From a tactical gamer, jaded by 'trendy' modern shooters

[vVRedOctoberVv]

Originally Posted by EisenKreutzer

@RedOctober: I'm really curious, do you think you could elaborate some on what you call "artificial balancing?"

Do you mean altering the stats of weapons (for example) post launch?

By "artificial balancing" I mean stuff like this:

"forced weapon ranges" Map is <this far> I can see a guy in a window over ---> shooting at my guys. I aim, I fire, I see the tracers vanish in mid-air just before reaching him because my gun is labeled "not able to shoot that far", however I can pick up a slightly different, or "different class" weapon, NOW I can shoot that far, even though nothing has changed.

CoF is an example of "artificial balancing". No matter how carefully you aim, you can NEVER hit >here< except by random chance... because the computer says so. Your personal ABILITY to does not matter.

There are myriad other examples, too. Using these concepts, you can probably safely assume other concepts I would like or dislike. I hate doing something and thinking "if I did this for real, such and such would happen". Or thinking, "Oh, look! An invisible wall. I can't go around THIS side of the rock, because the computer says so".

I know it's a "game". And some games are more or less geared toward realism, I recognise that. But I generally dislike most RPGs, for example, because the control, the action, is taken OUT of you, the player's, hands, and placed in "the computer's" hands. Honestly, I'm pretty open, depending on the genre, but as soon as it goes 1st person, I start growing dissatisfied with "imposed restrictions" because my first thought is "This isn't abstract. This is ME. -I- can do this. -I- am sitting here, holding this in -my- hands, and the game won't -let- me do it, because... somebody decided it would be "unfun" to let me do what I clearly SHOULD be able to do"

Generally, I dislike "abstract play", I dislike "classes", and other "forced restrictions". The whole concept of a game is "using your imagination, pretend you're THIS and live in THIS world". When my imagination is able to come up with solutions or actions that the game is fully capable of, but are being taken away from me because "someone" decided I shouldn't be able to, that, to me, is irritating.


-edit


If stats need to be altered, by all means, alter. But I feel most "balancing" stuff is just nit picking and trying to please people who are just going to find something else to complain about.

[EisenKreutzer]

Originally Posted by vVRedOctoberVv

Generally, I dislike "abstract play", I dislike "classes", and other "forced restrictions". The whole concept of a game is "using your imagination, pretend you're THIS and live in THIS world". When my imagination is able to come up with solutions or actions that the game is fully capable of, but are being taken away from me because "someone" decided I shouldn't be able to, that, to me, is irritating.

Ah, now I get it.

I guess I think more in terms of game design. I appreciate the limits the developers put on their games, and work inside those limitations because to me, thats what the game is "about." I play games to experience that "thing" the designers set out to create.

So for me, classes, levels, invisible walls and other such restrictions are just somethign I accept because thats what the game "is."

Did that make sense?

[vVRedOctoberVv]

Originally Posted by EisenKreutzer

Ah, now I get it.

I guess I think more in terms of game design. I appreciate the limits the developers put on their games, and work inside those limitations because to me, thats what the game is "about." I play games to experience that "thing" the designers set out to create.

So for me, classes, levels, invisible walls and other such restrictions are just somethign I accept because thats what the game "is."

Did that make sense?

Yeah, I get ya. I "accept" it, I have no choice And you're right that is "part of the game". I just irk when I start running into situations -I-, scrawy white boy that I am, can overcome... But my fireball hurling, chaingun wielding, woman stealing He-Man cannot.

[Klockan]

Originally Posted by EisenKreutzer

Did you just call me a bad player?

Nope, I said that bad players shackles themselves with such rules, not that everyone making such rules are bad. The point is however that you become a better player once you stop deciding what is legitimate and what is not, most things are counterable in some way.

Originally Posted by EisenKreutzer

Whats with the attitude? I have to say I do not appreciate your tone one bit.

I post in roughly the same tone you use, nothing strange really.

Originally Posted by EisenKreutzer

I am not saying that all examples of sitting and waiting for an enemy player to move into your crosshair is a wrong thing to do. I am saying that a player who relies on cornercamping to the exclusion of all else are bad players, or atleast players who do not care about playing the game the way it is intended to be played.

What do you define as cornercamping? You said before that you didn't like CoD cornercamping, but there is no reason why cornercamping in that game should be called cheese.

Originally Posted by EisenKreutzer

I have camped in multiple shooters, and it is a viable tactic that serves a purpose, especially when defending a choke or capture point.

Camping is a way to catch your enemy off guard, nothing cheesy about that no matter the situation or how excessively it is used since players should just learn to expect campers.

Originally Posted by EisenKreutzer

Am I bitching? Really?

