Does the term "Twitch gamer" have anyone else scared?

[Forsaken One]

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/09/09/dancing-to-different-beats-planetside-2/

The term Twitch gamer was thrown around a bit in one of the last "talks with a dev" and it has me a bit worried. Even more so that it fell under "If you don't want to be a twitch gamer you can f off and play a non combatant" which was how a "thought gamer" like me took it as.

I have to admit to me muscle memory to play a game well is an unneeded artificial game lengthener and annoyance to me. It does nothing but make a game unfun but for those who play less, require little to no brain power, rewards physical over intellect, and just overall makes me question about why a human would bother with it other then to feel somehow superior in a game made for the intellectually challenged.

Before anyone says anything about twitch is needed in a fps, may I remind them of some true FPS games. Rainbow Six, Swat 4, even PS1 to a point. Hell even Rainbow Six Vegas 1 wasn't very twitchy. Those games rewarded thought and teamwork over "lulz muscle memory means I auto win lulz" and would be so awesome to see in PS2.

I would love your thoughts on the matter AND maybe some posts from a dev on the issue.

[Gandhi]

PS1's lack of twitch gaming is the main reason I was subbed for so long. It's also why I'm against headshots and a lower TTK, but apparently I'm in the minority there so I guess I'll just sit on my porch and grumble about those damn kids some more.

[NapalmEnima]

Being able to aim down the sights of a weapon to increase its accuracy at the cost of movement speed puts Tactics way the hell out in front of Unreal-esque pogo-death-mongers.

--Former Pogo Death Monger. I LOVED Instagib!

I fully expect Good Tactics and Decent Reflexes will beat the snot out of COWABUNGA with Great Reflexes. Particularly with some team coordination vs a pack of adrenaline-crazed lemmings.

Not Worried.

[Crator]

I too am not worried about this, too much. I would hope they are not going to remove the tactics aspects of the game. If they do, that would be a grave mistake.

[Raymac]

If they are aiming for a TTK that is slower than BFBC2, then I wouldn't worry too much. It's not going to be CounterStrike, but it's still an FPS, so skill will be a deciding factor, not just tactics.

[Firefly]

What's funny is that I've played twitch games with a team that practiced tactics and won ladder matches and tourneys. So whilst twitch-gaming might be abhorrent to a Planetside player with only a little skill, let's not pretend that e-sports is a fucking fragfest dominated by solo twitch gamers. They can be taken out with teamwork.

[basti]

You guys are forgetting something here: First of all, this wont be COD. This wont even be BF BC 2, its actually somewhere between PS and BF.
And teamplay always wins, even in games like COD.

[Bags]

COD = 2 shot death
BFBC = 4 shot death
PS1 = ~10 shot death < 30m

So I imagine PS2 will be like 5 - 9 shots or something. Hopefully.

And teamplay always wins, even in games like COD.

Exactly, it's not like you can 1v4 or anything.

FeaR ASSASS1N 1v4 Clutch against OpTic at MLG Anaheim - YouTube
FeaR ASSASS1N 1v3 Clutch against Collapse at MLG Raleigh - YouTube

[Aractain]

So I imagine PS2 will be like 5 - 9 shots or something. Hopefully.

What the pony said.

[SavageB]

YAY for twitch!!!! IF you dont have the skill, you guys wont be having a good time. This game will be skill based and Im all for that. Ive never had any probs with twitch.

[Firefly]

COD = 2 shot death
BFBC = 4 shot death
PS1 = ~10 shot death < 30m

So I imagine PS2 will be like 5 - 9 shots or something. Hopefully.

Even if it's 5-9 shots, that's per-person. Put a full squad of people down, all firing at the same target, and that target is fucked. Even a one-man army target.

[Bags]

Even if it's 5-9 shots, that's per-person. Put a full squad of people down, all firing at the same target, and that target is fucked. Even a one-man army target.

That's how it is now. Not sure how a "one-man army" target is different than any other target in that situation though.

"Even if it's 5-9 shots, that's per-person. Put a full squad of people down, all firing at the same target, and that target is fucked. Even a special assault wielding target. "

is equally relevant.

[Firefly]

That's how it is now. Not sure how a "one-man army" target is different than any other target in that situation though.

"Even if it's 5-9 shots, that's per-person. Put a full squad of people down, all firing at the same target, and that target is fucked. Even a special assault wielding target. "

is equally relevant.
It's not really relevant unless you're the type of person that touts being a twitch-skilled one-man army as the elitest of elites.

[Forsaken One]

What's funny is that I've played twitch games with a team that practiced tactics and won ladder matches and tourneys. So whilst twitch-gaming might be abhorrent to a Planetside player with only a little skill, let's not pretend that e-sports is a fucking fragfest dominated by solo twitch gamers. They can be taken out with teamwork.

It matters. I find E-sports to be a total joke. Rarely do I ever see E-sports taking up any game that I would find worth a shit. To make matters worse, if they do talk about such a game, they "pro-moded" out anything that was worth a shit in the game, leaving only the physical stupidity.

The fact is the term tactics and strategy can be thrown around by a Twitch gamer. Just look at quite a few RTS games, where its so much more about clicking many buttons and baby sitting mentally challenged units then it is about real tactics and strategy.

Just because a person calls 5 people zergging into a room at once all popping headshots like a bunch of monkeys on crack a tactic doesn't mean it should work or make it a tactic at all.

As for what bags pointed out, a lower TTK with twitch just makes problems worse not better. It just means those 5 people who zerged into the room popping headshots took overall less damage then they would have if it was a fast TTK.

[SavageB]

It's not really relevant unless you're the type of person that touts being a twitch-skilled one-man army as the elitest of elites.

I honestly dont mind twitch based at all, I come from E-sports, ever since cs beta back in the day. I played professionally for DFI motherboards @ CPL vs 3d, complexity all of the of the top teams. I enjoyed my days of twitch gameplay, it comes down to true reaction times and acc. I do love ps1, but i find the TTK's can certainly be much faster, and Im hoping for that in the 2nd. Im hoping for a balance between the orig and what we see now these days, most importantly though, I want a good balanced game.

[Wahooo]

Tactical =/= slow and methodical
Twitch does not eliminate tactics
from everything we've heard so far a small increase in TTK without going overboard, and it sounds so far like headshots are going to be controlled weapon to weapon, all sounds good.

[Firefly]

Just because a person calls 5 people zergging into a room at once all popping headshots like a bunch of monkeys on crack a tactic doesn't mean it should work or make it a tactic at all.
It actually does make it a tactic. You can either solo it with your super-armour and God-gun, or you can team up with people and work together to defeat super-armoured God-gun wielding one man armies.

Yes, you're absolutely right that a solo twitch-gamer can throw off those team-oriented players. In that case, I'd have to say that team-oriented players need to practice more and play together more frequently. Because there's no excuse, really. I've seen teams in Planetside and e-sports shooters sweep the field, and become virtually unstoppable unless they meet an overwhelming force or a similar group of team-oriented players with more skill, better reflexes, and/or luck.

[Forsaken One]

It actually does make it a tactic. You can either solo it with your super-armour and God-gun, or you can team up with people and work together to defeat super-armoured God-gun wielding one man armies.


teamwork is not a tactic, it should be a "necessity".


Yes, you're absolutely right that a solo twitch-gamer can throw off those team-oriented players.
that's a game that rewards stupidity and physical ability over having a brain or the ability to think whats-so-ever, which hopefully will be avoided.
---
When I talk about thought being needed I'm not talking about things like teamwork that even a mentally challenged kid that lives in a bubble would understand. I'm talking about in-depth. The ability to win a firefight purely by playing mind games, useing MacGyver level resourcefulness, and rewarding overall being able to think fast even while moving slow.

[BuzzCutPsycho]

When I hear "e-sports" I laugh. Those have no place in MMO games and should never be taken into consideration when making one.

You lose a lot of flavor and fun when you try and turn your game into an e-sport. Learn from WoW and how abysmal a failure their arena was.

[Forsaken One]

When I hear "e-sports" I laugh. Those have no place in MMO games and should never be taken into consideration when making one.

You lose a lot of flavor and fun when you try and turn your game into an e-sport.


I have to wholeheartedly agree with this. I'd like to point out how a recent game that's come out only a few years ago turned into shit, called League of Legends.
This game was most likely the best Dota style game you would ever play back in beta and after release. People knew how to play fully thinking wise, stealth chars like Twitch and Eve weren't seen as overpowered, healing wasn't seen as overpowered, and overall being one of the top 500 on the list of elo was something to be proud of.
-Also when something was overpowered it was. (Jax dodging towers and TF AoE gold card to name a few.)

Then came the infestation of E-sports into League of Legends. As soon as Ranked mode entered suddenly everyone forgot how to counter champs do to banning. Skill is now about throwing "skillshots" which is a joke and overall the game is a shitty shadow of its former glory. Also a lot of people who knew the game before Ranked laughs at the top ranked elo. yeah duh they are there, they ban who they can't counter instead of learning to play for real. Its still a good game but if that E-sport shit hadn't infested it oh where it could be now.

A different game, but it shows a story of what E-sports does to games.

[Gandhi]

and this fact remains... ps1 didnt make it... cod has.. bf has.... though there is a niche with us 200 or so players... they have to build this game for the market, not us.
Of course PS2 needs to be more modern, but that's a pretty poor comparison. There's something COD and BF had that PS1 didn't: Marketing. I'd wager that's easily the number one reason why it never caught on, nobody knew about it.

[Forsaken One]

Of course PS2 needs to be more modern, but that's a pretty poor comparison. There's something COD and BF had that PS1 didn't: Marketing. I'd wager that's easily the number one reason why it never caught on, nobody knew about it.

I agree with this, also twitch has nothing to do with being modern. The Left 4 Dead games don't really have twitch. What about the ghost recon and ArmA style games? There are many Shooters that don't have twitch yet do well. Hell people are still playing games like Swat 4, get it and hop on and even at midnight on whats a dead day for other games you'll find maybe 1-2 versus servers full and a whole bunch of co-op games full.
Top it all off you need to load each match for like 5 minutes do to how old the scripting is yet its still getting played that much!

