What the heck is an arena shooter anyway?

#51DerppopotamusPosted 7/10/2014 11:13:18 AMmessage detail
CHAINMAILLEKID posted...
I mean... I look at shooters as a unique type of fighting game.

Fighting games are very competitive, or, they can be, but there are very few fighters that let you bring more than a single character into the match. Granted... a character's moveset tends to have more depth to it than a loadout, but they are within the same realm of eachother.


But each fighter has an entire arsenal of moves. If someone made a fighting game like a modern shooter, you would get to choose from two of your characters moves, and were only allowed to use those two until you die.
---
Wii Fit GOTY Edition: Thats fine. I'm getting ready for bed
Octavia Philharmonica: I will tuck you in
#52CHAINMAILLEKIDPosted 7/11/2014 12:31:59 AMmessage detail(edited)
I had a response ready for this, but you took too long, and I forgot.

:U


Oh yeah!

It was... Modern shooters with loadouts have a lot more contributing to the loadout than just the guns, to the point where you'd have drastically different behavior even between two loadouts that have the same weapon.

That, and the fact that, in the modern shooter, you're supposed to die, a lot.

In this hypothetical fighter, you wouldn't need an entire arsenal of moves so much, because it would only take a few hits between lives.

I think this brings the two much closer together, to the point where comparisons don't immediately break down.
---
NS_CHAIN 2666-2862-7656
#53CynralKynathelPosted 7/11/2014 9:20:04 AMmessage detail
CHAINMAILLEKID posted...
I had a response ready for this, but you took too long, and I forgot.

:U


Oh yeah!

It was... Modern shooters with loadouts have a lot more contributing to the loadout than just the guns, to the point where you'd have drastically different behavior even between two loadouts that have the same weapon.

That, and the fact that, in the modern shooter, you're supposed to die, a lot.

In this hypothetical fighter, you wouldn't need an entire arsenal of moves so much, because it would only take a few hits between lives.

I think this brings the two much closer together, to the point where comparisons don't immediately break down.


I would also like to add:
I can't speak for CoD, but in Con2 there's a lot more to do with guns than just shooting. In fact, trying to gun people down with the aegis device is a pretty dumb idea. Also, having perks and grenades does change the "fighter's" stats around.
---
Pseudo-official Co-'Pun'-isher of the Conduit 2 Board. I have veteran SCARs. Heheheh.
#54DerppopotamusPosted 7/11/2014 9:47:26 AMmessage detail
CHAINMAILLEKID posted...
I had a response ready for this, but you took too long, and I forgot.

:U


Oh yeah!

It was... Modern shooters with loadouts have a lot more contributing to the loadout than just the guns, to the point where you'd have drastically different behavior even between two loadouts that have the same weapon.

That, and the fact that, in the modern shooter, you're supposed to die, a lot.

In this hypothetical fighter, you wouldn't need an entire arsenal of moves so much, because it would only take a few hits between lives.

I think this brings the two much closer together, to the point where comparisons don't immediately break down.


Sorry, been preparing to go to Honduras.

I dunno about this, I played without perks and performed the same as most everyone who used them.

Anywho, there is a game you've probably seen called Divekick. It's a fighter where you can only get hit once and your only two moves are dive and kick. It works well because everyone has the same two moves.

In a modern mili you're given a lot of options but it ends up being the same few loadouts. It would be like if you were given a choice of all the moves from Street Fighter but everyone just used Tiger Uppercut and Hadoken, then got to choose if they wanted to be fast or have more health.
---
Wii Fit GOTY Edition: Thats fine. I'm getting ready for bed
Octavia Philharmonica: I will tuck you in
#55LigersRulePosted 7/11/2014 9:56:02 AMmessage detail
Derppopotamus posted...
Anywho, there is a game you've probably seen called Divekick. It's a fighter where you can only get hit once and your only two moves are dive and kick. It works well because everyone has the same two moves.


It's worth noting that there is a bit of variety to it, in terms of character selection. Each character dives and kicks a bit different from another. But you're right, in that the beauty of it is the extremely simple mechanics.
---
*Insert 25 wit here*
#56CHAINMAILLEKIDPosted 7/11/2014 7:06:10 PMmessage detail
Derppopotamus posted...
CHAINMAILLEKID posted...
I had a response ready for this, but you took too long, and I forgot.

:U


Oh yeah!

