Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
PSU: Everything below this line is pure awesome.
Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
2012-06-01, 05:32 PM | [Ignore Me] #91 | |||
Sergeant
|
Welcome to gaming! PS2 will be a great first game for you. |
|||
|
2012-06-01, 05:33 PM | [Ignore Me] #92 | ||
Many people are pointing out that prone will only slow down gameplay. That's actually one of the reasons having prone interests me - from the *sounds* of things PS2 is going to be fast paced run-and-gun. That honestly worries me.
Of courses this is just pure speculation until we get in there and see for ourselves. |
|||
|
2012-06-01, 05:35 PM | [Ignore Me] #94 | |||
Sergeant Major
|
|
|||
|
2012-06-01, 05:38 PM | [Ignore Me] #96 | ||
Colonel
|
I'm not complaining about it slowing down gameplay, I'm complaining about the uses being dolphin diving and camping. You KNOW for a fact that that's what the vast majority of people will use it for.
__________________
ZulthusVS, 34/5 DARK |
||
|
2012-06-01, 05:39 PM | [Ignore Me] #97 | ||
Staff Sergeant
|
I wouldn't say that prone encourages camping. Rather, it disincentivizes aggressive gameplay. Attacking against a prepared enemy is hard enough as it is. Defenders are already more accurate since they don't need to move and they have the benefit of cover. Prone simply gives them even more accuracy and more cover. The biggest downside of prone is the lack of mobility, but this is more disadvantageous to the attacking force than the defending force. Not having prone simply allows the attacking force a bit more parity with the defending force.
|
||
|
2012-06-01, 05:40 PM | [Ignore Me] #98 | |||
First Sergeant
|
Hell, people going prone in BF 3 were the easiest to kill. Never moved and just camped. |
|||
|
2012-06-01, 05:40 PM | [Ignore Me] #99 | ||
Colonel
|
Bear in mind that there is not some list out there of extra things that a sim must have that arcade games don't have.
WW2OL is a sim for other reasons, not because it has prone. And when I say it's a sim, it's a sim in terms of the gameplay, much like ArmA. A lot of people are hoping that PS2 will in fact be a simulator of war with arcade gameplay, meaning, of an overall strategic battle instead of deathmatch. That's what war simulator means to me, and has nothing to do with the levels of realism of the gameplay, but has to do with the scale and persistence of the game. Putting prone in doesn't make it a sim in terms of gameplay realism, it doesn't suddenly change from arcade to ArmA because of prone. Last edited by Stardouser; 2012-06-01 at 05:41 PM. |
||
|
2012-06-01, 05:41 PM | [Ignore Me] #101 | |||
ArmA is a much a shooter game as is Planetside. There may be some differences in pace but nothing that would let them be classified as different genres. It comes down to what the word simulation means: ArmA simulates modern war from a more tactical, low-paced perspective. PS does the same for a futuristic/scifi setting while being multiplayer only. Both games want to feel "real" in their own context.
__________________
|
||||
|
2012-06-01, 05:48 PM | [Ignore Me] #105 | ||
Staff Sergeant
|
Arma, OpFlash, WW2OL, Ro1 (not 2 lol)
= Realism Simulation based games. Or MILSIM Simulations based heavily on lifelike movement, tactics, etc. keeping it as close to "real" as you can to simulate a war/battle. Just so we can move beyond this problem. Last edited by ShadoViper; 2012-06-01 at 06:00 PM. |
||
|
|
Bookmarks |
|
|