WTB Proper freakin Military style FPS for PC

[WytchDokta]

Re: Balancing - it's not a popularity contest. Sure, all devs want to seel as many copies of their games as possible. For the most part, that would mean making the game the 'same-old same-old, arcadey stuff where it takes3 mags of 7.62 ammo to take down an enemy not wearing any armour (who also has 'sniper grenades' and can see/shoot through walls), linear stuff where it's 'go here, pick up this weapon that some one just lying around, find this key (they always make it so it's snining, so you can see it from amile off (which defeats the object of 'looking' for it)) and go back to this door to open it, all the while going up and down the same linear corridors with a lot of scripted predictable stuff going on and 5 minute long unskippable cutscenes every 10 minutes' - they try to force you to play the game in a certain way.

Some of us prefer difference.

Edited July 19, 2011 by WytchDokta

[petsfed]

I'm saying that game balancing is more complicated than just the egregious examples you put out there. My main criticism of NORG is that it only really works when everybody plays the way the designers intended. Its a microcosm of reality, and illustrates why ordung never occurred following the introduction of anarchy.

Look at Counterstrike. You saw bunnyhopping and a variety of other things, not because people were jerks, but because that was (and remains within that particular set of balancing restrictions) the best way to win.

Balancing is why they've eliminated quick-scoping, and added suppression effects in Battlefield 3. Balancing is why there is no jumping in Ghost Recon. Balancing is why servers restricted the OICW in Ghost Recon. Balancing is why you could look through an ACOG with NODs in ARMA II, but not in ARMA II:OA.

The point of balancing is to make you play the way the designers intended you to. The best balancing is the type that doesn't remind you that you're playing a game.

[Operative]

But what if a game wants to be as realistic as possible?

You cited the OICW in Ghost Recon. I really don't know why they added that weapon. For real, I know, it was just because of the 'look'.

If you follow strictly the reality balancing is superfluous.

Also, in your other comment, suppression does work in videogames. If you play some TvT in Ghost Recon and the other team starts to shoot like hell in your team position, or people run for cover or they die. It happened several times, specially in servers with more than 10 people (what is pretty common in DK Force).

Reality is not fair

There's no need for balancing IMO in realism centered games.

Now, arcadish games are another story.

[WytchDokta]

I agree with the 'no balancing in realism games' - as I've said before, real life is not balanced.

What I perceive as ideal bbalancing is to implement an 'advantages create disadvantages' system. That is, items provide bonuses aswell as penalties, rather than just providing penaties (players being unfairly and unnecessarily punished for being good as a means to balance the game to make it fairer for the enemy AI more challenging). Thus, each advantage that a given entity has over other entities generates one or more disadvantages for said entity. Fair is fair.

Edited July 24, 2011 by WytchDokta

[petsfed]

In real life I can jump, if I want. I can dig a trench. I can hold the gun off to one side and blind fire around cover. I can juggle hand grenades like a circus clown. I can do the worm.

But I can't do most any of those in a game.

Why?

Balancing concerns.

[Operative]

No petsfed, not balancing concerns, but development schedule

[WytchDokta]

Yes, but in real life, balancing doesn't concern. That's the point.

If balancing is implemented, it should be evenly IMO. But in most games it's balanced in favoUr of the AI. It's like, there this huge boss with like a milliton hitpoints and 90% damage resistance 30 minutes into the game, then there's you with your blanks-firing peashooter, and you're expected to take that boss out. That's not balancing, that's unnecessarily punishing the player. If there was balancing concerns in the game, surely the player should have the same amount of hitpoints to match the boss? Balance evenly or don't balance at all, is that not the ethic? Oh wait, I forgot, apparently balancing in favoUr of the AI makes the game more challenging.

Edited July 24, 2011 by WytchDokta

[CkZWarlord]

A week or two ago, I bought Homefront for PS3... and god, what a mistake that was... all the same old mistakes every developer seems to make nowadays and with the added bonus of a few new ones and absolutely no support... Even the freakin auto-save doesn't work properly... Epic fail @ THQ...

