is there a difference between rpg and fps anymore?

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Your example is still inconsistent. You are comparing Fallout's Science skill usage and application with DX's combat skill system. In the real world

 

Lol the real world is irrelevant when discussing game mechanics unless those mechanics are meant to in any way be realistic. And this isn't the case with neither game.

 

Even with a low small guns rating, you would still hit the target if you tried enough times or got close enough.

 

And this happens because that's how the skill system works and is meant to work, not because I've found a way to break the rules. There's a bit of difference between taking modifiers into account when handling a combat situation to get different results with each new roll and finding a way to artificially influence those modifiers to get a favorable result with each new roll.

 

Therefore the game isn't "telling you that you can't do something and then allowing you to do it", it's just merely indicating a low probability of success

 

Semantics. The game pretty much states that the recoil, or other associated weapon modifiers, will be hard to handle the less points you have into a skill. It very much is telling players they can't handle a firearm without penalties. Which is true - just not when it comes to Rifles.

 

(your claims of uncanny accuracy with the sniper rifle notwithstanding).

 

Lol how many times are you going to lie about what I say? I've said I managed to overcome some of the limitations. Yes, the sniper sights still wobble but not as much. Yes, the Assault Rifle still has a violent recoil but not as much. Where's the leetness in that? You were the only one to bark about me having uber Counterstrike skills and amazingly, are now going for the second time claiming I've made this claim. You're getting even more pathetic then I thought possible, and that's no small feat.

 

I also find it surprising that despite what you have said, you are less tolerant with that than with the player stepping in to solve a situation that the character lacks the means to overcome. Swapping between in and out-of-character freely like that (and the situations that require this by addressing the player directly, or by whatever circumstances) would appear to stomp on the barrier between player and character way more than DX's player-influenced combat skill system.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Because quite simply one doesn't compromise the other. If the player or the character take the back seat temporarily then they have no chance of providing mixed results that will either cancel or screw each other. No big mistery or contradiction there. Having a game tell me that it will be based on two different methods of input (character statistics and layer reflexes) to determine how an obstacle is handled is going to bring more issues than temporarily placing the player or the PC in the background. In fact, if you can imagine how this would work if we were talking about the character's intelligence and the player's intelligence being used simultaneously instead, it's not much of a stretch to figure out why this is preferable.

[213374U]

[snip]

TL;DR

 

Chances are it's all incoherent gibberish, anyway.

[Volourn]

NumbersU is wrong. RP is correct. Not surprising at all.

[213374U]

Coming from Volo, that actually means I'm right.

 

Thanks, Volo.

[alanschu]

Grenades, ballistic armor, using the environments for cover or to distract hostiles (ie, light, sound), speed or cloaking augmentations seem to work just fine.

 

Well, if you're using the environment for cover, then you'd be sneaking up on people unaware.

 

Would guiding a nuclear warhead yourself while adjusting its trajectory in realtime and seeing it all through an inbuilt camera in the nuke be any different than, say, a turnbased game where you deploy the nuke and have to contend with the nuke's attack power and the country's defense rating? Is guiding an invading army against a nearby region in HoI: Doomsday any different than guiding those soldiers across an FPS scenario where the invading success was determined by how quickly you fired?

 

I would have to say yes.

 

The problem with that is scale though, and I'm not even sure it appropriately compares to the example I used. I still don't see the giant difference between you spending more time to aim because your skill is low (a consequence of having low skill), and spending more AP points to get an accurate shot. In both instances, you're spending more time in the game mechanics term. In Deus Ex, if I improve my skill with the gun, my likelihood of hitting stuff goes up, to the point where I can run around and accurately pick people off without spending much time aiming (I'm using less AP then). Just like how in a game like Jagged Alliance 2, where I don't need to spend as many action points to shoot someone in the head when running out of the corner. Or, like in Jagged Alliance 2, if I'm already shooting at someone, I need less AP to pull off an aimed shot, since I'm already aiming at my target.

 

 

I didn't claim it would completely go around the skill system, just given limitations. And going around certain limitations doesn't mean it will go around all of them, does it. The lack of accuracy and attack power are still in place but you can circumvent some of the base limitations by doing what I did.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

In moving your mouse to counteract the recoil though, you're going to have inconsistencies with your accuracy. Compare it to the recoiless full auto that you have with expert skill, and it's a world of difference (ignoring the damage bonuses you also get with improved skill).

[Sand]

NumbersU is wrong. RP is correct. Not surprising at all.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I have to concur with Volourn here. Numberman is the loser in this argument.

[metadigital]

Where's the contradiction?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ok, here's the issue framed in small paragraphs.

 

You are saying that the fact that you have learnt a technique to help minimize the physical (in the game) penalty to the PC, yet it doesn't bother you that you can solve the Towers of Hanoi puzzle on Korriban in KotOR because you have encountered it before as part of your life outside this particular game.

