[Mikko]

Fox, on 09 June 2013 - 01:18 AM, said:

No. But, for example, a Gravity Gun is unique.
...
Counter-strike won't change the meaning of the word "unique".

Oh so now we're into a discussion about the semantics of the word "unique"?

Every weapon in Battlefield 3 or whatever is "unique" in the same way that every human is "unique".

Slippy_Pig, on 09 June 2013 - 05:32 AM, said:

I agree with Fox. Just because a gun shoots bullets differently, it's still a bullet shooting gun. Not that it doesn't have its own unique properties, but it's not an entirely different kind of weapon.

Well you're the one who started the whole weapon discussion by referring to the plasma gun in Doom, which is of course simply a gun that "shoot bullets differently" which makes it, by your logic, a "bullet shooting gun".

fuegerstef, on 09 June 2013 - 10:01 AM, said:

Every retard without skill, good reactions or decent understanding of tactics can be succesful at it. Simple as that. Success.


EDIT:
Oh, and of course perks and other unlockable stuff and levelling up that give the unskilled the illusion of having achieved something. Result: Success.


It is like with music for example. Listen to songs fro children. Children love them. But later they become boring to the more mature people because the brain evolves and isn't satisfied with the simplistic structure and harmonies of songs for children.

Now take a gamer who has played since 1978 and went from Pong to Quake,UT, various Tactical SHooters, etc.

CoD might remind him of the simple songs for children. Oh, yes, there is all that fancy stuff around it. But the gameplay itself is as if you are in Kindergarten and an adult takes you by the hand to cross the street (single player) or playing in a sandbox with other kids and a killstreak is when that other kid hits you on the head with his shovel 3 times (multiplayer).

What a load of elitist crap. I mean really, a person's "brain evolves" so that the person is no longer "satisfied with the simplistic structure"? I supposed you don't consider Doom & RotT simplistic? They're far more simple than CoD could ever hope to be. The original RotT is downright terrible in its extreme simplicity.

[----]

Mikko_Sandt, on 09 June 2013 - 01:05 PM, said:

What a load of elitist crap. I mean really, a person's "brain evolves" so that the person is no longer "satisfied with the simplistic structure"?

Neuroscience. It is the truth. (Not that I think you would understand such stuff) To put it this way: A human being (generally) feels most comfortable within the known, but enjoys variations. It is in our brains.

That's why music like we have today wouldn't have worked in the 50s (to stay with the music example) although the "rebels" in the 50s also used their music to offend the elders. But they would have hated hardrock or metal of today because with a whole populations these vvariations need longer. For individuals it works faster. And todays rock music is much more complex than in the 50s (talking about pop music here).
Look at the harmonies in songs for children. Mostly within one key without modulation.

With games a person who played a lot of games wants variations in the gameplay and challanges. All people do that. But for some the barrier to enjoy a challange is much lower and the threshold where it is too complex is much lower too.

How often does a person say "this gets dull" or "this is boring" or "getting old fast". It is in our brains, no matter how often you deny it.

[Mikko]

STFU and hail to the Godfather of all FPS you fucking fanboy of immature bullshit games.
If it comes down to the essentials, DukeNukem, Half-Life, Doom and Quake will fuck ALL of your BF,CoD and whatever games one after another!
Nuff said.
youtube.com/watch?v=h6YTBTSsrqU
I was born in 1982 and had this game on my Pentium computer in 1994. it was awesome cod black ops 2 sucks this game was awesome. if you compare the two as contemporaries as you seem to be doing of course cod piece is better but only a fool directly compares a classic to a new pos.
youtube.com/watch?v=yr-lQZzevwA

This is what I have a huge problem with. A few years ago there was none of this. Then CoD came and what used to be an interesting group of gamers retreated into a bubble of insecure elitism, started off a massive circle jerk and turned into a bunch that's far more annoying than any CoD-playing ADHD kid could ever hope to be. You can check any Youtube video featuring an oldskool fps and come across a billion comments about how old games are better and how CoD fans are stupid. These same pests can occasionally be found commenting CoD gameplay videos too with their elitist, immature filth. Compared to this, CoD fanboys come off as civil.

