am fairly sure that the video is a reflection of the overall advancement into simplistic and boring game play, which carries into the MP aspect. The point of the video is to show how much more exciting it is when the skillful mechanics are in play, even if they just show it against mindless ai/bots. It does not at all mean it’s flashy worthlessness durp. I still don’t understand what you think is so bland about the games? It’s not at all about being the best twitcher/aimer, in fact it’s even less than ET class based games. There’s map items that you have to time and strategize, CTF requires teamwork and has an objective, dueling requires more smarts than aim, etc, etc. Those games have a ton of content even if there’s no room for the guy who can only contribute with non-fps actions like revives or giving ammo packs. I mean honestly I think tossing around the phrase “substance” all the time from you select few is just some poor excuse for your want to not play an FPS and instead pretend to be some sort of tactical mastermind or helpy helperton on the battlefield. It’s all about well-roundedness and these games along with ET did it quite well. Honestly though… I really have no respect for people that make claims or try to prove a point when they really don’t have the faintest clue of what actually goes on in games. Calling everything “reflexes, movement, twitch skills and aiming” is not true at all. It’s an important mechanic, but there’s way more going on than your inexperienced and uninformed mind obviously can comprehend. But of course it’s the most common path of reasoning for the gamer noobs who think that the only reason they can’t compete is because they can’t put in the hours it would take to become a great aimer/twitcher, which is a reflection of their lack in the intelligence department. I LOL again…

(ArchdemonXIII) #29

Sorry I have to jump in here. Saying UT doesn’t really have team-based play is kind of baseless. Yes it has the more vanilla gametypes like TDM and CTF but it also has some of the more innovative team games that have come out: Bombing Run(way underrated), Onslaught/Warfare, Domination/Double Domination, not to mention Assault which was part of the original UT99 (if there was a game with objective type gameplay that predates this, I’m unaware of it). Not to mention some interesting CTF variants like Greed and Vehicle CTF in the latest iteration.

(tokamak) #30

Actually, the only skill I keep seeing played over and over is the rocket jump. I agree that it looks spectacular, but that’s about all there is to it. Take it away and you’re left with a fairly bland shooter.

(SockDog) #31

Problem always seems to come down to those who feel the need to have skill, difficulty and depth defined by some numerical measure, award or rigid gameplay element and those who measure their own performance and enjoyment against others or simply the core game.

I wouldn’t be surprised if many people sit firmly in the middle camp and enjoy a core game experience from which they can also expand if they so wished.

It seems what has happen is instead of accepting that middle ground many games have leapt from the one camp straight into the other. So now you can look forward to getting your fun not from playing a game but by consequence of playing through earning some ficticious XP to buy some virtual clothes or items.

(INF3RN0) #32

Seriously I would recommend people not even give opinions without experience or any form of basic understanding. There is a complex movement system that revolves around maintaining and gaining speed, and many of the weapons (not just the rocket) interact with this system allowing you to control your direction and navigate to locations of a map quickly. I don’t even play Quake games very much, but I at least took the time to look into what was going on and appreciate the game for all it’s complexity. Belittling the mechanics that are obviously too hard for you guys to master or understand its “non-flashy side” just kills it for everyone else. Seriously you want an analogy? It’d be like me telling you that chess is just fancy checkers.

(H0RSE) #33

I love how you assume that the reason for people having the opinions they have about it, must be because it’s too complicated for them to master, so they are just hating on it… YOu also assume they must not have taken any time to even experiment with the mechanics - like they just saw it and said -“pffft, that looks too hard, it’s probably stupid anyway.”

I understand that performing those moves and complexity involved with them and the map layouts and how they tie into tactics requires a degree of skill - that doesn’t mean I have to pay it any mind or even enjoy any of it. The opinions I have are not out of spite for something that I myself cannot master or perform or even understand. They are based off the fact that if none of of it even existed, I would still be having just as much fun, and to me, that makes something useless or just an extra.

An example would be a comparison to RPG games. Most rpg’s have a stealth mechanic, where players can opt to be hide in the shadows, be unseen and kill silently. I rarely opt for this approach, and instead will play a warrior and just use brute force. In most cases, you can complete all task either way, so one method or the other is simply an option, not a requirement, to cater to different playstyles. I approach the “flashy moves” in Quake games and such, in a similar way - just an option. It’s not too hard, it’s not too easy. It’s just not for me.

(SockDog) #34

But if you got a LVL UP and a pat on the head you’d be all over that MOFO right?

(H0RSE) #35

No, I wouldn’t. because like I said, I play games for fun, and the “movement game” depicted in the video, simply isn’t fun for me.

(INF3RN0) #36

[QUOTE=H0RSE;384248]I love how you assume that the reason for people having the opinions they have about it, must be because it’s too complicated for them to master, so they are just hating on it… YOu also assume they must not have taken any time to even experiment with the mechanics - like they just saw it and said -“pffft, that looks too hard, it’s probably stupid anyway.”