[WytchDokta]

And the enemies shoot only at the player. They also have 'snoipergrenades' - these are grenades that somehow ALWAYS land next to you, regardless of the fact the enemy threw it from halfway across the map and there multiple objective in the flightpath of the grenade, and regardless of the fact that you were moving. True story. On that mission, where you have to leg it to truck for extraction at the end, no word of lie, as I climbed in the back of the truck an enemy grenade landed in the back of the truck with me. This is NOT a scripted event, as it was game over. Now, the enemies were some distance away, the truck was moving at speed, and there were several street lights around that could have blocked the grenades' flight path. So there you have it, 'snipergrenades'

[101459]

I've been keeping an eye on these fellers who seem to have something interesting in the works that might be along the lines we (OGR Fans) are looking for. They've made a couple posts here looking for 3d Artists, seem to be making quiet but steady progress -- maybe they're the 'Dark Horse' (or Angels) OGR Fans are looking for...

Edited August 11, 2011 by 101459

[WytchDokta]

Here's some more for you lot:

Rave-Grenades

Grenades with flashing lights emitting a strobelight effect like the dancefloor down your local night club. The flashing lights are there so you can see where the grenade lands. That and the grenade indicator on the screen, because you apparently wouldn't have been able to look and see the grenade for yourself.

Rave-Weapons/Ammo Pickups

Seemingly so pimped up weapons that they got these flashing parts so you can see the weapon laying on the ground from a mile off. Then when you pick up the weapon, it's not so pimped up as the flashing parts instantly get replaced by normal, non-flashing weapon parts.

Not-So-Camo

All the in-game characters you can choose in MP are wearing camo, but they just aswell be running around with targets paintded on them as each team has these huge highly visible, single colour patches on them, and/or they glow a certain colour, just so you know they're on the opposing team. As if you didn't know who you were meant to be shooting at. 'Red Team' with big red patches on certain areas of their uniforms kind of defeats the whole concept of camo you know?

Sniper Rifle Bullet Trails

Just so I can see where some dude tried to snipe me from, because apparently I'm incapable of figuring it out myself. Same goes for laser sights on enemy sniper rifles, it defeats the object of sniping.

Invisible Walls

"I know, let's model this biilding with a blown off door on one end of the map and place a transparent wall in the doorway to stop players getting inside." Seriously, why put these seemingly accessible areas on maps then block access off with invisible walls? What's the point?

"Oh Noes, You're Leaving The Mission Area. Turn Back Nao! You Am Noob:"

See above. Don't even get me started on this one. If I want to explore, I'll do that. If you don't want me exploring, don't put these additional accessible areas on the maps.

Still, what do I know? I ain't no game dev.

Edited August 17, 2011 by WytchDokta

[petsfed]

Rave-Grenades

Grenades with flashing lights emitting a strobelight effect like the dancefloor down your local night club. The flashing lights are there so you can see where the grenade lands. That and the grenade indicator on the screen, because you apparently wouldn't have been able to look and see the grenade for yourself.

Invisible Walls

"I know, let's model this biilding with a blown off door on one end of the map and place a transparent wall in the doorway to stop players getting inside." Seriously, why put these seemingly accessible areas on maps then block access off with invisible walls? What's the point?

"Oh Noes, You're Leaving The Mission Area. Turn Back Nao! You Am Noob:"

See above. Don't even get me started on this one. If I want to explore, I'll do that. If you don't want me exploring, don't put these additional accessible areas on the maps.

Still, what do I know? I ain't no game dev.

I always found the grenade indicator to be quite useful in games where I was leaning hard on my twitch skills. Mostly it keeps the sniper-grenade phenomenon from getting too frustrating, and really simplifies the process of throwing a grenade back. Both, of course, stem from some much deeper design issues (or you're operating under the incorrect assumption that the game bears any resemblance to, you know, reality).

As for the other two, this is an awkward problem that nobody has found a good solution to. If you leave a completely open map (ArmA style) its very difficult to get those wanderers from actually participating, so indulging your curiosity can become a sort of griefing. Alternately, you can place the gameplay inside a building, which starts to feel either restrictive, or unrealistic. I always hated running into the unclimabable ramp or inexplicable impassable forest in Ghost Recon, so the polite warning thing seemed like a step up.

[Lightspeed]

Arma2 = proper freaking military shooter. That's all you need to know

[Tinker]

Mate you might actually try to read the first post?

[Lightspeed]

Oh yeh sorry lol. Well why can't that game be arma2/3?

