By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - FPS Questions

dsister44 on 13 January 2009

wait doesnt mgs4(tps actually u aim in 1st person) have something like that



Around the Network
Onyxmeth on 13 January 2009
vlad321 said:
Onyxmeth said:
vlad321 said:

It is a new system. Its roots are in the Battlefield games, I believe, but unlike you I believe that system completely ruins the online even more. There is no reason a new person should be denied the same means of killing others as the people who have played from before. Give everyone the weapons and let the best one win I say, no need to help out the player who suck, but spent a lot of time playing, anything. If they suck it's their own problem.

See I understand the system in MMOs and RPGs in general, after all the point of the game is to get better gear. But in FPSes where the point is to kill the other person, things should be on equal footing. One person's set of skills versus another's. You know kind of like a sport....

COD4 had that mode too as an option. It was called Old School mode or something. No health regeneration, and weapons and perks picked up on the field. Considering how popular it turned out, I would say more people agree the RPG like system should stay. Plus anyone with any moderate skill can be killing people and winning matches with the opening weapons since their beginning matches will be against those with horrible stats.

 

No offense but of course more people would prefer the RPG system. There is only 1 top spot, or 5 top 5. No offense but in general the FPS population sucks (in terms of skill), and anything that will make them feel better about themselves in game they will gladly latch onto. "Oh look, shiny new rifle, now I'm better than the people who don't have it." I agree with the fact that people should be ranked so that they can more easily find games with people their own skill level. After all the BEST matches I've had would end at like 8-10 or 10-9, where at the end of an encounter the survivor has only like 10 health left. However, there shouldn't be any rewards in terms of weapons or perks or vehicle acces or whatever else they can come up with in games these day.

Well not every game can be Unreal Tournament buddo. I know that's your preference, but this method works for others, and will probably continue to become more popular as more series pick it up. I like both myself. Unlocking new weapons have helped me in giving more weapons a chance I otherwise would have never tried, while UT does the same by having them all lying on the ground and each possessing very little ammo.

There really is no equal footing in online multiplayer anyways, regardless of the method of advancement. Noobs don't have working knowledge of the maps, spawn points, etc. which is something only time will award you with, same as the weapons.

 



Tag: Became a freaking mod and a complete douche, coincidentally, at the same time.



vlad321 on 13 January 2009
Onyxmeth said:
vlad321 said:
Onyxmeth said:
vlad321 said:

It is a new system. Its roots are in the Battlefield games, I believe, but unlike you I believe that system completely ruins the online even more. There is no reason a new person should be denied the same means of killing others as the people who have played from before. Give everyone the weapons and let the best one win I say, no need to help out the player who suck, but spent a lot of time playing, anything. If they suck it's their own problem.

See I understand the system in MMOs and RPGs in general, after all the point of the game is to get better gear. But in FPSes where the point is to kill the other person, things should be on equal footing. One person's set of skills versus another's. You know kind of like a sport....

COD4 had that mode too as an option. It was called Old School mode or something. No health regeneration, and weapons and perks picked up on the field. Considering how popular it turned out, I would say more people agree the RPG like system should stay. Plus anyone with any moderate skill can be killing people and winning matches with the opening weapons since their beginning matches will be against those with horrible stats.

 

No offense but of course more people would prefer the RPG system. There is only 1 top spot, or 5 top 5. No offense but in general the FPS population sucks (in terms of skill), and anything that will make them feel better about themselves in game they will gladly latch onto. "Oh look, shiny new rifle, now I'm better than the people who don't have it." I agree with the fact that people should be ranked so that they can more easily find games with people their own skill level. After all the BEST matches I've had would end at like 8-10 or 10-9, where at the end of an encounter the survivor has only like 10 health left. However, there shouldn't be any rewards in terms of weapons or perks or vehicle acces or whatever else they can come up with in games these day.

Well not every game can be Unreal Tournament buddo. I know that's your preference, but this method works for others, and will probably continue to become more popular as more series pick it up. I like both myself. Unlocking new weapons have helped me in giving more weapons a chance I otherwise would have never tried, while UT does the same by having them all lying on the ground and each possessing very little ammo.

