The Good and Bad of "Realistic" Shooters

Discussion in 'Games Talk' started by Konata, Mar 11, 2012.

  1. Konata

    Konata L2: Junior Member

    Messages:
    58
    Positive Ratings:
    124
    For some research, I'm compiling a list of things people think are good and bad in "modern" "realistic" shooters. The list is compiled from this thread as well as from chat.

    Good:
    • Cosmetic Unlocks
      Unlocks like the hats in TF2 are fine, as long as they don't distract too much, or mess with silhouettes in a game that relies on them.

    • Team Warfare
      Grouping players into squads and other similar methods of promoting teamwork in these realistic shooters can work well, and can help a small group of players feel like a strong and cohesive unit.

    • Quality Areas and Aesthetics
      "When they dont slather everything in smake and dirt and brown, they can look quite nice."

    • That big "Epic" feeling
      "Basically, the good bits of a good film. If someone can recommend me a shooter that feels big and epic without being dumb as a thick hollywood blockbuster, that's what i'm looking for."

    • Good leveling (Sense of accomplishment)
      "Leveling in multiplayer is a great way of rewarding players, but only if done right - meaning not making the weapons you get after 100 hours of gameplay instakill with infinite accuracy and a ten billion rpm."
    Bad:
    • Corridor maps
      Enclosed, or tiny routes through maps that lead into nothing but chokepoint after chokepoint.

    • Bad Progression/Leveling
      Some people contend that side-grading and TF2's style of handling unlocks/progression is fine, whereas the methods games like Call of Duty and Battlefield 3 use are bad.

    • Fake classes
      "Another thing I dislike in modern FPS games is when they attempt to have a class system, but the classes have so little diversity you don't even care."

    • Bad shotguns
      Extremely short range and wide spread, no other alternatives. This seems to be somewhat fixed in BF2BC and BF3 by offering different ammo types, but is still a problem overall

    • Strong Chance of Bad Plot
      Oh, we're saving AMURICAH from the Russians again. What's that? A nuke? Oh hey look, a double agent!

    • Slow gameplay, quick deaths
      Many realistic shooters suffer from the "look for 5 minutes, die in 5 seconds" problem. The combat can be slow and not really that intense, then be over for you in a second when that sniper you didn't see turns your head into red mush.

    • Limited Movement
      Either you move like you weigh 5 tons, or you have some really basic fancy movement like scripted climbing over low walls, but most realistic shooters don't have a lot of fancy/interesting movement around maps. Could be seen as a pro to people who enjoy realistic shooters.

    • Weapons are all the same
      "There might be slight changes to ROF, spread, clip size and whatnot, but they're literally the same but with number tweaks. You may have a RPG somewhere in there, which is nice but not a counter-argument."

    [](/c11) I'll update this as often as I can to reflect opinions I've heard from chat and this thread.
     
    Last edited: Mar 12, 2012
  2. Terwonick

    Terwonick L6: Sharp Member

    Messages:
    278
    Positive Ratings:
    89
    Most don't promote team warfare, I like how BF2 tries to fix this, with the squad system, where if your squad does good, you do good too. I also like that you can spawn off of your squad :D
     
  3. Pocket

    aa Pocket func_croc

    Messages:
    4,489
    Positive Ratings:
    2,217
    In regards to the unlocks thing... I'll be honest: I recently started getting into the BioShock 2 multiplayer (once I learned it's not actually dead after all... probably more action than TF2 on the 360), and despite going up against mainly people who were level 40 and up and not even having any gene tonics at all, I somehow managed to get kills anyway and have fun. Granted, that was just in team-deathmatch mode, which seems to be the only mode anyone plays, but I had been under the impression I would just be hilariously underpowered as a level 1 and that leveling systems in multiplayer was the stupidest thing you could possibly come up with.

    But that's the only multiplayer game besides TF2 I've touched in years. My last experience with them was in the Unreal Tournament/Halo era when multiplayer was all deathmatch/team-deathmatch/capture-the-flag and the only good strategy was "be the first to find the rocket launcher/sniper rifle, then destroy everyone".
     
  4. LeSwordfish

    aa LeSwordfish semi-trained quasi-professional

    Messages:
    4,106
    Positive Ratings:
    6,005
    Pros
    -They can, sometimes, i'll grudgingly admit, be rather pretty. When they dont slather everything in smake and dirt and brown, they can look quite nice. MW2's Favela level was nice.

    -Can often feel big and stonking and epic. Basically, the good bits of a good film. If someone can recommend me a shooter that feels big and epic without being dumb as a thick hollywood blockbuster, that's what i'm looking for.

    Cons
    -My god, they can be dumb. Thick, macho, 'MURICA posturing, with people shouting HOO-AH and talking about their cocks.

    -Plots are dumb.

    -The players actions have no bearing on the plot. whenever something happens, either you are helpless and it happens TO you, or someone else does it. It feels like playing a game 2-player with someone significantly more competent than you.
     
  5. Ravidge

    aa Ravidge Grand Vizier

    Messages:
    1,544
    Positive Ratings:
    2,492
    From a perspective of:
    Quake series - Team Fortress series - Unreal Tournament series - Tribes series.
    Modern realistic shooters are

    Pros:
    They Look pretty.

