1 button nade tossing has to stop in online multiplayer

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Play more tactical shooters. (even though there aren't that many to choose from)

Rainbow 6 Rouge Spear/Raven Shield, Ghost Recon 1, Operation Flashpoint: Cold War Crisis, Arma2, Swat 4.

Those are the only military type shooters i'll play.

The main online shooter I play is Metal Gear Online, it has all the tactical-ness of realistic tactical shooters but not the extreme realism. For example, dirty magazines are traps are Metal Gear Online.

 

[SovietPanda]

2)What game mechanics are you suggesting we create to utilise this now freed up shoulder button, i'll gladly cycle to my grenades in every game if L1 is a jetpack in every game.

3)isnt your point about having a no win in a gunfight redundant because each firefight is only a 5 second part of the match... noone wins till the timers up, if you get a kill and die at the same time thats fair, you overcommitted you died but atleast you took the other sucker out too

EDIT: on a serious note maybe you should have a look at brink... 1button grenade toss and unlimited supply however there is a significant cooldown period so yea you can toss one out in a pinch but you better not want to do it again too soon. Also i know the regening health side of this argument has been dropped but brink also gets that right in my opinion an reading this thread just the way you want it, regen only fills the main bar, however class upgrades, medic buffs and health command posts owned by your team can add extra segments you get shot almost to death and duck for cover and you heal but say goodbye to your extra health

2) I'm not a game designer or developer, obviously, so coming up with new game mechanics isn't something I'm good at. Even game developers aren't that good are coming up with new cool mechanics IMO as not many new games excite me because of the lack of new mechanics. In MGO, you can aim in 1st-person mode and lean left and right to avoid bullets and correct your aim. FPS leaning is something every FPS should have but none of them do. You can grab enemies in MGO to put them to sleep, scan them (and expose their whole team), use them as a shield, plant C4 on them, etc. I think adding close-quarters combat to more shooters would be a good idea. It's just simple logic that if you have more buttons available, you can allow the player more actions in-game.

3) If you are in a gunfight and you realize you are losing and going to die, you shouldn't be able to chuck a nade at the player at the last second and get the kill; either the health shouldn't be so great to enable that or you shouldn't be able to throw a nade as you are shooting (Uncharted has both of those traits). If two people see each other and one decides to nade while the other decides to shoot, that's fine. You shouldn't be able to do both.

And now the gritty truth, your not a game designer or developer and as such have not invested hudreds of hours into proper and fluid interface design. so stop raging on something that is simple and basic ergonomic principles in action.

you just seem to not like being taken out by a grenade when you think you 'deserve' the win, i dont know how realistic uncharted is i've not played it but combat armor exists irl with grenade hooks on the chest in easy reach of the off hand specifically so soldiers can throw a grenade while shooting wildly effectively providing their own cover fire.

Can we also try and limit the number of times you say "most shooters should have" or "all shooters should have" in my opinion the only thing all shooters should have is guns, granted alot of them have similar control schemes and similar mechanics and thats not a bad thing, but insisting that any change (ie 1bnt, health regen, player customisation, lobbyrooms to name a few that you've mentioned so far) be implented across the board rather then looking at whether that mechanic needs any fixing at all in any given game is just ridiculous

 

[Deschamps]

In Rainbow Six Vegas (and maybe other R6 games - I haven't played them) I thought it was implemented well (though the multiplayer was pretty much broken for other reasons). It was a one button toss, but it's a more deliberate action that takes a moment or so to perform, so it's not something you should be doing while under fire. Most of R6's combat is based around taking cover though, so it's a very different experience than other online shooters.

I like grenades in TF2, but I realize it's also a different situation than other games.

 

[Jake0fTrades]

If you think grenades are underpowered, you've clearly never been pre-naded in Call of Duty 4.

But then, this is just the opinion of ANOTHER CoD fan....

 

[Cogwheel]

I propose the fighting game solution. The grenade input is now 6234212C.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

And now the gritty truth, your not a game designer or developer and as such have not invested hudreds of hours into proper and fluid interface design. so stop raging on something that is simple and basic ergonomic principles in action.

you just seem to not like being taken out by a grenade when you think you 'deserve' the win, i dont know how realistic uncharted is i've not played it but combat armor exists irl with grenade hooks on the chest in easy reach of the off hand specifically so soldiers can throw a grenade while shooting wildly effectively providing their own cover fire.