 

You are quite pleased to deal with the latter conflict, but find the former a huge problem. And that's leaving aside the fact that I think you are exaggerating the former in Deus Ex, because, personally, I find the more powerful weapons in that game unusable without some PC skill.

 

NumbersU is wrong. RP is correct. Not surprising at all.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I have to concur with Volourn here. Numberman is the loser in this argument.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thanks for your valuable comtribution!

[Pop]

I like how people are "taking sides" now. Teh funnay.

[Darque]

This is usually what happens.

 

Soon it'll turn into a "you! No you!" shoving match.

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Well, if you're using the environment for cover, then you'd be sneaking up on people unaware.

 

Or I would be involved in intense firefights as well, which happened several times. Those don't last much in Realistic but they do provide for excellent hit-and-run tactics while they do; for those I usually take the high difficulty mode prior to Realistic.

 

I still don't see the giant difference between you spending more time to aim because your skill is low (a consequence of having low skill), and spending more AP points to get an accurate shot.  In both instances, you're spending more time in the game mechanics term.  In Deus Ex, if I improve my skill with the gun, my likelihood of hitting stuff goes up, to the point where I can run around and accurately pick people off without spending much time aiming (I'm using less AP then).  Just like how in a game like Jagged Alliance 2, where I don't need to spend as many action points to shoot someone in the head when running out of the corner.  Or, like in Jagged Alliance 2, if I'm already shooting at someone, I need less AP to pull off an aimed shot, since I'm already aiming at my target.

 

What are the odds of a highly trained character without direct player input in the form of aiming successfully hitting an enemy, as opposed to the odds of a highly trained character whose aiming is controlled by a player with slow reflexes and overall poor marksmanship?

 

In moving your mouse to counteract the recoil though, you're going to have inconsistencies with your accuracy.  Compare it to the recoiless full auto that you have with expert skill, and it's a world of difference (ignoring the damage bonuses you also get with improved skill).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Uh, you're basically repeating what I've a couple of tims in the thread. I've stated several times that my skill wasn't superhuman (contrary to popular belief held by idiots) and that there were still considerable penalties to the Assault and Sniper Rifle's accuracy, but that I still managed to find a way to get away from its basic form of penalty (ie, wobbling and severe recoil effects). Of course that the damage and accuracy penalties are still there in Untrained level because I didn't improve the skill; all I simply did was "wrestle" against the trajectory of the weapon or sniper sights when they recoiled or wobbled.

[alanschu]

Let me put the shoe on the other foot a moment.

 

In an FPS Game I want:

 

1: Dialogue Choices and Options that have a major effect on the end of a Game.

 

2: A Level up process and the collection of Experience for character growth by defeating MOB's and Completing Quests.

 

3: A Romance Option!

 

4: 100% Melee action, guns suck, I want Broadswords, Axes, Daggers, Spears and perhaps a Sniper Cross Bow.

 

5: Stealth and other Non Combative ways of solving Combat Encounters.

 

6: Weapon Skill and Aim to be completely determined by the Characters skills that improve as the character levels up.

 

 

This would all be bad, why?

 

A lot of what you just described was in Deus Ex and System Shock 2, among other games. Both of these games are some of the best games ever made in my opinion. There's also games like Dark Messiah of Might and Magic, and it's not uncommon for FPS games to hint at a romantic interest.

 

PS: I love how every time Alanschu cant respond to a point without admitting he is wrong, he calls it "Irrelevant." 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

What are you talking about? I immediately addressed the point you brought up right after I said irrelevant. In case you have forgotten, here's the statement:

 

"Irrelevant. I was assessing your asinine interpretation that Hell Kitty was referring to our skills as magic casters when stating the term player skill. Look closely at what I wrote, I made no statement as to how things should or should not be. I'm not sure if it was strawman and obfuscation, or just some sort of mind boggling deduction on how you thought his comments about player skill referred to

 

Furthermore, the fact that weapons aren't precisely accurate isn't a contradiction of player skill, even if you use your messed up interpretation of Hell Kitty's post. In fact, when dealing with a RPG elements such as in System Shock and Deus Ex, it demonstrates an excellent way to combine both player skill and character skill in a game. And in no way is this contradictory. Since my character has poor skill with a bow, it should take that into account with more random shot placement. Not "it only looks like you hit the opponent, but you actually didn't" that a game like Morrowind has.

 

And this was after you already went off on your own little world by either intentionally misconstruing Hell Kitty's post to think he was talking about making sure there wasn't a contradiction between the skills the character uses and the supposed magic casting skills of the actual player, rather than the skills of the player actually playing the game, or if you just dropped the ball altogether. The fact that you went ranting on about how different game characters in a game like Day of Defeat Source have different accuracy ratings is somehow a contradiction when it's not. You were grasping at straws, and unfortunately came away with nothing.