[NapalmEnima]

Of course PS2 needs to be more modern, but that's a pretty poor comparison. There's something COD and BF had that PS1 didn't: Marketing. I'd wager that's easily the number one reason why it never caught on, nobody knew about it.

I'd say PS's biggest problem was its system requirements. Back in the day, few machines could handle PlanetSide. Broadband connections weren't anywhere near as common as they are now.

That and BFRs. :doh:

[Draep]

Does the term "twitch gamer" have me scared? Of course not you pussy.

[CutterJohn]

"lulz muscle memory means I auto win lulz"

I find it humorous you spend several paragraphs making your case that your preferred style of FPS is good and deserves recognition, only to end with this choice little tidbit.

Perhaps you should show some respect to others if you want them to respect you.

But the irony was delicious. :lol:

[Furret]

Everyone seems to think that a game can either rely on physical reflexes or mental reflexes to be good at it. Why not a mix of both?

The planetside community seems to think that professional gamers are glorified apes whose only attributes are quick reflexes and good eyesight. Having come close to playing professionally, I know it takes more than good aim to win (aim was actually the reason I didn't make it). Even in games like MW2, you have to know HOW to move around the map, and know where your enemies were so you could engage the enemies one at a time, instead of running into them all at once.

I don't see any reason why we shouldn't expect to see PlanetSide 2 as a mix of both; tactics are important, but at the end of the day it comes down to who can put more bullets in the other guy as fast as possible.

[Forsaken One]

Everyone seems to think that a game can either rely on physical reflexes or mental reflexes to be good at it. Why not a mix of both?

The planetside community seems to think that professional gamers are glorified apes whose only attributes are quick reflexes and good eyesight. Having come close to playing professionally, I know it takes more than good aim to win (aim was actually the reason I didn't make it). Even in games like MW2, you have to know HOW to move around the map, and know where your enemies were so you could engage the enemies one at a time, instead of running into them all at once.

I don't see any reason why we shouldn't expect to see PlanetSide 2 as a mix of both; tactics are important, but at the end of the day it comes down to who can put more bullets in the other guy as fast as possible.


Because its very, VERY hard to translate both into a game at once and games that have tried it tend to fail hard.

Thinking gamers want lots of gadgets and stuff to "mind rape" the enemy, this can tend to fall under lots of things Twitch gamers would find cheap and make them rage quit. Thinking gamers also enjoy beating a enemy with pure thought, maybe a cleverly laid trap, bait, or something as such without ever needing to use reflex's.

Twitch gamers just want to be able to use reflex's to kill. often enjoy abusing exploits if it can be "controlled" (things such as strafe jumping.) and calling it skill yet thinking gamers would want non of this and feel insulted by the game itself if it was programed so that "glorified apes" had the advantage over the Thinkers because they had high reflex's.

To put the difference into another type of game.

The controversial char in the game Defense of the Ancients called :Techies

Techies is a char who's whole idea is based around baiting, mind games, clever traps, denying and even counter killing the enemy through planing. This char was made for Thinkers, planers, and strategists.
This is one char in the whole game that was made for Thinkers and guess what? The idea of them even existing cause's unending rage to all the skillshoters/twitchers/etc.

You just can't have both. You try and you piss both off.

[Accuser]

Everyone seems to think that a game can either rely on physical reflexes or mental reflexes to be good at it. Why not a mix of both?

In Bad Company 2, a sniper in a ghillie suit sitting in a bush is -very- difficult to see if he's still and not shooting. So on many occasions I've been able to sit still while a squad marched past me, only to kill all of them once their backs were to me. Low TTK doesn't mean no tactics.

As long as PS2 prevents goofy exploits (Taliban strafing, jumping like an idiot, etc) twitch/low-TTK will be fine.

[Rbstr]

Tactics, having strategy, proper equipment selection and good teamwork are all important things.
But being able to aim faster than the other guy is important as well. Because they can have all the other things as well. At the end of the day, all of these things only require practice to obtain.

There really isn't much to it...Sure L4D is a bit slower in some regards...but if you consistently brain zombies with good aim and know good strategy you're much better off than one or the other. To say having great reflexes and simply mowing down a dozen zombies without missing a shot is somehow a less worthy solution than luring them into fire or blowing up a container is just silly.

An FPS is, fundamentally, a game that requires motor skills. If you're better at those you're better at the game.
If you remove physical ability parts from an FPS you're left with an RPG...We already have plenty of good MMORPGs to play. If you can't deal with some people being better at aiming than you, and sometimes losing because of it, I suggest you play one of those instead. Too bad there's nothing turn-based, I know of, you could take years to select your target then!

[FIREk]

I'm under the impression that some of you are trying to promote this "Glorious PS1 Master Race" - the so-called "thinking gamers", only to compare it with an, apparently mindless and inferior, breed of "twitch gamers". Is there a point to creating such divisions, let alone a whole new kind of gamers, other than to arbitrarily shove oneself into the conveniently superior group and feel a bit better? :P

More to the point, though, unless you're physically impaired in some way, you really don't need twitch madskillz to compete with someone with superior reflexes and motor skills.
This is especially relevant in PlanetSide, which is a relatively static game. This will likely translate to PS2, so an enemy will be unlikely to suddenly appear from an unexpected location (even considering jump troops), requiring that you do a quick, wide turn and shoot him before he kills you, which is quite skill-dependent.
Therefore, if you keep your crosshairs roughly where you believe the enemy will be coming from (usually only one direction) you're halfway towards being a decent FPS gamer.
Also, with a relatively long TTK (slower than BFBC2 is a LONG TIME to kill someone;)) the difference between "decent" and "good" gets pretty blurred. Add vehicles and MAXes to the mix and suddently the blurring becomes much more pronounced. ;)
I'm therefore pretty sure that by "twitch gamer", Matt Higby meant little more than simply "a gamer that can aim", as opposed to casuals, or gamers that find themselves more at home in a classic MMORPG with quickslots, hotkeys etc.

I don't really see a need to panic. If any of you actually suck at FPS games (or never tried playing a proper one, and therefore believe that you will suck), you might find that, as you play the faster, more modern PS2, you will start sucking less.
You can't gain any skill playing a slow-motion dinosaur like PS1, so I can't blame any of you for being paranoid. But if you find yourself unable to adapt to PS2's faster gameplay in a year or so, and learn new things, you should rethink which imaginary group of gamers is truly the superior one. ;)

[Bags]

I'm under the impression that some of you are trying to promote this "PS1 Master Race" - the so-called "thinking gamers", only to compare it with an, apparently mindless and inferior, breed of "twitch gamers".

http://i.imgur.com/l0my0.jpg

[FIREk]

http://i.imgur.com/l0my0.jpg

It looks like it took 500 hours in Paint to make - I appreciate this. ;) The Glorious PC Master Race image is probably Yahtzee's biggest contribution to gaming. :)

Also, edited my first post with Glorious.

[Forsaken One]

I'm under the impression that some of you are trying to promote this "PS1 Master Race" - the so-called "thinking gamers", only to compare it with an, apparently mindless and inferior, breed of "twitch gamers".


This is nothing new in the least. Its gone farther back then the Rainbow Sixers(thinkers) Vs Quakers (twitchers.) days.

you should rethink which imaginary group of gamers is truly the superior one. ;)

See the funny thing about this is one is only better because of crapy coding, exploits that should have been fixed weren't, bad and outdated programing, and not compensating for the fact the guy is supposed to be a trained soldier and should have the basics down without user input.

while if any of this crap was real/a sim of how stuff really works the mentally challenged people would be the first to die instead while the people with Higher level thinking skills would be winning.

[Bags]

My thoughts on twitch gaming:

Pinkie Pie - twitcha twitch 2 - YouTube

[FIREk]

When comparing this to real life, I strongly believe that training is vastly superior to mental acumen when it comes to warfare. All the IQ and knowledge in the world won't count for squat if you haven't spent hundreds of hours drilling how to use cover, breach and clear a room, and do other stuff designed to lengthen your lifespan and shorten the other guy's one in turn. ;)

[Forsaken One]

When comparing this to real life, I strongly believe that training is vastly superior to mental acumen when it comes to warfare. All the IQ and knowledge in the world won't count for squat if you haven't spent hundreds of hours drilling how to use cover, breach and clear a room, and do other stuff designed to lengthen your lifespan and shorten the other guy's one in turn. ;)

Is that so? So while the low IQ people are doing all this training, the fact that the high IQ people will make a bomb and blow all the low IQ people up before they can even complete their training would mean little?

[CutterJohn]

I'm curious why you think people like the quake players are dumb, and the people in rainbow 6 are smart. Both games have good players and bad, and in both games the really good players have spent a long time learning and practicing the rules of the game to maximize their advantage.

You're all at the low end of the totem pole for strategy anyway, well below RTS and turn based players.

[Wahooo]

@ Forsaken

After reading through some of your posts today, i've come to the conclusion you are very likely not as smart as you'd like to think you are.

Reflexes/coordination and intelligence are not mutually exlusive. Just because you do not have reflexes or coordination does not make you, by default smarter. It just makes you uncoordinated and slow. Enjoying a slow game that makes you think does not make you more intelligent than others who enjoy twitch games. It just means you like to take time to think about things that may or may not need much thought.

In the same way Twitch play and Tactics are not mutually exclusive, and adding a tactical benifit to twitch play is part of what makes PS special.

Techies, traps and the like encite nerd rage in many FPS type games simply because they slow the game down. Most people who want to play a shooter want to shoot, even if they are not very twitchy or good at the twitch part of the game, what they want to do is aim-point-click kill. It is not to say those who hate those "techie" type elements are less capable of the strategy or that they for some reason are less intelligent than those who enjoy it. It is simply those gaming elements hinder and slow down the ability to enjoy the part of the game where you aim and shoot.

