But it's not the challenge they're interested in. Memorizing viscerally the non-marked spot on the screen where an ironsight will aim is uninteresting to them, and is trivially overcome with tape.
The majority of games which have ironsights these days have cross hairs when you are not within ironsight mode. At no point do you need to memorize anything. I'll restate that this has absolutely no influence on fundamental game mechanics. This is personal preference, as you admit, and really has no bearing on the discussion. It's a non-sequitor.
No mouse and keyboard.
NeoTokyo is essentially a CS clone. Why hasn't it taken off?
The majority of games which have ironsights these days have cross hairs when you are not within ironsight mode. At no point do you need to memorize anything. I'll restate that this has absolutely no influence on fundamental game mechanics. This is personal preference, as you admit, and really has no bearing on the discussion. It's a non-sequitor.
And these games often punish you for not using them. It is personal preference, but the difference matters to many people who play games like CS. They don't like that kind of faux realism, and the disruption to viewing is not something they're interested in adding as a test.
NeoTokyo is essentially a CS clone. Why hasn't it taken off?
It's class-based, for one, making it already a fairly different game. Beyond that, I'd have to play it to see. I shall.
NeoTokyo is essentially a CS clone. Why hasn't it taken off?
Broken as fuck. While the sights are done properly (Ironsights are used to extend your weapons range, not to make it usable.), they control badly (Toggle with no hold option.). Leaning is the real sticking point, moment your model touches something else, you come out of lean. This, coupled with how much harder target a leaning player poses, gives a huge advantage to those who memorize all the good points to lean.
They don't like that kind of faux realism, and the disruption to viewing is not something they're interested in adding as a test.
It's not really faux realism when iron sights disrupt your peripheral vision in real life or "firing from the hip" causes your accuracy to decrease. Come make this argument when we have Augmented Reality crosshairs.
NeoTokyo is essentially a CS clone. Why hasn't it taken off?
It's class-based, for one, making it already a fairly different game. Beyond that, I'd have to play it to see. I shall.
The problem with your challenge, apart from being needlessly specific, is that you want me to find a game that is exactly like Counter Strike, but not Counter Strike. An impossible task designed, like I said before, to get me into a gotcha situation. You know how you hate it when people play the "Whoo Game"? I'm the same way about the "Gotcha Game".
It's not really faux realism when iron sights disrupt your peripheral vision in real life or "firing from the hip" causes your accuracy to decrease. Come make this argument when we have Augmented Reality crosshairs.
No, they prefer a different faux realism. Counterstrike abstracts the things they don't care about. They don't care about the disruption of ironsights, just as they don't care about location damage.
No, they prefer a different faux realism. Counterstrike abstracts the things they don't care about. They don't care about the disruption of ironsights, just as they don't care about location damage.
Then why do guns like the Bullpup increase accuracy when you zoom in? Or have the spread of your shot change when you put a silencer on? Sorry, I misread what you were trying to say. I just don't see how this has any relevancy to the issue. At this point the argument has become just one of semantics. I think I've sufficiently shown that the argument "it's only good with a group" has merit.
You're right, Adam should have said it's only fun with a group and Scott shouldn't have gotten his panties in a bundle.
My only argument against Adam is that his particular group would have had similar fun with almost any game. They were awesome, the game was only middling. I don't disagree with him. Scott disagrees in a pedantic sense rife with bunched panties, conflating additional arguments.
You're right, Adam should have said it's only fun with a group and Scott shouldn't have gotten his panties in a bundle.
My only argument against Adam is that his particular group would have had similar fun with almost any game. They were awesome, the game was only middling. I don't disagree with him. Scott disagrees in a pedantic sense rife with bunched panties, conflating additional arguments.
I agree, having puttered around with Sturmgrenadier in any game made it way better. Hell, even City of Villains was awesome when I was playing with them. While I did still find Planetside enjoyable for a time after leaving SG, the experience just wasn't the same. Combined with some of the horrible patches to fix non-existent balance issues, the game died for me. Was it the greatest game ever? No. but it provided exactly the experience I was looking for a while. I also agree with Rym's observation of Scott's pedantic conflated bunched panties.
