What do you want to see in the next game?

(tangoliber) #161

I’ve always liked the idea of asymmetrical factions as well. It’s fun to think of possible third and fourth factions for NS2…such as a “Protoss” style faction with advanced energy weaponry.

With a stopwatch, ET style mode… you can have any kind of asymmetry you want, and it will be balanced. But of course, its more fun if its offensively biased.

While I’m able to accept mechanics that I don’t like if the other areas of the game appeal to me…I honestly would hate playing the “CoD” faction in your example, due to the iron sights. And I don’t think getting one hit killed is very fun because it punishes aggressiveness and rewards cautious players…which I personally don’t enjoy. We are all molded by the games we played the most. I played a lot of UT99 back in the day…and then I spent all of 2009 in Killzone 2 clan matchea… two games where you have to be aggressive and constantly moving, and both games conditioned me to love long duels while dancing or strafing…as opposed to tactical iron sight shooters. Though, I actually like iron sights in some slow-paced single player games that benefit from the immersion, like Stalker or Fallout New Vegas. I just mainly hate them in fast-paced games and multiplayer…but I recognize it as a completely subjective feeling. :slight_smile:

(tokamak) #162

Killzone 3 has ironsights though. I haven’t played it but from what I see the sights aren’t constantly needed so I guess that’s why you like it.

Looking at the gameplay it does seem like the best kind of ‘military’ style that would fit the arcade action. It’s slightly realistic but it’s also rough enough to stand a chance against quake dudes.

(tangoliber) #163

[QUOTE=tokamak;408666]Killzone 3 has ironsights though. I haven’t played it but from what I see the sights aren’t constantly needed so I guess that’s why you like it.

Looking at the gameplay it does seem like the best kind of ‘military’ style that would fit the arcade action. It’s slightly realistic but it’s also rough enough to stand a chance against quake dudes.[/QUOTE]

Killzone 2 had iron sights, but nobody used them (except beginners who don’t know.) It was essentially as if it didn’t exist. Everyone just strafes and tap-fires with the assault rifle. And crouched for long range. You didn’t want to stop moving, because the headshot to bodyshot damage ratio was huge. The exception was the LMG or bolt-action rifle, which you had to crouch to use well…but those were situational weapons.
This video shows the playstyle pretty well…Quick kills for headshots, but slow kills for bodyshots. For PC, I would just make the guns more accurate, and give more health, especially to account for the better aiming of the mouse. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqwBMcE26tw

For Killzone 3, they made the iron sights more effective (by putting in aim assist), so that the controls would feel less awkward to newcomers…and as a result the game became a lot campier. You run out the door, and get instantly killed… as opposed to KZ2 where you can strafe around in open space and and end up with a 50-5 KDR. Most KZ2 veterans, such as myself, didn’t like it, and KZ2 still has a bigger community.

(warbie) #164

That pretty much sums up the effect iron sights have on all fps. They slow them down and put more emphasis on cautious, defensive play - rather than the faster, aggressive and movement focussed play hip firing promotes. Every fps I’ve played that tries to marry the two ways of shooting suffers for it.