There really is no equal footing in online multiplayer anyways, regardless of the method of advancement. Noobs don't have working knowledge of the maps, spawn points, etc. which is something only time will award you with, same as the weapons.

 

 

Doesn't have to be UT. Look at Battlefield 1942. It still came down to skill (team skill), but everyone was offered the same things (ok, given the map it was the same, not all maps were even....). I realize that it will get you to use weapons you won't normally use. However, if you wouldn't normally use them it's because they weren't worth using them to begin with. A sign of a good MP FPS game is that all weapons should be useful.



Tag(thx fkusumot) - "Yet again I completely fail to see your point..."

HD vs Wii, PC vs HD: http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=93374

Why Regenerating Health is a crap game mechanic: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3986420

gamrReview's broken review scores: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4170835

 

Onyxmeth on 13 January 2009
vlad321 said:
Onyxmeth said:
vlad321 said:
Onyxmeth said:
vlad321 said:

It is a new system. Its roots are in the Battlefield games, I believe, but unlike you I believe that system completely ruins the online even more. There is no reason a new person should be denied the same means of killing others as the people who have played from before. Give everyone the weapons and let the best one win I say, no need to help out the player who suck, but spent a lot of time playing, anything. If they suck it's their own problem.

See I understand the system in MMOs and RPGs in general, after all the point of the game is to get better gear. But in FPSes where the point is to kill the other person, things should be on equal footing. One person's set of skills versus another's. You know kind of like a sport....

COD4 had that mode too as an option. It was called Old School mode or something. No health regeneration, and weapons and perks picked up on the field. Considering how popular it turned out, I would say more people agree the RPG like system should stay. Plus anyone with any moderate skill can be killing people and winning matches with the opening weapons since their beginning matches will be against those with horrible stats.

 

No offense but of course more people would prefer the RPG system. There is only 1 top spot, or 5 top 5. No offense but in general the FPS population sucks (in terms of skill), and anything that will make them feel better about themselves in game they will gladly latch onto. "Oh look, shiny new rifle, now I'm better than the people who don't have it." I agree with the fact that people should be ranked so that they can more easily find games with people their own skill level. After all the BEST matches I've had would end at like 8-10 or 10-9, where at the end of an encounter the survivor has only like 10 health left. However, there shouldn't be any rewards in terms of weapons or perks or vehicle acces or whatever else they can come up with in games these day.

Well not every game can be Unreal Tournament buddo. I know that's your preference, but this method works for others, and will probably continue to become more popular as more series pick it up. I like both myself. Unlocking new weapons have helped me in giving more weapons a chance I otherwise would have never tried, while UT does the same by having them all lying on the ground and each possessing very little ammo.

There really is no equal footing in online multiplayer anyways, regardless of the method of advancement. Noobs don't have working knowledge of the maps, spawn points, etc. which is something only time will award you with, same as the weapons.

 

 

Doesn't have to be UT. Look at Battlefield 1942. It still came down to skill (team skill), but everyone was offered the same things (ok, given the map it was the same, not all maps were even....).

Ok talking eye, I get your point. However, since I've never played Battlefield 1942, this is where my knowledge of the conversation ends. Now I'm going to go back to kicking Level 55 ass with my shitty beginner weapons in COD4.

Ladder Theory for the win!

 



Tag: Became a freaking mod and a complete douche, coincidentally, at the same time.



Slimebeast on 13 January 2009

Whenever you're ready to get to the next level you should try Enemy Territory: Quake Wars. Preferably the PC version.

ET:Quake Wars is a lot more advanced than normal FPS-games when it comes to leveling up/upgrades and also the tactics and team-play
(but doesn't have the steep learning curve of tactical squad based shooters á la Ghost Recon which I don't like at all).

The upgrades in ET:quake wars are only active during a 3 map campaign, then reset, but I think that is more fair.



Around the Network
Onyxmeth on 13 January 2009
Slimebeast said:
Whenever you're ready to get to the next level you should try Enemy Territory: Quake Wars. Preferably the PC version.