My only argument against Adam is that his particular group would have had similar fun with almost any game. They were awesome, the game was only middling. I don't disagree with him. Scott disagrees in a pedantic sense rife with bunched panties, conflating additional arguments.
It's exactly the same way with my gaming group. Hell, I played this shitty game and it was fun with them.
Memorizing viscerally the non-marked spot on the screen where an ironsight will aim is uninteresting to them, and is trivially overcome with tape.
Sure, but that also defeats the point of the challenge.
Of course, you're right in that CS players aren't interested in the specific challenge of iron sights. Iron sights create a different pace of game, and CS is a lot more like Action Quake or other action shooters.
I think the problem with your argument is that it went something like this:
"CS is popular because it's the best."
"No game has replicated the basic mechanics of CS."
"The basic mechanics of CS include [a bunch of stuff that is subject to personal taste]."
So your argument became "CS is the best FPS because it does all the things that I want an FPS to do," while you had just been talking about separating your personal experience with a game from your ability to judge it objectively.
My only argument against Adam is that his particular group would have had similar fun with almost any game.
This is true of all multiplayer games, though. A good group makes the experience so much better. A game like CS, a bad group can make your experience worse, but not as much as it would in a game like Planetside.
It's sort of an apples and oranges issue. Games like Planetside involve forced cooperation; all MMO's really do. A game like CS has cooperation, but it can be overshadowed by individual excellence much more readily. One guy can carry the team. This can mitigate the impact of being forced to cooperate with someone who sucks ass.
Some games have a lower skill cap, though, and so you can't break out as much and carry the team. In a game like L4D, one sucky player can ruin everyone's chances for success.
They wind up providing two very different experiences in gameplay terms, which is why it's really fallacious to compare CS and Planetside.
Some games have a lower skill cap, though, and so you can't break out as much and carry the team. In a game like L4D, one sucky player can ruin everyone's chances for success.
Some games have a lower skill cap, though, and so you can't break out as much and carry the team. In a game like L4D, one sucky player can ruin everyone's chances for success.
*looks at Pete*
No, that was my sucky internet. Also, I blame you, because I can.
See Pete. See Pete get a buck. See Pete pass that buck. Pass Pete, pass.
Some games have a lower skill cap, though, and so you can't break out as much and carry the team. In a game like L4D, one sucky player can ruin everyone's chances for success.
*looks at Pete*
No, that was my sucky internet. Also, I blame you, because I can.
See Pete. See Pete get a buck. See Pete pass that buck. Pass Pete, pass.
Maybe if Pete had saved that buck, he could afford faster interwebs and could have saved his team from the horrible zombie fate.
So I signed up for the Tribes:Ascend beta a long time ago. Now they are offering a guaranteed way to get into the beta that starts next month. You just have to pre-order for $30.
Originally people were saying that although the game is free to play, they wouldn't be charging for weapons or upgrades or nonsense. They would simply charge to unlock more classes. So it would be like TF2 if you could only play Scout for free, and had to pay to get heavy or medic. If all you ever played was medic, you could buy just medic and play the game for cheap, and there would be no competitive advantage if you were never going to pick a different class anyway. Of course, in a real team battle, having all classes available to all players would still be necessary. But you can think of the cost of all the classes combined as the cost of the game.
Also, reports of people who played the game say that it is Tribes. Not as fast as real Tribes, but kinda fast. Also, spinfusors and jump packs. It's Tribes.
But there is something very worrying in that article. Paying the $30 doesn't just get you the beta. It also gets you "The package contains VIP status (a $20 value, somehow!); 800 Tribes Gold, which sounds vaguely terrifying; a 30-day booster;"
Tribes Gold? 30 day booster? What the fuck is that shit? Doesn't sound like we're just paying for classes anymore. This game is now going in the fail bin, and it needs to dig its way out.
