Smart

(Fetter) #141

The default movement controls should move you as efficiently and quickly as possible. Anything else is just barriers to entry.

(INF3RN0) #142

SMART let’s you climb over a table, grab a ledge, slide, or jump off a wall. The pro of old movement was how you could gain speed and altitude from approaching specific terrain with the right motion. We have identified SMART lacking mostly due to the map designs under-appreciating the concept. Old movement was incredibly dynamic and active in every part of a map. SMART opens up a lot of new doors, but is entirely dependent on maps to place Smart-able objects for players to explore. The biggest mistake to me is that SMART is limited in a way that the old movement wasn’t, but it didn’t have to be like that. The reason why SMART is so easy is also due to this limitation. The combination of both concepts would be an extraordinary idea imo, but the map design really needs to make SMART feel like it’s a true part of the game instead of just a new means of taking the normal linear pathways with fake swagger. People who can’t see this are either too diluted by their fanboism or just will argue because someone they don’t usually like to agree with said it first. SMART functions at 20% of it’s potential in Brink, which is why I ask for moar cow bell.

(gooey79) #143

Claiming that’s a barrier to entry is like claiming the game not giving you instant head-shots is a barrier to entry. People who work on their aiming get better over time. The same can be said for games with an advanced movement system. Players who work at it get better over time.

Basically, you’re advocating the removal of skill in a skill based game.

Except none of those tactics were labelled in the game. And are accessible to all. Just like the opportunity to circle strafe, strafe jump, beat strafe etc are all available to all. It’s down to the user to decide if they want to put the time and effort into learning these different things.

You’re also advocating the removal of skill from a skill based game.

Should it not be clear, I’m not talking about Brink here as it has (in most cases) removed skill from a skill based game.

(H0RSE) #144
  • But SMART was supposed to to be easy - it was one of its selling points…
  • They promised that players would be rewarded for being more skillful with it, and you are. The degree of this “reward” is subjective and in the eye of the beholder.
  • Where you see limitation, I see refinement.

I have already said this in previous threads awhile back - the “skill” a player has in a system (movement or otherwise) is not determined by how many button presses it involves or how difficult executing the process is - it is determined by what players do with what they have available.

Your point? I never said show players every single thing strafe jumping, bunny hopping, ramping, etc. can be used for. I simply let it be known that players can do these things. The rest is up to the player - That way it leaves innovation, skill and the sense of discovery in tact.

Just like the opportunity to circle strafe, strafe jump, beat strafe etc are all available to all.

You’re right, they are avaiable to all - I’m simply saying let players be aware that they are available.

You’re also advocating the removal of skill from a skill based game.

lol, hardly. It’s a shooter, not a movement sim. Throughout my time playing ET and RTCW, I used only basic movement techniques - bunny hopping and strafing, and I never used them to find shortcuts or access hard to reach areas of the map, only to navigate faster (bunny hopping) and to better move while in firefights, yet I was still good enough to get invited into multiple comp level clans. Players can use only the basic run jump and crouch, and still be highly skilled players.

Even if you were right, and I was advocating removing skill from a skill based games, they aren’t necessary skills.

(gooey79) #145

Whilst I’ll disagree that a shooter isn’t also about movement I will agree that movement doesn’t have to be high level in order to ‘compete’.

In essence you validate the notion there’s room for differing levels of movement ‘skill’ in a shooter, just like there’s different levels of shooting ‘skill’. Those that want to invest the time and effort into improving are free to do so. The fact it wasn’t documented in the manual/game means nothing.

Incidentally, it’s interesting that you now call bunny hopping and strafing ‘basic movement techniques’. Weren’t these ‘hidden’?

(H0RSE) #146

Strafing is not hidden - it is simply holding left or right (or A or D) on the keyboard - simply looking at the contrls from the menu will tell a player what left and right do. Bunny hopping is a hidden feature, and it was awhile until I discovered it. I used the the term “basic movement techniques” in reference to all the other movements one can learn. In comparison, strafing and bunny hopping are basic.

(INF3RN0) #147

Difficulty of execution is the key to skill… this is why people view it the way they do. There is a basic understanding about everything in the game, but the difficulty of execution gives it meaning. High skill gives these games meaning, teamwork gives it strategy, and objectives give it focus. This is why I choose to play these games over others, and I also want them to continue and expand on the concept. If the three core elements aren’t in balance, the game will suffer as Brink has. The best games are the least friendly and the most difficult to master.

(DarkangelUK) #148

I’m still wondering how the dev can let the player know about discoveries via emergent gameplay when they themselves have no idea what could develop simply by the player innovating off their own back.

[QUOTE=H0RSE;381081]I’m not picking and choosing anything.