[----]

Mikko_Sandt, on 09 June 2013 - 01:23 PM, said:

STFU and hail to the Godfather of all FPS you fucking fanboy of immature bullshit games.
If it comes down to the essentials, DukeNukem, Half-Life, Doom and Quake will fuck ALL of your BF,CoD and whatever games one after another!
Nuff said.
youtube.com/watch?v=h6YTBTSsrqU
I was born in 1982 and had this game on my Pentium computer in 1994. it was awesome cod black ops 2 sucks this game was awesome. if you compare the two as contemporaries as you seem to be doing of course cod piece is better but only a fool directly compares a classic to a new pos.
youtube.com/watch?v=yr-lQZzevwA

This is what I have a huge problem with. A few years ago there was none of this. Then CoD came and what used to be an interesting group of gamers retreated into a bubble of insecure elitism, started off a massive circle jerk and turned into a bunch that's far more annoying than any CoD-playing ADHD kid could ever hope to be. You can check any Youtube video featuring an oldskool fps and come across a billion comments about how old games are better and how CoD fans are stupid. These same pests can occasionally be found commenting CoD gameplay videos too with their elitist, immature filth. Compared to this, CoD fanboys come off as civil.

The thing is, that 90% of the CoD fans are not even "fans" as we know them. Well, even with the less mainstream IPs you see only a ver small percentage of them coming to forums or reading on the web and being dedicated to the game. With CoD it is even more extreme. This is a franchise that goes far beyond gamers. It is for "everyone". And it surely has very high production values, good visuals and it keeps you entertained with variation within the campaign (the thing I explained in former post) by changing the setting each mission. But, because of the fact it caters to such a wide audience gameplay has to be kept simpler.


Oh and for you info:
I played CoD with an open mind to see what it is about. The result for me was that I was bored to death and threw it away (well, uninstalled it, got it from steam). But since I am interested how things work I looked into the phenomenon and why it is so popular with the masses. I happened to study such stuff and read alot about all this.
We can argue and call it elitism or whatever ... it won't change the facts that if something is meant for the masses it needs to be simplified.

[Mikko]

fuegerstef, on 09 June 2013 - 01:20 PM, said:

Neuroscience. It is the truth. To put it this way: A human being (generally) feels most comfortable within the known, but enjoys variations.

...

With games a person who played a lot of games wants variations in the gameplay and challanges. All people do that. But for some the barrier to enjoy a challange is much lower and the threshold where it is too complex is much lower too.

By this token, the gamer who's played tons of games can increase variation by playing CoD. Oldskool gamers are not looking for a challenge or variation but are instead stuck playing only the type of games they grew up with, and these games tend to be the most simple of all.

[Mikko]

fuegerstef, on 09 June 2013 - 01:31 PM, said:

The thing is, that 90% of the CoD fans are not even "fans" as we know them. Well, even with the less mainstream IPs you see only a ver small percentage of them coming to forums or reading on the web and being dedicated to the game. With CoD it is even more extreme. This is a franchise that goes far beyond gamers. It is for "everyone". And it surely has very high production values, good visuals and it keeps you entertained with variation within the campaign (the thing I explained in former post) by changing the setting each mission. But, because of the fact it caters to such a wide audience gameplay has to be kept simpler.

Just as it was with Doom, Duke3D, Quake, etc.

[----]

Mikko_Sandt, on 09 June 2013 - 01:31 PM, said:

By this token, the gamer who's played tons of games can increase variation by playing CoD. Oldskool gamers are not looking for a challenge or variation but are instead stuck playing only the type of games they grew up with, and these games tend to be the most simple of all.

I edited my last post. There I said I played CoD with an open mind. But it was so boring to me when it comes to gameplay*. And a fact remains: If something is meant for the masses it has to be simplified.

*)As I always say: We had this before, with less shaders and fewer polygons, but more depth and more interesting gameplay.


And I wouldn't care at all, if it wouldn't affect other IPs in a negative way. I wouldn't mind if every studio has it's CoD clone to make money and then have IPs that stay true to their formula but advance it. And I think that is what a lot of people have a problem with. It affects their IPs and suddenly they have to walk down a corridor with only one door at the end ... and this door flashes blue and an overlay telling you that this is a door that you can use as exit if you press the "open door" button (which is exaclty what happend in DNF) and you suddenly drop a weapon as soon as you try to pick up a third.