NS2 and CS:GO are the only ones left. I'm putting my money on CS:GO.
I'm having trouble comprehending the "30-day booster" more than the 800 gold. Clearly the gold is a currency. If the game is free-to-play, what is a "booster?" Is it like a League of Legends bonus XP buff thing?
So-far it still sounds really slow. What could redeem this game for me is if the team-play is actually pretty good. I have trouble not wanting to open up my wallet to try it anyway.
If I would have to quess, I'd say that gold is for buying stuff (classes) and Tribes:A will probably follow other free to play games where you get some points to unlock stuff (classes) with just by playing and booster increases the amount of points you get. Biggest question is the VIP status. Beta place, custom avatar, special skin like NS2's black armour, something like that?
You can answer all of your questions by looking at their current offering, Global Agenda. It's probably both an XP boost, and a boost to currency/item rewards at the end of missions or whatever. GA started out with paid items being only cosmetic, then moved to increased rates of XP and currency gain. I didn't think it detracted much, but I haven't played in a while.
It will likely be an XP boost for the booster, And the gold will likely be used for skins, maybe classes, don't know. I remember hearing that you earn gold through regular play, but could also buy it, but don't quote me on that, since I can't remember where I heard it.
VIP status isn't a question at all. From the Tribes Ascend Beta FAQ -
“VIP†is a special account status that will be available to those that purchase it in Tribes: Ascend. Those with VIP status will have priority login, access to exclusive servers, and will earn Tokens and Experience faster inside the game, allowing them to unlock items faster.
What Worries me the most is that they mention unlocks a lot - Frankly, having unlocks really makes it a coin toss on if I'll ever bother playing a game multiplayer. TF2, despite the complaints about it having them, at least does the unlock bullshit right - It's not a grind, it's entirely random, and everything is balanced against everything else. And yeah, if you don't feel like waiting for a random drop, you can buy it. Unlike, say, Crysis 2, where if you've got the starter shotgun, it might as well be firing fairy dust and marshmallows, emptying an entire magazine into someone does absolutely nothing, but the unlock shotgun will kill someone in one hit, or two if they're in Armor mode.
It's unfortunate - You can get away with just using nothing but the regular vanilla gear in TF2, or you can use your other shite, whatever, you'll be fine. But most other games, from BFBC2 to BF3, To COD, to Crysis 2, pretty much any game with unlock bullshit? I would propably pay five or ten bucks to just instantly have all the unlocks, and skip all the endless bullshit.
I'm putting my money on CS:GO.
If you hate having money that much, you can just give it to me instead.
I admittedly would be willing to pay monies for custom looking vehicles. Flying a custom shrike and having modded out looking armor appeals to me. But the model of "classes" is already missing one of the key things I liked about tribes.
I also could get behind an MMO planetside/tribes hybrid, but the model they are running with on their existing games is way out of line for what I want. I don't want levels and gear or bossfights. I want any game investment to be into non-player stuff. Bases, dropships, and defenses for those things. But let all players be equal in the field. I'm totally fine with somebody putting down a thousand dollars on a game to build his ultimate fortress of ultimate doom on some mountain. He's spent money for his cool thing, but it also makes my experience cooler. But the second he gets a gun+1 over me, no fun.
Comments
While the sights are done properly (Ironsights are used to extend your weapons range, not to make it usable.), they control badly (Toggle with no hold option.).
Leaning is the real sticking point, moment your model touches something else, you come out of lean. This, coupled with how much harder target a leaning player poses, gives a huge advantage to those who memorize all the good points to lean.
I also agree with Rym's observation of Scott's pedantic conflated bunched panties.
Of course, you're right in that CS players aren't interested in the specific challenge of iron sights. Iron sights create a different pace of game, and CS is a lot more like Action Quake or other action shooters.
I think the problem with your argument is that it went something like this:
"CS is popular because it's the best."