I understand that performing those moves and complexity involved with them and the map layouts and how they tie into tactics requires a degree of skill - that doesn’t mean I have to pay it any mind or even enjoy any of it. The opinions I have are not out of spite for something that I myself cannot master or perform or even understand. They are based off the fact that if none of of it even existed, I would still be having just as much fun, and to me, that makes something useless or just an extra.
[/QUOTE]

Your failing to get the point. Your categorizing games as being purely flashy reflexive and movement based, with lack of substance. You have admittedly little experience with the games, yet your very confident in your claims, which are entirely incorrect. With this in consideration, your opinions have zero worth and prove nothing but your need to pretend to have some sort of ability to judge games from a distance or low-level ability to work the basic mechanics. You call the game mechanics useless without ever breaking an extremely low ability level, so how can you know they have artificial worth? Any pro player obviously just performs on an entirely reflexive level by your standings (which is an utterly ignorant claim), so even if someone tried to explain to you everything that was going on you probably would just tell them off? Honestly buddy the only thing that is useless is you. You find it so easy to just fabricate uninformed statements about things that you have no experience in and think that’s going to contribute anything other than asking for someone to call you out on it? So if you don’t mind a challenge, then please tell me why your against anything that adds some sort of skill curve to a game… it seems like your ideal fun game would involve pressing one button that does everything for you and makes you feel special, as long as your completing an “objective” as a “class”.

(H0RSE) #37

I did not categorize any game as simply flashing or having no substance. I said that what that vid showcased (the tricking and movement) is flashy and the gamemodes (to me) have no substance, not they they actually have no substance. There is a wealth of depth, for those who like those types of games - I don’t.

You have admittedly little experience with the games,

where did I admit this? I said I didn’t really play MP a lot with Quake and UT, but that is hardley admitting I have little experience with the games, especially since I was initially only speaking about single player.

yet your very confident in your claims, which are entirely incorrect.

YOu speak this as it werre fact, which it is not - to each their own.

With this in consideration, your opinions have zero worth and prove nothing but your need to pretend to have some sort of ability to judge games from a distance or low-level ability to work the basic mechanics.

To be me accurate, my opinions have no worth “to you,” which I really don’t care. My opinions hold much merit with me, which is all that maters.

You call the game mechanics useless without ever breaking an extremely low ability level, so how can you know they have artificial worth?

Because that’s my opinion? I don’t care to reach a high-skill.competitive level in such games.

Any pro player obviously just performs on an entirely reflexive level by your standings (which is an utterly ignorant claim), so even if someone tried to explain to you everything that was going on you probably would just tell them off?

Oh, so you read minds now too? This ins’t what I am claiming, it is simply what you wish to interpret.

Honestly buddy the only thing that is useless is you.

Personal attacks now? Don’t you know one of the cardinal rules in debate is to attack the idea not the person?

You find it so easy to just fabricate uninformed statements about things that you have no experience in and think that’s going to contribute anything other than asking for someone to call you out on it?

First off, it is not uniformed - it is based off of my observations. And second, I wasn’t attempting to contribute anything, just stating my opinion. Whether you agree with it or disagree, I couldn’t give *****.

So if you don’t mind a challenge, then please tell me why your against anything that adds some sort of skill curve to a game…

I never said I was against it, I just said that it wasn’t my cup of tea and that I don’t care for it. If you and others want to trick and do all the movement based skills in those games, knock yourselves out. I never said I was against it or that it should be removed. Perhaps if you weren’t so busy getting defensive and angry, you could see things more clearly.

it seems like your ideal fun game would involve pressing one button that does everything for you and makes you feel special, as long as your completing an “objective” as a “class”.

Even if that was true (which it isn’t) what would be wrong with that? If a person gains enjoyment from such a game, what do you care?

(INF3RN0) #38

Quake has “classic” not “generic” modes and they are quite diverse. Dueling and CTF for example are not in the least generically simple, and they involve way more than you credit them in the category of TDM. Battlefield has classes and objectives, so are they on par with ET for you? I find their game play much less appealing than Quake or ET, and omg BF has objectives and classes so you must like it! Quake involves reflexive aim, weapon skill, and movement skills the same as any other FPS game, but that is not in the least the only thing going on. Go tell Rapha he is a mindless aimer drone lmao. Sure in ET games you can go 0-20 and accomplish something like say completing an objective or healing your teammates, but that doesn’t mean you aren’t actually supposed to be able to balance your performance; in CTF you can go 0-20 and get flag deliveries, same thing derp. You can’t win a non-pub game in ET when your 0-20 unless others on your team is doing all the aim work for you… so you really make it appear as if your preference for “teamwork” is so that the incompetent player can have a purpose instead of being motivated to actually master the FPS mechanics. IE kill skill so the tards don’t have to learn or work hard. How do you not understand that at the core of any FPS game regardless of the game mode, you are required to kill someone?! If you don’t have any challenges between you and the objectives, then you have the most boring game ever. Don’t tell me you seriously just find the act of completing an objective fun? The fun is what leads up to you completing it, ie fire fights, explicit movement, etc. Teamwork compliments gun play, not the other way around…

I say you have no experience, because there is no actual experienced/recognized player who plays a game like Quake or ET who would agree with anything you say. I know players in ETQW for example with thousands of hours who still understand 1% of the game, and would quickly blame it on something other than themselves. I don’t appreciate your kind of feedback, because that’s why SD thought Brink was the right step. Right step for you perhaps, but apparently not for everyone else that matters.

(SockDog) #39

You missed the nuance of my question. I implied that the addition of motivational tools to such mechanics would make it fun to you.

I wonder if SD had just included achievements like these whether they could have avoided the need to apply so much chloroform soaked cotton wool to the game.

UnSmart - Complete the game using only Sprint, Jump, Crouch/Slide movement keys
How the Devs Jump - Use weapon splash damage to vault over a player and shoot him in the back x1000

etc etc

(H0RSE) #40

You have your opinion and I have mine. You’re failing (or refusing) to see my point or evenly correctly interpret it, and apparently I am doing the same. I’m done with you - I’m moving on to bigger and better things.