TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- fao: pkc
Pages (4): « 1 2 [3] 4 »

It's like /v/ but with intelligence.

And they're actually talking about video games.

quote:

Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On Internet connectivity had a little something to do with that. I remember playing Doom 2 in deathmatches over the net. That was actually the first place I'd heard the term.

Doom 2, DM8. The one that was a big square and had all the spiders in it. that�s something I miss from the doom days, you could death match in an arena with re-spawning monsters. I�d like to see that make a comeback.

quote:

Originally posted by shaw that helps level the cross-platform playing field, so to speak, but certainly doesn't make them equal.

If anything, aiming in Halo is much easier than in competitive PC titles. If you find it harder, then you simply haven't put in enough time with the control system.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN You make a fair point. But, since the title came out the previous year, I am still going to compare it to HL given that GE�s influence on HL would be negligible unless you�re alleging that valve re-wrote the game mid-stream. Again, I am not doubting its quality, just that the MP did not light me on fire.

Valve did remake the game halfway through. Famously. It was originally scheduled for a similar release date to Quake II, but Valve weren't happy with it and spent an extra year on it. That was the beginning of "Valve time".

quote:

anyway, I would hardly call the dual-weapon inventory notable at all. sure, it made you choose which weapons you take on your adventure, but in the thick of it all it really meant was that you were forced to go grab another weapon if your ammo ran out. The health/shield system I agree made the game play differently, and this was a net loss to FPS everywhere. All you need to do is look at the shitness of health-recovery systems in just about any title released these days. sure, it was revolutionary, but not in a positive fashion. Melee existed from the times of wolfenstein (possibly before) and was a big part of Q3 so not sure what you�re referring to here.

I'm sorry man, but you simply do not understand the game you are talking about (and dismissing). In terms of multi-player weapon balance the dual weapon inventory is absolutely critical to Halo. It's completely central. Melee in previous FPS games had been like grenades in previous FPS games - it was a unique weapon on the inventory. What I'm talking about is having the melee on a separate button, as with the grenades, so you can use both of them without switching weapon. That changes the gameplay massively. Massively. It's a new dimension to the options you have available at any point in combat. If you don't understand that, you simply do not understand Halo.

I'm not actually a massive fan of Halo's single-player in terms of overall design. Level design, enemies and so on are fairly average. The appeal of that side of the game is in the unique core mechanics allowed by the things I'm talking about. Bungie themselves described it as "30 seconds of fun, over and over". They designed a core model that was original and great fun, and put it into an epic space opera plot with grand scale and production values.

quote:

as a gamer whose main interest in (traditional) FPS lies in competitive MP, I resent being called a fuckstick for placing greater importance in certain areas, particularly in things like precision, competitive gameplay, speed/skill ceilings etc. these are, after all, part of the fundamental aspects of FPS MP.

Granted, and I didn't expect to offend you with a throwaway insult, but I know a few guys like you who are seriously into the competitive thing and they're all completely intolerant of other perspectives on good game design. It's a real fanatical tunnel-vision outlook I always get from these guys. And don't get me wrong I respect your knowledge and opinion on games, but I've seen you shit on Halo over and over and yet it's pretty blatant from what you've said you just don't understand the game's design at all. And again, dismissing GoldenEye when you admit you've only played half the game and you played it several years after the fact. You can't have a fair perspective on how revolutionary games like that felt if you didn't play it until every single game being released was copying it.

I know you like to play up the abrasiveness for effect, but when you come across with an extremely hard-line and dismissive stance on particular games when you clearly don't have the knowledge to justify it, you unfortunately come across as, well... a bit of a fuckstick.

You sound awfully nostalgic.

quote:

Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On You sound awfully nostalgic.

About what?

About that time you brought your Gamegear to the sandbox just to tell all of the other kids they were stupid for playing with shovels.

Goldeneye was not revolutionary.

quote:

Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On Goldeneye was not revolutionary.

* Objective-based missions
* Pseudo-realistic AI: patrol patterns, alert/non-alert behaviour states, etc.
* Realistic level design
* Sound-based stealth
* LOS-based stealth
* Hit-boxes
* Sniping
* Drivable vehicles
* Active NPCs

I can't even be bothered to detail all the weapon and game mode innovations. As said earlier, I played just about every major FPS game released on PC or console from 1993 to the end of the decade. I know GoldenEye was revolutionary.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J * Objective-based missions * Pseudo-realistic AI: patrol patterns, alert/non-alert behaviour states, etc. * Realistic level design * Sound-based stealth * LOS-based stealth * Hit-boxes * Sniping * Drivable vehicles * Active NPCs I can't even be bothered to detail all the weapon and game mode innovations. As said earlier, I played just about every major FPS game released on PC or console from 1993 to the end of the decade. I know GoldenEye was revolutionary.

i'll give you hitboxes.

but to be fair, Jedi Knight had hitboxes too. just not as obvious.
(hey i'm back!)

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J Your strawman is bullshit, son. Insert coin to try again.