Planetside is many things and the diversity of combat roles is a big part of what makes it special. At its core however, it is an FPS. The core mechanic of an FPS is point-shoot-kill so yes to appeal to a wide market, to be successful one thing PS2 will need to do different than PS1 is reduce (slightly) TTK of the weapons and build the FPS elements in a more twitch based fashion.

[Graywolves]

I'm all for the twitch gameplay as long as it doesn't drive the game. Like as long as someone can't run around quick-scoping/no-scoping OSOK on everyone then it's cool imo. I love those clutch moments and they make great stories.

I just don't want to see 1 NC taking out a squad of TR in a tower....




Twitch gameplay aspects don't eliminate teamwork or intelligent play. TBH it's really just part of the very simple and universal aiming mechanic in all FPS games. Perhaps combined with movement too.


P.S. - Has anyone noticed how in alot of these FPS games they're not actually shooting at the guy?

[Brusi]

In a game with as much scope as Planetside 2, i really doubt that gamers that don't play half an hour of counter-stike in the morning as part of their physical fitness regime will be resigned to doing ANT runs ;p

The more aspects of mastery that you include in the game, the longer people will play it and the more people it will attract. If different apsects of real skill make someone a fantastic cloaker, combat engineer, fighter pilot, bomber pilot, driver, gunner, commander, grunt, light assault, then i say... BRING IT ON!

If someone can beat you in chess, and can beat you in basketball, then it kinda makes sense that they should beat you in chessketball.


The controversial char in the game Defense of the Ancients called :Techies

Techies is a char who's whole idea is based around baiting, mind games, clever traps, denying and even counter killing the enemy through planing. This char was made for Thinkers, planers, and strategists.
This is one char in the whole game that was made for Thinkers and guess what? The idea of them even existing cause's unending rage to all the skillshoters/twitchers/etc.

You just can't have both. You try and you piss both off.

If you have both, then the players who possess both abilities (and playing a class which rewards both) may become unkillable to both "types" of players, those lacking clever skills and those lacking twitch skills. i.e. Kinda like your example, a good robo with twitch skills in Global Agenda really dominated.

[Draep]

You realize by typing essay long posts, you're giving OP some legitimacy.

[Brusi]

IP.S. - Has anyone noticed how in alot of these FPS games they're not actually shooting at the guy?

You mean due to lag/leading?

[Forsaken One]

personal attacks + fluff afterwards

I'm just going to ignore the first part and move on to the fluff.

At the Techie point, fact is those very same things are what make games require thinking. Instead of zerging you have to think and plan what could be around the next corner, or always think what to do if you get attacked by a stealther, watch for explosives that might be planted or hidden and you have to think if you should pull the trigger. (what if it was a enemy non combatant? or had a vest covered in explosives and you were too close or something? ]

Why do people assume that Twitch gaming is modern? BF2142 isn't all that twitch. (last decent BF game. ) Is it because the kinda twitchy games (Cod, etc.} have to come out every year just to keep their pops while games like Swat 4 still keep a pretty decent player base?
You know whats modern? programing and game engines that should be at the level to get rid of the crap older games had to deal with just because they didn't have the tech to get rid of it or compensate for.

a good robo with twitch skills in Global Agenda really dominated.

Ah, I so remember the beta of that game, when it was fun. Then they made cloakers stupid (they used to be a master of mindgames and the decoy was a blast.) and make robos stupid. [ I remember when you didn't have to be stuck in a wall with your turrets up your rear because they didn't suck that hard.] all for the sake of twitch skill, sigh.

If anything I would like a class or two based purely on offensive Thinkers. (decently powerfull] traps, turrets, maybe a tactical grenade launcher {like flash bangs and emps.] throwable and stackable c4 and would happily trade a gun for the ability of stealth. Pure mind games with a dash of screwing enemy's up and sabotage without ever needing to fire a gun.

[XPquant]

Forsaken, your just sad you can't win in competitive games, go back to boardgames. Leave planetside to the people who can think and shoot. Your whining makes it all the more clear why need skill based combat in PS2 if for nothing else then to scare pussies like you.

I would own you in any game of your choosing because i don't limit myself to labels.

[Hamma]

Please be constructive when posting and refrain from personal attacks.

[BuzzCutPsycho]

I find the talk of PlanetSide's "skill" based combat to be rather humorous considering how terrible it was at launch and well into the game's first year. Do you forget that it was built upon the EverQuest engine? Did you all suddenly forget all of the problems with combat that came as a result of said engine? Do you forget the insane amount of warping, inconsistent hit detection, and lack of head shots? Where "good" players would abuse something simple as strafing to try and get their characters to warp as a result of terrible netcode?

PlanetSide's strong point was never it's small scale infantry fighting gameplay. There were games out at that time that handled it much better. In my opinion the real hit on PlanetSide was the teamwork and large scale battles. Quite frankly I find this talk of e-sports and hyper competitive twitch gaming to be a joke when it is applied to PlanetSide and honestly a bit disturbing when applied to PlanetSide 2.

That being said I did enjoy the pacing of PlanetSide, minus the surgile which was eventually fixed. I couldn't care less about headshots so long as the combat is smooth, responsive, and accurate.

[basti]

I'm all for the twitch gameplay as long as it doesn't drive the game. Like as long as someone can't run around quick-scoping/no-scoping OSOK on everyone then it's cool imo. I love those clutch moments and they make great stories.

I just don't want to see 1 NC taking out a squad of TR in a tower....



You didnt play planetside, did you?

I have seen several times that a single guy took out up to a squad of enemys. How he did that? Skill, and a brain.

You guys are afraid that a single guy could drop on a tower and headshot a bunch of enemys before they could react. Well, that wont be the case. But that one guy could take out a few guys if he aims right, and if he isnt just running into all of them at the same time. Oh, and if the squad of enemys is a bunch of idiots who dont use cover, have no sense of teamwork, and cant handle their aiming. Means they arent twitch nor thinking players, they are plain simple idiots.


Every FPS requires thinking, even COD. Heck, i played COD MW2 for quite a while, always the hardcore mode (thats the one with 2 shot kills and 1 shot headshots), and i figured two thinks: If i dont care about tactics and just run around, im food for everyone, even the guy who cant aim for shit and used other means. But if i actually think about what im doing, or even play with a few pals in a team, i rock, extremly, and nothing can stop me and my guys. Even the guy who sucks at aiming has a part. He wont run in guns blazing and kill 5 guys by himself, but heck, he will shoot like the rest of the team on the target, and takes it down eventually.



You really dont need to worry guys. If Planetside 2 turns turns out to be 2 fast paced and rewards aim much more than teamwork, them im personally leading the biggest rage ever seen in the history of games, because i just dont want that, as much as you dont want that.

[Sirisian]

I'm not too worried. I mean the old Planetside was twitchy during CQC. I'll need to see how it's actually implemented in the end. My only problem would be if I can't tactically move around with a squad. That is moving slowly and deliberately around terrain and through bases with time to heal and revive fallen people.

I've already discussed my ideal system. Long TTKs where it takes more than one person to kill a player quickly and when a single person kills someone they should only have a few rounds left in a magazine. Always bothered me in games when it only took a few rounds to kill someone since it speeds up the battle immensely and leads to killstreak gameplay. You go from one kill to the next. If you can imagine moving into a corridor having two people shoot and kill an enemy then reloading while other squadmates move forward. Basically the idea of a single person jumping into a hallway and killing another player in less than a second would result in two people shooting them and killing them and the person they were fighting would just be damaged.

Yeah I get what you're thinking "this destroys any chance of having solo play", but it still allows snipers and cloakers to exist in the game. A one on one battle would still be a one on one battle. It just wouldn't be one where you could take a few easy shots at someone behind a tree. You might hit them and they'd move to where you can't get a clean shot. This promotes using grenades tactically or pulling a special assault weapon. If they're running at you and you're behind cover you'd still get a rather "quick" kill.

See this system allows for twitch based combat since you still need to land shots. It just smooths out the skill level. You might get a kill, but you're not gunning down a whole platoon while sitting behind a rock. You might kill one or two but they'd overwhelm your position.


You guys are afraid that a single guy could drop on a tower and headshot a bunch of enemys before they could react.
My fear is he'd do that in under a few seconds. I prefer more tactical shooting. Like throwing a grenade into the middle of them then shooting at then and pulling back or luring them outside. Just running in and headshotting them without reloading is kind of lame gameplay for me personally.

Also I'd prefer if that was 2 or more people dropping onto the tower working together. Long reload times are one of my favorite things since it makes people vulnerable.

[Furret]

Every FPS requires thinking, even COD. Heck, i played COD MW2 for quite a while, always the hardcore mode (thats the one with 2 shot kills and 1 shot headshots), and i figured two thinks: If i dont care about tactics and just run around, im food for everyone, even the guy who cant aim for shit and used other means. But if i actually think about what im doing, or even play with a few pals in a team, i rock, extremly, and nothing can stop me and my guys. Even the guy who sucks at aiming has a part. He wont run in guns blazing and kill 5 guys by himself, but heck, he will shoot like the rest of the team on the target, and takes it down eventually.

PC? What was your name?

and suddently the blurring becomes much more pronounced. ;)

I lol'd

When comparing this to real life, I strongly believe that training is vastly superior to mental acumen when it comes to warfare. All the IQ and knowledge in the world won't count for squat if you haven't spent hundreds of hours drilling how to use cover, breach and clear a room, and do other stuff designed to lengthen your lifespan and shorten the other guy's one in turn. ;)
Is that so? So while the low IQ people are doing all this training, the fact that the high IQ people will make a bomb and blow all the low IQ people up before they can even complete their training would mean little?

And this is where I think you can have both in a game.

Example: Tower 1v1 between "Thinker" and "Twitcher"

If Thinker and Twitcher run at each other with REXO and MCGs, Twitcher wins 90% of the time because he's a better shot than Thinker.

