Cinimatic Combat or Classic ?

[SeeJay]

You have to be realistic in the common sense retard. If they didnt then you might as well play Sims and send 30 natural disasters through a city. Also yes their are headhshots, but to actually get one is rare and major hard.

[KopMcginty]

Originally Posted by buried

UT has headshots.

If they are smart with writing their netcode and use server clusters for the battlezones, I don't see how they couldn't combine fast movement with large amounts of players.

Also, please don't say "that's not realistic" when talking about this game, as it is clearly designed without realism in mind.

I agree but its a massive task to get it right on the coding side. It has to maintain fast respones from the server or your going to be shooting where the dodging-running-jumping guy is when he is now actually off to the side filling you full of lead. The faster the gameplay, the harder it is for each client to keep track accurately of where the other clients actually are. This can lead to warping and shots hitting but not damaging when the server updates player positions compared to where the clients thought people where.

This is going to be a massive factor for them, for Huxley to be worth while over standard fps, one of the things it needs is scale.. ie the dozens, hundreds of players fighting at once, it gets this wrong and there will be trouble. They get it right and the fighting will be intense.

[SeeJay]

If it is just a bunch of guys with UT like armor and stuff, then what is the point of strategizing. A person can take an entire clip of damage he doesnt have to take cover until he gets low which he will have plenty of time.

With a system like America's Army, Call of Duty 2, or Socom 3 it makes people have to duck, provide covering fire, exploit weak positions. With out it you got nothing but a chaotic fire fight of who can fire th emost bullet at the most exposed target. The only strategy there will be consentrating fire on one guy just to kill him fast enough.

[Felix12g]

Webzen has their own netcode they've used in MMOs they've already released, which works very well for massive combat. UT engines have always handled netcode better than others. Added onto that the strictly PvP fights with massive players and no bots won't actually have that much overhead in terms of processing. The movement and dodging aren't really the problem.

A vector calculation and positioning system sucks up almost no processing, however using those calculations for an AIs processes does take up alot. Basically it just uses the old a^2 + b^2 = c^2 using a false origin as the corner of the right triangle. Once it has the vector and distance, basically all that's left is transmitting the hits and positions back and forth. In strictly player battles this won't cause a problem. Their MMO servers should easily be able to handle a 200 player deathmatch since servers 5 years ago could handle 64 player matches in Tribes 2.

One problem that will show up is the graphical lag client side and players' computers being able to handle the graphics and not be lagged that way. It's one thing to have great net code and quite another to have great net code and graphics lag, which amount to closely the same thing. It remains to be seen whether they have their hit calculation based on net or client side. Client side hit detection opens up so many more ways for cheating that I don't believe they'll make it like this.


Last and very least we've got seejays last bullshit. What kind of games are you playing that take an entire clip into a person to kill them? As for saying that's how huxley is going to be, try watching a couple vids, it doesn't take much at all to kill the opposing players in the E3 demo. As for being hard to get head shots . . . . well all i can say is practice more.

[KopMcginty]

I have experienced server side/net lag in a few games, i know its not my rig due to being decent spec blowing the reccomended specs for the games i'm talking about out of the water, so lag thats out of your control does happen. Simply saying that how they approach this is very important.

Sounds like you know more about coding than me fella (admittedly not hard lol) so i'll go with what you are saying but it still remains to be seen how well they adapt the engine to the number of players and how well they adapt their coding/infrastructure to a fps based game.

Of course the fact that Wezen do have this prior experience in the MMO area and arent just jumping in saying uhh fps would be good will be an advantage.

AS for the entire clip comment, the game i have seen attacked for this the most seems to be PS and even that you can get several kills per clip with most weapons so i guess thats a random comment with little to no thought actually put in. In fact i dont think i have ever played a FPS where it takes a whole clip to kill and i'm not even all that good a shot lol.

[SeeJay]

In the previous posts they were discussing if the armor would play such a heavy affect on the fighting.

This is seen all of UT and Quake when using an assualt rifle just isnt adequate. So you go looking for bigger guns so you can fire off even more yet just as fast slugs at your opponet.

Oh by the way I mentioned some of the games I play and I dont have to empty my clip at all. 2 bullets normally is good enough to do the job for me. Games when the armor takes in place means that people are just gona bve in hectic fire fights and not a strategic fight using plans and etc.

oh and I am getting a warning even though this douche bag is flamin me still. Even though I said nothin to him. Felix must be suckin the mods dicks too.

[KopMcginty]

Give it up Seejay, your getting a warning for talking trash and if it makes you feel better, whether or not Felix or anyone else reported you, i did. To feel sorry for yourself after the posts we have had to read of yours is laughable. Whether directly because of that or not, the mods obviously agreed with my feelings that there is no place for talk like you have taken to using. I am guessing you want to be banned seeing as in the same sentence as complaining about the warning you are still using personal insults.