[Mikko]

fuegerstef, on 09 June 2013 - 01:36 PM, said:

I edited my last post. There I said I played CoD with an open mind. But it was so boring to me when it comes to gameplay*. And a fact remains: If something is meant for the masses it has to be simplified.

*)As I always say: We had this before, with less shaders and fewer polygons, but more depth and more interesting gameplay.

Well, again, is Doom not a pretty damn simple game too? The maps make no sense, there are no puzzles beyond finding objects lying on the ground, the environments hardly change and there's zero variation in gameplay. ID Software intentionally simplified both Doom & Quake, both of which were originally intended to be more complex with Doom having NPC buddies and more realistic maps and Quake having RPG elements.

Edit: Also, interestingly, back in 1996 people were willing to overlook Quake's rather weak single-player "campaign" because of its much more popular multiplayer mode, which is pretty much what's going on with the CoD franchise.

[Fox]

Forge, on 09 June 2013 - 08:31 AM, said:

i can play the running in circles game as well

then don't complain about mechanics based on reality if those are the types of games you choose to play
play something with a more varied arsenal

So your point is that "reality"-based games are immune to criticism?

Mikko_Sandt, on 09 June 2013 - 01:05 PM, said:

Oh so now we're into a discussion about the semantics of the word "unique"?

If you are going to argue that BF3 guns are unique because of the slightest differences, then yes, it is necessary to point out the meaning of "unique".

Mikko_Sandt, on 09 June 2013 - 01:05 PM, said:

Every weapon in Battlefield 3 or whatever is "unique" in the same way that every human is "unique".

A mantra o make mediocre people feel better?

Mikko_Sandt, on 09 June 2013 - 01:05 PM, said:

Well you're the one who started the whole weapon discussion by referring to the plasma gun in Doom, which is of course simply a gun that "shoot bullets differently" which makes it, by your logic, a "bullet shooting gun".

Which is a ridiculous argument that doesn't prove that BF3 has unique weapons.

Mikko_Sandt, on 09 June 2013 - 01:23 PM, said:

STFU and hail to the Godfather of all FPS you fucking fanboy of immature bullshit games.
If it comes down to the essentials, DukeNukem, Half-Life, Doom and Quake will fuck ALL of your BF,CoD and whatever games one after another!
Nuff said.
youtube.com/watch?v=h6YTBTSsrqU
I was born in 1982 and had this game on my Pentium computer in 1994. it was awesome cod black ops 2 sucks this game was awesome. if you compare the two as contemporaries as you seem to be doing of course cod piece is better but only a fool directly compares a classic to a new pos.
youtube.com/watch?v=yr-lQZzevwA

This is what I have a huge problem with. A few years ago there was none of this. Then CoD came and what used to be an interesting group of gamers retreated into a bubble of insecure elitism, started off a massive circle jerk and turned into a bunch that's far more annoying than any CoD-playing ADHD kid could ever hope to be. You can check any Youtube video featuring an oldskool fps and come across a billion comments about how old games are better and how CoD fans are stupid. These same pests can occasionally be found commenting CoD gameplay videos too with their elitist, immature filth. Compared to this, CoD fanboys come off as civil.

The same reaction they have to Justin Bieber, which is kinda of deserved.

[----]

Mikko_Sandt, on 09 June 2013 - 01:42 PM, said:

Well, again, is Doom not a pretty damn simple game too? The maps make no sense, there are no puzzles beyond finding objects lying on the ground, the environments hardly change and there's zero variation in gameplay. ID Software intentionally simplified both Doom & Quake, both of which were originally intended to be more complex with Doom having NPC buddies and more realistic maps and Quake having RPG elements.

Edit: Also, interestingly, back in 1996 people were willing to overlook Quake's rather weak single-player "campaign" because of its much more popular multiplayer mode, which is pretty much what's going on with the CoD franchise.

Interesting fact: I have over 700 games installed, as a collection. Those are all the games I enjoyed in my life an a lot that serve as inspiration and so on (I make smaller advertising games for a living) from Space Invaders* to Crysis 3**. Doom isn't one of them (although I have the BFG with the classics included edition and might once play it), because I felt it was boring. And no Quake either. I always though UT had more depth with the weapons (alt fire and combined firemodes) although it only had dodging and no strafe jumping. Quake was more of getting from one short firefight to the next, UT was more abuout the firefights.