    The slower pace lets people keep up with each other and play together more easily.

    Has better potential for a story you could care about.


    Cons:
    The combat is boring, it's slow and careful because you die so fast. It's like playing a platformer with bullshit instadeath traps spread across the level, except the traps aren't "things" in realistic shooters, they're other people who managed to sneak up on you or just sit and wait for you.
    If you're caught in either of those situations you're dead, you can't react to what is happening before it's too late (assuming equal aim/tactical skill on both sides on the battle).
    So it effectively comes down to who can get behind the other guy, before he gets behind you.

    Movement is limited because it has to be realistic, at best you get some parkour climbing.
    Some people like this, others don't. I strongly prefer it when there is some tricks you can pull off to gain combat advantage other than just pure aim/reaction time.

    All weapons are the same. There might be slight changes to ROF, spread, clip size and whatnot, but they're literally the same but with number tweaks. You may have a RPG somewhere in there, which is nice but not a counter-argument.


    ---
    All my cons can be turned into pros, if argued for by someone who likes those kind of games, it all comes down to personal preference.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 2
  6. Seba

    aa Seba DR. BIG FUCKER, PHD

    Messages:
    2,363
    Positive Ratings:
    2,365
    I have to disagree with your Leveling issue, Konata. Leveling in multiplayer is a great way of rewarding players, but only if done right - meaning not making the weapons you get after 100 hours of gameplay instakill with infinite accuracy and a ten billion rpm. BF3 actually does this somewhat well - the starting weapons, namely the AR-15 series (M16A3, M4A1, M27 IAR), are great for any beginner - low recoil, pretty fast RoF, high accuracy. Same goes for the FAMAS, the (arguably) most OP weapon in the game. Even though it has a 1000rpm, stupidly low recoil with a foregrip, and the standard 25 max damage, it is the easiest B2K weapon to obtain. My problem is with the Russian weapons, which are basically the same as the US ones but with a longer reload and a slower RoF.

    Point: leveling in multiplayer isn't always bad, and can be fun if done right (see CoD4, BF2142).
     
  7. Freyja

    aa Freyja ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    Messages:
    2,841
    Positive Ratings:
    4,765
    This, a million times this.
     
  8. owly-oop

    aa owly-oop im birb

    Messages:
    817
    Positive Ratings:
    1,154
    Cons: gameplay consists of shooting racial caricatures so cartoony they belong in an 80s children cartoon
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  9. Konata

    Konata L2: Junior Member

    Messages:
    58
    Positive Ratings:
    124
    That wasn't actually my thoughts, but ones summed up by some people in chat when I asked the question.

    But yeah, not all leveling is bad.
     
  10. Galgus

    Galgus L1: Registered

    Messages:
    2
    Positive Ratings:
    0
    I contend that leveling should feel like unlocking new options which cater to different play-styles, and never feel like a power increase.

    When leveling is handled in this way, it makes players feel like they are exploring the game and seeing new possibilities and play-styles, rather than being simply disadvantaged by weaker tools.

    I also detest the 2-second death Assault-Rifle based game-play I see in so many realistic FPS's: I feel weapons with quirks to them such as TF2 or the current Tribes beta offer more interesting game-play choices.

    As a final rant against them, they seem to have very limited play-style options and ways to approach a problem.

    EDIT: When I say two-second death game-play, I don't mean that death should never happen quickly or that it doesn't in the games I quoted: I refer to when it happens every time you turn a corner and see a new enemy.

    In TF2 and Tribes, there are ways to avoid damage via dodging, juking, and simply keeping your distance while avoiding kill zones that prevent these options.

    In Assault-Rifle based game-play, how long you live in a fight is usually far less up to your tactics and skill: being almost solely reliant on your opponent's aiming skill.
     
    Last edited: Mar 13, 2012
  11. grazr

    aa grazr Old Man Mutant Ninja Turtle

    Messages:
    5,436
    Positive Ratings:
    3,562
    I think most modern shooters have the universal issue of sniper rifles being OP because although being a weapon that should be balanced for extreme long ranges there's very little stopping a player from using it at medium ranges like a regular rifle or even at short range like a slug loaded shotgun. Either results in the "1 shot kill" scenario that is the standard mechanic of a sniper rifle giving it very few drawbacks beyond having a long reload (restricting to bolt action mechanics is one option but then there always seem to be semi-automatic alternatives for gun enthusiasts).

    Day of Defeat sort of reconciled this issue by disallowing pin-point accuracy when unscoped which incorporated the same accuracy penalty as when moving (any movement resulted in increased inaccuracy represented by a dynamic cross-hair). Of course the game suffered from an exploit dubbed "the strafe bug" or "counter strafe" whereby hitting the opposite movement key resulted in immediate and 100% accuracy for a short duration, completely negating "drift" (inaccuracy cool down from moving). So the OP sniper rifle issue was still a problem in competitive leagues that didn't regulate this exploit and infact openly encouraged it.