[SeeJay]

LMAO I am actually, I have no use for the forums anymore so I decided to leave with a BANG. I'll come back and visit once in awhile to see if the payment fee has been announced or if it will be free. When I am baned or my account shut off I'll leave.

[KopMcginty]

Lol some bang.

[Maki-Maki]

Ugh I'd hate if it were like UT. There is so many goddamn games like that, Prey, Doom 3, Q4, now huxley? I just dont like games where it all depends on the gun you have to get a kill. i mean in the beggining of an online game in UT, Q4 ect. you all begin with a crappy ass rifle that does no damage at all. Even if you encounter somone by surprise if he has any gun better that that crappy rifle your dead.

At least in Games like halo 2 ( i know most of the ppl here probably are getting huxley on their comp. and maybe never even played halo 2) when you start out with an SMG you can easily take on someone with, lets say, Rockets, a shotgun, Energy sword and all the weapons better than it ( Especially if your dual wielding XD). Plus you can crouch and sneak up behind someone and assasinate them for an instant kill. Also when im playing games like Quake 4 and Prey ( Both very similar to UT) no one is really talking, everyone on your team is doing their own thing. But in games like halo you cooperate as a team because the engine dosent allow everyone to run off by them selfs cuz you'll get your self killed.

[connnnn]

It's kind of funny he should mention 2 bullets. If you're good enough, and use the right weapons (or even a little lucky), you can kill anyone in UT2k4 with a maximum of 2 shots, and that's assuming they're absolutely stacked as far as they can get and you don't have any (offensive) powerups. You spawn with 100 health, and you can do that much damage in less than 2 seconds with pretty much any gun (even the assault rifle can rage up close), and instantly with a few.

People can like and play whatever type of game they want, but folks should stick to talking about the games they know and understand, and not try to make claims about ones they don't.

EDIT for above:

Er, there's dozens of games released every year based on slower realism-based combat. Fast DM games get on average 1 or fewer a year. Point is, there's plenty of other options.

I assume you're talking about TDM. Don't most public servers have weaponstay on? If you can't find a weapon when they're just sitting there the whole time, you must not have been playing very long. How can you expect to do well in a game where you don't even bother to learn the map? And in an organized game, TDM is all about controlling the weapons and then powerups. Teamwork is based around weapon distribution; it's pretty much 75% of the gameplay. Dual assault rifles in UT is pretty powerful, and that's why your teammates throw them to you when you don't have a weapon. If they don't do it in pubs, it's because it's completely unnecessary since weaponstay is on and every weapon in the game is just sitting there waiting to be picked up...

[SeeJay]

You can kill someone in 2 hits in UT with a rocket launcher and flak cannon, if you hit. Kinda hard when you got a bunny hoppin guy with armor. Using your assault rifle your not dishin enough fire power to be that affective so you grab your near by minigun and you launch 300 bullets in the guys direction. Now I know it is possible, but when you spawn you immediatly think ok I need something better. Either that your goin shit I can get to another gun.

[TheVermin23]

Originally Posted by Maki-Maki

Ugh I'd hate if it were like UT. There is so many goddamn games like that, Prey, Doom 3, Q4, now huxley? I just dont like games where it all depends on the gun you have to get a kill. i mean in the beggining of an online game in UT, Q4 ect. you all begin with a crappy ass rifle that does no damage at all. Even if you encounter somone by surprise if he has any gun better that that crappy rifle your dead.

At least in Games like halo 2 ( i know most of the ppl here probably are getting huxley on their comp. and maybe never even played halo 2) when you start out with an SMG you can easily take on someone with, lets say, Rockets, a shotgun, Energy sword and all the weapons better than it ( Especially if your dual wielding XD). Plus you can crouch and sneak up behind someone and assasinate them for an instant kill. Also when im playing games like Quake 4 and Prey ( Both very similar to UT) no one is really talking, everyone on your team is doing their own thing. But in games like halo you cooperate as a team because the engine dosent allow everyone to run off by them selfs cuz you'll get your self killed.

i completely get what you're saying, and the type of FPS you're describing halo to be, has already existed on PC way before halo. i guess alot of these other games you mentioned seem to outshine the others in ads and hype. that is, not to say, that they're bad or good. it's just a different style of play that, i too, do not so much prefer.

it was the same in perfect dark and goldeneye.
get a good shot off on someone and they run away to get the shield again. and as for the bigger weapons, it kinda creates imbalance. sometimes. i think the only real problem with that is the spawn areas. all FPS's are leaning more towards a 'spawn in your own area and the middle ground is where everyone fights'. spawn killing takes on another meaning when you start with minimal firepower.

but as said before, you can still kill with that gun you start with.

and really, halo isn't that much different from the 'collect bigger guns and armor' type of play.