I liked this.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J If anything, aiming in Halo is much easier than in competitive PC titles. If you find it harder, then you simply haven't put in enough time with the control system.

Well the hitbox does take up half the screen after all
It still feels very unnatural though to just use thumbs to aim.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J * Objective-based missions * Pseudo-realistic AI: patrol patterns, alert/non-alert behaviour states, etc. * Realistic level design * Sound-based stealth * LOS-based stealth * Hit-boxes * Sniping * Drivable vehicles * Active NPCs I can't even be bothered to detail all the weapon and game mode innovations. As said earlier, I played just about every major FPS game released on PC or console from 1993 to the end of the decade. I know GoldenEye was revolutionary.

System Shock?

(For the record, I agree Golden Eye was one of the better games back then and helped drive a lot of future development, but the control system was still inherently flawed and slow because of the gamepad)

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J Valve did remake the game halfway through. Famously. It was originally scheduled for a similar release date to Quake II, but Valve weren't happy with it and spent an extra year on it. That was the beginning of "Valve time".

Ok, I don�t remember it being re-written.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J Melee in previous FPS games had been like grenades in previous FPS games - it was a unique weapon on the inventory. What I'm talking about is having the melee on a separate button, as with the grenades, so you can use both of them without switching weapon. That changes the gameplay massively. Massively. It's a new dimension to the options you have available at any point in combat. If you don't understand that, you simply do not understand Halo.

Oh right, I see what you�re saying now. My mistake. Still though, I don�t think this is particularly impressive, especially given the minor change in gameplay mechanic (ie eliminates the use of a shortcut key because its ever-ready). It certainly makes more sense for a controller.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J Granted, and I didn't expect to offend you with a throwaway insult,

Well, im not normally. But coming from you and being seemingly unprovoked, it caught me off-guard!

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J but I know a few guys like you who are seriously into the competitive thing and they're all completely intolerant of other perspectives on good game design. It's a real fanatical tunnel-vision outlook I always get from these guys. And don't get me wrong I respect your knowledge and opinion on games, but I've seen you shit on Halo over and over and yet it's pretty blatant from what you've said you just don't understand the game's design at all.

look, I just don�t think halo was a particularly good game. I didn�t enjoy it. It was boring. It was slow. The health/shield system worked well but I didn�t like that mechanic, or its appearance in other titles (I don�t like the reward for hiding like a bitch). I played PC, xbox & 360 versions of halo. Didn�t like them for reasons already mentioned.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J And again, dismissing GoldenEye when you admit you've only played half the game and you played it several years after the fact. You can't have a fair perspective on how revolutionary games like that felt if you haven't played it until every single game being released was copying it.

Other than my first post claiming that quake was the better title, where exactly have I �dismissed� it? I think I mentioned that it was a great game in at least 2 posts already. Having not enjoyed the MP part I wasn�t going to play SP, but yes, i wasn�t in a position to gauge its awesomeness at release, a fact which I have admitted to.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J I know you like to play up the abrasiveness for effect, but when you come across with an extremely hard-line and dismissive stance on particular games when you clearly don't have the knowledge to justify it, you unfortunately come across as, well... a bit of a fuckstick.

Fair enough, however misunderstanding your posts is not the same thing as not having the knowledge. I played more hours of halo than I care to admit, and I did not find the duel-wielding, melee-using, auto-healing options to be very much fun at all, nor such mechanics to be particularly exciting or revolutionary, and in one of those cases, was imo to the detriment of FPS generally.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN Ok, I don�t remember it being re-written.

it wasn't really.

but Gordon Freeman looked like a lumberjack before.....plus there were a few "scripted sequences" that were cut...like when Barney and a Scientist were arguing and a monster (that was cut from the game) came up behind them, barney threw the scientist to the ground and ran to safety.

edit:



edit #2

i miss the old days of half-life and counter strike when you could zoom with the colt. and warp around the map with gauss and long jump.

now we have ragdoll perfect cs
god damn i've grown up


edit. god damn that guy was hard to kill :X

quote:

Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On Goldeneye was not revolutionary.

anybody want to play quake live?!

i'm kinda drunk but i can play instagib.

quote:

Originally posted by Fledz Well the hitbox does take up half the screen after all It still feels very unnatural though to just use thumbs to aim. System Shock? (For the record, I agree Golden Eye was one of the better games back then and helped drive a lot of future development, but the control system was still inherently flawed and slow because of the gamepad)

You can't hold that against the game though as it wasn't the games fault but the hardware. Having said that though, for it's time I found the controls to be the absolute best for a console.

I'm not holding it against it. It was just an observation

I think everyone can agree that goldeneye was a very fun game to play with your friends...

but I also guarantee that the new goldeneye for wii will suck dick...and that games today don't borrow ANYTHING from goldeneye, except for mutilators...

license to kill + pistols was my favorite way to play golden eye.

goldeneye and all the other old school FPS for n64 had THE WORST control scheme. ever. n64 controllers were such fucking fail. they almost got it right with the thumbstick- but instead of a 2nd one, they had fucking c-buttons. so retarded.

anyways, of course mouse and keyboard are where it's at for FPS, but for halo, which everyone realizes is a "slow" fps, xbox controller-s' are where it's at. i would never play halo with a mouse and keyboard.

quote:

Originally posted by Fledz System Shock?