  • Oppressor shields, Hogs - both in-game. Both something all players are aware of. Putting the 2 together is where innovation comes in.
  • HE, Husky - both in game. Both something all players are aware of. Putting the 2 together is where innovation comes in.
  • Strafe-jumping, ramping, tricking. All in-game. All things not everyone could be aware of. A player can’t be innovative if they’re not even aware they exist or what they can do.[/quote]
    Moving forward, strafing. sprinting, jumping = all things the players are aware of, putting them together in different combinations is where the innovation comes from.
(.Chris.) #149

In ET:QW there were lots of places were ramping was heavily hinted at, on Refinery they are some angled solar panels on a series of rooftops at increasing heights, doesn’t take a genius to figure out to try and run up them and jump.

All this talk reminds me of the first Zelda game, “It’s a secret to everybody”. Was lots of caves in the game you could find by blowing some random places in the terrain giving you extra health containers or lots of money. No where in the game did it mention you could find these caves but by experimenting with your equipment you would be rewarded and when you found these areas you would tell you’re mates about it if they haven’t learned it already hence “it’s a secret to everybody”. You could play the game fine without these rewards/advantages and still beat the game but if you were inventive enough you would be rewarded, same with everything mentioned in this topic.

(montheponies) #150

playing devil’s advocate, where does frame locking to 43, 76 or 125fps in order to acheive the ‘innovation’ come in?

(DarkangelUK) #151

You do know that stuff was neutered years ago right, and doesn’t affect games beyond idtech3? QuakeLive also has it removed even though it’s using idtech3.

(montheponies) #152

i thought idtech4 neutered the extremes available in idtech3, but to be fair i never played as much ETQW. Anyway if you want to answer a question with a question that’s cool.

(.Chris.) #153

There are no ‘magic numbers’ in idtech4 no.

(H0RSE) #154

Pleae…kill the ego. Just because you just pushed 17 different button combinations while doing a 360 (exaggeration) to do something that in a different game engine could have been done using 1 button means nothing. The onnly “meaning” such a feat gives is a personal one. Just seems like the oldschool trickers are butthurt because all the blood, sweat and tears they put into the old system, mastering manuevers, has been removed and replaced with something more streamlined, and dare I say it, “simplified.” - boo hoo.

(INF3RN0) #155

Nearly everything was simplified. You call it ego, I call it a need for a challenging game. You obviously just game to mash buttons and pretend you have purpose. Boo hoo? Seriously… your mindset is beyond words, or perhaps only describable with language deemed inappropriate on this forum. I hope your buried along with Brink.

(tokamak) #156

You would’ve been even happier if they artificially made the movement more difficult wouldn’t you? Go play Dance Dance Revolution or something.

(H0RSE) #157

lol, it’s ashooter…it can have all the “challenge” you could ever ask for and more, while only offering basic movements. Still don’t see how offering the abilty to do “off-beat” movements makes shooter more challenging. The only thing it makes more challenging is performing said movements - you can remove the shootong aspect and the teamwork if that’s the case.

DDR is 10x harder than tricking in idtech games - and more meaningful.

(Crytiqal) #158

Cause movement has an impact on traversing the battlefield, thus gives an edge over the opponent when done skillfully?

Seriously, movement is as much part of a shooter as shooting, otherwise you could play shooting ducks.
Now that the movement takes zero skill (YES, pressing SHIFT and looking where you want to go == 0 skill in my book) means part of the game (challenge and skill) has been removed.

Its the same as if they would remove the need to aim, cause why would someone who can move his mouse better, have an edge over someone who cant perform this skillfully?

Oh wait…

(INF3RN0) #159

[QUOTE=H0RSE;381178]lol, it’s ashooter…it can have all the “challenge” you could ever ask for and more, while only offering basic movements. Still don’t see how offering the abilty to do “off-beat” movements makes shooter more challenging. The only thing it makes more challenging is performing said movements - you can remove the shootong aspect and the teamwork if that’s the case.

[/QUOTE]

What’s wrong with having a game that offers precise shooting, teamwork, and advanced movement? I mean these elements are present in a lot of successful games, including the old titles we all refer to here, so why downgrade one area because you find it non-important? Advanced movement is more than doing a cool TJ to overcome an obstacle; you use it to get across the map fast, escape bad positioning, outmaneuver your opponent, and increase the difficulty of hitting a moving target. I find incredible meaning in it all and constantly use it in-game, which makes me think your just suffering from the de-motivational quote “Your doing it wrong”. The performance of the “hard” stuff is there to balance out what it all achieves, just like aim. If you make a mistake, your going to suffer a consequence; It’s an aged old system that defines skill.

(H0RSE) #160

[QUOTE=Crytiqal;381179]Cause movement has an impact on traversing the battlefield, thus gives an edge over the opponent when done skillfully?

Seriously, movement is as much part of a shooter as shooting, otherwise you could play shooting ducks.
Now that the movement takes zero skill means part of the game (challenge and skill) has been removed.

Its the same as if they would remove the need to aim, cause why would someone who can move his mouse better, have an edge over someone who cant perform this skillfully?

Oh wait…[/QUOTE]

this simply isn’t true or at least doesn’t apply to all shooters. There have been countless challenging shooters where the extent of movement was run, jump and crouch.