If Thinker plants a boomer at the top of the stairs and baits Twitcher into the trap, Thinker wins 90% of the time because Twitcher was too greedy.

The good players are the ones that can beat Twitcher in a 1v1, but are smart enough to throw the jammer up the stairs before finishing off Thinker.

[XPquant]

To add more substance to my previous post which was entirely in response to forsaken one introducing no point and talking down to people for being monkeys.

The idea of not rewarding people with the ability to track a target and shoot it in a first person shooter game is absurd. Your entire argument is based around engine limitations of the first planetside. This is total war, to penalize quality players to even out the playing field defeats the purpose of the game.

As an outfit leader and a 'thinker' confronted with squads of higher caliber troops you either overcome your strategic and tactical limitations and dedicate your resources to exploiting the flaws of the enemy. A skilled 'twitch' gamer has to see who he is shooting to shoot them. To me this is a modernization of the entire concept of planetside not a deviation from it because it adds even deeper play. So what if i have 4 squads of line infantry and 1 squad of elite infantry now i having a fixing and crushing force no matter what they have, the winner will be decided by terrain, timing and application of force. That's just a commanders perspective.

In the front lines of battle in planetside there were so many times my attacks were thwarted because of cheap tricks and milking game mechanics. It didn't matter i was faster because i coulden't kill anyone quickly enough to make a difference. I hated the damage system in planetside, there was no such thing as aim, precision or skill. I was penalized for trying to sieze the initiative in one on one combat and that frustrated me.

In summary, making shots count and lives worth something could never be a bad thing in a game that promotes total strategic and tactical warfare. The game mechanics being described to me here in this thread sound more like eve, i don't want to have to break out a calculator to play the game. I want to pick up a gun and shoot you in the face.

[cellinaire]

Seen so many "Anyone else scared about this, too ?" thread in the last 2+ years hehe.
I know you guys and gals care so much about this game and really want PS2 to succeed, but oh well the beta is still a long way off. 3-year development plan is -also- still a long way off I guess. I definitely don't mean not to express your concerns, but it's a bit early to be serious about these matters. =)

[Haro]

I'm not sure why you're worried. Planetside one was fairly twitchy (and not just because of the lag *rimshot*)

Also, I think (and I know you said not to say this, but tough) the vast majority of games require some "twitch" skills, as in reflexes, muscle memory, and fine-motor skills. They are necessary for the interface with any real-time game. Put a controller in the hands of someone who has never played before and they usually will not be good at anything, because it's a function they aren't used to. Even between different genres of games, the muscle memory and reflexes are different. The games you list have a slower pace and encourage more tactical thought, but they still require you to actively react and properly function in your environment. This requires physical practice, though it may not seem like that to you since you are probably used to it.

But this is a bit of a moot point, moving on.

I think Planetside is more of a twitch game than Swat or Rainbow six. It's based on a very different premise, one of respawning, long ttk, and lack of realism. And better yet, even if individual gameplay is more twitch oriented, there is still a tremendous strategic and tactical basis behind all of that, in the very nature of the game. You need to secure objectives, work in coordination with a team made up of varied elements. It's almost impossible for planetside not to have a thinking man's element to it.

I'd prefer the game to be faster paced now. Not Call of Duty, but more like Halo, with some one shot kills available in highly specialized cases, but most of the time kills requiring anywhere from 7-20 hits. I think that Halo and Planetside have a lot in common in terms of how gameplay works (longer ttk, open areas, more emphasis on objectives, and of course, vehicles) so I think that this could be expanded. Besides, few people actually have legitimate claims to poor elements of halo gameplay. It's been solid for a decade now.

I think the OP needs to be less provincial in how they view "twitch" games. Seems like all he conjures up are thoughts of quake and a stereotype of call of duty. While this is understandable, as these games are staples of the fps genre, it's not what a site like RPS is comparing the game to.

[Kalbuth]

Hard LOL @ the "superior Thinkers" vs "stupid Twitchers" theory.
Funny too how answers to this theory are labeled as personal attacks when the very theory at hand is in fact a personal attack to anyone who dares thinking that being able to aim is important in a First Person Shooter.

It's not like "Shooting" was not the central concept of a First Person Shooter.
You can outsmart your opponent all day in a FPS, if you're going to aim at the rock behind him instead of the guy itself, you're going to lose, in a FPS.
Perhaps not in a First Person Outsmarter, but we are talking here about a First Person .... Shooter
If you don't like the central concept of a FPS, perhaps you should play something else. Not ask that your target should be immobile for you to aim easier at it, for example.

Thinking is one part of the fight
Executing is another part.
You must do both to succeed.

Look, I'm a simulation guy by roots, I started online gaming on Falcon 4, my biggest game ever is Operation Flashpoint, I modded for it, I learned everything I could about realism technicals behind it, etc...
I'm slow, I aim poorly in FPS in general, I'm generally better at pre-planning and preparation, etc... And I don't come here insulting everyone who is better than me at aiming and moving, implying they are stupid just because they use their mouse better than I do.

Since my early days on sim games, I've played a bit of more twitchy FPS, by following friends I had known from PS1, things like BF, ET:QW, and I discovered other types of players. I'll certainly not say they are dumb, they plan and tacs as much as everyone else, and on top of it, they do it faster, and live while in combat. Besides, they are often better at communicating than slower, more sim oriented FPS players. They rehearse their drills, etc...
Of course, you'll find here a good share of stupid people, like in every community.
And they share a common trait with many players of every game community I know : they hate change. Thus the heavy restrictions you often find on e-sports version of mods for many games.

But spouting hate at these guys is not going to help your case, tbh.

If a twitch player get killed by a smarter guy using any kind of advantage over him, he simply should train more in planning and game mechanisms
If a smart player outsmart his opponent but gets killed in the final confrontation, he should spend a little bit of time in perfecting his movement and aiming. It's not hard, and it's certainly not making him any dumber.

Labelling twitch players as brainless monkeys is simply BS, no more, no less

[Heaven]

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/09/09/dancing-to-different-beats-planetside-2/

The term Twitch gamer was thrown around a bit in one of the last "talks with a dev" and it has me a bit worried. Even more so that it fell under "If you don't want to be a twitch gamer you can f off and play a non combatant" which was how a "thought gamer" like me took it as.

I have to admit to me muscle memory to play a game well is an unneeded artificial game lengthener and annoyance to me. It does nothing but make a game unfun but for those who play less, require little to no brain power, rewards physical over intellect, and just overall makes me question about why a human would bother with it other then to feel somehow superior in a game made for the intellectually challenged.

Before anyone says anything about twitch is needed in a fps, may I remind them of some true FPS games. Rainbow Six, Swat 4, even PS1 to a point. Hell even Rainbow Six Vegas 1 wasn't very twitchy. Those games rewarded thought and teamwork over "lulz muscle memory means I auto win lulz" and would be so awesome to see in PS2.

I would love your thoughts on the matter AND maybe some posts from a dev on the issue.

Scare? Nah its only a game. But I guess the more you play it the better you will get...

[Draep]

If anything I would like a class or two based purely on offensive Thinkers. (decently powerfull] traps, turrets, maybe a tactical grenade launcher {like flash bangs and emps.] throwable and stackable c4 and would happily trade a gun for the ability of stealth. Pure mind games with a dash of screwing enemy's up and sabotage without ever needing to fire a gun.

Sounds like you should play a cloaker.

[FriendlyFire]

I've played FPS games competitively (ladders, etc) and the things that are the most frustrating (in PS1) to deal with are long TTKs and poor weapon balancing.

I like what I have heard from PS2 so far.

[Graywolves]

I never concidered aiming a skill in FPS. It is but it's such a basic mechanic that every FPS gamer has exercised constantly in every game they played.

It's just muscle memory, it comes with gameplay/practice. like shooting hoops.

[Infektion]

Twitch doesn't frighten me at all... If anything, I believe it'll be like CS or DoD where when a match isn't a total fragfest, it's won by strategy and *SOMETIMES* encounter a "twitch" event where you are 1v1 or 1v2. I'm most certain Planetside will prevail strategic as opposed to thousand man army twitch frag fests... though, those will be fun on occasion. It can't be all work man, we gotta have fun too sometimes.

P.S. I hope it's not like Quake or UT. Fun but gets boring quickly.

[SgtMAD]

I love all the angst and hairpulling with all this talk about strategies and tactics vs. twitch guys

I have played this game for 8 years,have multiple CR5s on all empires and have yet to run into all these armchair Pattons in the game.

twitch gamers don't scare me,(I recruit them) and that also goes for damn near all of the tactical geniuses in this thread too,its like you never played the game.

I could explain how twitch gamers are perfect for this game but why should I pontificate on crap that I would rather use against you in game.

speed kills in the modern battlefield,why would that be any different in a game like this?

its like ppl are saying twitch gamers can't use tactics,which is a false premise at its best because there is plenty of evidence refuting that argument.

[ikon]

a fps requiring good aim?

what blasphemy

[SgtMAD]

a fps requiring good aim?

what blasphemy

AMEN

[Wahooo]

At the Techie point, fact is those very same things are what make games require thinking. Instead of zerging you have to think and plan what could be around the next corner, or always think what to do if you get attacked by a stealther, watch for explosives that might be planted or hidden and you have to think if you should pull the trigger. (what if it was a enemy non combatant? or had a vest covered in explosives and you were too close or something?

No. Those are not the only things that make games require thinking. There IS tactics and thinking involved in all parts of an FPS, including the twitch play and even zerging. The difference is, as I stated and you ignored, that explosives, like boomers and traps simply slow the game down because it is not a target to go shoot it is somthing that makes you stop and use another device or method to deal with.

Simply being able to shoot and get shot at does not preclude thinking. Being aware of the number of enemies, being aware of the weapons they have, being aware of your surroundings all play into how you approach them. IE tactics. Being better at aiming and quicker at shooting the correct target simply makes employing those tactics easier.

