Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
PSU: Does cannibalism give us grief points?
Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
2012-06-01, 03:55 PM | [Ignore Me] #65 | ||
First Sergeant
|
I like prone, but im okay with it not being there. Though from what ive seen of the map design, youll pretty much always be standing then crouching for cover behind a low wall/baricade. So as long as there is some cover like that, im fine with it.
The problem does arise where say an infiltrator is doing some recon work on a ridge and the only way for her/him to see is to leave themselves exposed from the waist up. So as long as there are these areas of cover, hell even a rock will do, im content without having prone. Though to argue it makes defense more campy, defense is always campy. The best defense is to trench in. People will just camp but be crouched. So i dont really see a sound argument in just stating "it promotes camping". The main focus in the game promotes camping, bases. But to have people from popping in and out of prone fast there is a simple solution to that as well. Give prone an animation time. Soldier kneels, puts hand on ground, lays down, moves weapon into firing prone stance. Then just do the same but in reverse for getting up. Enemy lobs a grenade at you, you cant get up to move away in time. So you have a trade off there with mobility. Last edited by SpcFarlen; 2012-06-01 at 03:56 PM. |
||
|
2012-06-01, 03:57 PM | [Ignore Me] #67 | ||
Master Sergeant
|
BF3 shows why prone is a bad thing to put in an FPS. 50% of your team will lie around in some corner scrubbing the floor. They just love the LMG with bipod and ext. mags. Ratatatatatata all day and 5% overall accuracy. Its a sad thing to see, really.
__________________
(ノಠ益ಠ)ノ彡┻━┻ |
||
|
2012-06-01, 03:58 PM | [Ignore Me] #68 | |||
Lieutenant Colonel
|
Call them games. |
|||
|
2012-06-01, 04:02 PM | [Ignore Me] #69 | ||
Contributor PlanetSide 2
Game Designer |
The problem with prone is how it changes the gameplay style.
Compare BFBC2 to BF3. BFBC2 had a lot more action, more attack, more movement. Since there was no prone in BFBC2 cover was higher and facilitated attack & move style gameplay. Hiding was harder and it encouraged more assault and thus more action. Camping in corners while making yourself small as possible wasn't an issue. Gameplay with BFBC2 was quite awesome, fast paced, and fun. BF3 had less cover (because of prone), more camping (because of prone), and less action (because prone rewards camping), and attack was discouraged due to prone putting attackers at more of a disadvantage. The targets shooting at them were smaller, harder to hit, and harder to spot. Prone made the battlefield franchise worse. It isn't needed in PlanetSide 2, there's no reason to add it, and the game will be much better off without it. Last edited by Malorn; 2012-06-01 at 04:04 PM. |
||
|
2012-06-01, 04:05 PM | [Ignore Me] #70 | |||
The only valid argument for prone IMO is running and diving. Otherwise It's just a nice tool for snipers and people defending locations with a perfectly reasonable trade-off that your a sitting duck. People will camp with or without prone it's not going to matter.
__________________
Last edited by Gonefshn; 2012-06-01 at 04:07 PM. |
||||
|
2012-06-01, 04:11 PM | [Ignore Me] #71 | ||
Staff Sergeant
|
Prone works in some games, but in Planetside it would be kinda silly. Prone is supposed to be for games with a much slower pace and a far quicker time to kill like Arma and the older Rainbow 6 games where moving slowly and cautiously is important. In Planetside we have seen that your character is durable enough to survive being shot so prone is mostly just a superfluous form of movement that gets you where you want to be slower.
Last edited by lolroflroflcake; 2012-06-01 at 04:17 PM. |
||
|
2012-06-01, 04:14 PM | [Ignore Me] #72 | ||
Colonel
|
BC2 is too fast paced. Prone is not a problem.
Camping isn't a concern for people who don't want to force others to run and gun. Lack of prone doesn't encourage anything, it FORCES you to move, and that's always bad. BF3 also encourages camping by having a low TTK and other problems. You can't pick out one thing and blame it for BF3's problems. Also, the KDR lifestyle of sniping and going for a high KDR instead of playing the objective is part of it. Last edited by Stardouser; 2012-06-01 at 04:16 PM. |
||
|
2012-06-01, 04:16 PM | [Ignore Me] #73 | |||
Sergeant
|
Not that you're correct in saying forcing a player to do something is always bad. Making generalizations, that's always bad. |
|||
|
2012-06-01, 04:17 PM | [Ignore Me] #74 | |||
It simulates a futuristic war.
Proning is quite realistic, you know? You would want to lay for being less of a target and aim better. Basic military behavior, and this is a military game.
__________________
|
||||
|
2012-06-01, 04:17 PM | [Ignore Me] #75 | ||
Private
|
I never needed prone to have fun, I wouldn't miss it very much if it wasn't in ps2. In a lot of games I never used it, I felt the only reason to really use it in most games was to hide briefly as something went past and get the jump on them or move onto a objective usually the latter. Examples would be avoiding a tank...or a huge amount of enemy soldiers. So it does have it's merit in that regard for me.
More often when someone decided to prone for long periods while defending they would eventually get a grenade throw at their face! Last edited by Rare Raisin; 2012-06-01 at 04:19 PM. |
||
|
|
Bookmarks |
|
|