 

On a final note, if you wish to continue with your remarkable displays of maturity, do not bother with Post Scripts at the end of your message about how I allegedly cannot admit I am wrong and hence use the word irrelevant. Particularly seeing as you failed to respond to my post in kind, so it just makes you look that much more absurd.

 

If you have any particular issue with me, don't be a coward bring it up in a post directly (preferably addressing the post in question), rather than as a footnote at the end of an unrelated post. Or use private messages.

Edited December 28, 2006 by alanschu

[Bokishi]

LOL

[Diogo Ribeiro]

You are saying that the fact that you have learnt a technique to help minimize the physical (in the game) penalty to the PC, yet it doesn't bother you that you can solve the Towers of Hanoi puzzle on Korriban in KotOR because you have encountered it before as part of your life outside this particular game.

 

You are quite pleased to deal with the latter conflict, but find the former a huge problem.

 

How exactly does "I don't enjoy that type of design but can tolerate it" even get near "I am quite pleased with dealing with"? If you don't particularly care for what I'm writing you're not obliged to answer back or even discuss it. But if you're going to I'd appreciate it if you managed to get the basics of what I'm saying. Which was...

 

Wait, I've got an idea. Here's the issue framed in smaller paragraphs.

 

I prefer to interact with a gameworld via my own skills or those of a character instead of both. I prefer to have my skills succeed because of me, or those of a character succeed because of itself, rather than having to deal with abstractions of both and seeing the game choke up because of it.

 

And that's leaving aside the fact that I think you are exaggerating the former in Deus Ex, because, personally, I find the more powerful weapons in that game unusable without some PC skill.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Aiming is hard?

Edited December 28, 2006 by Role-Player

[Mortis Nai]

If you have any particular issue with me, don't be a coward bring it up in a post directly (preferably addressing the post in question), rather than as a footnote at the end of an unrelated post.  Or use private messages.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Wow... talk about taking things too seriously...

 

When did this go from "Internet Forum discussion" to "OMG you disagree so you must hate me!"

 

There is no venditta or big conspiricy here, I do not know you or even care to know you, let alone hold a grudge. Your simply not an important aspect of my life for me to have feelings one way or the other for you.

 

Sorry

 

Take a break from the computer for a bit man, go for a walk or something. When you cool down everything will still be here waiting for you.

 

Nothing in this or any other thread is worth getting offended about, especially when its just strangers spouting opinions.

Edited December 28, 2006 by Mortis Nai

[metadigital]

You are saying that the fact that you have learnt a technique to help minimize the physical (in the game) penalty to the PC, yet it doesn't bother you that you can solve the Towers of Hanoi puzzle on Korriban in KotOR because you have encountered it before as part of your life outside this particular game.

 

You are quite pleased to deal with the latter conflict, but find the former a huge problem.

How exactly does "I don't enjoy that type of design but can tolerate it" even get near "I am quite pleased with dealing with"?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Try answering the point, rather than nitpicking my sentence structure and choice of analogy. I have to paraphrase your writing because it takes several paragraphs.

Wait, I've got an idea. Here's the issue framed in smaller paragraphs.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Excellent. Brevity is the soul of wit, after all.

I prefer to interact with a gameworld via my own skills or those of a character instead of both. I prefer to have my skills succeed because of me, or those of a character succeed because of itself, rather than having to deal with abstractions of both and seeing the game choke up because of it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Who said the game has to choke up? Are you seriously trying to say that the gameplay of Deus Ex is below your expectation?

And that's leaving aside the fact that I think you are exaggerating the former in Deus Ex, because, personally, I find the more powerful weapons in that game unusable without some PC skill.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Aiming is hard?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Um, it is harder when there are penalties attached to it, yes. That's the point of bonuses and penalties, so working as designed, really ... you are the only one that has stated that you can circumvent the penalties with your metagaming mouse twiddling. "

[@\NightandtheShape/@]

I like how people are "taking sides" now. Teh funnay.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

There are sides... What's the arguement? It's a purely subjective matters at the end of the day.

[213374U]

I have to concur with Volourn here.  Numberman is the loser in this argument.

Volo didn't even bother to read the thread. So what's your excuse?

 

 

having to deal with abstractions of both and seeing the game choke up because of it.

No.

 

 

Aiming is hard?

Yes.

[@\NightandtheShape/@]

If something is difficult... Get better at it.

[213374U]

If it's hot outside... don your sunglasses.

[metadigital]

Don't go outside in the rain in your socks.

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Try answering the point, rather than nitpicking my sentence structure and choice of analogy. I have to paraphrase your writing because it takes several paragraphs.

 

Paraphrasing doesn't promote misconception of a simple concept.

