WTB Proper freakin Military style FPS for PC

[WytchDokta]

*How the double post heck did I do that?*

Edited April 19, 2011 by WytchDokta

[Zeealex]

good question

[petsfed]

The ragdoll physics thing can often be unrealiistic as hell, and often just plain messes things up. I've had this happen in ES5: Oblivion and SC:C - the angle and direction that the enemy gets knocked back (or in these cases, 'fly' rather than get knocked back) is disproportionate to the angle they were hit from. They should be thrown in the opposite direction of the hit, bit in these case they 'fly' in some other direction, mostly straight upwards, as if they were propelled from below yet you hit them from behind, on level ground. It's funny to see the ragdoll physics or Havok physics (or whatever they're calling it these days) do stuff like that when it's not meant to, but that's besides the point

Near as I can tell, whenever that happens, its because the collision detection used for "living" animation, and the collision detection for ragdoll physics uses two entirely different code sets. What I'll bet is happening is that the rag-doll potential functions are based on the assumption that the model shouldn't pass through other objects, so they make a very strong expelling force to keep it from happening. Of course, the animators and collision detection people weren't really talking to the rag doll folks (and this is so widespread that I think there's a fundamental problem with how rag-doll models treat collision vs. animated models) so the hacks that the animators used to get their animations to work weren't carried over to the rag-doll stuff. If you've never noticed, in a lot of games the characters' feet are slightly below ground level, especially while walking up a gradual slope. Kill them in that situation and the rag-doll overlap-avoidance routine rockets them to the moon.

[Zeealex]

wow, nice info still needs to be adressed either way

[WytchDokta]

Kill them in that situation and the rag-doll overlap-avoidance routine rockets them to the moon.

Haha, cool. I gotta try that on SC:C, try and recreate the situation like it happened earlier, and this time see how high I can propel the enemy (and of course record it)

[WytchDokta]

Anyone know what's the deal with Sniper/Scout classes always being weaker and faster in these games. That is, weaker in terms of apparently having less armour, yet their physical character model has the same amount of armour as the other classes.

[zeealice]

i guess it just makes people think twice about going in the full blaze of battle with a powerful, but slow, gun. i do think physically snipers do need to have less armour, but i would always see them as having more armour

[WytchDokta]

Alright, let me rewrite what I said to Sniper/Scout/Marksman (as in the designated marksman of a fireteam within a squad). They always seem to have less armour than other classes in their fireteam.

[zeealice]

come to think of it, it does seem a little pointless. sniper's Armour level surely would be the same as a rifleman's no? seeing as like you said they do wear the same looking armor. i can understand the grenadier and the demo dude having more armor than the standard guys because they are handling explosives more than the others.

BUT having said that, the sniper isn't getting shot at as much as the riflemen, because if they have common sense they keep hidden, thus not needing the extra armor weighing them down. and then they can run from spot to spot allot quicker then.

i'm barking up the wrong tree aint i?

Edited April 29, 2011 by zeealice

[Tinker]

Im sick of all the crappy FPS' they put out nowadays

As much as it is fun, it gets tiresome. Just finished a level on L4D1 SP without firing a single round No pipes or molys. Is so similar to doing the same on some COD levels. Just hide inbetween the AI, trigger the next wave, all fine. But by doing this, you clearly see, that no matter what, the enemy are homing in on you all the time, regardless the fact that you are not firing, or even moving.

Yeah I am talking about 2 of the most unrealistic games, but where did the challenge go?

Would look forward to the next FPS that aims towards the thinking man, and punishes anything less.

[WytchDokta]

From my own tests on L4D, I conclude that the horde are more likely to attack when you are preoccupied by some other task. In my case, the only time I get hit on L4D is whenever I reload. This could just be oppotunist AI though, as I can keep the horde at a distance with singleshot headshots from distance with the M16 (tapping fire button as if I'm firing pistols, that's how to singleshot the M16). Whenever I stop to reload, a Smoker (who appeared out of nowhere) gets me.

[WytchDokta]

Expanding on the terminology side of things is Conflict of Terminology. I becamee aware of this through a recently released game I enjoy, Brink, and it's the first instance of Conflict of Terminology I've heard/seen oin a game.