[Crator]

I never concidered aiming a skill in FPS. It is but it's such a basic mechanic that every FPS gamer has exercised constantly in every game they played.

It's just muscle memory, it comes with gameplay/practice. like shooting hoops.

Pretty sure that's the definition of skill:

skill (skl)
n.
1. Proficiency, facility, or dexterity that is acquired or developed through training or experience. See Synonyms at ability.
2.
a. An art, trade, or technique, particularly one requiring use of the hands or body.
b. A developed talent or ability: writing skills.

[Effective]

Whenever I see people complain about skill/twitch gaming/1 guy running over a team of players. I can only facepalm over the stupidity of it. If you and your squad/outfit/friends, die to 1 guy you died for a reason, because you can't be asked to take the time to learn how to properly aim/use whatever weapon you were using or how to properly play a game.

There are 3 types of skilled gamers.

You have the ones who have great aiming ability, they always win the straight up fight.
You have ones who have great situational awareness, map knowledge.
You have ones who have both of those.

The first 2 are equally important to the success of a skilled gamer. Removing aiming ability as a factor because people are to lazy to adjust their mouse sensitivity is dumb.

[Bags]

Whenever I see people complain about skill/twitch gaming/1 guy running over a team of players. I can only facepalm over the stupidity of it. If you and your squad/outfit/friends, die to 1 guy you died for a reason, because you can't be asked to take the time to learn how to properly aim/use whatever weapon you were using or how to properly play a game.

There are 3 types of skilled gamers.

You have the ones who have great aiming ability, they always win the straight up fight.
You have ones who have great situational awareness, map knowledge.
You have ones who have both of those.

The first 2 are equally important to the success of a skilled gamer. Removing aiming ability as a factor because people are to lazy to adjust their mouse sensitivity is dumb.

What about the videos I posted early on of some guy at MLG 1v4ing and 1v3ing?

[Sirisian]

speed kills in the modern battlefield,why would that be any different in a game like this?

its like ppl are saying twitch gamers can't use tactics,which is a false premise at its best because there is plenty of evidence refuting that argument.
I think the disagreement stems from speed detracting from the gameplay. It's fine if a player can put their cursor on a player half a second faster than another player. The decision comes though, should that action alone be rewarded with the kill or should it come down to more than that. Obviously you can have both twitch gameplay, that focuses on fast reflexes, while still preserving a level of balance in the game.

The easiest way to allow that is for long TTKs and slow reloading times (Something SOE nailed in the original). It forces players to aim well (get headshots when they can) but it limits a players ability to go from one kill to the next in a matter of a second. It also allows a response by the player being attacked. It still rewards players that have trained for hours playing the game but it also opens up more tactical gameplay. Suddenly running into a room and going for headshots isn't the preferred choice. You quickly realize that if you want to kill two people at a time it's not about how fast you can strafe. It comes down to "do I have the right gun/sidearm/grenades/etc" to pull this off.

This also makes ranged combat a lot more interesting when bullets are going 50 meters or more. It requires precise aiming and leading to land more than 3 bullets on a target making it a valid tactic to move forward running from tree to tree since there isn't that "if one person sees me I'm dead" mentality. Sure you might take damage but it's not going to send you back to the respawn just for trying to get a better firing angle.

Not to mention the more obvious staying alive mentality with upgrades. If I have an upgrade that cost resources I don't want to spawn then die in 10 seconds. Someone should really earn the kill by showing they've been able to land a decent number of shots accurately meaning they controlled their CoF. For instance, in Planetside you're often fairly certain when you were killed from range that the person hitting you wasn't just spraying and praying.

As an example. Say I'm behind a tree and a player comes running up to start shooting at me. He might hit me a few times and I'd move to put the tree between him and I and someone else might shoot and kill him. He isn't rewarded with a kill for running out guns blazing by himself in that situation. It requires a little bit more planning.

A big part of this is a gun's range. Choosing a gun that's better at further ranges than a harder hitting closer range gun. However, these kinds of mechanics aren't reserved to just higher TTK gameplay since they can work for any game speed. While it might be unintuitive or confusing for a normal FPS player that's used to raycasted bullets it opens up many design decisions for weapons. I personally enjoy leading a target and putting a few rounds into the enemy from a far distance before they fall. Gives them a chance to react and makes each experience point feel like it was earned. (Especially true when multiple people target a single person and share the experience).

[Draep]

Yooo, OP hasn't even posted in like 3 pages, calm down guys lol

[FriendlyFire]

snip

As an example. Say I'm behind a tree and a player comes running up to start shooting at me. He might hit me a few times and I'd move to put the tree between him and I and someone else might shoot and kill him. He isn't rewarded with a kill for running out guns blazing by himself in that situation. It requires a little bit more planning.
/snip


Running at someone guns blazing can be a tactic and strategy, just not in PS1. i.e. A defender running in to a fight, shooting a target in the head with a shot gun at point blank range, then quickly moving behind enemy lines, slowing an attack down. "He might hit me a few times," is too many times, in PS1.

[FIREk]

<snip>

Double-posted due to misuse of the Back button. Please delete. ;)

[FIREk]

(a lot of text;))

WHAT.

So basically you're enjoying PS1's ridiculously slow gameplay, one that lets you casually prance from tree to tree, ignoring fire because you can just heal up behind the next tree, and call that interesting and a tactic? In a game like PS2, with bullet ballistics and modern-but-still-not-so-fast TTK, if someone kills you with 4-5 shots at 50 meters, while you were running, bitch earned the kill, and you deserved to get killed for being incompetent. ;)

If you don't like dying and losing precious, resource-dependent stuff, don't get killed, regardless of the TTK, or wait for a medic to pick you up. If you don't have the perfect weapons for the situation, run towards friendlies or use skill to turn the situation to your advantage - use cover to isolate enemies and turn a bad scenario into a decent one.
Longer TTK games don't promote tactics, thinking, or whatever. They're just a crutch for people who think they suck and can't be bothered to get better at playing the game.
My friend from work has got amazing situational/map awareness skills and decent aim, yet he believes he's a bad FPS gamer. Despite his beliefs, he's actually very good. When APB's TTK got dropped suddenly shortly before the game die, he was pretty scared, but never gave up and he adapted pretty quickly.
I'm sure that, once you start playing a proper FPS, you'll discover that you're doing pretty well, too. :)

I'm an in-your-face shotgun player in most games, that means I need to think ahead, think fast, have both movement skills and a quick, reasonably accurate twitch. Situational awareness is secondary here, as this kind of gameplay style mostly boils down to reacting to the situation immediately around you. Moving from cover to cover and surviving in a proper FPS is what requires skill and thinking ahead - things that aren't really needed in low TTK games.
You need to distract the enemy, do something unexpected, take a longer route behind more cover, maybe throw a grenade or fire some pot shots to send him hiding. Carry smoke grenades or flashbangs to gain a tactical advantage.
You can't just press W and heal up behind some, not necessarily nearest, cover. In a snail-paced game where everyone shoots BBs instead of bullets, there is no room for skill.

Please, buy yourself a copy of BFBC2 (it's not expensive nowadays) so that you know what you're reeling against.
When I first started playing BFBC2 (at that point I didn't have much to play regularly, so I casually played MW1 and Fear Combat, which are very fast games), I was shocked at the long TTK and unusual bullet ballistics. After playing faster games, it was like I was firing rubber bullets (exactly the words I used to describe the game, before I got used to it and began to appreciate the extended TTK).
So BFBC2 is a game with rubber bullets, PS2 is said to be a bit slower, and you guys are panicking about more skilled players mowing you down? ;)

[Lunarchild]

What about the videos I posted early on of some guy at MLG 1v4ing and 1v3ing?

I saw 4x 1v1 in the first video, which is a big difference from 1v4. While he tactically may have been up against 4, those 4 did not go against him at the same time, nor used tactics. The opposing team was not working as a team in that video at all, so I don't see the problem. From the video: The guy was using cover, knowledge of the map and tactical movement to survive. That together with good reflexes made him win that match. Pretty much the same with the other video.

Now the thing to note is that the time to kill is lower than it will be in PlanetSide 2. The game type they're using is Search and Destroy (the Counter Strike game type), which is a real PITA as there is no respawning in between rounds.

Overall I think that people who use tactics and strategies will be better at PlanetSide 2 than those who don't. Someone who can aim quickly might have an advantage over someone who cannot in an equal fight, but using tactics you should prevent such situations anyhow.

[Lunarchild]

On the other hand, I find this thread amusing. Because in the "twitch" games mentioned the reverse happens really.

Take Call of Duty for example: All those twitch people? They hate campers with a passion! You really have 2 extremes: Runners and Campers. Runners are twitchers, they run around the map, dodging bullets and trying to kill people with their knives. Campers are thinkers, they stay in one place, lay a trap for people approaching and try to keep a good overview of their surroundings. Runner vs Camper: Camper wins 9 out of 10 times.

So, I don't think anyone used to PlanetSide has anything to fear from these "Twitch gamers". However, if you go against someone who is good in both twitch and thinking, now you're going to have to start to pay attention ;)

[FIREk]

(...) Campers are thinkers (...)

Campers aren't thinkers. They're just lazy and out for effortless, dull kills. ;)

Seriously, it boils down to placing a claymore (or two) behind a corner (or two), then lying around in Convenient Camping Spot #4, only to get stabbed once someone who knows what they're doing goes to check out CCS#4. Respawn, rinse, repeat, maybe switch to a different Convenient Camping Spot after being farmed for the umpteenth time.

I wouldn't call that a textbook case of "thinking"... It's routine at best. :)

[Lunarchild]

Campers aren't thinkers. They're just lazy and out for effortless, dull kills. ;)

Seriously, it boils down to placing a claymore (or two) behind a corner (or two), then lying around in Convenient Camping Spot #4, only to get stabbed once someone who knows what they're doing goes to check out CCS#4. Respawn, rinse, repeat, maybe switch to a different Convenient Camping Spot after being farmed for the umpteenth time.