 

Who said the game has to choke up? Are you seriously trying to say that the gameplay of Deus Ex is below your expectation?

 

Expectation is different from preference. Deus Ex is one of my favorite games ever. This doesn't mean I enjoy all facets of its gameplay.

 

Um, it is harder when there are penalties attached to it, yes. That's the point of bonuses and penalties, so working as designed, really ...

 

No need to bring this up since it wasn't a point of dissent. Working as intended or designed doesn't mean its flawless or beyond reproach.

 

you are the only one that has stated that you can circumvent the penalties with your metagaming mouse twiddling. "

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

You should blame it on Ion Storm for not coming up with a better way to enforce penalties, not me for having found out the obvious.

[metadigital]

You still haven't explained why you can tolerate the OoC solving of puzzles but cannot tolerate the fact that you can metagame aiming (and you must be metagaming, because other people don't seem to be able to duplicate your amazing feats).

[alanschu]

What are the odds of a highly trained character without direct player input in the form of aiming successfully hitting an enemy, as opposed to the odds of a highly trained character whose aiming is controlled by a player with slow reflexes and overall poor marksmanship?

 

Better than the odds of a lowly trained character whose aiming is controlled by a player with slow reflexes and overall poor marksmanship Seriously though, I see where you are coming from. The thing I guess is how much do you just let the computer make the decisions, and how much input do you really like. You commented on dropping Atomic Bombs in Hearts of Iron, but that's a game that puts me more in the role of being the Commander in Chief of a country. I place production orders, determine where units move, and so on. I'm not the one fighting the battles, some grunt is. The thing is, I'd not mind at all if it was a hybrid. I love the Total War games, and how I can be both leader of a faction, as well as lead armies directly in battle. If HOI2 offered, say, a Combat Mission or Close Combat style system of fighting the battles, I'd still be delighted (assuming of course that this monster of product was actually able to bring everything together naturally). One game that I enjoy for this is Pacific Storm. If I want to go and drop The Bomb on Nagasaki, I can.

 

And you can still run into issues about how other attributes of yourself influence the impact of the game. While fighting a particularly tough battle, you as the player may notice a weakpoint to make the game easier. But it's you that figure it out, not the character. So how much is too much when it comes to requiring some player input, compared to letting the character figure things out. Conceptually, it almost seems like you'd be happy with a game where many of the decisions are made for you, based on the attributes of your character. The only real influence you may have is how you talk to a character, of which the dialogue options would only be appropriate for the attributes of the character of course. I'm pretty sure that this isn't necessarily what you want (essentially have an AI traverse through the game for you dependent on your attributes), but it's just sort of the impression that I'm getting.

 

 

Uh, you're basically repeating what I've a couple of tims in the thread. I've stated several times that my skill wasn't superhuman (contrary to popular belief held by idiots) and that there were still considerable penalties to the Assault and Sniper Rifle's accuracy, but that I still managed to find a way to get away from its basic form of penalty (ie, wobbling and severe recoil effects). Of course that the damage and accuracy penalties are still there in Untrained level because I didn't improve the skill; all I simply did was "wrestle" against the trajectory of the weapon or sniper sights when they recoiled or wobbled.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

I guess it's just that I don't necessarily see that as a bad thing. With poor skill, the player must try to counter the recoil of the gun, which will (even if you are really good) affect where JC is actually pointing the gun). As the skill improves, the player no longer needs to compensate for such things, and accuracy greatly improves, both in the intrinsic crosshairs, as well as the removal of the wobble.

 

I'd bet that if the only thing that was different between the skill levels was the wobble, you'd still find yourself performing much, much better with a higher skill in rifles.

[Sand]

Actually I like how some of the puzzles in NWN2 worked. For example in the library. You need a good in character skills to solve the puzzles, and not player skills, and if the NPCs have good enough skills for the require skill they can interject and solve the puzzle to for the PC.

[Diogo Ribeiro]

You still haven't explained why you can tolerate the OoC solving of puzzles

 

Once.

 

Twice.

 

Doesn't get any shorter or clearer than that.

 

but cannot tolerate the fact that you can metagame aiming (and you must be metagaming because other people don't seem to be able to duplicate your amazing feats).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Where are these other people? How many people in this thread have expressed they can't move a mouse down when a recoiling assault rifle is going up onscreen? One until now, and if my credibility is at stake then so must be his considering neither of us provided any kind of evidence other than our words. At least I described in detail what I did exactly. I'm still waiting to be told how "I tried it, didn't work, so whatever" constitutes as a valid refutal.

 

Also, how does moving a mouse in the opposite direction of a 3D model onscreen constitute an amazing feat? It's no different nor harder than pressing the down arrow key - or the S key if you use WASD - to have JC Denton run backwards. Are you also going to insist in the idiotic notion that this requires great feats of dexterity or Counterstrike skills?