So what is 'Conflict of Terminology'?

In Brink, magazine capacity in weapon stats is referred to as Clip Size. It's funny that, considerng when the bots reload they clearly say 'Changing mag' or something to that effect, uusing the word mag in place of clip. I've put a lot of hours into the game (I have several different character builds all at max xp) and I've yet to hear one bot use the the word clip instead of mag. In short, the game devs use the word clip, the voice actors for the bots use the word mag.

[Operative]

In short, the game devs use the word clip, the voice actors for the bots use the word mag.

Bots are smart, devs are not

[Zeealex]

agreed

[WytchDokta]

Bots are smart, devs are not

Not in the release version of Brink. For example, play as Security on the Reactor map. Sometimes, Resistance bots will come up the stairs at the back of the main area then just stand there looking at you. And even after patching it, they still retain complete disregard for personal safety in regards to grenades, they will sometimes girl throw grenades so they bounce back and explode in the throwers face.

Another thing: why in the majority of these games is the FAMAS, or rifles based on the FAMAS through weapon model, locked to 3rnd burst?

[Operative]

Not in the release version of Brink. For example, play as Security on the Reactor map. Sometimes, Resistance bots will come up the stairs at the back of the main area then just stand there looking at you. And even after patching it, they still retain complete disregard for personal safety in regards to grenades, they will sometimes girl throw grenades so they bounce back and explode in the throwers face.

This one doesn't follow the rule AI that throw grenades in places were it will bounce back right to their face? This is what I expect from a game 5 to 10 years old. They retain their attention to graphics and then release such an abomination AI.

Another thing: why in the majority of these games is the FAMAS, or rifles based on the FAMAS through weapon model, locked to 3rnd burst?

Remember, only bots are supposed to be smart

EDIT: OMG, bad grammar

Edited June 10, 2011 by Operative

[petsfed]

Another thing: why in the majority of these games is the FAMAS, or rifles based on the FAMAS through weapon model, locked to 3rnd burst?

Because switching from semi/burst to semi/select requires flipping a switch on the buttstock, rather than just flipping a selector switch near the trigger? While that added step of realism would be nice, its such a game breaking mechanic that they leave it out, recognizing that it won't be missed.

[WytchDokta]

@Operative - If it was an abomination, I would have shalved it along with Homefront. The occurence of them throwing grenades in such a way/place that they will bounce back is rare. Of all thr hours I've put into the game, I've only seen it happen up to three times maximum. I do think they need to give the bots more random behavior though, as they are currently predivtable in places - play as a Security engineer on the Reactor map. Mine the entrances to the main area, when mine is tripped, place another one. Watch as bots repeatedly take the same path through the mines, and thus blow themselves up. You wouold have thought that by the fifth time this happened, they would have taken a different path, or got an Operative to spot the mines and an Engineer to disarm them. Don't get me wrong, I like Brink, it's a great game. It's just the AI, the AI is broken.

@Petsfed - I see. However, when they are other weapons in the game that are (in reality) capable of 3rnd burst, such as the G36, why is the FAMAS always locked to 3rnd burst, yet the other rifles are locked to full auto.

Edited June 9, 2011 by WytchDokta

[Operative]

Oh, now I see. The AI doesn't fail that hard so, albeit being predictable

[petsfed]

@Petsfed - I see. However, when they are other weapons in the game that are (in reality) capable of 3rnd burst, such as the G36, why is the FAMAS always locked to 3rnd burst, yet the other rifles are locked to full auto.

Also game balancing. The FAMAS has one of the highest rates of fire of any assault rifle currently in use. If they left it full auto, they'd have to nerf everything else about the gun (that is, limit the attachments, make it less accurate, cut the mag size etc) so the game wouldn't devolve into the FAMAS show. I'm fairly confident that, unlike what the in-game statistics say, the Sig-552 is not demonstrably more (or less) powerful than the G36C, Rainbow 6: Vegas not withstanding. Red Storm did the same thing to SAWs in Ghost Recon. Shoot, UBI did it to the SL-8 in Raven Shield despite not giving the G36 a 90% power neutering if you threw a silencer on it (not to mention that suppressor or scope, but not both thing).

