1 button nade tossing has to stop in online multiplayer

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

I've been playing the Uncharted 3 beta over the past couple days and the multiplayer is so much better than Uncharted 2. However, the thing that really ruins what is supposed to be a "shooter" and makes it into a "grenade tosser" is 1 button nade tossing (1BNT). The first time 2 opponents bump into each other, it is rather commonplace for each of them to toss a nade, it looks stupid and shooting is then option #2 instead of #1. I don't demand that games be realistic and this complaint is not because it's not realistic (which it is) but because 1BNT breaks much of the core gameplay.

For example, it is extremely broken for both players to get into a gun fight, one of them realizes they are losing, and the loser then tosses a nade just before he dies and can easily kill the winner because the winner has to keep shooting for that extra second to finish off the kill. The loser is able to kill the winner of the gun fight resulting in no one actually winning.

Another example is running into 2 or more enemies and being able to take them both out while they are both shooting you as you drop a nade at the last second to kill both of them in a situation that should be a definite loss unless you have a power weapon.

Now, I do these same exact things I'm complaining about because you need to to be competitive. When I do get kills like this, I don't feel like I one upped anyone, it just feels like a cheap kill, and the other guy(s) actually one upped me. In any kind of competitive game, when you win, you should win because you outplayed your opponent. Using a grenade should have some kind of risk to it as it's your most powerful attack and you should be vulnerable while throwing it. In pretty much every kind of game (realistic or over-the-top), weaker attacks are quicker while stronger attacks take longer to execute.

The simple solution to this is to make you cycle through your weapons like MAG and Metal Gear Online do, I am not aware of any other online shooters that make you cycle through your weapons (I only have a PS3 and my PC is 10 years old). With this setup, if you are shooting someone and losing, by the time you can cycle to your nade and throw it, you'll be dead. Plus, this setup actually frees up more buttons; Uncharted has a button to switch to your secondary and to toss a nade. If one button handles that, the devs have more gameplay mechanics they can implement as they have more buttons at their disposal.

And, fucking health regen needs to stop in online shooters as well, give me a fucking health bar.

TLR - Being able to use your most powerful attack at a moments notice is broken.

 

[Ordinaryundone]

Not really. 1BNT, as you call it, was implemented because, honestly, without it grenades are underpowered. It takes too long to switch to them, pull the pin and cook them, then throw them. Its this way in just about every shooter I've played, mostly because things like suppression, where real life grenades are at their most effective, simply don't exist in shooters. There is often no penalty for dying, so people are unafraid to jump and flank out of cover, rendering the primary purpose of the grenade (flushing enemies out of cover) pointless, making them more useful for indirect damage. If you are getting hit by grenades during firefights, learn to anticipate them. Run forward when you see one get thrown, or better yet, engage at long distance. Or just have better aim and kill them before the grenade is thrown. If you die to a grenade, you were outplayed, as you did not move to dodge it.

Unless I am mistaken, throwing a grenade makes you vulnerable in nearly every game their in, as you can't shoot your gun and throw at the same time. Also, to have any kind of pinpoint accuracy with grenades in a firefight, you have to have line of sight, meaning you are likely out of cover and thus vulnerable anyway. Combine that with the time it takes for them to detonate. Grenades are always unsafe unless you have the drop on your opponent or are moving with a group.

 

[Kahunaburger]

honestly, without it grenades are underpowered.

I think grenades are underpowered in games because they don't do enough damage. You could just go for realism by having a switch time and greater damage, which would be an alternate way to balance it. It's all about the system that involves less random grenade deaths while keeping grenades actually useful, IMO.

 

[SilentCom]

1 button grenade throwing is sort of annoying and is one reason for grenade spam. My proposal is limiting the number of grenades and availability players have to them, also make them more powerful and having a larger AoE, but forcing the player to either switch to them or hold down the one button grenade throw. Holding down the button for at least 1 second will cause the player to take out the grenade and pop the pin. Holding on to it longer will allow the player to "cook" it. This will prevent accidental grenade deaths and decrease spamming. It will also force players to be more careful when picking their targets.

 

[Biodeamon]

when in doubt frag out!

yeah, anyways, can't you just change the controls for that?

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Not really. 1BNT, as you call it, was implemented because, honestly, without it grenades are underpowered. It takes too long to switch to them, pull the pin and cook them, then throw them... If you are getting hit by grenades during firefights, learn to anticipate them. Run forward when you see one get thrown, or better yet, engage at long distance. Or just have better aim and kill them before the grenade is thrown. If you die to a grenade, you were outplayed, as you did not move to dodge it.

Unless I am mistaken, throwing a grenade makes you vulnerable in nearly every game their in, as you can't shoot your gun and throw at the same time.