I wouldn't call that a textbook case of "thinking"... It's routine at best. :)

That's the textbook case of a bad camper, and one that no-one really cares about because they are easy kills. The ones that are hated are not these, they're the ones that camp for a while, and when they know the coast is clear move to the next spot. There is a lot more tactical and situational awareness involved in a proper camp.

[FIREk]

That's the textbook case of a bad camper, and one that no-one really cares about because they are easy kills. The ones that are hated are not these, they're the ones that camp for a while, and when they know the coast is clear move to the next spot. There is a lot more tactical and situational awareness involved in a proper camp.

Does such a gamer qualify as a camper, though? As the name suggests, a camper would be someone who stays in one place for a long while, typically until they get killed. I think we need a new name for the people you describe. :)

I have yet too notice such gamers, though. If they're too clever to be spotted and killed/farmed, they they're probably not too effective since they move around a lot instead of killing stuff (and thus don't get high on the scoreboard to make me wonder what their trick is). And if they don't kill a lot, why would they be hated? ;)

[Lunarchild]

Does such a gamer qualify as a camper, though? As the name suggests, a camper would be someone who stays in one place for a long while, typically until they get killed. I think we need a new name for the people you describe. :)

I have yet too notice such gamers, though. If they're too clever to be spotted and killed/farmed, they they're probably not too effective since they move around a lot instead of killing stuff (and thus don't get high on the scoreboard to make me wonder what their trick is). And if they don't kill a lot, why would they be hated? ;)

Hrmm, maybe. Maybe I'm not making myself clear enough.

Regardless though, I think we can agree that campers that rack up those kills don't necessarily need nearly as good twitch capacity as for example those runners. Cause that was more or less my point :)

[Sirisian]

Running at someone guns blazing can be a tactic and strategy, just not in PS1. i.e. A defender running in to a fight, shooting a target in the head with a shot gun at point blank range, then quickly moving behind enemy lines, slowing an attack down. "He might hit me a few times," is too many times, in PS1.
A shotgun is a different story. That's what I meant when I was talking about range and how it plays into things. Using a shotgun at close range and headshotting a person would so a lot of damage. I just don't agree with it killing in one or two shots. It just needs to kill faster than a rifle at that range and be generally more effective.

So basically you're enjoying PS1's ridiculously slow gameplay, one that lets you casually prance from tree to tree, ignoring fire because you can just heal up behind the next tree, and call that interesting and a tactic? In a game like PS2, with bullet ballistics and modern-but-still-not-so-fast TTK, if someone kills you with 4-5 shots at 50 meters, while you were running, bitch earned the kill, and you deserved to get killed for being incompetent. ;)
Who mentioned anything about healing behind a tree? You mean if you had a medic following behind you? I agree that would be enjoyable. I didn't find the Planetside gameplay slow. I thought it was the perfect pace for an MMOFPS. You moved at a decent pace (without surge) and people died at a fast enough rate to be enjoyable for myself. One thing I really enjoyed was that I could step into a hallway and launch a decimator at a max without worrying about being killed before I could pull the trigger. The game didn't punish you for doing things like that.

If you don't like dying and losing precious, resource-dependent stuff, don't get killed, regardless of the TTK, or wait for a medic to pick you up. If you don't have the perfect weapons for the situation, run towards friendlies or use skill to turn the situation to your advantage - use cover to isolate enemies and turn a bad scenario into a decent one.
None of what you described has anything to do with the TTK. Relying on a medic purely for reviving is pointless. This is precisely another point that was made a long time ago. You'd end up using the medics to revive a person since they died in a few bullets. Healing them might not even be worth it and repairing their armor is a waste of time since it only takes 2 bullets to destroy (or less according to some people here).
Longer TTK games don't promote tactics, thinking, or whatever. They're just a crutch for people who think they suck and can't be bothered to get better at playing the game.
I'm not sure I'm following you. How does increasing the TTK create a crutch. If you, out of skill, lock onto a target a second faster chances are you'll get the kill no matter the TTK. However this is assuming some kind of perfect flat field 1v1. When you increase the TTK in an FPS with a lot of players it gives the players time to react to the situation as a group. The player being attacked could pull back while others make the push.
I'm sure that, once you start playing a proper FPS, you'll discover that you're doing pretty well, too. :)
Wait, did you just make an assumption about me? That I haven't played every FPS game released? Also "proper" FPS. Classic. :lol:

I will point out that it's a personal preference. It has nothing to do with being good or bad at FPS games. I think it's a flawed argument to associate the two. Tons of people were amazing at PS1. The TTK didn't stop them from getting 8+ kills in a row. (I'd name names, but I don't want to de-rail the thread).
I'm an in-your-face shotgun player in most games, that means I need to think ahead, think fast, have both movement skills and a quick, reasonably accurate twitch. Situational awareness is secondary here, as this kind of gameplay style mostly boils down to reacting to the situation immediately around you. Moving from cover to cover and surviving in a proper FPS is what requires skill and thinking ahead - things that aren't really needed in low TTK games.
So a single shotgun shell to the face is skill? It makes so much sense now. I think your definition of skill is extremely narrow. Also most of what you described about moving from cover to cover has nothing to do with the TTK. You merely just want fast kills so you can move to the next one. That's something I've always been against. Since this is mostly veterans, we've all hot dropped on a tower and found we'd soloed a lot of people. That in your face shotgun approach. It works even with a long TTK. It just promotes in my eyes a very non-teamwork oriented gameplay where it's more often than not better to just run in shooting.
You need to distract the enemy, do something unexpected, take a longer route behind more cover, maybe throw a grenade or fire some pot shots to send him hiding. Carry smoke grenades or flashbangs to gain a tactical advantage.
What would just described is ideal with a faster TTK system. Still need the advantage and the surprise. It just doesn't promote the solo-play headshotting you seek which I think bothers you. You'd still win 1v1 fights, but if another person is standing next to them your chances drop drastically.
Please, buy yourself a copy of BFBC2 (it's not expensive nowadays) so that you know what you're reeling against.
When I first started playing BFBC2 (at that point I didn't have much to play regularly, so I casually played MW1 and Fear Combat, which are very fast games), I was shocked at the long TTK and unusual bullet ballistics. After playing faster games, it was like I was firing rubber bullets (exactly the words I used to describe the game, before I got used to it and began to appreciate the extended TTK).
So BFBC2 is a game with rubber bullets, PS2 is said to be a bit slower, and you guys are panicking about more skilled players mowing you down? ;)
Did you just discover the FPS genre? Congratulations. :lol: Again personal preference regarding TTK after playing those you've listed along with a lot of other FPS games. As much as you want to relate this to skill it's not even related. You just want to see a fast paced MMOFPS that's nothing like the original. Can't really blame you, but it's not something I'd enjoy playing for an extended period of time. (I can't play COD/BF/CS:S/COD:MW for 7 hours straight on the weekends. Somehow I could do that with my friends in Planetside). I'm almost certain the TTK and the survivability was the big difference for me.

[Talek Krell]

I'll be happy as long as there's a variety of ways to kill people. Mines, boomers, cloakers, emp grenades. PS1 had all sorts of interesting toys to keep things interesting. The TTK they're aiming for sounds like it will be about right. Quick enough that ambushing and flanking have value, but not so quick that victory ultimately just goes to whoever aims at the other guy's head fastest.

[Crator]

Sirsian, you make good points. I would like to see the TTK increase a bit though. I think this is something they should change as need. The question however is, how does that change get weighed by the devs in order to make it appropriate.

[eebster]

Now I loved the old game as much as the next person, but lets not all look at PS with rose tinted goggles here.

I will never forget names (which I rather keep to myself) that knew how to exploit the bugs best in PS and would end up taking down not 1v3 or 1v4, but 1v a whole tower (granted he runs down and back up to refresh, reload, heal).
Someone who would average a 200 kills to 10 deaths every log in, people that you can NEVER bring him out of the air in a 5v1 dog fight and have him out play and out bug the others and take 2 reavers and 3 mossies out at once with his mossie.

A TR timing his strafe with his MCG and bring down a zerg of NC's trying to get up the stairs of a tower by himself.

Now I'm 100% sure we will see some seriously crazy things in ps2, but it would be something worth youtubing for and for the fans of the game (and skilled players) to be aweing about.
I'm sure the 1 man army in ps2 wont be as effective and dangerous as the one man army in ps that not only knew how to play, but also know how to exploit (abuse the lag and buggy net coding).

I for one used to be a good twitch gaming player, and am sure I can be a pretty decent one still, even at my older age with my hand to eye reflexes losing out on some, a lot of practice and I have faith I as anyone else can be pretty damn good and ready to release our own awe inspiring videos ;)

[Graywolves]

I never concidered aiming a skill in FPS. It is but it's such a basic mechanic that every FPS gamer has exercised constantly in every game they played.

It's just muscle memory, it comes with gameplay/practice. like shooting hoops.

Pretty sure that's the definition of skill:

skill (skl)
n.
1. Proficiency, facility, or dexterity that is acquired or developed through training or experience. See Synonyms at ability.
2.
a. An art, trade, or technique, particularly one requiring use of the hands or body.
b. A developed talent or ability: writing skills.


Said it was but that I personally don't concider it to be one.

[Brusi]

tracking is a skill...

[Graywolves]

tracking is a skill...

Science.

[Brusi]

Science.
Word.

[Accuser]

So a single shotgun shell to the face is skill? It makes so much sense now. I think your definition of skill is extremely narrow. Also most of what you described about moving from cover to cover has nothing to do with the TTK. You merely just want fast kills so you can move to the next one.

Example: A high-maneuverability guy with a shotgun, who uses the terrain and flanks the enemy comes up against three enemies who don't see him.

With a long TTK, he starts shooting one, the other two turn and kill him before he gets a single kill.

With a short TTK, he kills two of them before they know what happened, and has a decent chance of finishing off the third with his sidearm.

