Jump to content
StillBlaze

Default weapon! Discussion

Recommended Posts

​Maybe because far fewer people play QW and all the top players are in QL?

​Well, all of them. Q3 and QL were the most enduring in terms of popularity and they have a machine gun that the pros think is OP and most players think is UP. The hardcore wannabe-pros who think the genre should be as inaccessible as possible are partly responsible for the death of the arena shooter. Remember that if you don't have a large casual playerbase you don't have a game and don't have a pro scene.

 

This place is like a cult at times. 

​None of the quakes have been failures, they have all been pretty big hits.

The hardcore players aren't the ones at fault, they don't actually make the gameplay. Also, I honestly don't think ArenaFPS is dead...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Milton interview from http://www.quakeworld.nu/forum/topic/304/2554/milton-interview/

as far as i know, you don't play duels much, right?
That's right. After duelmania.fi I kinda retired from duels although I play one or two every month or so.

tired or what?
That and the fact that at one point it was really hard to do anything new in duels. You can always get better aim but i.e. in dm4 the tactics are already there.

​That's not to say it has been degraded to an aimfest, just that he feels there's nothing left to improve upon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Milton interview from http://www.quakeworld.nu/forum/topic/304/2554/milton-interview/

as far as i know, you don't play duels much, right?
That's right. After duelmania.fi I kinda retired from duels although I play one or two every month or so.

tired or what?
That and the fact that at one point it was really hard to do anything new in duels. You can always get better aim but i.e. in dm4 the tactics are already there.

​I stand corrected. I think the rest of my argument still holds up though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My personal opinion of the Burst gun, is that its basically a crappy shotgun. Once you pick up the real shotgun, theres no reason to ever use burst. It would almost make more sense to bind both weapons to the same key and just have it go to the shotgun automatically if you have it.

In quake the spawning weapon (the MG) is kind of thought to "suck", but it doesnt suck its really good- its just situational, its the most situational of all the guns (thus being weak through being so situational)

But whenever someone is running away with only 10 health and you just need to deal some consistent damage- the MG is always your go to weapon even if you have a full stack of every weapon in the game. Every gun in quake has a type of situation its most meant for so every gun is always useful.

The burst in reflex doesnt have that kind of equivalence. Once you get the shotgun youd always use the shotgun over the burst. 

Edited by Shadow_Being
clarification of a sentence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My personal opinion of the Burst gun, is that its basically a crappy shotgun. Once you pick up the real shotgun, theres no reason to ever use burst. It would almost make more sense to bind both weapons to the same key and just have it go to the shotgun automatically if you have it.

In quake the spawning weapon (the MG) is kind of thought to "suck", but it doesnt suck its really good- its just situational, its the most situational of all the guns. But whenever someone is running away with only 10 health and you jsut need to deal some consistent damage- the MG is always your go to weapon even if you have a full stack. of every weapon in the game. Every gun in quake has a type of situation its most meant for so every gun is always useful.

The burst in reflex doesnt have that kind of equivalence. Once you get the shotgun youd always use the shotgun over the burst. 

​There's a reason why it is weak, if you read the rest of the thread you'll find the answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

​There's a reason why it is weak, if you read the rest of the thread you'll find the answer.

​There's a difference between being weak and being totally useless compared to everything else. It's almost an insult to the player.

​None of the quakes have been failures, they have all been pretty big hits.

The hardcore players aren't the ones at fault, they don't actually make the gameplay. Also, I honestly don't think ArenaFPS is dead...

​Delusion. Quake Live was a flop. Quake 4 was a flop. Arena FPS couldn't be any deader, I can't think of another genre which has suffered such a decline. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

​There's a difference between being weak and being totally useless compared to everything else. It's almost an insult to the player.

​Delusion. Quake Live was a flop. Quake 4 was a flop. Arena FPS couldn't be any deader, I can't think of another genre which has suffered such a decline. 

​Quake Live was a flop by whos standards? They managed to keep it running for 7+ years, and people still play it.

Quake 4 was a flop according to who? Esreality? It got pretty good reviews and sold fairly well afaik.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Delusion. Quake Live was a flop. Quake 4 was a flop. Arena FPS couldn't be any deader, I can't think of another genre which has suffered such a decline. 

​Is everything that's not a blockbuster success a flop now? Quake 4 didn't take over the multiplayer game but that doesn't mean it wasn't successful and Quake Live was a F2P rejuvenation of an already 10 year old game and just because they've finally decided to pull the plug on it after it carried Quake for another 5+ years of life hardly makes it a flop.