[WytchDokta]

I suppose another one is a broken invisibility mechanic in games. That is, broken as in I'm invisible, but enemy AI can apparently see me at short range. What's up with that... *cough* Crysis 2 *cough* *cough*.... I thought I was invisible?!

Also, in certain games.... *cough* Mass Effect 2 *cough* *cough* (I should really get some stronger cough medicine) .... when I go invisible, the enemy is all like "Oh noes, that pillock just went invisible. Watch out guys, he might use his stealth poke you in the eye ability while cloaked" - seriously, the enemy AI know when I go invisible, yet they are halfway across the other side of the map and there's many obstacles between me and them blocking their sight??

[Tinker]

I suppose another one is a broken invisibility mechanic in games. That is, broken as in I'm invisible, but enemy AI can apparently see me at short range. What's up with that... *cough* Crysis 2 *cough* *cough*.... I thought I was invisible?!

Are the enemy not supposed to pick up signals from you or your suit, only in close prox?

@ the 2nd point.

[WytchDokta]

I suppose another one is a broken invisibility mechanic in games. That is, broken as in I'm invisible, but enemy AI can apparently see me at short range. What's up with that... *cough* Crysis 2 *cough* *cough*.... I thought I was invisible?!

Are the enemy not supposed to pick up signals from you or your suit, only in close prox?

@ the 2nd point.

No. If they can track me via non-existant signals when I'm invisible, I just aswell not be invisible. On C2 (not the Citroen version), I am very aware of my surroundings - when cloaked, I'm careful not to bump into things or walk on broken glass etc, in order to not compromise my presence. So I'm crouch-walking BEHIND an enemy, on a level road, in the middle (so as to nnot bump into things and to avoid broken glass etc). I get a couple of metres away from the enemy and he's like "I hear something. That's right, I hear invisible images and see silenced sounds. Even your stealth fart massive intoxication missle bomb ranged attack can't thwart me" What the? How did he hear me/see me, and from a few metres away to.

Let's get this clear, I'm talking about invisibilty, not stealth. There is a big difference between those two. And now to reinforce what I said - air is invisible, you can't see it or hear it, not even at close prox.

[WytchDokta]

To further reinforce my point (in the unlikely event that I would need to), the definition of invisible:

not visible; not perceptible by the eye: invisible fluid.

From Dictionary.com

Note particularly the emboldened text. So, in some games *cough* Crysis 2 *cough* *cough* (now where'd I put that cough medicine?) howcome enemies can see me at close range when I'm invisible?

[CkZWarlord]

I don't think invisibility has any business in a serious military style FPS.

[Operative]

Well, the thread is not that much about serious gaming, more about military-style.

[Tinker]

First let me explain where I am coming from. What I truly love about FPS' (in theory) is the competative side of it. Playing in leagues and ladders.

That one sentance pretty much sums up what is being sought after here to me. Admittedly, a few of us have forgotten about the OP`s point and gone a little off topic in here. However I would say that the OP is talking about serious gaming, more than military style.

[Operative]

When I say serious gaming, I mean the oposite of casual gaming, don't know how to say, er, games/simulators like ArmA2, MSFlightSim, this kind of gaming.

As far as I know, the most competitive FPS in story was Counter Strike 1.6. Military-style, non serious-game. I hope you get the idea of what I'm trying to say. It's so hard to try to express yourself in a foreign language when you have no complete knowledge of it's vocabulary

It was an answer to this post from the thread author:

I don't think invisibility has any business in a serious military style FPS.

Invisibility really don't match that much with Military-style (well, current and historic military), but he mentioned serious, wich wasn't really mentioned in the OP;

Edited August 28, 2011 by Operative

[Tinker]

You are on the right track.

As far as I know, the most competitive FPS in story was Counter Strike 1.6.

Agree with this.

Military-style, non serious-game.

non-serious? You believe the teams at the top of the CS tables find CS as a non serious game? Any game can be serious, with the right mindset.

So, forget CS, and mil sims have no place here. What would be the best choice to play some competitive TvT, ladder style games, in the FPS world?

[Operative]

This is what I mean:

Casual Game

Serious Game

Quote from Wikipedia:

A serious game is a game designed for a primary purpose other than pure entertainment. The "serious" adjective is generally prepended to refer to products used by industries like defense, education, scientific exploration, health care, emergency management, city planning, engineering, religion, and politics.