I think Uncharted's multiplayer illustrates to the extreme why 1BNT is a bad mechanic. In Uncharted, you can throw a nade while aiming, you are not vulnerable when you throw a nade. Also, it takes way too many bullets to kill someone in the game so you can realize you are losing the gun fight and be able to throw a nade; in pretty much every other shooter, you probably wouldn't be able to throw a last second nade like you can in Uncharted. And, headshots don't nearly kill as quickly as they should, there's really no point in trying for headshots.

And, of course, I adjust and learn to anticipate nades as I play. If someone that I'm about to kill tosses a last second nade, do I keep shooting for the kill or move and let him get away? The regen health is a big factor as well because I just took about all his health and if I let him go, he gets it all back in a matter of seconds.

Nades underpowered? In Metal Gear Online, you have to cycle to your nades and nades don't even fucking kill in one hit, and believe you me, the use of nades is extremely important in winning and losing, they are in no way underpowered. I've been playing Metal Gear Online for 3 years so I'm an expert on it.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Without it, people have to press one extra button.

And this solves problems?

Yeah, they can't be aiming at me and throw a grenade at the same time. I'd have that extra second to finish off the kill. And, with that setup, it frees up an extra button on the controller to implement another gameplay mechanic that otherwise wouldn't be allowable.

 

[bbad89]

Go back to having them be equip-able instead of this. Problem solved.

 

[Canid117]

I think it would work better if there was a tiny delay and animation that displayed you pulling out the grenade and arming it as opposed to "And a grenade shoots out in a nano second. I do like Cods grenades but they just seem a little too fast to me. No idea about Uncharted though. Never played it.

 

[LTAshler]

You're trying to canvas online gaming at large and as a result, falling into a hasty generalization fallacy. I can't speak for uncharted's multiplayer, but Games such as Halo, Battlefield and CoD simply wouldn't be the same games without 1bnt. These games have grenades as an integral part of combat and altering that element would fundamentally change the way they play, on every level. Guns and vehicles would have to be rebalanced, running speeds altered, Melee would take an even greater precedence in many already melee heavy titles. Titles like Halo have as of late, reduced grenade capacity and presence in games. Your dislike of fast nade use seems to tell me that you prefer gunplay over 'nades or (possibly) melee. In this respect I sympathize. Guns SHOULD be the dominant feature in shooters, but focusing on firearms to the detriment of other playstyles will alienate players and make the game stale. Try engaging at greater distance if you dislike grenade deaths/kills, they're much more demanding in terms of skill and placement when your opponent is farther away.

EDIT: In Halo, BF and COD, often throwing a grenade, even if well placed, can seal your doom if it's done mid-firefight. Those extra few bullets are quite often the deciding factor.

TLR: While I sympathize with the OP's dislike of 'cheap' grenades kills/deaths, removing 1bnt from games in general is not a good idea when viewed from an objective perspective.

 

[Nichael Bluth]

To be perfectly honest... I just don't like grenades. Most multiplayer shooters would be improved simply by removing them. Except maybe flash grenades, because those do have tactical uses, but for the most part, grenades simply act to make a game messier. Ideally, they'd be used in special circumstances strategically, but we all know that's not the case in reality.

 

[Dogstile]

Throwing a grenade i've found doesn't work unless you "cook" it, so either the winner needs to learn to move out the way or shoot faster. I think it works fine as it is.

 

[Katana314]

I could be wrong but it often seems in Uncharted like the grenades don't quite have a 5-second timer. Changing that could help. As some people have said, just making the throw animation take longer might be a good idea. However, keep in mind that other solutions reduce simplicity for players, and make the controls more confusing.

I certainly get the issue; that you want a clear victor in a 1-on-1 engagement, rather than both of them dying which is ultimately a stalemate ending.

 

[Confidingtripod]

It's across lots of games, the problem is that either guns are underpowered or grenades are overpowered, have you played halo online? there might aswell be four instakill weapons, vehicles and grenades, most of the guns are useless unless put in VERY specific circumstances

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

You're trying to canvas online gaming at large and as a result, falling into a hasty generalization fallacy. I can't speak for uncharted's multiplayer, but Games such as Halo, Battlefield and CoD simply wouldn't be the same games without 1bnt. These games have grenades as an integral part of combat and altering that element would fundamentally change the way they play, on every level. Guns and vehicles would have to be rebalanced, running speeds altered, Melee would take an even greater precedence in many already melee heavy titles. Titles like Halo have as of late, reduced grenade capacity and presence in games. Your dislike of fast nade use seems to tell me that you prefer gunplay over 'nades or (possibly) melee. In this respect I sympathize. Guns SHOULD be the dominant feature in shooters, but focusing on firearms to the detriment of other playstyles will alienate players and make the game stale. Try engaging at greater distance if you dislike grenade deaths/kills, they're much more demanding in terms of skill and placement when your opponent is farther away.