ET:Quake Wars is a lot more advanced than normal FPS-games when it comes to leveling up/upgrades and also the tactics and team-play.
(but doesn't have the steep learning curve of tactical squad based shooters á la Ghost Recon which I don't like at all).

Is that game actually good? I tried the demo on PS3 and it was the glitchiest, twitchiest mess of a game I have ever played. It lagged horribly too. Basically it was unplayable.

 



Tag: Became a freaking mod and a complete douche, coincidentally, at the same time.



Slimebeast on 13 January 2009
Onyxmeth said:
Slimebeast said:
Whenever you're ready to get to the next level you should try Enemy Territory: Quake Wars. Preferably the PC version.

ET:Quake Wars is a lot more advanced than normal FPS-games when it comes to leveling up/upgrades and also the tactics and team-play.
(but doesn't have the steep learning curve of tactical squad based shooters á la Ghost Recon which I don't like at all).

Is that game actually good? I tried the demo on PS3 and it was the glitchiest, twitchiest mess of a game I have ever played. It lagged horribly too. Basically it was unplayable.

 

 

Oh. I know the console versions got bad reviews but I never understood why. The PC version of ET:QW is easily the best shooter I've ever played, and I experienced no difficulties in the console version demo. No lag either. The game takes a bit longer to get into though than the 2 hours of game time the demo offered.

What do you mean by glitches and twitches?



vlad321 on 13 January 2009
Onyxmeth said:
Slimebeast said:
Whenever you're ready to get to the next level you should try Enemy Territory: Quake Wars. Preferably the PC version.

ET:Quake Wars is a lot more advanced than normal FPS-games when it comes to leveling up/upgrades and also the tactics and team-play.
(but doesn't have the steep learning curve of tactical squad based shooters á la Ghost Recon which I don't like at all).

Is that game actually good? I tried the demo on PS3 and it was the glitchiest, twitchiest mess of a game I have ever played. It lagged horribly too. Basically it was unplayable.

 

Well there's your problem.... The easiest solution is to stick it on your PC. If it says Quake, it should probably be on something that says Windows (or DOS) at startup. As to the actual game, it was good, but I wasn't all that impressed. I liked the qhole quake-universe thing best. I loved killing me some humans as strogg.

Also how dare you mock the eye of win, bringer of good and evil, destroyer of noobs, god of 1337 p33z. Stupid frowning face.

 

LADDER THEORY FTW!



Tag(thx fkusumot) - "Yet again I completely fail to see your point..."

HD vs Wii, PC vs HD: http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=93374

Why Regenerating Health is a crap game mechanic: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3986420

gamrReview's broken review scores: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4170835

 

shio on 13 January 2009
Slimebeast said:
Onyxmeth said:
Slimebeast said:
Whenever you're ready to get to the next level you should try Enemy Territory: Quake Wars. Preferably the PC version.

ET:Quake Wars is a lot more advanced than normal FPS-games when it comes to leveling up/upgrades and also the tactics and team-play.
(but doesn't have the steep learning curve of tactical squad based shooters á la Ghost Recon which I don't like at all).

Is that game actually good? I tried the demo on PS3 and it was the glitchiest, twitchiest mess of a game I have ever played. It lagged horribly too. Basically it was unplayable.

 

 

Oh. I know the console versions got bad reviews but I never understood why. The PC version of ET:QW is easily the best shooter I've ever played, and I experienced no difficulties in the console version demo. No lag either. The game takes a bit longer to get into though than the 2 hours of game time the demo offered.

What do you mean by glitches and twitches?

This. Quake Wars is simply amazing, the best tactical shooter ever. In Quake Wars you NEED team effort and brains to win, not twitch gameplay.

 



http://i48.tinypic.com/120qaon.jpg
papflesje on 13 January 2009

Resistance 2 also has this level up system and it works quite well.

It can indeed be annoying when some dude kills you because he has access to better equipment or weapons (or berserks in Resistance2), but on the other hand, it's a major "haha, SUCKER" when you do manage to kill him. So it works both ways (although for me, it's usually a "FFS, LEAVE ME ALONE /cries/"-response >_>)