ATTN:HVSTony

#1DarkZV2BetaPosted 4/26/2010 5:00:47 PM
Have you played Unreal Championship 2? I thought the double weapon system in that game was rather unique.
Also, how did the team respond to the idea of move decay?
And finally, do you h8 me? ; ;
---
2% of GameFAQs users have this in their signature. If you're one of the 98% that doesn't, copy and paste this into your signature.
#2Valdimir_DregaPosted 4/26/2010 5:39:41 PM
I doubt he hates you. I simply expect that he considers your advice stifling to his creativity and drive for innovation, if he gives it creedence at all.

You seem to assume that HVS can't possibly make anything new and original without screwing it up. So you propose that they simply copy what's already been done in order to minimalize their plethora of possible blunders. They're smart people with some impressive credentials and college degrees, I think they're more than capable of making something on their own. -_0
---
Uncharted 2 Machinima Voice Actor. Currently playing Sully and Lazarevic. Add me on PSN if you want to get involved: Geo_Chronic.
#3DarkZV2Beta(Topic Creator)Posted 4/26/2010 5:41:18 PM
It's nice that you like fancy words and all, but obvious trolling will always be obvious, especially when it's that obvious.
---
2% of GameFAQs users have this in their signature. If you're one of the 98% that doesn't, copy and paste this into your signature.
#4GenericCommentsPosted 4/26/2010 6:01:05 PM
Ah yes move decay. I never got around to destroying that so now I will. This is my counter-argument to that theory.

It doesn't make sense that a weapon gets weaker through repeated use. Explosives don't pack less punch. Bullets don't hurt any less. Knives don't dull considerably. Energy blasts don't incinerate less. You could make the argument that a knife does get duller but, realistically, does it make a difference if you are going to only fight fr ten minutes? Conduit 2 is not a fact-based world so this won't be the heart of my argument. However, keep in mind what doesn't make sense to the player is less likely to be liked.

After reading your idea it seems that the decay system is a subtle way of discouraging camping and spraying. To make your sniper shots stronger you have to move around. This is something that I, as a camper and I believe many others, would not like. Being forced to move around rather than defend strategic point as a sniper would be incredibly lame. This discourages individual player choice and favors only mobile sniping. The same goes for automatics the decay system discourages spraying and favors burst-fire. This is an unfair disadvantage as spraying already has its own disadvantage spread, which, paired with decay, makes automatics next to useless unless they use burst-fire.

Also ammo supply is limited so it is much more difficult to abuse a weapon which your theory is based on. And I'm sure HVS is taking steps to balance weapons so they are even less susceptible to abuse.

In short the decay system favors one type of play over another in a nonsensical fashion.
---
I'm not changing this Sig until Resident Feeble...4 gets an update.
http://finickypenguin.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/hola.jpg
#5DarkZV2Beta(Topic Creator)Posted 4/26/2010 6:10:53 PM
All you did was make my point on it. The Conduit was never a campfest anyway.
Also, if you'd read it more thoroughly, this isn't about balance or abusability anymore, but about a new layer of gameplay.
And finally, you opened your post outright stating that you're just looking to pick things apart to make yourself feel better.
---
2% of GameFAQs users have this in their signature. If you're one of the 98% that doesn't, copy and paste this into your signature.
#6BlitzkriegOSUPosted 4/26/2010 6:11:50 PM

From: GenericComments | #004
In short the decay system favors one type of play over another in a nonsensical fashion.


Personally, I think a variety of play styles are welcome in any game. It's up to the developers to make sure that the game is balanced and that every action can be, in some way, counter-acted. So yes, I would tend to agree with you in that damage decay would be a terrible solution to a problem that, with hard work and balance, can be worked out to fit all play styles, rather than encourage everyone to, essentially, play the same way.
---
my only regret... is that I have.. bone-itis.
I'm with Coco
#7BlitzkriegOSUPosted 4/26/2010 6:29:39 PM
Hmm...

Also, if you'd read it more thoroughly,


smugness isn't a good quality

this isn't about balance or abusability anymore, but about a new layer of gameplay.


What's the new layer of gameplay going to entail? Because for the vast majority of people decay won't do anything, because they've already adopted the strategies that decay might entail. Defend your opinions, sir.
---
my only regret... is that I have.. bone-itis.
I'm with Coco
#8CHAINMAILLEKIDPosted 4/26/2010 6:43:30 PM
"What's the new layer of gameplay going to entail? Because for the vast majority of people decay won't do anything, because they've already adopted the strategies that decay might entail. Defend your opinions, sir."

In order to get a competitive edge, You're going to want to keep your weapons fresh. How do you balance out your use so that your power weapons don't get overused?
Or do you just want to not even bother with it, and become a dedicated specialist who's good enough with there weapon to ignore decay?

Even though, in the whole scheme of things. Keeping a weapon fresh wouldn't offer a very large advantage. But its one of many things that you could master to step up your game.
Or, You can be stubborn like me, and insist on being good at what you're good at, despite the disadvantage.
#9DarkZV2Beta(Topic Creator)Posted 4/26/2010 6:44:47 PM
It gives the player something extra to think about, and a new layer of strategy must be added to their tactics. Small things like this make a huge impact on competitive play.
This isn't something that's meant to reinvent the entire game. It's meant to throw a wrench in the works of "point and shoot" for those looking for a highly competitive game.
---
2% of GameFAQs users have this in their signature. If you're one of the 98% that doesn't, copy and paste this into your signature.
#10Sudsy86_Posted 4/26/2010 6:46:26 PM

Generic, your argument assumes realism is necessarily desirable. I'd have to say it is not. With realism obviously comes realistic decision-making. Camping is realistic. Camping provides you with a tactical advantage, usually, if you're working a strong spot. You are generally more able to keep everything in front of you, and, thus, able to filter out areas to check, able to filter out information, and, thus, able to be more discerning. In games like Tcon, which are very unrealistic, you can avoid camping through being able to explore higher levels of skill. You can see an inversely proportional line between realism and camping tendencies in games. UT3-little camping. Tcon-little camping. CoD-med-high camping. BFBC2-high camping. Again, camping is realistically smart. Games are watered down with more camping.

The argument from realism shouldn't be made.