as for me, i like games like medal of honor:allied assault(mohaa), america's army, etc.
in mohaa, you pick a weapon class. rifle, SMG, MG, sniper, and rocket. each come with a pistol. so you spawn fully equiped for your class, ready to kill at full potential. the only weapons to pick up are from dead people; but you have to throw down your own main weapon first. so it's kinda like a class change, mid-battle. grabbing dead peoples guns is also where you get ammo. because you only start off with a certain amount. as for health- enemies drop a health pack once killed in addition to thier gun. it give a good percent of life back.

so the only place to get weapons, ammo, and health, is to kill more. no ones running away unless they are truly running away to go hide. if someone hasn't died in a long time and is getting many kills, it doesn't just mean he's resourceful, but that he's a good killer.

america's army (for PC, havne't played it on console), everyone picks a class, and there's only a certain amount of positions. the AR or grenade launcher attachment is only available in a few slots. 6 players- ONE AR. and so forth. but really, the only advantage powerful weapons have in this game is for thier tactical usage. the weapon that 90% of the ppl get is FINE. this game is what most would call 'extreme realism'. you might say that in socom or in other games, you get shot and the foot and die. that's realism, sure, but not real-ism.
in America's Army, you can get shot quite a few times in the arms or legs. and people might get pissed that you didnt' die from all those shots. but it was particular limbs, you are not dead and are still able to shoot, but you are bleeding and you walk slow, and need a medic. however body shots and head shots may not even have to be direct to kill. someone could shoot the pipes next to your head and ricochet fragments.
-no health packs
-but you do start with an empty slot for another main weapon, so after a kill you can scurage around for more tactical firepower.




blah blah blah. basically, the ones you described on computer would be classified mainly as twitch shooters. hop hop hop bang bang bang die die die. and the type you described halo to be has existed a long time on PC. halo's style is the SAME as that of a twitch shooter. only the control is so slow, it doesn't quite reach that definition of twitch.

i'll say one last thing-
UT, and other games like it, are the manifestation from the incredible range of movement in addition to simutaneous pinpoint aim. both made possible by keyboard and mouse.
if it is a console player that is upset that it's too fast and unfair, then that kinda sounds like when neo got beat up by morpheus in the dojo.

[Felix12g]

It is true that alot of games start you off with little to no weaponry forcing you to move about and expose yourself. That's just a simple way to create flow in a map. What they've said and shown in Huxley so far is you choose up to 5 weapons, what kind of armor etc you want and go out to frag your way to an objective. They've said over and over "Lots and lots of guns" so the concerns about being able to find them should be soothed.

It's a pity to say, but those of you that are hoping for a game unlike UT might want to start shopping around for a different game to look forward to. Huxley may not have the constantly airborne fighting (Which I find to be more fun than slugs poudning themselves against each other in 2d on the ground) but it will still be mobile like UT from all evidence.

[TheVermin23]

i'm prepared for that.

when i first got into FPS, i tried UT. it came with my voodoo card. i didn't like it all that much, partly because i was new to it all.

then i tried UT4, many years later, and found it more comfortable. it's still not a form of FPS that i prefer so much. but i think that's gonna change.

[SeeJay]

I prefer the FPS like the Battlefield games. They bring together the best mix of a normal FPS with vehicle combat. Nothing compares to Battlefield 2 in reconstructing a real battle. If huxley plays its cards right then it will become the best simulation of a real battle.

Oh and actually having a UT system will actually work against what they said. A person at level 50 with a full set up with kick ass shit will kick the crap out of someone who is level 1. Instead of taking 50 shots to take the guy down it will take somewhere in the hundreds, plus the guy at lvl 1 will have to make sure he isnt hit once or else the minigun will tear him up in 20 bullets.

If this was a more realistic system. Armor will only mean that the guy has more time to duck for cover and not get killed. While the lvl 1 guy will have to take extra care in making sure this guy doesnt get shots off on him exposed.

This is a more liked way of fighting. This is the most realistic form of fighting that is being done in the most popular of games. This will also give those of a lower level the chance to fight. A UT type style of fighting will basically make it so a level 50 could just walk right up and take whatever a level 1 throws at him. This is not what Huxley wants and I am most sure that most people will hate this.

[TheVermin23]

Originally Posted by SeeJay

I prefer the FPS like the Battlefield games. They bring together the best mix of a normal FPS with vehicle combat. Nothing compares to Battlefield 2 in reconstructing a real battle. If huxley plays its cards right then it will become the best simulation of a real battle.

Tribes was more indepth to me.
bases were run by on power, and had a power generator or 2 or 3. and you could destroy any of it to cripple the enemy. it took time to repair all of it, and that would be enough to stage an attack. oh, and you could build turrents, shields, etc. even an outpost. teleporters were my favorite- with the bases about 2 miles apart: "flag taken" (5 seconds later) "flag captured".
and from what it looks like- quake wars might take the cake on the full scale battle scene. except for one flaw- player capacity. but maybe they might pull it off.

i did like battlefield, but if you eliminate the vehicles then the FPS part of it is sub-par. imo.