It was... Modern shooters with loadouts have a lot more contributing to the loadout than just the guns, to the point where you'd have drastically different behavior even between two loadouts that have the same weapon.

That, and the fact that, in the modern shooter, you're supposed to die, a lot.

In this hypothetical fighter, you wouldn't need an entire arsenal of moves so much, because it would only take a few hits between lives.

I think this brings the two much closer together, to the point where comparisons don't immediately break down.


Sorry, been preparing to go to Honduras.

I dunno about this, I played without perks and performed the same as most everyone who used them.


But did you play the same?
---
NS_CHAIN 2666-2862-7656
#57DerppopotamusPosted 7/11/2014 7:32:55 PMmessage detail
CHAINMAILLEKID posted...
Derppopotamus posted...
CHAINMAILLEKID posted...
I had a response ready for this, but you took too long, and I forgot.

:U


Oh yeah!

It was... Modern shooters with loadouts have a lot more contributing to the loadout than just the guns, to the point where you'd have drastically different behavior even between two loadouts that have the same weapon.

That, and the fact that, in the modern shooter, you're supposed to die, a lot.

In this hypothetical fighter, you wouldn't need an entire arsenal of moves so much, because it would only take a few hits between lives.

I think this brings the two much closer together, to the point where comparisons don't immediately break down.


Sorry, been preparing to go to Honduras.

I dunno about this, I played without perks and performed the same as most everyone who used them.


But did you play the same?


But, really, are you eatin' tho?

People had more health, could do more damage than me and most could run faster. I guess I had to shoot more bullets than everyone else. But it was near the end of Conduit 2, so I never encountered any good players. Any players who considered themselves good depended on Lock-on and radar, so if they some how ended up in Hardcore, rarely did they stay for even half the match.

@Signal
Some new pictures of the CSGO version of Streets.
http://imgur.com/a/PBnFm#0 Figured you'd want to see it.
---
Wii Fit GOTY Edition: Thats fine. I'm getting ready for bed
Octavia Philharmonica: I will tuck you in
#58CHAINMAILLEKIDPosted 7/11/2014 9:34:24 PMmessage detail
Derppopotamus posted...
CHAINMAILLEKID posted...
Derppopotamus posted...
CHAINMAILLEKID posted...
I had a response ready for this, but you took too long, and I forgot.

:U


Oh yeah!

It was... Modern shooters with loadouts have a lot more contributing to the loadout than just the guns, to the point where you'd have drastically different behavior even between two loadouts that have the same weapon.

That, and the fact that, in the modern shooter, you're supposed to die, a lot.

In this hypothetical fighter, you wouldn't need an entire arsenal of moves so much, because it would only take a few hits between lives.

I think this brings the two much closer together, to the point where comparisons don't immediately break down.


Sorry, been preparing to go to Honduras.

I dunno about this, I played without perks and performed the same as most everyone who used them.


But did you play the same?


But, really, are you eatin' tho?

People had more health, could do more damage than me and most could run faster. I guess I had to shoot more bullets than everyone else. But it was near the end of Conduit 2, so I never encountered any good players. Any players who considered themselves good depended on Lock-on and radar, so if they some how ended up in Hardcore, rarely did they stay for even half the match.

@Signal
Some new pictures of the CSGO version of Streets.
http://imgur.com/a/PBnFm#0 Figured you'd want to see it.


Well, when I played w/o perks, I had to learn to play completely differently. And there was no way I'd ever come up on top of a straight up dual, and my tactics all relied on either playing as a diversion and relying on my team to finish my kills, or to play really tricky with terrain, which is something I'm normally very poor at.

If you didn't play different with or without perks, then its not really possible to say they detract from the balance of the game.
---
NS_CHAIN 2666-2862-7656
#59CHAINMAILLEKIDPosted 7/12/2014 1:38:21 AMmessage detail
BTW, if I'm like, totally off the wall here...
I don't understand a lot of whats going on in this thread, and there seems to be a lot of pretext that's gone right over my head, and so, yeah.

I just wanted to bring up the way that I like to approach shooters from perspective of prospective designer.
---
NS_CHAIN 2666-2862-7656
#60xXAISPXxPosted 7/12/2014 7:17:40 PMmessage detail
Where's Signal?
---
SOTD: "I am Michael Ford, still with a purpose. I thank you all, for your great service."
- Col Biscuit's "Hero"