Chade on 20/11/2003 at 09:55
Quote:
Originally posted by ZylonBane These units don't function as clips, so don't confuse the issue by calling them clips.
You're actually the only person I know of that has really made this into such a big issue. I know where you're coming from, but the alternative (making up a word) doesn't strike me as being any easier to get into. And I don't really see how it's a big deal. It's not all THAT confusing ...
Uncia on 20/11/2003 at 11:16
Anyone remember why all the weapons in SS2 used the same amount of space in your inventory? Yes indeed, it was because otherwise, with a full inventory, you'd dump a bunch of your inventory when you swapped your largeass launcher for the tiny pistol and didn't have the space to store it any more. This is just a different variation of the same problem; when you have a single ammo source, what size is the clip? If you used full integer values for usage [and you'd have to to have clip sizes], you'd need to have HUGE numbers just to be able to justify the pistol/rocket ratio, which consequently meant that the pistol would have virtually no reload, whilst the rocket launcher would constantly reload. Either that or lose 45 pistol shots because your rocket reload dropped a bunch of resources with every reload.
How is this different from none of them having reload period and the rocket launcher just has slower firing rate?
Why this issue is causing such a stir is beyond me. I found the concept of a unified ammo somewhat iffy, but no reload? WTF, what's reload? I've not had ANY "wow, reload just totally redefined that scene!" moments in gaming, ever. It's just an annoying "oh shit, I took unnecessary damage due to ammo reloading, let's quickload and do that better" causer. Reloading is there because it gives you a sense of realism, not because it actually adds something to the gameplay; maybe it does to some people, but shit, Halo's stupidass "only 0.4 weapons at a time" limitation improved it for some aswell, and I hated it.
Shadowcat: how is having a gun with a single bullet and long reload different from a gun with no reload and longer firing rates? :weird:
[edit] Come to think of it, the single ammo pool is genius. It both means you don't have to save the best weapon ammo into infinity, too afraid to spend it lest you need it in 30 minutes` time, with the added benefit of also having no more scenes where you beat a tough situation with ease, just because you happened to have hoarded said ammo due of different playing style.
Maggie Chow meeting was such a disappointment for me, I just blasted her to vapour with my limitless rocket ammo [since I used the Tooth half the game and had more ammo than god by that point].
Iron Shadow on 21/11/2003 at 03:22
Personaly I think that the 'one ammo type for everything and no reload' removes any kind of strategy in a game like DX-IW which thrives on such. Having such a system would turn a RPG/FPS into a plain FPS.
How can you justify having a 10mm tactical pistol using the same ammo as a 80mm HESH rocket launcher or an experimental plasma rifle? Heck if we want to amalgamate ammo, lets do it to the weapons as well.
On another note- Nano-ammo. WTF! You know how big a UC (A UC being the only device capable of engineering nano-machines) was? And since this is all going to happen after a *communications blackout caused by the actions at area 51* who would know how to build a UC the size of a back pack? :nono:
Reloading alows one to re-evaluate the situation (Should I change from my traq. crossbow to the WP GEP gun?) and is a small atmosphere building thing. If you are dumb enough to stand out in the open to reload then you deserve to be shot. Removing it is saying to the guys at the Underworld Bar 'look at my fantabulous limitless self loading FMJ/AP/HEAP/HESH/WP/PCM/Dart- Automatic Knife Machine Pistol Plasma Cannon Crosbow Rifle with the coffee perculator and toaster oven.
'one ammo type for everything and no reload' belongs in a deathmatch free-for-all multiplayer NOT in a complex and story driven single player.
I don't have a problem with the multitool-lockpick item. It gets rid of the 'I have twenty lockpicks but I need 2 multitools which I don't have to bypass the keypad for the INF door' syndrome. (Yes I know it is contradictory to what I said before but it is more plausable than the 25 weapons but only one ammo thing)
If what I am reading is correct, DX-IW is going to be a major back step from its predecessor and I'm not liking it. Killing off a few things just to reduce the need to do things like reload, ammo management or guessing keypad combos is one step towards a bust. Storylines and character interaction is good and fine (and important) but if you can't 'get into' the game then Story is going to mean jack.
Iron Shadow
GCD
ZylonBane on 21/11/2003 at 03:44
Ditto that. Removing reloading is unquestionably a step backward to the mindless days of Doom.
A thing about FPS game design is that it's ruthless at determining what players do and do not like. Some new concepts are embraced (having to reload), while others are rejected (losing ammo when reloading).
The last few years of FPS games have amply demonstrated that players love the reload. DX:IW is worse off for its absense.
Mehrunes on 21/11/2003 at 04:21
Quote:
Originally posted by Iron Shadow On another note- Nano-ammo. WTF! You know how big a UC (A UC being the only device capable of engineering nano-machines) was? And since this is all going to happen after a *communications blackout caused by the actions at area 51* who would know how to build a UC the size of a back pack? :nono:
You obviously haven't seen the intro trailer yet.
I wish the guns took time to manufacture rounds though, and that they could only hold a limited amount of them.
Uncia on 21/11/2003 at 11:37
Quote:
Originally posted by ZylonBane The last few years of FPS games have amply demonstrated that players love the reload.
The last few years of first person games have amply demonstrated that players love the WW2 theme exclusively, that they dislike games more complex than "yellow key opens yellow door, shoot, pick up ammo" and that if it involves shooting deer, it's a hit... I don't really think "because everyone does it" is the same as "because it's good design".
Brem_X_Jones on 21/11/2003 at 16:09
And then people complain that all games play the same.
Funny world, isn't it?
KG
ZylonBane on 21/11/2003 at 16:19
Quote:
Originally posted by Uncia The last few years of first person games have amply demonstrated that players love the WW2 theme exclusively, that they dislike games more complex than "yellow key opens yellow door, shoot, pick up ammo" and that if it involves shooting deer, it's a hit... I don't really think "because everyone does it" is the same as "because it's good design".
Please try to keep your genres straight. WW2 is currently very popular in
multiplayer FPSs (which DX2 is not). Hunting games are popular with
casual gamers (which DX2 players are not). And the part about most gamers disliking gameplay more complex than move/shoot/collect keys is demonstrably false. Need I remind you of the staggering popularity of console games like Goldeneye, Metal Gear Solid, and Splinter Cell?
BXJ, you do realize that not all change is necessarily change for the better, yes?
Morte on 21/11/2003 at 17:18
Call of Duty, Medal of Honor and Wolfenstein were exclusively multiplayer were they? :weird:
All change might not necessarily be for the better, but won't know until you try.
ZylonBane on 21/11/2003 at 19:31
Not exclusively, but multiplayer is what's made them popular.
And "no reloading" is something that was already tried... years ago. People like reloading. There's no way they can tout this as an improvement. The best they can hope to claim is that it won't suck.