I strongly prefer the short TTK!

[SKYeXile]

Now I loved the old game as much as the next person, but lets not all look at PS with rose tinted goggles here.

I will never forget names (which I rather keep to myself) that knew how to exploit the bugs best in PS and would end up taking down not 1v3 or 1v4, but 1v a whole tower (granted he runs down and back up to refresh, reload, heal).
Someone who would average a 200 kills to 10 deaths every log in, people that you can NEVER bring him out of the air in a 5v1 dog fight and have him out play and out bug the others and take 2 reavers and 3 mossies out at once with his mossie.

A TR timing his strafe with his MCG and bring down a zerg of NC's trying to get up the stairs of a tower by himself.

Now I'm 100% sure we will see some seriously crazy things in ps2, but it would be something worth youtubing for and for the fans of the game (and skilled players) to be aweing about.
I'm sure the 1 man army in ps2 wont be as effective and dangerous as the one man army in ps that not only knew how to play, but also know how to exploit (abuse the lag and buggy net coding).

I for one used to be a good twitch gaming player, and am sure I can be a pretty decent one still, even at my older age with my hand to eye reflexes losing out on some, a lot of practice and I have faith I as anyone else can be pretty damn good and ready to release our own awe inspiring videos ;)

taking out mutiple people is easier the faster the TTK is, you can easily takeout 5 people in COD without even knowing it, iv fired at 2 guys running across a brigde in COD and got 5 kills because there were guys behind them i really didn't see and since it only takes a shot to the head, they died. when you look at the other extreame planetside yea you can takeout 5 at once(by that i mean essentially nonstop shooting to takedown 5), but is ALOT harder, and few people can do it, it requires the right situation, weapon and ample n00bs.

Up the TTK and it becomes less about aim, more about reaction time, camping and spraying and preying. good player will still be good under any situation, but games like COD that require a fast reaction time favor younger players that can react faster, not nessisary aim better.

[Traak]

I fully expect Good Tactics and Decent Reflexes will beat the snot out of COWABUNGA with Great Reflexes. Particularly with some team coordination vs a pack of adrenaline-crazed lemmings.

Not Worried.

LOL pack of adrenaline-crazed lemmings. The visuals of Monster-gulping pasty skinny pimply-faced teens staying up to five hours past their bedtime hunched over a glowing screen looking over their shoulders to see if moms is coming is hilarious.

[INIDominus]

I should stick to singleplayer games

I feel slightly bad for getting into this thread...

IF you aren't trolling, then you are a noob who has no understanding of the processes involved.

The sheer intelligence required to play a twitch FPS is outstanding. Your mind is constantly running simulations of opponents. If you miss sight of an enemy for any given time, then you must create virtual paths which they may have chosen, base those on probability and experience gathered on that particular player. For true FPS's like Quake 3 or UT2004, you are also running a clock in your mind on every power-up, but also you must factor this in to your simulations.

Quick aiming, is far-far more than quick reaction speeds. It's mostly, about finding the best way to bridge the gap between your thoughts and the game, accurately and rapidly. This often entails finding the best setup of peripherals, OS and configuring the game.

And yes, practice is most important of all. Y'know, like everything in life is.

The term 'twitch' is most often used by people who are either too thick, or too lazy, to apply their mind to video games.

It's nice to see you talking shit about DoTA, another great set of games.

You are the opposite of a "thought gamer".

If this was a troll; good job sir.

[Sirisian]

Example: A high-maneuverability guy with a shotgun, who uses the terrain and flanks the enemy comes up against three enemies who don't see him.

With a long TTK, he starts shooting one, the other two turn and kill him before he gets a single kill.

With a short TTK, he kills two of them before they know what happened, and has a decent chance of finishing off the third with his sidearm.

I strongly prefer the short TTK!
Why not just go in with a squad or a second person. See 2 people killing 3 people sounds perfectly possible with focused fire. Using the voice system built into PS2 you could say "okay shoot at the guy on the left when the door opens" then bust in and take him out and concentrate fire to kill the rest.

If the enemy doesn't have their guns out you might still win a 1v2. It also depends on the gun. Obviously with a shotgun you'd be better equipped to kill some people at close range if they have rifles so even with a higher TTK you'd probably still win. It really balances the fight. From range you could probably easily pick off a single person with a few rounds then move in to kill the second.

However, at 1v3 that's a level of skill that would really need to trained. Throw a grenade in the middle of them to damage them all or something. It wouldn't be an easy spam the shotgun into their face win. You'd really need to earn it. Or that's my preference.

The sheer intelligence required to play a twitch FPS is outstanding. Your mind is constantly running simulations of opponents. If you miss sight of an enemy for any given time, then you must create virtual paths which they may have chosen, base those on probability and experience gathered on that particular player. For true FPS's like Quake 3 or UT2004, you are also running a clock in your mind on every power-up, but also you must factor this in to your simulations.
You don't need twitch gameplay really for that. It shows up in every FPS game no matter the speed. This is more obvious in a slower game like America's Army where knowing your enemy's movements and planning around them is invaluable. You end up with the same "oh if a new goes for an objective at X time I can throw my grenade off a wall and it'll bounce into the room and kill them".

Also this whole "true FPS" thing is silly. It makes you sound pretentious. Sure in Quake 3 you really did need to hold the timers in your head of when the quad damage spawned and know exactly from when you see your enemy how fast they can get to a certain spot, but it's not exclusive to just those highly twitch FPS games. If anything speeding things up promotes single player decision making over a cohesive teamwork decision making. That is it's less advantageous to go "hey follow me. We have a guy going to the generator" than it is to just run off and get them yourself.

I will also point out that a high TTK doesn't remove this level of tactics at all. It's easy to see that knowing your enemy is important. If you're a cloaker for instance you know a single target is easy to kill, but attacking two at a time is probably a bad move so you might wait until they separate.

[Traak]

Ping disadvantage and such is one reason I like my CE. CE>fast reflexes.

And this from someone who has fast reflexes.

[Traak]

That's the textbook case of a bad camper, and one that no-one really cares about because they are easy kills. The ones that are hated are not these, they're the ones that camp for a while, and when they know the coast is clear move to the next spot. There is a lot more tactical and situational awareness involved in a proper camp.


It's finding the proper camping circumstances, timing, situation, population and location that is the art. The kills are the icing; the cake is all the work you put into finding and possibly preparing a camping spot.

Some really enjoy the mental challenges associated with careful and meticulous preparation. And sometimes, in those golden moments where you have waited, possibly for months, for the right population, combination of bases to be owned, continental links, and all, and your camping spot is ready, then it's time to flout Ranger Smith and go grab yourself some pic-a-nic baskets!

:)

[Wahooo]

beta will tell all tales.

Negative. Beta will set the stage, what is fixed/buffed/nerfed and generally changed for the good (hopefully) and the bad for release will tell the tale.

[Graywolves]

Negative. Beta will set the stage, what is fixed/buffed/nerfed and generally changed for the good (hopefully) and the bad for release will tell the tale.

You're all wrong.


My alphabet cereal will tell the tale. And it says "ooooooooooooooooo"

[Traak]

You're all wrong.


My alphabet cereal will tell the tale. And it says "ooooooooooooooooo"

LOL that's Apple Jacks, not Alpha Bits!

[TacosWLove]

No

[Jimmuc]

hmm...i've all ways thought of any FPS as a "twitch" (reaction) game..hell even RTS games have "twitch" (reaction) elements, most modern FPS have you use strategy to win especially with multiplayer games. instead of the linear AI of singleplayer where over time your start thinking "Ok their going to pop up here...there aaannddd there!" you start think "Ok... where are they going to come from?" maybe "how can i get the drop on this guy without him knowing?" and "OMG THEY FLANKED US QUICK!" your reaction to being flanked is the "twitch" to FPS even in Planetside because when your playing multiplayer your now playing with other humans, not a scripted AI bot.

i think people are misinterpreting the term "twitch" and throwing it in the wrong light. i looked up Twitch-gameplay (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitch_gameplay) for reference and also i found this interesting tidbit under first-person shooters
World War II Online, released in 2001, featured a persistent and "massively multiplayer environment", although IGN said that "the full realization of that environment is probably still a few years away. Battlefield 1942, another World War II shooter released in 2002, featured large scale battles incorporating aircraft, naval vessels, land vehicles and infantry combat.In 2003, PlanetSide allowed hundreds of players at once to compete in a persistent world, and was also promoted as the "world's first massively multiplayer online first person shooter."

P.S. i think anyone comparing PS with CoD needs a slap. imo the closet game is Battlefield, especially with the early BF games, BF2 and 3.

[PrISM]

A TR timing his strafe with his MCG and bring down a zerg of NC's trying to get up the stairs of a tower by himself.
I wanna see this guy. Taking out an entire NC tower in just agile/MCG with ScatMAXes and rexo/hammers after him?

[Graywolves]

I wanna see this guy. Taking out an entire NC tower in just agile/MCG with ScatMAXes and rexo/hammers after him?

I know I've seen rexo/hammers take down entire towers of TR before...........

[FriendlyFire]

I know I've seen rexo/hammers take down entire towers of TR before...........

I know I've seen rexo/lashers take down... oh wait the Lasher isn't an ADS or twitch weapon and was nerfed beyond viability.

[Graywolves]

I know I've seen rexo/lashers take down... oh wait the Lasher isn't an ADS or twitch weapon and was nerfed beyond viability.

I've seen the Rexo/lasher turn Auraxis purple at one point.

[Scow2]

I like the change. Now, both Highly-"skilled", high-reflex "Twitch" gamers and tactically-minded, less reflexive gamers can both play the way they want to. And, honestly, the high TTK of PS1 made it feel even "Twitchier" to me than the fast-paced COD games. No matter how good you are at getting Headshots, your Suppressor's won't even be worth the pixels rendering it when faced with a Tank.

