• Call of Duty “has almost ruined a generation of shooter players,” says Tripwire Interactive
    258 replies, posted
[QUOTE=27X;39930714]You always make incredibly stupid responses to threads about mainstream populist gaming.[/QUOTE] Don't be so emotional because someone disagrees with your opinion about video games that you give in to flaming. Your post could have been made without this anecdote. Relax. There is no need to be so combative. [QUOTE] The topic says nothing about the mechanics in a vacuum. The article is entirely about player reaction to the mechanics. He even spells out the reason it's immensely popular, his main area of concern is establishing a false ceiling and floor on the level of skill you can bring to bear, and he's 100% correct on how narrow it is[/QUOTE] I never disagreed, atleast in relation to the skill ceiling. It's incredibly easy to join a pub match of Black Ops 2 with an SMG and rack up kills. I'd say the game has a higher skill ceiling than people give it credit for under controlled conditions (competitive matches, CoD4 promod) but that's unrelated. I was never defending CoD as a particularly skillful or deep game, I just find the exaggeration of his statement that it"almost ruined a generation of shooter players" to be ridiculous hyperbole. [QUOTE]and he doesn't even bring up the [B]15 year old[/B] lag compensation model they further use to enforce this artificiality of progression.[/QUOTE] If it works it works. Call of Duty games, as long as everyones at a decent ping on dedicated servers, has pretty good hit detection, easily better than what you will find in RO2 and most of CoD's direct competition. [QUOTE]Whether RO2 sold well or not is actually completely immaterial and not even germane to the subject at hand, which is CoD mechanics are artificially simplistic and the gameplay equivalent of junk food, and the fact that the world's best CoD players tend to get smeared in other games with relative impunity by midcard contenders in other communities tends to make his theory hold some weight.[/QUOTE] I don't think that really happens. Do you actually have proof of this happening, of the worlds best CoD players jumping into other games and getting "smeared" by the average players of whatever that game is? And for consistencies sake, what about players of those games jumping over to CoD? With my own anecdote I know someone who is decent at games like Battlefield and Planetside where one can easily dominate the field by getting into a tank or a plane, but quickly becomes frustrated with CoD because it requires faster reflexes and maneuvering. That's not to say you are wrong, your statement just comes across as a very thinly veiled "CoD players suck at all games" instead of anything of substance. If I wanted to know what random people on the internet think about CoD, I have enough material to last me awhile.
[QUOTE=zombojoe;39931790]CS is virtually the only modern FPS where every gun handles very differently. Very different recoil and spray patters for all the guns, you can't gun someone down from across the map with an MP5 like CoD.[/QUOTE] I used to snipe the shit out of people with the pump shotgun in CSS [editline]16th March 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Sunday_Roast;39932203]Except that in CS; your bullets go all over the place and only hit things by chance if you fire full auto. And different guns require different tactics. In CoD I've noticed that the only effect of not holding the trigger down until your foe drops is that you will put out less damage per second and loose the firefight.[/QUOTE] Yeah, I mean different guns have different spreads, recoils, and damage but if you can at least aim properly they're all generally accurate enough to hit your target from across the map. And if you hit them in the head it doesn't matter what gun you used because its always an instant kill (unless they have a helmet or something)
[QUOTE=0FucksGiven;39932029] "gunning people down from across the map" happens with every weapon imaginable, you don't need to be 10 feet away from someone in CS to hit them. [/QUOTE] This was always the best part about CS. Running MP5 to get easy headshots at medium range, mac-10 for the ROF, or AK/M4 for the range.