[CkZWarlord]

I really hope devs will take notice of this thread! I see a lot of great comments in here that are useful for them so keep it up people! Keep adding to this thread when you see stuff you do want to see or stuff you want left out! Surely we can create a framework for devs to create an awesome game!

[WytchDokta]

Regarding balancing: is it necessary in a realistic game? I mean, real life is NOT balanced, not even in the slightest. (Watch some-one come here and counter argue that 'realistic' games aren't real life)

One thing I'd like to see in games is more realistic feelling and emotion. I mean, you take some of these recent games like Hunted: Demon's Forge and Dungeon Seige 3 - there's scanty clad female playable characters (which devs seem to incorporate into games these days like some sort of fan service. Matter of fact is, some of us prefer our women dressed more appropiately) running around in torrential rain/arctic environments, apparently not phased by it. I see myself these days, people here think 15 degrees is 'freezing) (they are oblivious to the fact that freezing point is 0 degrees and below, so we're talking minus figures), when in actual fact minus 15 is freezing, plus 15 isn't even scratching the surface. So, characters that feel the heat or cold would be more realistic (or have the character state something to this effect), along with others that don't, I say that because some of us, like me, have a higher resistance to the cold (or heat)

Edited June 22, 2011 by WytchDokta

[petsfed]

Regarding balancing: is it necessary in a realistic game? I mean, real life is NOT balanced, not even in the slightest. (Watch some-one come here and counter argue that 'realistic' games aren't real life)

In a word, yes.

Suppression does not work in video games unless you add some unrealistic game element (screen blurring, decreased accuracy, stupid high suppressing accuracy, unrealistic suppressing damage) because the odds of actually getting hit by somebody laying down cover fire are relatively low. Seriously, even at 1-in-100, I'd still lean out and snipe the gunner then move on. That's not realistic, but the gamble makes sense to the gamer since, worst case scenario, they restart the level. Meanwhile, it has to be better than 1-in-10,000 before an actual soldier is dumb enough to lean out and attempt accurate aimed fire. Similarly, does it make sense that the standard kit in Ghost Recon on servers not populated by mil-sim fanatics was the OICW since it had the semi-auto grenade launcher? The actual gun was notoriously heavy, and very expensive to field. In the game world, the things were more common than Kalashnikovs, and people spammed grenades.

Game balancing does not mean trying to make it fair. It means tweaking the game to force people to play a certain way. That may mean something as small as limiting ammo for certain weapons, or it may mean removing the ability to crouch. Furthermore, it means choosing between drowning the player with options so that those who don't know your design document front and back rage quit over the apparent unfairness of the game (e.g. ArmA) or limiting the options so the most prudent course of action becomes apparent before the 5th player death (e.g. Ghost Recon, although navigating to the best possible execution of that course of action may still take a few dozen more player deaths). Dieing before you succeed at something is one thing, dieing before you can figure out how to succeed is quite another.

I know I tend to harp on ArmA and its successors a lot, but it's because they're so close to what we want that the flaws detract so much. Even then, there's game balancing at work. A good fraction of the buildings can't be entered, or else the performance would suffer even more. There's no way to actually deploy a bipod. Shoot, they removed the second sight on the G36 because it triggered an infinite-ammo bug. There's no way you can over-encumber yourself by trying to carry an M249 with a full ammo complement, and a full backpack, even though there's nothing in the real world that says you can't. I've moved under 90lb loads before. I've hiked for several days underneath them. I'm not even that strong. I wouldn't say I'd be combat effective in such condition (truth is, we scrubbed our climbing plans because we couldn't get the climbing gear to the mountain before the food would run out), but I can do it. So why doesn't ArmA allow you to try the same? Game balancing.

[CkZWarlord]

Yes, balancing is very neccesary for a game to become popular. When you can choose the side with tanks, choppers and machineguns no-one is going to play the side with a stcik, a pebble and a lottery scratcher ;-)

[CkZWarlord]

You know, I also like a lot of customization in my games and I thought it would perhaps be cool if you could do your own color scheme for the camouflage. Would be kinda cool to have as a unique identifier for your clan if you could then proceed to share it. Just a thought ;-)