Headshots...

[Sirisian]

Originally Posted by basti

that doesnt work. There are easy ways to prevent that, but clientside hit detection got other issues, as well as benefits. I hope it is clientside again, because thats the only way to allow you to actually hit stuff. Otherwise you would have to start shooting infront of running targets...

http://developer.valvesoftware.com/w...yer_Networking
As a programmer it's funny watching people guess about how things would or could be implemented.

Also I mentioned a few times adding more hit boxes doesn't hurt performance. Collision is done using hierarchy. That is if a bullet fires through the world it only tests against against a spatial partitioning system first to find possible collision pairs with players. Then for each player that is found a cylinder would be tested. Only when a collision is detected against that cylinder would the bounding boxes of the player be tested.

I will point out that all of this is very very trivial to do on a computer.

Should be interesting to see how it's implemented.

[I SandRock]

Originally Posted by basti

that doesnt work. There are easy ways to prevent that,

Well if that doesn't work and there are easy ways to prevent hacking you should start making that software because last I checked pretty much every single FPS out there is playing a game of cat and mouse with hackers.

Not to mention I've seen it done in Combat Arms where due to client side hit detection people had hacks that allowed them to shoot through walls and headshot you anywhere on the map from anywhere else. This generally meant getting shot coming out of your spawn by some dude sitting in his spawn...

[Aractain]

If they are hacking, a 20% damage modifer (INSTANT KILL HEADSHOTS ARE DUMB BTW) is not really the problem is it. Its the bit where his hitting you through a wall.

[I SandRock]

Actually I'd say those getting 20% extra damage are the worst ones. At least those who use extreme hacks you know are hacking. 20% extra damage all the time pretty much means you will win any 1vs1 and it's hard to tell they were hacking.


Though on the other hand if the extreme hacks aren't taking care of they pretty much making playing the game impossible.

Either way I don't see the need. I'll throw you a bone and agree on a 1% headshot damage modifier

[Jonny]

Originally Posted by I SandRock

Either way I don't see the need. I'll throw you a bone and agree on a 1% headshot damage modifier

Oh boy, thats an incentive to aim for the head. C'mon, at least 20%?

Ok, ill meet you at 10%, deal?

[basti]

Originally Posted by Sirisian

http://developer.valvesoftware.com/w...yer_Networking
As a programmer it's funny watching people guess about how things would or could be implemented.

And as a guy who ripped apart games already and created cheats for them, i can tell you that the source engine is ASKING you to break it. And doing a MitM for a online game is just way to crazy, and complicated. And i havent even mentioned encryption of Client and traffic yet, and rumor says PS Next uses that.

But lets put it together:

Cheating is hopefully a small issue, if SOE does the job right.
Performance shall also be no big issue. Especialy because im pretty sure hit detection will be clientside again (god i HOPE so!)

Means, the only thing left is the gameplay, and im sure we all agree that any kind of hitboxes, may it be 1s1k or just 1% extra damage, is a bad idea.


/thread

[I SandRock]

Originally Posted by Jonny

Oh boy, thats an incentive to aim for the head. C'mon, at least 20%?

Ok, ill meet you at 10%, deal?

10% of 10% and you got yourself a deal!

[Aractain]

Hitboxes or in gameplay terms using tactics, rewarding skill and creating oppertunitys increase the gameplay depth and fun.

Headshots reward skill; a stray bullet wont mean much, keeping your aim cool and steady on an enemys head will.

Hitboxes on vehicles and MAXs means flanking and teamwork are greatly rewarded while creating gameplay imperitives like reversing while retreating.


A game without depth is a boring game.

[Elude]

Why not just do a headshot system similar to UT, only limit it to sniper rifles where it actually can make sense.

[DviddLeff]

The whole point of head shots is to give those with the poorer weapons like pistols more of a chance if they are good enough.

[I SandRock]

Originally Posted by DviddLeff

The whole point of head shots is to give those with the poorer weapons like pistols more of a chance if they are good enough.

That's not how it works. It makes spam guns like the MCG easy-mode because you don't need to aim, just spray near the head for great justice. Or a gun like the JH with it's spread.

Pistols do shit damage 10% of shit damage is still shit damage

[Warruz]

Originally Posted by I SandRock

That's not how it works. It makes spam guns like the MCG easy-mode because you don't need to aim, just spray near the head for great justice. Or a gun like the JH with it's spread.

Pistols do shit damage 10% of shit damage is still shit damage

Well first off why are you so close to a shotgun to warrant a full head shot? The Shotguns case should be you want to hit the body because its a bigger target and youl inflict more damage then going for the smaller headshot cause more "shot" will connect.

The Chain gun should follow same suite because its inaccurate ,the few they connect to the head shouldnt outweigh a string of body shots.

If this became a issue you could restrict it to non heavy weapons
Or it could be a scaling system

Snipers +50% Dmg
Pistols +35%
Assault Weapons +25% dmg(all assault esc rifles such as the cycler and gauss and punisher)

Just a example

[I SandRock]

Originally Posted by Warruz

Well first off why are you so close to a shotgun to warrant a full head shot?

Because I'm inside a base and turning a corner

[Bags]

Originally Posted by I SandRock

Because I'm inside a base and turning a corner

Don't go in bases, silly.

[Warruz]

Originally Posted by I SandRock

Because I'm inside a base and turning a corner

So a Headshot wouldnt really matter anyway cause your taking a shotgun shot at point blank. But i do like how you ignored my other idea.