I won't debate the linearity of Call of Duty, but I will argue that there is nothing wrong with the gameplay. I can't stand a lot of modern shooters because they have momentum systems and weapons that shake like a paint shaker if you hold the trigger. As where in games like Unreal Tournament 3, Saints Row 3, Borderlands 2, you move exactly when you tell your character to and your weapons are extremely accurate with little to no spray. In games like Battlefield 3, Red Orchestra 2, ARMA 2, you have no hope in hell of hitting anything 300 yards away unless you hunker down and take your time with each round, and if someone ever runs up on you while your prone or stationary, you're just fucked if you try to get up/back away quickly enough to not get lit up by someone charging you. When I play a video game, I want to play [b]a video game[/b], not a life simulator. I don't care about how real weapons work, I don't care about how real physics applies to the body, I just want to shoot things and have fun. [editline]March 16, 2013[/editline] Additionally, if you're making something like a video game, where you have no form of restraint and you can do literally anything, why would you want to limit yourself to Earthly rules? It just seems like a complete waste of potential, when you could be making all sorts of wondrous and imaginative ways to play.
Why is everyone saying RO2 is dead? There's literally always 10-15 almost full 64 player server up, the game is constantly getting new maps duo to that mapping competition they have going and I have no doubt a big update is planned with the release of FH since it will be integrated into RO2
[QUOTE=kaskade700;39939025]Why is everyone saying RO2 is dead? There's literally always 10-15 almost full 64 player server up, the game is constantly getting new maps duo to that mapping competition they have going and I have no doubt a big update is planned with the release of FH since it will be integrated into RO2[/QUOTE] What's FH?
[QUOTE=Raidyr;39939048]What's FH?[/QUOTE] Sorry meant RS(Rising Storm)
Thought you meant Forgotten Hope was being integrated into Red Orchestra 2 and I got really excited.
[QUOTE=Cureless;39938778]I won't debate the linearity of Call of Duty, but I will argue that there is nothing wrong with the gameplay. I can't stand a lot of modern shooters because they have momentum systems and weapons that shake like a paint shaker if you hold the trigger. As where in games like Unreal Tournament 3, Saints Row 3, Borderlands 2, you move exactly when you tell your character to and your weapons are extremely accurate with little to no spray. In games like Battlefield 3, Red Orchestra 2, ARMA 2, you have no hope in hell of hitting anything 300 yards away unless you hunker down and take your time with each round, and if someone ever runs up on you while your prone or stationary, you're just fucked if you try to get up/back away quickly enough to not get lit up by someone charging you. When I play a video game, I want to play [b]a video game[/b], not a life simulator. I don't care about how real weapons work, I don't care about how real physics applies to the body, I just want to shoot things and have fun. [editline]March 16, 2013[/editline] Additionally, if you're making something like a video game, where you have no form of restraint and you can do literally anything, why would you want to limit yourself to Earthly rules? It just seems like a complete waste of potential, when you could be making all sorts of wondrous and imaginative ways to play.[/QUOTE] I enjoy realistic modern shooters because then i can shoot up my friends without going to jail
[QUOTE=Raidyr;39934991]If it works it works. Call of Duty games, as long as everyones at a decent ping on dedicated servers, has pretty good hit detection, easily better than what you will find in RO2 and most of CoD's direct competition.[/quote] I'm sorry but just no. The hit detection is probably the most glorious thing RO2 has to offer. remember that this is the sequel to the game where people could shoot your hands to make you drop your gun(A feature removed in RO2 though)
RO2 is one of the few games where having 64 players in one server doesn't lag the game out. The only problem with it is some of the maps are way too small for it.
I haven't played RO2 since launch when it was practically broken so maybe I shouldn't have listed it specifically but that was the opposite of how I felt. If it actually does have good hit detection that's cool too. My point was that CoD, under ideal circumstances (dedicated servers or a good host for consoles) has good hit detection too. It's part of the "feel" of the movement and gunplay that keeps people hooked. [editline]16th March 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=zombojoe;39939474]RO2 is one of the few games where having 64 players in one server doesn't lag the game out. The only problem with it is some of the maps are way too small for it.[/QUOTE] wow it must have made a lot of progress because last time I played, "not lagging" was not something RO2 did at all at any player count on any map :v:
[QUOTE=zombojoe;39939474]RO2 is one of the few games where having 64 players in one server doesn't lag the game out. The only problem with it is some of the maps are way too small for it.[/QUOTE] but it's a massive buggy mess apparently because a few people played it at release and haven't played it since and still complain about the bugs that were like 2 weeks after release
The game changed substantially since launch. It was a buggy turd for at least 3 months since release, its a solid game now.
there are apparently grown ass adults that give a shit about bideogame players being "ruined"
[QUOTE=Lazor;39939631]there are apparently grown ass adults that give a shit about bideogame players being "ruined"[/QUOTE] Back in my day people said Halo was the game ruining FPS players. And if you wanted a new game you had to go 15 miles to Blockbuster, in the snow, uphill, both ways!
