News: Jimmy Whisenhunt Joins PlanetSide 2 Team

[Otleaz]

Originally Posted by AzK

To Otleaz and to a lesser extent, Zar:

I'm NOT arguing semantics, bunnyhopping is actually a GAMING TERM used to indicate a movement technique used in some shooters (usually with quake engine) where the player gains speed and air control by jumping and strafing properly.

So Otleaz, you're using a word, thinking it means something, when it means something else, that's not semantics. Know you words before you use them.

You understood what I was talking about once I said it due to context. That fact alone makes it semantics. If you got the impression that I thought battlefield had people strafe jumping and sprint jumping everywhere, then it would be different.

[AzK]

Originally Posted by Ratstomper

And I never said that a player shouldn't know how to do their job. In fact, what I said was that the hours and hours of practicing something inane like sidestepping should be spent learning to master the content the game devs provided instead. I'm not entirely disagreeing with you. However, I'm speaking out against the petty little exploits that people employ to get an easy upper hand against someone else. Clipping, diving, bunny hopping, etc. are things that the average person will want nothing to do with and they shouldn't, because doing those things are stupid, not conducive to fun gameplay and are blatant abuse of mechanisms. THOSE have nothing to do with aim, reaction, tactics or any combination of the three.

Should a sniper put the time in to learn how to snipe? Absolutely, if he wants to be a good sniper he better, but it should be by using it while he plays the actual game and has fun doing it.



I don't see that happening in PS2 in relation to gun handling. I DO see a good infantryman using cover and positioning to win a 3v1 against people who aren't as able to think tactically and if that's the case they the guy won fair and square. What probably shouldn't happen is someone wining a 1v3 going toe-to-toe without getting behind cover and using only his gun. That shows a blatant design flaw....unless the three guys just can't aim worth crap.

It sounds like you're exactly one of those guys in the lib getting owned 3v1.

The guy is better than you on foot, his aim is better his reflexes are better his movement is better. He should kill you and your 2 friends who bombed him earlier. End of story.

But no, at the sole idea of it you start complaingin "it shouldn't be possible" "if something like that happens the game is flawed" bla bla bla. Have some decency please.

[AzK]

Originally Posted by Otleaz

You understood what I was talking about once I said it due to context. That fact alone makes it semantics. If you got the impression that I thought battlefield had people strafe jumping and sprint jumping everywhere, then it would be different.

What the...

You're joking right? Yes i understood the very moment you replied you had no idea what you were talking about. But what you said was that you wouldn't want bunnyhopping (referring to the bf3 sprint jumping) in ps2 cause people can't be hit when they do it.

And that makes no sense because 1) It's not true and 2) you went on arguing about not wanting bunny hopping for ages pretending to know what it was when in your head you were thinking about something else (false, nonetheless)

So unless your goal was to entertain and amuse me, i think you've failed. Under all aspects.

[Otleaz]

Originally Posted by AzK

What the...

You're joking right? Yes i understood the very moment you replied you had no idea what you were talking about. But what you said was that you wouldn't want bunnyhopping (referring to the bf3 sprint jumping) in ps2 cause people can't be hit when they do it.

And that makes no sense because 1) It's not true and 2) you went on arguing about not wanting bunny hopping for ages pretending to know what it was when in your head you were thinking about something else (false, nonetheless)

So unless your goal was to entertain and amuse me, i think you've failed. Under all aspects.

Yeah, we are done here. You fail to impress, though you don't disappoint. You have met my expectations to the "S".

[Ratstomper]

Originally Posted by AzK

It sounds like you're exactly one of those guys in the lib getting owned 3v1.

The guy is better than you on foot, his aim is better his reflexes are better his movement is better. He should kill you and your 2 friends who bombed him earlier. End of story.

But no, at the sole idea of it you start complaingin "it shouldn't be possible" "if something like that happens the game is flawed" bla bla bla. Have some decency please.

Aim? No, what I just said was that if it's 3v1 and they're all at least decent shots, 3 people should be able to make up for the fact they're fighting one person in a toe to toe fight. Tactics and smart playing are what should separate good players from bad players, not how twitchy you are. No amount of hopping around, diving or side stepping should negate that.

Like talking to a brick wall.

[Mohawk]

Originally Posted by Otleaz

To be honest, I don't know exactly how. I have only experienced it first hand.

Confirmation bias if ever I saw it.

[AzK]

Originally Posted by Otleaz

Yeah, we are done here. You fail to impress, though you don't disappoint. You have met my expectations to the "S".

Yes, we're definitely done here, since what you called and thought was bunny hopping from cs turned out to be a non issue as it doesn't actually exist in ANY game quake engine or bf alike.

God i'm in tears..