You were bitching earlier in this thread.
Have you read your own posts?
Here you compare camping/sniping to 6 pooling in Starcraft:

Originally Posted by EisenKreutzer

No, this is not war. This is a game. And in a game, there is such a thing as cheesy tactics.
If you don't believe me, try 6- or 7-pooling in Starcraft 2 and see how popular you become.

Also, dealing with a stationary target is easy. Dealing with a stationary who is cornercamping like a little bitch isn't.

Which is why I explained that only noobs and certain unimaginative players with bad attitude (Idra) look down on cheese in Starcraft, everyone got to cheese now and then or they are predictable and thus easier to beat which is Idra's biggest problem. Cheesing is a part of the metagame.

Originally Posted by EisenKreutzer

Are you seriously trying to tell me that a sniper lying in a corner, oneshotting people who have no way of defending themselves or even knowing he's there is a legitimate, non-cheese tactic?

The only reason such tactics works is because you don't expect it, that is the deal with cheese. But as long as the enemy don't expect it then it is a legitimate tactic, turning your enemies ignorance against them is always legit. Even spawn camping is legit since the guys can just choose to spawn at another place or just overwhelm the spawn campers, spawn camping serves as a way to deny that spawnpoint for a while, you don't have to spawn there really.

[OnexBigxHebrew]

I've said it before, and I'll say this a thousand times.

Never, ever under any cirumstance will I disparage a player for abusing any sort of playstyle, 'cheesy', OP or otherwise. The fault goes on the Dev 100% of the time.

I used to play on a ton of MLG teams, and let me tell you, any good team absolutely knew that the 'oh, just a camping bitch' or 'what a chasing pussy' mentality is a losing mentality, whether your team plays that way or not.

I used to have my halo team lock down power weapon spawns in halo because power weapons are purposely OP in that game. But we won. A lot. I got a ton of hatemail saying 'omfg n00b all you do is use r0x'. I didn't need to reply. Why? I was a winner.

It is always the developer's responsibility to balance a mechanic that is overpowered. Period. And, for the record, cheesy isn't a term I support in anything competitive. Running the clock or intentional fouls/walks in sports are 'cheesy', but if a coach didn't do them when the time was right because he was self-righteous, he'd be fired.

[vVRedOctoberVv]

Originally Posted by OnexBigxHebrew

I've said it before, and I'll say this a thousand times.

Never, ever under any cirumstance will I disparage a player for abusing any sort of playstyle, 'cheesy', OP or otherwise. The fault goes on the Dev 100% of the time.

I used to play on a ton of MLG teams, and let me tell you, any good team absolutely knew that the 'oh, just a camping bitch' or 'what a chasing pussy' mentality is a losing mentality, whether your team plays that way or not.

I used to have my halo team lock down power weapon spawns in halo because power weapons are purposely OP in that game. But we won. A lot. I got a ton of hatemail saying 'omfg n00b all you do is use r0x'. I didn't need to reply. Why? I was a winner.

It is always the developer's responsibility to balance a mechanic that is overpowered. Period. And, for the record, cheesy isn't a term I support in anything competitive. Running the clock or intentional fouls/walks in sports are 'cheesy', but if a coach didn't do them when the time was right because he was self-righteous, he'd be fired.

One smart Hebrew... You just described the "competitive process" in a nutshell. Game or real world war, one principal applies to both: they are competitions. And generally speaking, you are limited only by your imagination. There is no such thing as "good" "bad" or "cheese" there is "the winner" and "the loser".

[OnexBigxHebrew]

Originally Posted by vVRedOctoberVv

One smart Hebrew... You just described the "competitive process" in a nutshell. Game or real world war, one principal applies to both: they are competitions. And generally speaking, you are limited only by your imagination. There is no such thing as "good" "bad" or "cheese" there is "the winner" and "the loser".

Yep! Actually I think its funny, the tagline from the teaser kind of applies here.

"War will not determine who is right, only who is left."

[Flaropri]

Originally Posted by vVRedOctoberVv

One smart Hebrew... You just described the "competitive process" in a nutshell. Game or real world war, one principal applies to both: they are competitions. And generally speaking, you are limited only by your imagination. There is no such thing as "good" "bad" or "cheese" there is "the winner" and "the loser".

Absolutely. However, games (unlike real life) can be patched, so things that are actually imbalanced (not just disliked as being quirky-but-strong or simple-but-strong) can be addressed, while the meta-game can learn to adjust to handle so-called "cheese."


Also, this could potentially apply (albeit hopefully to a very shallow degree):

http://extra-credits.net/episodes/perfect-imbalance/

[goneglockin]

squishing the word tactical in front of FPS has always been a tiny niche brand. It's not surprising that you all seem to be concentrated in one place here. I do find it amusing you lament the decline of something that never fully materialized as a real sub-genre.