Also, the devs mentioned that Headshots deal damage on a per-weapon basis: Rapid-fire weapons don't deal headshot damage, leaving it to the already individual-skill-oriented Sniper-types to deal with.

I saw a lot of comments disparaging E-sports... Well, the developers love them. Planetside is a massive, persistent 3-way E-sport. And that's what makes it unique. Hell... sports are the earliest team-oriented tactical games.

Weapon selection really matters in FPS games as well... In Call of Duty 4, despite my abysmal skill in FPS games, I still managed to mostly hold my own using Light Machine Guns, using their great range, large magazines, high penetration, and good Field-of-View (No vision-limiting scopes on the iron sights) to take down far more "skilled" non-snipers (Anyone who used an SMG or Assault rifle) before they got in range.

There will always be tactics, skill is just something you have to take into consideration when formulating them.

[Accuser]

I've seen the Rexo/lasher turn Auraxis purple at one point.

I'm pretty sure that was back when it was a weapon.

[Traak]

The Lasher isn't a New Year's party favor?

[kidwithstick]

I like how OP brought up rainbow six, but failed to mention which rainbow six.

the original (which I played in ladder play for years on mplayer and zone) was HUGE twitch.

IMO when they went to rougue spear, and later r6 vegas, they completely ruined my favorite game by slowing it down and making it, in your words, "less twitch"

no... sorry friend but FPS games are twitch based. thats how its been and how it will be. If you want to play ps2 and not worry so much about the combat aspect of the game I'd suggest lvling command.

[Mezorin]

To the OP: There will always be a certain level of "Twitch" involved in a game. Even in World of Warcraft, which is dice rolls, you still have player movement, positioning, timing, and execution. But this twitch factor is arguably a very low skill ceiling for most games out there these days, and even PS1 (lag warp bullcrap not withstanding) is not that high. It is doubtful that PS1 will have the same level of twitch required as say old school Quake 1 or Tribes. But there will be some twitch involved here, like it or not.

To the original poster, if you think that twitch is all that counts in games, I challenge you to do this: play COD:Black Ops or Battlefield 3, but play so with the mindset of finding the most effective way to win strategically. If you can hunt down a copy of Art of War, and a copy of David Sirlin's "Playing to Win", do so before you start, and read them as you go.

Out smart your enemies. Learn Map Awareness. Learn Observing in general. Play the maps and control the SPACE on the maps. Think of the game like a game of chess, with every movement you do being involving strategy. Abuse weapon strengths and weaknesses to your advantage(noob tube haters gonna hate). Throw up spy planes, counter spy planes, and black birds, but also have a Stella load out to shoot down theirs. Listen for enemy reloads, and other audio tells (pro tip: "Grenato!" is Russian for "MOVE!"). DO NOT go head to head with any enemy and trade hits if you can help it, unless they have a shot gun, you have a machine gun, and you have 100 yards between you two. If you have the shotgun, force them to fight you in a phone booth. Avoid campers if you cannot flank them, and play the objectives (let them have their 5/0 for the entire game, as your 20/10 + objective beats their score anyways).

Yes, you will some times get that bullshit dolphin diver who pulls a mircale 180 turn and gets you, and yes you will have a lot of deaths just from random nades. Twitch guys can sometimes get away with some miracles, but long run play you are fighting smarter, while they have to fight harder. Playing smart pays yields returns much faster than trying to be Neo, and you will find yourself winning before a battle ever starts.

[Traak]

I honestly anticipate that a lot of the "top scorers" from PS1 are going to be getting permanently banned in PS2 as their cheats are discovered, and they are crucified for them.

What we have thought was superior reflexes, lower ping, etc, has most often been just cheats, cheats, and more cheats.

I have seen a Fury hit me with one rocket of the fired pair, and as I had just dropped behind cover, the second one miraculously targeted my AMS, which was WIDELY divergent from where I was, so it was physically impossible for him to have adjusted his aim that fast. Obviously an aimbot, which the cheating players always shrieked didn't exist (of course).

If there is ANYTHING I am looking forward to in the new game, it is crucifying cheaters. I may even volunteer to help Sony out in any way possible with that. I love to see them kicked off, down, and out.

Get rid of one cheater, improve the game for 1000 other players.

[Bags]

^ "good players are all cheaters"

[2coolforu]

It's best not to throw around hackusations until you are certain that they are a hacker. Unless I see a killcam or they have a retarded K/d like 200:4 or similar with normal weapons I generally assume they are just far better than me.

[Traak]

No, actually it is far more productive to bring potential cheaters to the attention of the devs than it is to let them cheat for another six years before you believe you have enough DNA evidence to prove they are a cheater.

The devs have far better and faster tools for catching hackers than a choppy low-res FRAPS video or anecdotes.

Hence, reporting and appealing on suspicion, not just when the evidence is completely overwhelming can cut months off the time a hacker is allowed to roam loose.

Hackers, however, LOVE the idea of no one doing ANYTHING until someone can prove, by breaking into their house and downloading a copy of their hard drive, and pinpointing the use of hack software, that they are cheating.

Nah, over-reporting is FAR more desirable than cheaters even having a few spare minutes on the server before they are banned. I have found, as with any game, that the cheaters are always the most vitriolic character-assassinators of those who decry cheating. It's to be expected.

Not everyone who stands up for the rights of criminals is one, either. It just makes you wonder at the motives of those who feel it necessary to attack those who decry cheating. I know it comes under the guise of making fun of someone they try to paint as being inferior to them, but you really do have to wonder at their motives.

Especially when the only time they ever seem to address what you say is when you decry cheating. Then it is their duty to leap to the fore, spewing ridicule? Why then? Why all of a sudden? Looks weird.

[Graywolves]

hackusations

http://piclund.com/data_images/haha-pics.jpg

I was actually looking for a Family Guy picture...but w.e

[Effective]

It's best not to throw around hackusations until you are certain that they are a hacker. Unless I see a killcam or they have a retarded K/d like 200:4 or similar with normal weapons I generally assume they are just far better than me.

Catching hackers (www.youtube.com/user/gigantor89)

On that note, I disagree with pointing out EVERY potential hacker to the devs. For the simple reason that they will be FLOODED with information then, it will become ridiculous to attempt to sort out the crap from the legitimate appeals.

As for making fun of people who accuse others of cheating, I do it for the same reason when people make outrageous claims with no proof (such as invisible pink unicorns that are undetectable yet live among us). I'm skeptical until I see real proof of someone cheating. Afterall, I'm in a outfit that is notorious for "cheating" and have been personally accused of cheating more times then I can count. So I'm willing to give people the benefit of the doubt.

[basti]

Catching hackers (www.youtube.com/user/gigantor89)

On that note, I disagree with pointing out EVERY potential hacker to the devs. For the simple reason that they will be FLOODED with information then, it will become ridiculous to attempt to sort out the crap from the legitimate appeals.

As for making fun of people who accuse others of cheating, I do it for the same reason when people make outrageous claims with no proof (such as invisible pink unicorns that are undetectable yet live among us). I'm skeptical until I see real proof of someone cheating. Afterall, I'm in a outfit that is notorious for "cheating" and have been personally accused of cheating more times then I can count. So I'm willing to give people the benefit of the doubt.

It was said in the past that the plan is to have a extra team dealing just with the hacking issue. If that is going to be the case, theres nothing wrong with spamming them about potential hackers.

The issue is not the 0815 hacker that is obviously hacking. Those guys get spottet automaticly by triggering mechanics that are there to spot them.
The issue is the subtile hacker, the one you dont really notice until you encouter him several times.

[Traak]

And, regrettably, the dual-account holders can seem to have miraculous cheat powers, but are actually exploiting.

You have to catch them through behavior. When you notice that they exhibit behaviors that are consistent with AFKing one character, such as those who sleep in the basements of bases during base assaults, you just let others know and move on.

I sincerely hope that dual-boxing is not rewarded as much as it was in PS1.

That, if nothing else, is why we need subscription prices and not free to play.

[Sirisian]

That, if nothing else, is why we need subscription prices and not free to play.
I agree, but honestly it never stopped people from having more than one account. Tigersmith had/has multiple accounts for playing Planetside 1 even with the subscription. Look at EVE online. I know people online with 7 accounts. That might be because you can buy subscriptions with game money or something.

I mean I'll probably be getting more than one account only because the skill trees are so large. I like to experience everything in games so the fastest way to do that is to train a lot of alts. Doesn't mean I'll play them all at the same time. (I only have 2 computers that can run PS2 anyway).

Kind of off-topic for the discussion at hand though.

[Traak]

I see. Well, at least if you can't stop dual-boxing, at least make it so it makes money for Sony, which might enable them to hire a guy to catch bona fide code/overlay/whatever cheaters. Having more than one account isn't the issue. Having more than one account, on more than one empire, using one to spy, and the other to kill, is the issue.

And I would love to see some way of defending against that.

Edit: making free accounts available doesn't just encourage this, it almost makes it de rigeur.

[Crator]

Not sure how they can stop this. Unless they only allowed one account to login to the same server from the same IP at the same time. That's silly because then two or more people living together couldn't play on the same server with each other.

[LostSoul]

I'm skeptical until I see real proof of someone cheating. Afterall, I'm in a outfit that is notorious for "cheating" and have been personally accused of cheating more times then I can count. So I'm willing to give people the benefit of the doubt.

You dirty cheater, you have more twitch then I!

[Dreamcast]

No it doesn't.

Thats the way real games should be...and how Planetside 1 was in a way.

People skills matter, thats what twitch gaming means...meaning that you can't waste 1000 hours to get the best armor in the game, suck ass but still destroy better players just because you have the best armor.

It doesn't work like that.

Planetside 2, should be way more advance in gameplay, meaning twitch should count more this time around. As for Headshots, i say they should only be available for certain snipers to OSOK but a headshot should make more damage.


As for those games, like Raven Shield...That is a hardcore twitch game, you really need to perfect leaning and aiming to be the best so I don't know what you are talking about.