The movement....it's all in the movement

[MrBongo]

guns fire straight.

Well, assuming you're talking about a small caliber one, then yes, perhaps. But not in the case of automatic or even semi-automatic weaponry, which is what I was referring to. Even so, a pistol shot would generate large ammounts of kickback from the bullet discharge, which would obviously through off someone's aim slightly. Hence the automatic weaponry, with sustained weapons discharge, having very poor accuracy/innacurate bullet placement.

 

[PvtRyan]

So by "skillful players", you mean "people against realism"? Honestly, the things that you are complaining about are the things that make these (awesome) games more true-to-life, which is the point, right?

I hate to be the one to crush your fantasy world, but in real life, people don't move 200-mph Unreal Tournament style, can't jump through the air the way Master Chief does, guns do not fire straight, and people don't have the reaction time like a housefly to a magazine.

*sigh* Go play Counterstrike with the other legions of babbling morons and hackers, I'm sure they'll be in complete awe of your "skills"... :hmph:

Always funny when people need to bash CS they fall back onto the "hackers" argument. Yeah, the game is littered with hackers, in fact, I estimate 90% being a hacker.

This has little to do with realism and non-realism, this has to do with shitty movement. And games like MoHAA and BF1942 have a horrible infantry feeling. And this is me speaking as a BF1942 fan.
The games feel bulky, unresponsive and unintuitive. But if you feel that walking like a knight in 50 kg armor brings you closer to "realism" (realism and BF1942, MoHAA in the same sentence, laughable) then fine, have it your way.

 

[MrBongo]

Soldiers and infantry did infact carry quite a deal of weight on their shoulders during wartime, especially in World War 1 and 2. What, do you think the weapons and supplies delivered themselves to the battlefield, or that supply trucks could cross any terrain- bombed out or otherwise.

Pay attention in history class, you might not appear so ignorant next time...

 

[GuNzABlaZiN]

Well, assuming you're talking about a small caliber one, then yes, perhaps. But not in the case of automatic or even semi-automatic weaponry, which is what I was referring to. Even so, a pistol shot would generate large ammounts of kickback from the bullet discharge, which would obviously through off someone's aim slightly. Hence the automatic weaponry, with sustained weapons discharge, having very poor accuracy/innacurate bullet placement.

Yeah, it's called a fire-cone, it's used to simulate recoil. On the first shot, the bullet will go where you are aiming (IRL), since the bullet leaves the muzzle before the innitial recoil of the shot is felt. That was the whole idea behind the G11, it could put out a 3 round burst at 2000rpm and all 3 bullets would go on target. Automatic weapons don't neccessarily have bad accuracy as long as the user can control the weapon. The M16 is a very precise weapon, even in full auto. Everything is so "tight" inside, while the AKM has very low tolerances, everything is very loose inside, which leads to bad accuracy in full auto, even with an experienced user.

and

So by "skillful players", you mean "people against realism"? Honestly, the things that you are complaining about are the things that make these (awesome) games more true-to-life, which is the point, right?

I hate to be the one to crush your fantasy world, but in real life, people don't move 200-mph Unreal Tournament style, can't jump through the air the way Master Chief does, guns do not fire straight, and people don't have the reaction time like a housefly to a magazine.

*sigh* Go play Counterstrike with the other legions of babbling morons and hackers, I'm sure they'll be in complete awe of your "skills"... :hmph:

You really don't see the point behind games, do you? Games aren't real life, pal.

 

[Diablo2k]

Soldiers and infantry did infact carry quite a deal of weight on their shoulders during wartime, especially in World War 1 and 2. What, do you think the weapons and supplies delivered themselves to the battlefield, or that supply trucks could cross any terrain- bombed out or otherwise.

Pay attention in history class, you might not appear so ignorant next time...

Games are ment to be fun, moving as slow a snails in big maps isnt fun!

 

[Sideswiped]

i wouldn't say that it is perfect. For some reason they slaughtered the BAR while giving a huge boost to the german machine pistol. I hate Unteroficers.

Have you played lately? The unteroficer and thompson are roughly equal and the bar is a step above the k44, IMHO.

 

[Doofus]

Try loading up Battlefield 1942, and climb up a ladder, and you'll understand why it doesn't "feel" right.

 

[schaf]

I started playing counterstrike with 0.6 beta or sth. and abot 2 years ago I was sick of all those guys randomly jumping around corners giving you headhots.

I think, CS is a game where you can decide the round on your own.

On the other hand, in Battlefield you need your whole team (sometimes 16 people) working, playing together and you will only win, if your whole team knows what (and when) to do.

I think the two games are very different and both have their advantages and disadvantages.

I'm looking forward to tf2, maybe the game will take profit of both, the "one-man show", sometimes and the "team", too.

We'll see ...

 

[UndercoverBob]

i HATED the movement in halo OMG its ...its.... eViL

 

[Doofus]

?? I thought Halo movement was pretty solid.

 

[UndercoverBob]

i geuss its sorta a pet peeve

 

[UndercoverBob]

i diddent like movement in theif 3 and when i turn it theif 3 it all blurres

 

[Gunner]

The source engine "feeling" is even better, movement is crisp, precise. I just love it =)

 

[UndercoverBob]

ya its so atmospheric

 

[csmighty1]

only thing that annoys me in counter strike is that every time you take out you gun, you always cock it. In real life you wouldn't need to do that beause htere is already a bullet in the chamber, and if you relode while in the middle of a clip, you don't have to cock it because there is already a bullet in the chamber. Jeeze, common developers! get you head in the game! (no pun intended)

 

[UndercoverBob]

whoa ur right

 

[MultiVaC]

Yeah, I hate that too.

 

[UndercoverBob]

valve should think about that
edit:yay im a zombie

 

[Jakeic]

Have you played lately? The unteroficer and thompson are roughly equal and the bar is a step above the k44, IMHO.

yeah i have. The BAR is a stronger round than the k44, but due to lower rate of fire, less controlability, and overall gayness of the Unteroficer's texture, trying to gun those guys down can be a struggle.

 

[Reaperman]

i'm suddenly jumping with the awp hs'ing a guy 100 m away, whipping a deagle out hs'ing a few guys running at me.....i find that variance in gameplay awesome.

the reason i hate CS...



WWII ONLINE ROX THE BOX! FUX CS!


www.wwiionline.com

 

[Portis]

Ok, now i do agree that games are all about movement. And i do believe that the Souce engine has a nice feel to it, however in CS:S there is something a bit off. I know that CS has always been a little more realistic then say the Q3s or Unreals but I think the biggest problem with CS:S is the weapon accuracy.

The only game IMO to truly nail the combo of movement and weapon feel/accuracy was SOF2. Now in SOF2 the movement was fantastic, a nice balance of speed and precision. Also the weapon accuracy and weapon feel was great. If you were good enough you could easily kill in 1 to 2 shots. Also SOF2 had a good shot pattern for its weapons (the smaller the burst the more accurate,once again a good balance of realism/game). In SOF2 battles felt like skill more then anything not luck like they do in CS:S. Also in CS:S when you are getting shot you get like glued to that spot for a second. Real? yes Fun? no.

Not to many game designers have gotten this balance right and while with the Source engine all the right ingredients are there they just arent quite mixed right. I mean these are "games" after all.