"No game has replicated the basic mechanics of CS."
"The basic mechanics of CS include [a bunch of stuff that is subject to personal taste]."
So your argument became "CS is the best FPS because it does all the things that I want an FPS to do," while you had just been talking about separating your personal experience with a game from your ability to judge it objectively. This is true of all multiplayer games, though. A good group makes the experience so much better. A game like CS, a bad group can make your experience worse, but not as much as it would in a game like Planetside.
It's sort of an apples and oranges issue. Games like Planetside involve forced cooperation; all MMO's really do. A game like CS has cooperation, but it can be overshadowed by individual excellence much more readily. One guy can carry the team. This can mitigate the impact of being forced to cooperate with someone who sucks ass.
Some games have a lower skill cap, though, and so you can't break out as much and carry the team. In a game like L4D, one sucky player can ruin everyone's chances for success.
They wind up providing two very different experiences in gameplay terms, which is why it's really fallacious to compare CS and Planetside.
See Pete. See Pete get a buck. See Pete pass that buck. Pass Pete, pass.
http://kotaku.com/5849013/you-can-buy-your-way-into-next-months-tribes-ascend-beta
Originally people were saying that although the game is free to play, they wouldn't be charging for weapons or upgrades or nonsense. They would simply charge to unlock more classes. So it would be like TF2 if you could only play Scout for free, and had to pay to get heavy or medic. If all you ever played was medic, you could buy just medic and play the game for cheap, and there would be no competitive advantage if you were never going to pick a different class anyway. Of course, in a real team battle, having all classes available to all players would still be necessary. But you can think of the cost of all the classes combined as the cost of the game.
Also, reports of people who played the game say that it is Tribes. Not as fast as real Tribes, but kinda fast. Also, spinfusors and jump packs. It's Tribes.
But there is something very worrying in that article. Paying the $30 doesn't just get you the beta. It also gets you "The package contains VIP status (a $20 value, somehow!); 800 Tribes Gold, which sounds vaguely terrifying; a 30-day booster;"
Tribes Gold? 30 day booster? What the fuck is that shit? Doesn't sound like we're just paying for classes anymore. This game is now going in the fail bin, and it needs to dig its way out.
NS2 and CS:GO are the only ones left. I'm putting my money on CS:GO.
So-far it still sounds really slow. What could redeem this game for me is if the team-play is actually pretty good. I have trouble not wanting to open up my wallet to try it anyway.
VIP status isn't a question at all. From the Tribes Ascend Beta FAQ - What Worries me the most is that they mention unlocks a lot - Frankly, having unlocks really makes it a coin toss on if I'll ever bother playing a game multiplayer. TF2, despite the complaints about it having them, at least does the unlock bullshit right - It's not a grind, it's entirely random, and everything is balanced against everything else. And yeah, if you don't feel like waiting for a random drop, you can buy it. Unlike, say, Crysis 2, where if you've got the starter shotgun, it might as well be firing fairy dust and marshmallows, emptying an entire magazine into someone does absolutely nothing, but the unlock shotgun will kill someone in one hit, or two if they're in Armor mode.
It's unfortunate - You can get away with just using nothing but the regular vanilla gear in TF2, or you can use your other shite, whatever, you'll be fine. But most other games, from BFBC2 to BF3, To COD, to Crysis 2, pretty much any game with unlock bullshit? I would propably pay five or ten bucks to just instantly have all the unlocks, and skip all the endless bullshit. If you hate having money that much, you can just give it to me instead.
I also could get behind an MMO planetside/tribes hybrid, but the model they are running with on their existing games is way out of line for what I want. I don't want levels and gear or bossfights. I want any game investment to be into non-player stuff. Bases, dropships, and defenses for those things. But let all players be equal in the field. I'm totally fine with somebody putting down a thousand dollars on a game to build his ultimate fortress of ultimate doom on some mountain. He's spent money for his cool thing, but it also makes my experience cooler. But the second he gets a gun+1 over me, no fun.