    TF2 sort of resolves this issue by limiting damage and rendering headshots benign whilst unscoped, but the rifle is still a powerful shot, dealing the most damage at medium ranges by any hit-scan weapon (47-57), besides perhaps the enforcer.

    My second issue isn't as "FPS" orientated, but is certainly an apparent issue in FPS games like BF and MW, where leveling systems in place allow players to spec retardedly aggrivating builds that promote tactics like spam, or spawn camping or other tactics that allow the player to siphene "unavoidable" kills whilst out of combat such as "support demolition" hybrids that can place limitless claymores and servaillence equipment.

    Such levelling systems have also been oberseved in multiplayers such as Space Marine which enhance particular weapons giving a clear advantage over other players who are not only out-equiped/gunned but out-experienced already. Such systems really unbalance PvP but are actually clever mechanics that increase replayability in PvE games like Killing Floor where weapon balance isn't a major issue.

    EDIT:

    I wanted to complain like Ravidge had about being blind sided by enemies but this can usually be avoided by a basic knowledge and experience of relevant maps. Basic map knowledge and situational awareness will help you avoid being blind sided/flanked and is usually one of the major differences between public and competitive skill levels; micro-management of your FoV. For instance, making sure to check your backside at every opportunity that at least doesn't make you vulnerable on your "fore" can significantly reduce deaths by backstabs.
     
    Last edited: Mar 13, 2012
  12. Pocket

    aa Pocket func_croc

    Messages:
    4,489
    Positive Ratings:
    2,217
    I kind of wonder why nobody's tried just making it impossible to fire a sniper rifle without scoping. Especially in games that are supposedly going for "realism" — I can't imagine anyone would run around firing a sniper rifle from the hip in real life.
     
  13. tyler

    aa tyler snail prince, master of a ruined tower

    Messages:
    5,032
    Positive Ratings:
    3,978
    Because they'd just quickscope--that's what the default rifle in TF2 is trying to discourage, not necessarily firing from the hip.

    Doesn't work though.
     
  14. LeSwordfish

    aa LeSwordfish semi-trained quasi-professional

    Messages:
    4,106
    Positive Ratings:
    6,005
    So what if there was a sniper rifle that's damage scaled up with distance?
     
  15. Galgus

    Galgus L1: Registered

    Messages:
    2
    Positive Ratings:
    0
    Personally, my issue is with the Assault-Rifle game-play with quick deaths over large ranges with little dodging capability- but I can see how Sniper Rifle no-scopes could also be frustrating.
     
  16. YM

    aa YM LVL100 YM

    Messages:
    7,099
    Positive Ratings:
    5,741
    Just did finished Deus Ex HR using pretty much only my scilenced pistol and headshots.

    The early game is full of enemies wearing balaclavas - headshot work
    Later they add some guys wearing helmets - heedshots still work
    Towards the end there are guys in heavy armour with balaclavas exactly like the early-game guys- headshots don't work here.

    Some terrible lapses in sensible game design going on over at Eidos. (Ignoring the debacle of the boss fights) (Google chrome is underlining debacle as though it's not a word.. what o_O)
     
  17. Fr0Z3nR

    aa Fr0Z3nR Creator of blackholes & memes. Destroyer of forums

    Messages:
    6,391
    Positive Ratings:
    4,906
    Fix. Grammar. Now.


    Anyways. If you haven't noticed I've been playing CoD4 (MW1) Multiplayers a bit over the past few days and have been looking at it from a design perspective for my design test, so here is my 2 cents.

    1) The game is fun as hell. I'd like to get that out there.
    2) From a design standpoint, the maps are ridiculous (bad ridiculous, not good). Unlike TF2, there is barely any specialized maps. There are a lot of maps that can play ALL the game types, such as Backlot (Yes, I know) or District. At least to me, if you have maps that need to be designed for ALL gametypes that makes things harder on the designer when mapping, and makes the maps weaker overall. (I don't know if BF3 does something like this, if it does someone tell me) I just feel that maps that are specialized to certain game modes (which, some are, but not enough) make a game better overall and add a bit more diversity to the game and it's gamemode. Almost forcing you to try and play new maps. Yes, there is cons to this, such as you need to make more maps for release, and have less for each game mode. But I think it is probably a decent trade-off.


    I for one though like the rank-up and perk system. Through, I wouldn't call each one "classes"... more like "loadouts."
     
  18. Trotim

    aa Trotim

    Messages:
    1,180
    Positive Ratings:
    993
    Dunno what else to really say, they're just not creative at all. I'll definitely always prefer TF2, UT99/2k4, Tribes, Duke Nukem, Prey etc. to one of the five same generic other shooters. Seems to me like they use "but it has to be realistic" as an excuse for really bad design too often
     
  19. Seba

    aa Seba DR. BIG FUCKER, PHD

    Messages:
    2,363
    Positive Ratings:
    2,365
    Frozen: CoD4 and BF3 are the same mapwise - every map has every gamemode available, but some work better than others (see CoD's Crash TDM v Shipment TDM and BF3's Caspian Border CQ Large v Op Metro CQ Large).

    EDIT: now that I think about it, I don't think that every CoD4 map is available in every mode...