RO2 is an amazing game, but it lost immersion. Red Orchestra: OST was an amazing game, and still feels more realistic.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;39917109]Far Cry 3 is absolutely horrendous? Far Cry 2 was highly superior? Where am I, who are you, what is going on?[/QUOTE] far cry 3 was as generic and casual as any number of call of duty titles. do you think that's because the devs just couldn't figure out how to make a non generic non casual game? no, it's because ubisoft understands and heavily prioritizes commercialism. the game has absolutely nothing going for it. generic combat, multiplayer that is literally closer to call of duty than some call of duty games, single player map editor that you're literally not allowed to use, graphical artifacts all over the place, absolutely nothing to do after the game ends aside from collect pelts for no reason, drastically downgraded technological aspects. I could go on but I'm not sure facepunch has the capacity to display all the flaws that game has. [editline]16th March 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=mixshifter;39917129]far cry 3 was a goldmine of a game it had problems but my god it was just so good compared to almost any other 3rd sequel[/QUOTE] gears of war 3, grand theft auto 3, hitman: contracts, splinter cell: chaos theory, fallout 3, metal gear solid 3, max payne 3, halo 3. I'm sure I could sit here and list hundreds more that heavily exceed every aspect of far cry 3. far cry 3 is a goldmine of flaws.
[QUOTE=Bruhmis;39940449]far cry 3 was as generic and casual as any number of call of duty titles. do you think that's because the devs just couldn't figure out how to make a non generic non casual game? no, it's because ubisoft understands and heavily prioritizes commercialism. the game has absolutely nothing going for it. generic combat, multiplayer that is literally closer to call of duty than some call of duty games, single player map editor that you're literally not allowed to use, graphical artifacts all over the place, absolutely nothing to do after the game ends aside from collect pelts for no reason, drastically downgraded technological aspects. I could go on but I'm not sure facepunch has the capacity to display all the flaws that game has.[/QUOTE] oh hey, i forgot to look at your credentials as "master of bullshit" before I read this post now that I have, this post makes sense.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;39940519]oh hey, i forgot to look at your credentials as "master of bullshit" before I read this post now that I have, this post makes sense.[/QUOTE] can't argue with facts, but at least you didn't try. I mean, if you want to stake a claim that making a game with a ridiculous amount of flaws is ok because you enjoy it anyway then that's fine, but other people don't want to pay $60 for lazy bullshit and in the lazy bullshit department far cry 3 is a record holder. just because you don't pay attention to the games you play that doesn't mean everyone else should just accept awful games, specifically the one in subject which was sold using several instances of false advertisement.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;39939496]wow it must have made a lot of progress because last time I played, "not lagging" was not something RO2 did at all at any player count on any map :v:[/QUOTE] That was RO2 on release, half a year after release or so a patch was released that basically fixed everything. Only remaining issues are MG's flying up when they die, problems with picking up weapons in some situations and some annoying issues with low gfx wankers being able to see trough bushes and smoke better than others. The GUI is still a mess as well. As stated above, RO2 is highly optimized for large player counts, and unlike many shooters almost all playermovement is client side which smoothes out the (imo) most annoying kind of lack, the player movement related kind. I mean I can think of no other game where when I'm sniping I check my ping and gauge it like it's the wind I have to adjust for, it's that predictable.