The only thing dead about Arena FPS is no AAA development team has dared to challenge Q3A/QL's success probably because they know anything less than perfection would be outright rejected as worse than Quake and of course Id Software is basically dead so don't expect them to do it.

Yeah, the AAA developers have evolved their games in other directions to make things like Halo and Call of Duty and yeah the new Doom looks like less of an Arena FPS than COD but I don't think it's realistic to call Arena FPS dead because it's successful hits have too much damn longevity and just wont die to let anything else come along, compare similarly aged games of any other genre and you'll find they pretty much fare worse (except maybe CS1.6 and WoW).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

​Quake Live was a flop by whos standards? They managed to keep it running for 7+ years, and people still play it.

​A few hundred people. That's a flop by anyone's standards for the latest title in such a famous franchise. If a game has so few players it can't even support an active development team and becomes abandoned then I'd classify that as an objective flop. 


The only thing dead about Arena FPS is no AAA development team has dared to challenge Q3A/QL's success probably because they know anything less than perfection would be outright rejected as worse than Quake and of course Id Software is basically dead so don't expect them to do it.
 

​Or maybe because they don't see a market. If you add up the current live playerbase of every AFPS it probably wouldn't even reach a thousand.

Until you accept that the AFPS is dead you can't set about reviving it. Pretending everything is fine is the road to failure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

​A few hundred people. That's a flop by anyone's standards for the latest title in such a famous franchise. If a game has so few players it can't even support an active development team and becomes abandoned then I'd classify that as an objective flop. 

​Or maybe because they don't see a market. If you add up the current live playerbase of every AFPS it probably wouldn't even reach a thousand.

Until you accept that the AFPS is dead you can't set about reviving it. Pretending everything is fine is the road to failure.

​Thousands, more like. After 7+ years. I believe syncerror has stated it's been profitable, and the fact that they were still developing it after 7 years means it got financing.

The game ran for 7 years. Not a flop.

As for AFPS being dead, you seem to make the assumption that everyone thinks it's fine. How can you be sure that's what everyone thinks?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

​If you read my post at all----- Fuck it you wont read this one either.

​Terifire's point is that a starting weapon should feel worthless compared to the weapons you pick up. Look at it like this, suppose you're playing starcraft, would you say non-upgraded marines are UP because they can't hold their own vs fully upgraded marines? Similarly, when you wipe out the opponent's army, would you think it's reasonable if a new army instantly respawned at his base free of charge?

 

Disclaimer: I don't actually play SC, there are probably a ton of things wrong with this analogy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

​A few hundred people. That's a flop by anyone's standards for the latest title in such a famous franchise. If a game has so few players it can't even support an active development team and becomes abandoned then I'd classify that as an objective flop. 

​Or maybe because they don't see a market. If you add up the current live playerbase of every AFPS it probably wouldn't even reach a thousand.

Until you accept that the AFPS is dead you can't set about reviving it. Pretending everything is fine is the road to failure.

By that logic Battlefield 1942 was a flop as soon as Battlefield 2 came out because DICE no longer kept any developers on it so all it's past success is negated?

If you add up the number of AFPS games that aren't 10+ years old or still in development/early access for this player base to belong to, what's that number?

My point is a product that doesn't exist can't have users, maybe developers don't see a market or maybe they see a bigger one in other genres or maybe they figure half a billion dollars on advertising and giant billboards will sell whatever they make - what ever the reason they aren't making many more AFPS games the player base of Quake Live is pretty damn big for such an old game so I'd say AFPS has fared quite well for how little developer love it's been given in recent years.

Anyway a game can be successful without having users idly waiting by for it to be released, new games and even new genres emerge without any existing player base.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

whenever someone is running away with only 10 health and you just need to deal some consistent damage- the MG is always your go to

​that is literally the *only* example where the MG is the better weapon. also, this assumes you know for a fact that he's below 80, because while you try to use the MG (which has spread) he will be railing you. in fact, most high level CA players will probably prefer rail as it guarantees a hit if you can aim it. there's people that have 60%+ accuracy with rail and to them the spread of the MG makes it worse than the reload of the rail.

the MG is just inferior to everything. surprise, one weapon HAS to be the worst one, by definition. Anyway,

Consider a DM6 duel. infinite ammo but 1 weapon only. normal PUs (RA, mega..), identical high level players. it would probably go like this:

 

RL vs MG : RL wins (spam the splash damage + rocketjump)

Rail vs MG: Rail wins

LG vs MG: arguably the MG is better is the hands of a skilled player, even though it has a lower DPS, it does have infinite range. MG *could* win.