Yeah, I'll admit System Shock did a couple of those things earlier, but I tend to think of it more as an RPG title a la Ultima Underworld. Definitely an important game but it only sold 170,000 copies and so many of the things it did do were simply unknown to the larger audience. GoldenEye sold 8,000,000 copies and an important part of being a pioneer is that people listen to you and act because of you.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN Oh right, I see what you�re saying now. My mistake. Still though, I don�t think this is particularly impressive, especially given the minor change in gameplay mechanic (ie eliminates the use of a shortcut key because its ever-ready). It certainly makes more sense for a controller.

It's emergent gameplay from simple interaction of variables. In isolation each of the changes is very small, but because they're central to everything you do in a given moment of combat, they combine with each other for emergent patterns that are quite different to standard FPS mechanics. I don't want to get too wanky about this, but Halo, particularly MP, plays a hell of a lot different to more conventional shooters. Quakematch may be much more balanced, and I've had a hell of a lot of fun with it, but it feels almost two dimensional at times in comparison. Halo has that bit of nuance about it that makes it different, and interesting. Even if you don't like it, to downplay the importance of the gameplay mechanics suggests you simply don't know the game well enough.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J Yeah, I'll admit System Shock did a couple of those things earlier, but I tend to think of it more as an RPG title a la Ultima Underworld. Definitely an important game but it only sold 170,000 copies and so many of the things it did do were simply unknown to the larger audience. GoldenEye sold 8,000,000 copies and an important part of being a pioneer is that people listen to you and act because of you.

Mmmmmmmm there's sort of a point there and there sort of isn't. SS came out in 94, GE when, 97? 98? Sales of games have rapidly risen over the past two decades so it's not the most accurate measure.

Deus Ex to date has sold over a million copies.
If circumstances were similar now, 10 years later but with the type of sales we're seeing, it would at least triple that number if not more. Granted, DX had a slow start but sales would catch up. Not every game can be Starcraft 2 or CoD#.

Gaming in 94 also wasn't mainstream but I think by the end of the century it really was becoming mainstream.

quote:

Originally posted by Fledz Mmmmmmmm there's sort of a point there and there sort of isn't. SS came out in 94, GE when, 97? 98? Sales of games have rapidly risen over the past two decades so it's not the most accurate measure.

Measure of what? I'm not trying to validate the game through its popularity. I'm stating a simple fact: System Shock was not a widely played game, and so not many people saw what it could do. Even in 1994 on the PC, 170,000 copies was not a large number. Ultima Underworld, a previous and similar Looking Glass title, sold 500,000 copies in 1992. Top PC titles of the era, such as Doom, Myst, SimCity and Civilisation, were shipping 5,000,000+ copies.

They were? Interesting, I was thinking the numbers would have been far lower that far back. Apparently not.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J It's emergent gameplay from simple interaction of variables. In isolation each of the changes is very small, but because they're central to everything you do in a given moment of combat, they combine with each other for emergent patterns that are quite different to standard FPS mechanics. I don't want to get too wanky about this, but Halo, particularly MP, plays a hell of a lot different to more conventional shooters. Quakematch may be much more balanced, and I've had a hell of a lot of fun with it, but it feels almost two dimensional at times in comparison. Halo has that bit of nuance about it that makes it different, and interesting. Even if you don't like it, to downplay the importance of the gameplay mechanics suggests you simply don't know the game well enough.

Well, I don�t think you�re being wanky, just seriously exaggerating the significance of something like the melee key. Like seriously, big f�n deal. Quake two-dimensional in comparison? First off let�s remember that it plays like 400% faster. This gives the gameplay more nuance; the margins for error are much smaller. The skill ceiling is much higher, inc. rocket/grenade jumping & knowing how to run thru a map backwards. Let�s remember the lack of gameplay assists, like aim or reticles the size of small African nations. There�s plenty of nuance in how you dominate weapons/armour/quad etc.

I�ve seen people play halo and I�ve played it myself and it is merely another unrealistic game of circle-strafing (just in slow mo) or long-range sniping. No, I don�t think that something as insignificant as a default melee button is something that is particularly notable, especially given that almost the identical result can and was achieved through shortcuts previously. The fact that the melee is much more useful is somewhat notable though. Also, obviously the shield mechanic is an important facet of the gameplay, I haven�t meant to play that down. I don�t happen to like it but it certainly has a big impact on how the game is played.

But you�re right, maybe I don�t know the game enough. I don�t tend to play average titles for very long

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN I�ve seen people play halo and I�ve played it myself and it is merely another unrealistic game of circle-strafing (just in slow mo) or long-range sniping.

I gave you more credit than this.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.