The tactical shooter is more of a collection of a few odd ball titles that tactical gamers claim represent the tactical sub-genre by saying the word tactical a lot.

[vVRedOctoberVv]

Originally Posted by Flaropri

Absolutely. However, games (unlike real life) can be patched, so things that are actually imbalanced (not just disliked as being quirky-but-strong or simple-but-strong) can be addressed, while the meta-game can learn to adjust to handle so-called "cheese."


Also, this could potentially apply (albeit hopefully to a very shallow degree):

http://extra-credits.net/episodes/perfect-imbalance/

Yes! Often times, people confuse "different" with "unbalanced or broken".

Originally Posted by goneglockin

squishing the word tactical in front of FPS has always been a tiny niche brand. It's not surprising that you all seem to be concentrated in one place here. I do find it amusing you lament the decline of something that never fully materialized as a real sub-genre.

The tactical shooter is more of a collection of a few odd ball titles that tactical gamers claim represent the tactical sub-genre by saying the word tactical a lot.

It is a niche, yes. So? Nothing wrong with that. Just because it's a niche doesn't mean it can't be catered to, as well just as legitimately as anything else.

[Pyreal]

Originally Posted by EisenKreutzer

I absolutely do not think that my opinion on how the game should play does not count because I am not a veteran of Planetside 1. I am a passionate fan of Planetside 2, and my opinion should be worth as much as anyone elses in the beta.

Not saying OP ment this, but I just thought I'd make it clear.

Other than that.. Theres something about OPs tone I don't like, a vague hint of elitism perhaps. But it's subtle.
Otherwise, i find myself nodding in agreement. I too, want Planetside 2 to be a rich and complex experience, not another cookie-cutter shooter of the gunmetal gray and dogshit brown school.

So good show, OP. Jolly good show.

I didn't notice any 'elitism' overtones, nor any presumptuousness, though I can't say the same of yours.

Oh yes, do pardon the interlude: I am in full accord with the originator of this topic. har har.

[Forsaken One]

I would love a fully updated, larger scale SWAT 4

Hell even large scale, updated Rainbow Six Vegas I would love. (vegas 2 sucked balls.)

[vVRedOctoberVv]

Ya know, I saw SWAT -AGES- ago, and always wanted to play, but never did. I think I ended up getting Rainbow Six at some point (the first one) Tactical turn based wasn't it?

[Dairian]

As being a planetside Vet I agree with you. I will spend money hands over fist on PS2 if it brings the feeling of something new but also keeps the tactical side of PS1. I believe they will even surpass its little brother. I have even just ordered and waiting on the parts to build a custom PC to play the new forgelight on full graphics. But if the game turns out to be more of a Battlefield copy I will not spend a cent. But from what I have seen I do not believe it will.

CASE CM|HAF X RC-942-KKN1
MB ASUS|SABERTOOTH Z77 1155
2 x VGA GIGABYTE|GV-N670OC-2GD GTX670 ran in SLI
PSU COOLER MASTER RS800-80GAD3-US
CPU INTEL|CORE I7 3770K 3.5G 8M
SSD 512G|CRUCIAL CT512M4SSD1 7MM
MEM 8Gx2|GSKILL F3-2133C9D-16GXH
DVD BRN ASUS | DRW-24B1ST/BLK/B/AS%
MS WIN 7 HOME SP1 64BIT 1PK - OEM
WATER COOLER CORSAIR| CWCH100

Changed my order at the last minute.

[Forsaken One]

Originally Posted by vVRedOctoberVv

Ya know, I saw SWAT -AGES- ago, and always wanted to play, but never did. I think I ended up getting Rainbow Six at some point (the first one) Tactical turn based wasn't it?

SWAT 4 and SWAT 4 The Stetchkov Syndicate are still played a lot today even thro they are around 5+ years old. You can pretty much always find at least one full-almost full server at anytime, day or night 24/7 for most game modes. new players even still show up.
The games loading times however no matter what computer you have will make you want to kick puppys through. lol

If you still want to get the game you should, you can most likely get it cheap. Its not going to die anytime soon. lol

As for Rainbow six Vegas..... Well ubisoft had a hand in it... so the dedi servers, server browser, DRM, and other things just ended up making the game screwed up to the point where some people who'd want to play can't even etc. Ubisoft only cares about money, once you buy any ubisoft game they pretty much just give you the finger and so don't give a shit about multi player support at all for any of their games.

But SWAT 4 is powered by Gamespy. ALL HAIL GAMESPY. no matter the game gamespy makes making and useing servers, looking for servers, hosting and joining servers, etc easy and non painful. I wish all games would use it. its even 100% better then anything steams ever done.