SG vs MG: SG wins (makes no noise, can camp CQC)

PG vs MG: PG wins (spam + the blinding effect of a wall of plasma heading to you)

GL vs MG: MG wins (good luck getting CQC hits with the GL)

 

Regarding the "no reason to use it", i think you are right, there. But then again you will see dreamhack duels where the only weapons used are rail, RL and LG; no GL, no MG, no Plasma AT ALL. The way the burstgun works, with its high potential damage, slow projectile, and weird spread, makes it unsuitable for just about any situation. I personally use the MG quite a lot, since i can't rely on great RG aim, and it's useful to do some damage while getting in LG range. I wouldn't use the brustgun for that, i'd just use plasma or shotgun.

So yes, it's a weapon which becomes useless soon after the start of a game (i'm actually thinking of binding key2 to something else); is that a major problem for you? I think the game as designed works well, and i don't stress over the fact that we don't have a MG. 

 

you should not rely on it, it's only a deterrent for chasers until you get ... anything else. and it's fine the way it is. it's meant to be weak.

Missu's argument of 3v1 assumes some fantastical situation where the other 2 people are AFK which rarely happens, from my experience. In fact, the reason why TDM was practically dead for 10 years is because it's not 3 MG vs 1 guy with a RL, but it's 3 MG vs 3 guys with full stack; you only have to wipe the enemy once to completely shut them out, and if you go look at some scores on QLRanks you'll see most *classic* TDM games end in pathetic 30-150.

Citing QW as an example to look up to is ridiculous; do you want a game where weapons are so ridiculously tiered that out-of-tier fights are impossible, then go play QW. Thankfully we have moved away from those games because they were ridiculously unbalanced.

But hey, if you want to lose games 30-150 be my guest,We do not want to play a game where you are out of control for the whole 20 minutes, and the only way to get a single frag is to die 30 times. Also because you imply that doing so would allow your team to get control, while that is demonstrably false. Classic TDM simply does not give you enough resources to deal as much damage in a set time, as the map respawns PUs. If a control team plays the perfect game, they cannot lose, and the out of control team cannot win even if they play a perfect game. That's why TDM was dead. 

 

re: high level duellers complaining that duel is boring.

first off, perception bias, seriously. 

watch the same duel they said was boring, and you will not think it boring in any way. Unless you are a pro who legitimizes spending 2 hours each day on a devmap practicing rail shots. So high level play gets repetitive? Jeez, name one game which is not repetitive. CHESS? people literally memorize games and play them move-per-move identical to the printed version; adhering to each move identically is considered a fundamental skill. Tekken is like this. SSF is like this. SC2 has basically 3 tactics. Unless you look into large team (5+) games you will not find variation, because it's inefficient. And now that the netcode has changed, and everyone has access to low latency connections, you find it weird that people are perfecting the game?

The truth of shooter games is that it takes ~3 rockets to win(or less, depending on the game). And in QL it pays to play like Evil (i played in his team in CA last week, he had 8k dmg at the end of a 10-2) because the game is designed to be that way IF you can play like that, because pulling off that shit IS HARD. Should we redesign the entire AFPS genre because 5 guys in russia can hit 70% rail?

 

 

incidentally, i want to add one thing. 

before the "duel bad because aim", do you know what the pros were complaining about? not enough aim.

"I played better for the whole game and then he had a stroke of luck and won" (i.e he out-aimed me when he needed to)

that would translate as "we want a more stable, predictable game where consistency is more important than luck".

 

So leave the brustgun as it is. Move your mouse, press W+A+space, and get to a decent gun, it shouldn't be hard.

 

Edited by Sky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

By that logic Battlefield 1942 was a flop as soon as Battlefield 2 came out because DICE no longer kept any developers on it so all it's past success is negated?

Um no, if it was a flop they wouldn't have made Battlefield 2. Quake Live didn't have no development because they made Quake 5, it was because there were no revenues or playerbase to justify it. Do you even think about what you're writing? What was Quake Live's peak playerbase anyway?

games the player base of Quake Live is pretty damn big for such an old game so I'd say AFPS has fared quite well for how little developer love it's been given in recent years.