[BillyBob]

Originally Posted by AzK

You can't possibly think to compare the aim/twich/movement skill required to play a game like ut or quake to the aim/twich/movement skill required to play a game where people are 1) much slower 2) are basically ALWAYS still or turretting prone or in ads mode when shooting each others, and 3)weapons have random factors not controlled by players.

It is quite obvious that the former type of games have a much higher skillcap when it comes to the aim/twich/movement personal level of the player. It's just the way it is, i'm sorry.

So to answer your question yes, tactical thinking and situational awareness are a constant, the actual gameplay mechanics aren't. And games like ut or quake have a much higher skillcap in that regard as opposed to "camper" games.

I'm sorry, but you obviously have no clue whatsoever of what you're talking about.

Have you even played a game like for example ArmA?

It requires very high skills in twitch, aim and movement...some might even argue that it does so to a greater extent than for example CS.

Why? Because it has many additional parameters to take into account like ADS, bullet drop, wind direction, whether you're standing, kneeling or prone when firing, body sway, stamina etc.

You need to take all these things into account when hitting what you fire at, while in a game like CS, all you pretty much need to do is to place the sight over your target and fire...which could be considered as being a matter of simple "point-and-click".

Take two opposing players in ArmA and the one who will hit the other one first is the one with the best twitch aim and movement...AND best takes into account ALL the other factors I mentioned above. How could that possibly be any less demanding in terms of skills than CS?

As there are obviously far more parameters involved in a game like ArmA, it clearly follows that it takes more skill than CS, even when it comes to twitch, aim and movement...since you have to make far more decisions in the same given time.

Ok, see what I did there in the previous 3 paragraphs? You simply CAN'T claim in any true objective manner that one game takes more skills than the other...they simply require DIFFERENT applications of the same skills (twitch, aim, movement, tactics etc).

/BB

[AzK]

Originally Posted by Ratstomper

Aim? No, what I just said was that if it's 3v1 and they're all at least decent shots, 3 people should be able to make up for the fact they're fighting one person in a toe to toe fight. Tactics and smart playing are what should separate good players from bad players, not how twitchy you are. No amount of hopping around, diving or side stepping should negate that.

Like talking to a brick wall.

So if those 3 persons are worse than the single 1 at hopping, diving, side stepping, aiming and everything else, providing that all the 4 players have the same tactical skills, the 3 terrible ones should still win? Thanks for proving my point that in your opinion ACTUAL fps skills should count a flat out 0 in shootouts. In games that are, well, vastly about shooting.

Darwin award 2012 1st place i think.

[Seagoon]

Originally Posted by AzK

You're mentioning vehicles and logistics, none of them have anything to do with the gunplay being discussed here, if a liberator flies over a guy in open space and bombs him, it doesn't matter if the guy's crosshair has pinpoint accuracy while running, jumping, or sliding. It doesn't matter if the guy can sprint, bunnyhop or strafe/circle jump, he'll still get oneshot by the bombs.

The vehicles and logistics I mentioned was in reference to the idea that all games had the same skill cap for situational awareness/tactics/strategy/coordination etc... I was proving this to be a silly statement with the example of the BF2 mod project reality. This was nothing really to do with the gun play specifically.

Originally Posted by AzK

And it's perfectly fine, nobody is complaining about that or wants that changed. But say those guys in the lib are actually terrible on foot and get owned 3v1 because that person on foot is actually amazing and can use a deep gunplay mechanic to its fullest. Suddenly those people who got owned 3v1 feel entitled to complain and say that a turretting ads mechanic would be more skilled for infantry combat ..... riiiiiight.

Yeah, it sucks when people who are bad at the game complain rather than learn from their mistakes and improve.
The key thing is though, that three players of average FPS skill and superior teamwork and coordination/tactics/etc should slaughter a single player who has superior FPS skill and average skill in the other catagories.
BUT I think that for PS2 to be the best game it can be, 3 players with the superior teamwork skills vs 3 players with the superior FPS skills and everything else equal, this should come out as an equal fight.
Maybe this is what some other people are getting at as well in this thread? Im not sure.

[AzK]

Originally Posted by BillyBob

I'm sorry, but you obviously have no clue whatsoever of what you're talking about.

Have you even played a game like for example ArmA?

It requires very high skills in twitch, aim and movement...some might even argue that it does so to a greater extent than for example CS.

Why? Because it has many additional parameters to take into account like ADS, bullet drop, wind direction, whether you're standing, kneeling or prone when firing, body sway, stamina etc.

You need to take all these things into account when hitting what you fire at, while in a game like CS, all you pretty much need to do is to place the sight over your target and fire...which could be considered as being a matter of simple "point-and-click".

Take two opposing players in ArmA and the one who will hit the other one first is the one with the best twitch aim and movement...AND best takes into account ALL the other factors I mentioned above. How could that possibly be any less demanding in terms of skills than CS?