What got me into shooters were the Marathon series and of course Duke Nukem 3D.


*) Pong cannot be emulated, so it isn't on my HD.
**) Only for that one open mission towards the end.

[leilei]

No one cares how many games you've owned or how long you have played them. You've claimed your non-enjoyment of CoD has to do with "evolved" intelligence. All I see is the "its popular so it sucks" dead horse with unnecessary personal condescending over it. xkcd/386 applies heavily.

I'm old and I own a huge game collection too, but that doesn't make me superior. But if you can't enjoy CoD, a game that was a breath of fresh air in 2003, you'll really hate MOHAA... which I also enjoyed in 2002, because it too were a breath of fresh air since RTCW bored me for feeling like some Q3 single player mod.


Funny, because years ago I often saw this same kind of argument over Halo, which has much less degree of 'everything is a non unique bullet weapon' and a far more fantastical unrealistic setting, It's the whole "because xbox kids play it i do not want to be part of it!!!" elitism i'm seeing, and yes this retro PC gaming elitist snobbery only cropped up recently and makes me feel ashamed to have them representing that platform with obnoxious fauxstalgia...

[----]

Fox, on 09 June 2013 - 01:42 PM, said:

The same reaction they have to Justin Bieber, which is kinda of deserved.

Imagine your favourite band (Slayer, to name one random example) would suddenly make music close to Justin Bieber's music, because he is so successful. That's what we currently have in the gaming industry.

I don't have a problem with CoD. It is not for me. But I don't like it that other IPs suddenly try to be what they aren't.

Yes, Bieber will always sell more records than Slayer or some genius indie band. But that's OK. But that's why I think that some IPs soudln't be AAA games but independantly produced like Shadow Warrior Redux, for exmaple (don't know if it will be good, or be my taste, just saying that the indie approach works well if you want to do something not appealing to the masses).

[----]

leilei, on 09 June 2013 - 01:58 PM, said:

All I see is the "its popular so it sucks" dead horse with unnecessary personal condescending over it.

Get some glasses than. Seems necessary. If you were able to read you had learned that I said if it has to appeal to the masses it has to be simplified and that I find that boring. And I explained how mass appeal works. But then I also explained that I have no problem with every studio makng it's CoD clone or Justin Bieber making his music etc ... as long as it doesn't affect other IPs too much.


I will try to exaplin explain what I think would be a good addition to the Duke Nukem IP and that is taken from the more mainstream IPs: Iron Sights. Not for all weapons, but for some, like the pistol for example. It is inaccurate in DN3D and if that accuracy is carried over to the sequel nothing had changed. But if you need better accuracy to shoot for example some distant buttons you can aim down the sights and all is fine (as long as the rest of the gamplay doesn't completely rely on it and replacing the IPs strong points with cover based sight aiming).


Look, the newes CoD Ghostdog footage, underwater: http://kotaku.com/ht...-acce-512204150

Amazing graphics and a lot of suspense could be created and you could explore this gorgeous environment and fill it with enemies in caves, behind plants, etc ... but all you do is swim after the other person until you reach that point where you meet the enemies. I find that boring. Visually impressive, but boring. Because nothing happens and all you have to do is follow the other person. Yes, I know, not being satisfied by the challange of pressing the right direction buttons to swim the same way as the leader might sound elitist to you, but I want more from shooters than that and then ending up at the next enemy checkpoint where you have a little shooting followed by the next passage of basically doing nothing.

OH: EDIT: Sorry, I cannot resist. Didn't they say that the next gereation will be so amazing that the fishes swim away when the player comes near them. Apart from the fact that this was done over 10 years ago in some Mario game ... why does one of the fishes in the next Gen CoD even hit the player's scuba maks, not enough GPU power for all fishes?

[leilei]

The only studio I see making a CoD clone is EA DICE and that was only since the Medal of Honor reboot.

[----]

leilei, on 09 June 2013 - 02:12 PM, said:

The only studio I see making a CoD clone is EA DICE and that was only since the Medal of Honor reboot.

What I meant is that I have no problem with every studio wanting their piece of the cake by making their game close to this and having 2 weapons, and a linear cinematic approach and helpers everyhere (if you can disable that the latter are Ok everywhere).

as long as the original IPs stay true to their formula.