[QUOTE=Gareth;39939527]but it's a massive buggy mess apparently because a few people played it at release and haven't played it since and still complain about the bugs that were like 2 weeks after release[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=zombojoe;39939534]The game changed substantially since launch. It was a buggy turd for at least 3 months since release, its a solid game now.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=kaskade700;39940673]That was RO2 on release, half a year after release or so a patch was released that basically fixed everything. Only remaining issues are MG's flying up when they die, problems with picking up weapons in some situations and some annoying issues with low gfx wankers being able to see trough bushes and smoke better than others. The GUI is still a mess as well. As stated above, RO2 is highly optimized for large player counts, and unlike many shooters almost all playermovement is client side which smoothes out the (imo) most annoying kind of lack, the player movement related kind. I mean I can think of no other game where when I'm sniping I check my ping and gauge it like it's the wind I have to adjust for, it's that predictable.[/QUOTE] ummm, I got the game during the summer of 2012, have around 400 hours in it, play it in scrims, and still think it's buggy (being able to reload while bandaging, bandaging, then bleeding out anyways, despite mashing the button right as you got hit, glitching through terrain, all the fucking TWIL problems, buggy vaulting, PPsH/MG34/AVT lag (reason I stopped playing actually), exploits, scope focus bug) and I'm not even mentioning tank combat... don't even get me started on that. really, RO2 can be fun and shit, but it still is extremely buggy. Anyone who says otherwise is simply ignoring the facts right in front of them.
[QUOTE=trotskygrad;39940688]ummm, I got the game during the summer of 2012, have around 400 hours in it, play it in scrims, and still think it's buggy (being able to reload while bandaging, bandaging, then bleeding out anyways, despite mashing the button right as you got hit, glitching through terrain, all the fucking TWIL problems, buggy vaulting, PPsH/MG34/AVT lag (reason I stopped playing actually), exploits, scope focus bug) and I'm not even mentioning tank combat... don't even get me started on that. really, RO2 can be fun and shit, but it still is extremely buggy. Anyone who says otherwise is simply ignoring the facts right in front of them.[/QUOTE] I've never experienced gltiching trough terrain, some wounds a bandage won't save you from, that's not a bug. Tank combat sucks, but I never even liked that back in Ostfront so I really have no say in that.(except that Combined Arms isn't as terrible as all the whiners say, they're just too damn stubborn to go AT themselves.) There are lots of bugs true, but none game breaking in my honest opinion. [I] PPsH/MG34/AVT lag[/I] Now this I have no idea what you mean.
[QUOTE=kaskade700;39940905]I've never experienced gltiching trough terrain, some wounds a bandage won't save you from, that's not a bug.[/QUOTE] glitching through terrain is easy, you'll experience it if you prone-dive a lot like me. If there's a wound a bandage won't save you from, the bandage dialogue shouldn't pop up, and the sound/animation shouldn't play. The issue is bleeding out after you start bandaging. [QUOTE=kaskade700;39940905] Tank combat sucks, but I never even liked that back in Ostfront so I really have no say in that.(except that Combined Arms isn't as terrible as all the whiners say, they're just too damn stubborn to go AT themselves.)[/QUOTE] um, when ATRs are basically useless against tanks frontally (anyone who's played bridges a lot knows this) it's a problem. Also tanks movement feels a LOT less smooth than ost, they can rubberband and glitch all over the place, get stuck on obstacles that you can only get unstuck from by firing your cannon, etc. it's a shitfest of game-breaking bugs. [QUOTE=kaskade700;39940905] There are lots of bugs true, but none game breaking in my honest opinion.[/QUOTE] not really, there's also artillery bugs (arty is called but doesn't drop), and exploits are really game breaking in high level play, same with the others I mentioned (dropping your rifle and picking it back up to reset the scope isn't exactly something you can afford to do in a tense countdown situation). [B]Also, the ability to carry essentially infinite grenades can be broken in territory matches, collect 50 and nadespam the shit out of the enemy team,[/B] then there's also niggling little bugs, like the TT not having the correct bullet count after a tactical reload, hands vanishing after picking up a weapon, blablabla. [QUOTE=kaskade700;39940905] [I] PPsH/MG34/AVT lag[/I] Now this I have no idea what you mean. [/QUOTE] it's a couple fps lag when firing high RoF weapons, just google it and you'll find lots of issues on TWI forums. It's really common and on and off for me.