It's only five years old. TF2 is three years older and still going, which is why they're making Overwatch. L4D2 is a year older than Quake Live, has no support and over ten times the playerbase of Quake Live.

Like I said, you people are delusional. You need to accept that the AFPS failed and that Reflex needs to revive it if it is to have a chance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Um no, if it was a flop they wouldn't have made Battlefield 2. Quake Live didn't have no development because they made Quake 5, it was because there were no revenues or playerbase to justify it. Do you even think about what you're writing? What was Quake Live's peak playerbase anyway?

It's only five years old. TF2 is three years older and still going, which is why they're making Overwatch. L4D2 is a year older than Quake Live, has no support and over ten times the playerbase of Quake Live.

Like I said, you people are delusional. You need to accept that the AFPS failed and that Reflex needs to revive it if it is to have a chance.

​QuakeLive is a bit older than that. Also, it has been around for quite a long time with active development behind it, do you really think they would do such a thing if they weren't making money? Your whole argument of why it failed is flawed.

You say battlefield 1942 was obviously a success, because they made battlefield 2. Before that you said Quake4 was a failure... yet they made QuakeLive.

You say L4D2 has no support, but there was an update in the last 3 days.

You are delusional, do you even think about what you're writing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's like arguing with children. Quake Live was officially released in 2010. That's five years old. Quake Live was not based on the success of Quake 4, otherwise they'd have made Quake 5 instead of a 3 remake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's like arguing with children. Quake Live was officially released in 2010. That's five years old. Quake Live was not based on the success of Quake 4, otherwise they'd have made Quake 5 instead of a 3 remake.

Might be because iD is dead. Doom 3 released 11 years ago, took them that long to make a successor despite it being a success (financially). I love reading all these metaphors about how we have to let go of quake to magically find what's going to make AFPS popular again but nobody ever provides any ideas which would actually do that except 'we need a good new teammode' which is basically nothing.

Personally i don't give a flying fuck about whether people consider AFPS dead or not, if i want a match i will hit up one of the 17 players (hue) and i'll get a match. I don't need to feel like part of a huge community or prizemoney as an incentive to play. The only reason i want Reflex to get a larger playerbase is to fund the game, other than that people can stay in their HLTV hellhole for all i care.

Regarding the Burstgun, the only thing i dislike about it is the spray pattern, shooting next to the opponent at mid range to get a bit of chip damage is very counter intuitive. If the pellets were instead fired in a straight line i'd like it a lot more, but i suppose that would make it unreasonably strong.  It's shit in most scenarios because it's supposed to be shit, it's not supposed to be an alternative to the shotgun in any way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>it's not supposed to be an alternative to the shotgun in any way.

 

thats percisely the point I am making. it IS an alternative to the shotgun. I even said the burst and shotgun should have the same keybind because theyre the SAME GUN. Its a shotgun that does a little less damage. Thats all it is.

 

In quake the MG isnt just an LG that does a little less damage, it has unlimited range making it it's own gun good for its own situations (eg cleaning up kills). Its not just an "LG that does less damage"

 

The burst has no special properties or special advantages, theres nothing useful, interesting, or fun about the gun.

Edited by Shadow_Being

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Making burst gun into a low dps projectile MG could be an interesting alternative.

​Would be cool.

Make each projectile 1-2 dmg, with a higher ROF. Mebe tighten up the spread pattern and give it a less linear path. More of a ramp shaped spread than a straight line so that it can be more effective to longer distances. If the pattern started out at 0degress and increased to 90degress max it'd basically  be shooting around corners at some pre-disposed distance, which would be cool to allow for chip/splash damage.

Edited by Gangland

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Personally i don't give a flying fuck about whether people consider AFPS dead or not, if i want a match i will hit up one of the 17 players (hue) and i'll get a match. I don't need to feel like part of a huge community or prizemoney as an incentive to play. The only reason i want Reflex to get a larger playerbase is to fund the game, other than that people can stay in their HLTV hellhole for all i care.

 

Well that's the thing isn't it? Quake Live averaging 1k active players can't even justify a single developer anymore. The only way Reflex can survive is if it attracts, and continues to attract, enough new players to pay for three devs living in Australia. A scattering of old QW/CPMA vets isn't going to cut it, there aren't enough of them and they're the ones who sneer the hardest at modern revenue models like microtransactions.

i really wish the loudest people with the most ideas regarding gameplay changes werent also the newest players.

​New players are the only ones that are going to save the game. Your attitude is appalling. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×