[Forge]

Fox, on 09 June 2013 - 01:42 PM, said:

So your point is that "reality"-based games are immune to criticism?

er, what?

maybe i misunderstood the point you were making earlier. I though you were saying the weapons weren't unique enough from each other.

I mentioned that they're based off real mechanics to fit in with a game based on realism.

ergo: complaining about realistic weapons in a realistic based game isn't really making connections between my synapses.

[Minigunner]

fuegerstef, on 09 June 2013 - 02:03 PM, said:

I will try to exaplin explain what I think would be a good addition to the Duke Nukem IP and that is taken from the more mainstream IPs: Iron Sights. Not for all weapons, but for some, like the pistol for example. It is inaccurate in DN3D and if that accuracy is carried over to the sequel nothing had changed. But if you need better accuracy to shoot for example some distant buttons you can aim down the sights and all is fine (as long as the rest of the gamplay doesn't completely rely on it and replacing the IPs strong points with cover based sight aiming).

"Iron sights? I don't need no friggin' iron sights!" *turns on laser sight*
In all seriousness, it sucks that neither Duke3D nor DNF made use of the laser sight on their respective pistol. Well, the former was understandable due to some issues it had while it was in Lameduke, but the latter has no excuse. It would be nice to run and have a good field of view, and be accurate at the same time.

[leilei]

Bandwidth has a lot to do with why there's lack of visible laser sights in multiplayer games. Having to update those per game tic is just TAXING to network congestion, it's not something you can simply predict like lerping player velocity between updates. TF2 sniper gets delayed updates for it.

[Minigunner]

It's not that I want a visible effect; it's that I want it to actually be useful. Since there's a crosshair anyways, the best use to give it would be an accuracy upgrade akin to L4D2. Of course, it'd have to be limited to Duke's pistol and not just any old pistol.

[Kathy]

fuegerstef, on 09 June 2013 - 01:20 PM, said:

And todays rock music is much more complex than in the 50s (talking about pop music here).

I want to say something here, but have no time to elaborate. I find this whole music analogy quite arguable.

fuegerstef, on 09 June 2013 - 02:03 PM, said:

why does one of the fishes in the next Gen CoD even hit the player's scuba maks, not enough GPU power for all fishes?

Not enough clouds.

P.S. Gonna be late... Again.

[----]

Cathy, on 09 June 2013 - 07:23 PM, said:

I want to say something here, but have no time to elaborate. I find this whole music analogy quite arguable.

I would love to have nice discussion about that. In another thread, though. Problem would be that my English is OK for everyday use and when it comes to gaming terms. But I had a hard time explaining what I mean earlier already, because my scientific english is not good, because it isn't my first language.
But when it is OK if I more often describe things with everyday words, I am fine with tht too.

[Kathy]

I'm also not a native speaker. And quite frankly I don't really want to discuss this really because there is too much to discuss and probably it should be done with musical theory at hand which I haven't learnt much.

Also, I just came back to find limping cat and a frontal loudspeaker in horizontal position so I am not in the mood to argue.

[Fox]

Neither am I, but I know the swearing, so I think I can handle any Internet discussion.

[Jimmy]

Define pop rock of the modern age and pop rock of yester-year. Also state WHERE it was popular.
That's just a broad, terrible analogy.

[Kathy]

That's the problem I didn't want to tackle. For discussion to continue there needs to be some clarifications and if we can't come to understanding regarding word 'unique' the discussion is surely will be a long one. Especially with a Jimmy on board.

[Jimmy]

I don't know, just as an avid music buff and shit-tier musician that completely rubbed me the wrong way, it sounded like something someone who just listens to Top-40 Flavour of the Week type shit might say.

[Kathy]

He expressed it in somewhat not clear way. And I don't think analogy between shooters and music is appropriate. I suggest we just leave it at that.

[Radar]

fuegerstef said:

And todays rock music is much more complex than in the 50s (talking about pop music here).

Elvis?

[----]

Radar, on 11 June 2013 - 10:37 AM, said:

Elvis?

In form and rhythm, yes. Overall you can find out that the music rules were loosened, if that makes sense.

[Mikko]

Gonna be gone for a few days so you nigs can catch a breath.