As there are obviously far more parameters involved in a game like ArmA, it clearly follows that it takes more skill than CS, even when it comes to twitch, aim and movement...since you have to make far more decisions in the same given time.

Ok, see what I did there in the previous 3 paragraphs? You simply CAN'T claim in any true objective manner that one game takes more skills than the other...they simply require DIFFERENT applications of the same skills (twitch, aim, movement, tactics etc).

/BB

I have tried arma, unfortunately, but i try to keep away from shit games so i don't play it.

You have just compared the aim/twich/movement skill required to play this
to the ones required to do this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjEZT...eature=related

Sorry if your credibility in my eyes just reached a new low, i didn't think it was possible to go below 0 credibility, but you just did it.

No one, his right mind, could watch those 2 videos, and then say, while keeping a straight face, that arma requires the same fps aiming/twitch/movement proficiency as q3.

[Ratstomper]

Originally Posted by AzK

So if those 3 persons are worse than the single 1 at hopping, diving, side stepping, aiming and everything else, providing that all the 4 players have the same tactical skills, the 3 terrible ones should still win? Thanks for proving my point that in your opinion ACTUAL fps skills should count a flat out 0 in shootouts. In games that are, well, vastly about shooting.

Darwin award 2012 1st place i think.

The subtle sound of jimmies rustling through the trees.

That argument makes NO sense. You didn't quantify HOW worse we're talking. Obviously, there's a point where aim can be so bad that tactics won't make up for it. What are "actual" fps skills? You're bunny hopping? If three guys go up against one and they have comparable aim, the one guy should lose in a face to face fight with no cover. It doesn;t matter if you've got the best aim in the world, if you're stupid enough to charge into a 3v1, you deserve to die (did someone say Darwin Award?). That's common sense: something you seem to be lacking in. Or are you just getting too mad to make legible arguments anymore?

[Landtank]

Originally Posted by AzK

I have tried arma, unfortunately, but i try to keep away from shit games so i don't play it.

Sorry if your credibility in my eyes just reached a new low, i didn't think it was possible to go below 0 credibility, but you just did it.

No one, his right mind, could watch those 2 videos, and then say, while keeping a straight face, that arma requires the same fps aiming/twitch/movement proficiency as q3.

I could, they both require the same skills in a different manner I would say. You can't say one requires more skill than the other. Some people are better at flying around and adadada movements, others are better at using a scope and tracking their targets etc.

You're just an extremely biased gamer, and that's okay, just don't go throwing your opinion around like its the law.

I don't think he cares about his credibility in your eyes, I don't think anyone does really.

What are actual FPS skills? There's many different kinds of FPS games that require different skills, how do you not realize that?

[AzK]

Originally Posted by Ratstomper

The subtle sound of jimmies rustling through the trees.

That argument makes NO sense. You didn't quantify HOW worse we're talking. Obviously, there's a point where aim can be so bad that tactics won't make up for it. What are "actual" fps skills? You're bunny hopping? If three guys go up against one and they have comparable aim, the one guy should lose in a face to face fight with no cover. It doesn;t matter if you've got the best aim in the world, if you're stupid enough to charge into a 3v1, you deserve to die (did someone say Darwin Award?). That's common sense: something you seem to be lacking in. Or are you just getting too mad to make legible arguments anymore?

Oh, people can be pretty damn terrible, believe me, i've won plenty of 3-4(or even more)v1 fights, not because i choose to walk into a bad situation on purpose, but simply because i had no other choice (unless i knew those people were indeed subhuman and then i did it on purpose).

This is the kind of level of play we're talking about, directly from one of my outfit members on ps1 i'm pretty confident he could take on 3+ guys like you and come out on top.

You can keep on making up excuses as much as you like and keep saying that what i say makes no sense, at the end of the day, it's not me the one afraid of having a deeper and higher skill capped game. It's you.

[AzK]

Originally Posted by Landtank

I could, they both require the same skills in a different manner I would say. You can't say one requires more skill than the other. Some people are better at flying around and adadada movements, others are better at using a scope and tracking their targets etc.

You're just an extremely biased gamer, and that's okay, just don't go throwing your opinion around like its the law.

I don't think he cares about his credibility in your eyes, I don't think anyone does really.

What are actual FPS skills? There's many different kinds of FPS games that require different skills, how do you not realize that?

It is the law, pretty much, not because it's "my" word, but because facts prove it. Games like ut or quake have basically died out and you know what that is? Because their skillcap was too hard for the average person.

The average person is content with games like cod or bf3, where everyone can kill everyone, regardless of how good they are, precisely because the skillcap is too low, games like those thrive while the others didn't.

And the only reason is, there's far more bad players in the world than good ones. It is that simple.