EDIT: In Halo, BF and COD, often throwing a grenade, even if well placed, can seal your doom if it's done mid-firefight. Those extra few bullets are quite often the deciding factor.

TLR: While I sympathize with the OP's dislike of 'cheap' grenades kills/deaths, removing 1bnt from games in general is not a good idea when viewed from an objective perspective.

I haven't played that many online shooters because I have a list of game mechanics that I don't like and most online shooters use those mechanics so I don't play them (Warhawk, MAG, and Metal Gear Online are really the only ones I can get into). I jump on Uncharted online every so often because the co-op is fun and so is the multiplayer for about an hour or so. It takes so many bullets to kill in Uncharted that you can't really engage from a far distance and be able to kill the guy unless you're sniping, and then if you don't kill him, which you won't, his health will regen anyways. 1BNT isn't nearly as bad in other games because it takes less bullets to kill, Uncharted just exemplifies why I hate the mechanic.

Anyways, I've played MAG and Metal Gear Online (for over 3 years now) and both those games have you cycle weapons; nades in both those games are extremely integral part to the game. Metal Gear Online has more different kinds of nades than probably any shooter and more traps as well. MAG isn't that different of an FPS from say COD, it's just has more players per game and is more objective based.

By making you cycle from your gun to your nade, I very much doubt it would drastically change how COD, Halo, or Battlefield played. In Metal Gear Online, for example, you usually run around with you nades out (since you run faster than with a gun) and then you tap R2 to switch to your gun to shoot when you need to. And, there's no need for a sprint button either in these FPSs, just use the analog stick to control how fast you run, COD4 ruined my left stick because of the constant sprinting. With those extra buttons free, the games could incorporate new mechanics and be a lot deeper than they currently are. Metal Gear Online has FPS leaning in it, something FPSs don't even have anymore, it's truly sad how these games get simpler instead of more complex from a gameplay standpoint.

To be perfectly honest... I just don't like grenades. Most multiplayer shooters would be improved simply by removing them. Except maybe flash grenades, because those do have tactical uses, but for the most part, grenades simply act to make a game messier. Ideally, they'd be used in special circumstances strategically, but we all know that's not the case in reality.

Nades IMO should be used as an anti-camping mechanic and to clear areas and allow you and your team to push forward.

That's because the shooting sucks at close range encounters. Such is the flaw with third person shooters.

Also, how many people do you see thwarted by that grenade? I'd wager not many, I most use it in that situation to control which way the enemy is going to strafe. And then you have no more grenade. You're really complaining about a very silly little thing. It's not an instant kill. A grenade is more effective as an actual weapon when they enemy is camping or entrenched with little margin for escape.

Shooting in TPSs can work just fine at close range. Metal Gear Online has an auto-aim mechanic that only can lock-on when the enemy is within about 10 feet and it's basically the equivalent of shooting from the hip in a FPS. Uncharted's blindfire mechanic works well at close range too, it's pretty similar to auto-aim. Also, the damn sticky aim or aim assist in Uncharted pisses me off, I don't need any fucking assistance, it screws me up more that it helps. Metal Gear Online has no aim assist whatsoever and I have no problem headshotting other players across the map.

If you played Uncharted 2 online or the new beta, you'd know nades are almost your primary weapon. I agree that nades SHOULD be used to kill or flush out campers but the mechanics allow nades to be basically your primary offensive attack; 2 or 3 players from the other team see me, and they all toss nades instead of shooting me because they know if they all shoot me and I toss a nade I can kill all them while they all kill me.

I could be wrong but it often seems in Uncharted like the grenades don't quite have a 5-second timer. Changing that could help. As some people have said, just making the throw animation take longer might be a good idea. However, keep in mind that other solutions reduce simplicity for players, and make the controls more confusing.

I certainly get the issue; that you want a clear victor in a 1-on-1 engagement, rather than both of them dying which is ultimately a stalemate ending.

I don't get how cycling through weapons via a shoulder button is complex. Plus, with that setup, there are more free buttons on the controller to implement new things. It's win-win if you ask me. If every game used this setup, everyone would be used to it like how when you pick up any FPS, the control scheme is exactly the same.

It's across lots of games, the problem is that either guns are underpowered or grenades are overpowered, have you played halo online? there might aswell be four instakill weapons, vehicles and grenades, most of the guns are useless unless put in VERY specific circumstances

I never had a Xbox, but I have played a decent amount of the first Halo at other friends' places and it was a fun game. However, Halo 2 was broken as shit. And I haven't played any other Halo game.

I think someone needs to play Counter strike.
Point blank You have to know where youre placing your grenades to make sure you kill them.

I never played CS but I'd be willing to guess that the closest thing to it on a console is Metal Gear Online and I've been playing that game weekly for over 3 years. I don't play PC games because my PC is 10 years old and I hate using the keyboard for character movement, I need analog not digital input for that.