So you can't try and bandage a wound even if it's too late? Come on. The tanks getting stuck are very much dependent on the quality of the map, a lot of the maps suffer from horribly clumsy collision meshes which the tanks suffer greatly from, Pavlovs house is like a minefield for german tanks to get stuck on, while commissar house is like easy mode. I'm also pretty sure the frag weight bug has been fixed. That last thing honestly sounds like your pc is just too darn slow.
[QUOTE=Bruhmis;39940602]can't argue with facts, but at least you didn't try. I mean, if you want to stake a claim that making a game with a ridiculous amount of flaws is ok because you enjoy it anyway then that's fine, but other people don't want to pay $60 for lazy bullshit and in the lazy bullshit department far cry 3 is a record holder. just because you don't pay attention to the games you play that doesn't mean everyone else should just accept awful games, specifically the one in subject which was sold using several instances of false advertisement.[/QUOTE] there's nothing to argue with but what your opinion is. i'm not bothering to debate that just laughing at how you feel your view is factual
[QUOTE=Raidyr;39939496]I haven't played RO2 since launch when it was practically broken so maybe I shouldn't have listed it specifically but that was the opposite of how I felt. If it actually does have good hit detection that's cool too. My point was that CoD, under ideal circumstances (dedicated servers or a good host for consoles) has good hit detection too.[/QUOTE] CoD really has a quite crappy hit-detection. Basis being for how little it handles. Mainly just player location and hit-scan weapons being the main course. And the boxes are massive and still the sync can be abhorrent at several occasions. During the free weekend of BlOps2 I lost count of how many times I would die instantly just to see in the killcam that I was actually shot with a spray of bullets before going down.
My big problem with MW2 was the killstreaks, the way they handled the servers (like shit) and the abundance of hackers. A few months after release it seems like they just stopped caring, and soon after I got tired of getting killed by a guy aimbotting, or getting every unlockable title (achivements pretty much) just by joining a server. Of course there were a lot of balance issues beyond the killstreaks, but they didn't really feel like fixing those either. Overall, it was a fun game, but they dropped support way too fast.
It's easy to pick up CoD and sprint around the map getting involved and getting kills in seconds. It's easy to have fun in CoD and hell, isn't that the whole purpose of games? I'm personally not a fan of CoD because I feel it stifles progression within development of the genre... We've seen nothing new in CoD for like 10 years, yet I suppose it serves it's purpose well as an engaging, atmospheric interactive motion-picture.
[QUOTE=kaskade700;39941312]So you can't try and bandage a wound even if it's too late? Come on. The tanks getting stuck are very much dependent on the quality of the map, a lot of the maps suffer from horribly clumsy collision meshes which the tanks suffer greatly from, Pavlovs house is like a minefield for german tanks to get stuck on, while commissar house is like easy mode. I'm also pretty sure the frag weight bug has been fixed. That last thing honestly sounds like your pc is just too darn slow.[/QUOTE] If you're not able to, the dialogue shouldn't pop up. as for frags, no it hasn't, you can still do it. If the default maps have horrible performance with tanks, which maps are good? you still have issues even on tank maps like gumrak. More bugs? Deploying on uneven objects can be broken, players spawning in tanks (still can be an issue), reloading the short belt first on the belt-feed MG34 (resulting in a double reload, something you don't want to have to do in a combat situation), animation bug for the belt-fed MG34 (your hands don't manipulate the belt), visual recoil of the select fire PPsH is way higher than the actual recoil, [B]co-axial MG blowing up tanks[/B], unlimited ammunition bug when quickly firing... Also a lot of "fixes" for the bugs have simply meant they occur less often, they still exist. I'd happily source any of these bugs for you. and my PC isn't slow, it's i7, good graphics card, 16 GB RAM. it's a problem with the game's code.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.