Can we also try and limit the number of times you say "most shooters should have" or "all shooters should have" in my opinion the only thing all shooters should have is guns, granted alot of them have similar control schemes and similar mechanics and thats not a bad thing, but insisting that any change (ie 1bnt, health regen, player customisation, lobbyrooms to name a few that you've mentioned so far) be implented across the board rather then looking at whether that mechanic needs any fixing at all in any given game is just ridiculous

The gritty truth? You actually thought I was a game designer until I said I wasn't? Anyways, I played plenty of games to know a good control scheme from a bad one. I'm playing Enslaved right now and the controls are just adequate at best; X to roll, jump, and slide into cover = fail. I don't have to be a movie maker to say a movie stinks or a musician to say a song sucks. Game reviewers don't make games nor do movie reviewers make movies, I guess their opinions are completely invalid then.

I said that my grenade kills are cheap as well.

What's wrong with a game having options? Player customization doesn't change gameplay and almost every online game is doing it now, it must be something players want. Player customization just gives players the option to change their online avatar's appearance; if you like the default look, you don't have to change it. What's wrong with having lobbies/rooms along with matchmaking? What if I'm a noob and just want to play with noobs or I'm a veteran player and only want to play with the better players? Matchmaking doesn't provide those options. Also game rooms allow players to set certain game options and create custom games; players can actually play player-created game modes as well. MGO players make rooms and play game types like City, Hostage, Vampires, Zombies, etc. And, all those modes are not standard MGO modes. I actually just stick to the normal modes but it's nice to have the option to play other modes. I don't see why any gamer would be opposed to having more options so everyone can play the way they want to. I don't see why it's not a standard that you can completely remap the controls (the newest Hot Pursuit game let you completely remap the controls, which was awesome), it's very simple from a programming standpoint to add that in, it takes all of 5 minutes (I did take about 5 programming classes in college, remapping controls is just letting the player change around some variables). I'm playing Enslaved and the shooting controls are mapped to L2 and R2, I would like to have the option to remap them to L1 and R1 like every other PS3 shooter.

 

[SovietPanda]

snip

I accept that the start of my last post was overly combative, and i dont mean to invalidate your opinion or that of any gamer critic or anyone at all. I just meant to illustrate the fact that game designers spend alot of time making the interface as simple and user friendly as possible, effective interfacing between the player and the avatar makes or breaks a game. Your gripes with uncharted may be entirely founded. My problem with your argument is that you keep seeming to insist that because this change to scrolling to grenades may make uncharted better (or because it works so well in MGO) that it should be applied to all games. Plenty of games have extremely well implemented 1bnt and the fluidity and balance of the game would be thrown out if that was changed.

Also i never said there was anything wrong with player customisation or lobby rooms, they are good features. Does this mean they need to be in every game. Not by a long shot. "nothing wrong with giving options" wont always justify the expense and manhours required to design, code and render all the individual armor or clothing options, not to mention the extra menu screens required. I for one think character customisation in games like halo and brink is a little pointless... I play these games for some twitchy sweat inducing reflexive gameplay and rarely notice the difference in character models... if its moving in the opposite direction to me, i shoot it, and quickly.

I agree with you on remapping however, having the option to reset the buttons to whatever suits your hands better is definately a good thing, i personally get very confused about why so many ps3 games have L1 nd R1 as the iron sights and fire button, that maybe due to me spending alot of time exclusively playing xbox at the start of this console cycle. Though again i wont subscribe to the "its a good idea so everyone should do it" argument, sometimes its jarring going from a game with my preffered set up to a game that i can't remap, but at the same time it can make me rethink my playstyle to suit the control sheme.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Also i never said there was anything wrong with player customisation or lobby rooms, they are good features. Does this mean they need to be in every game. Not by a long shot. "nothing wrong with giving options" wont always justify the expense and manhours required to design, code and render all the individual armor or clothing options, not to mention the extra menu screens required. I for one think character customisation in games like halo and brink is a little pointless... I play these games for some twitchy sweat inducing reflexive gameplay and rarely notice the difference in character models... if its moving in the opposite direction to me, i shoot it, and quickly.

I agree with you on remapping however, having the option to reset the buttons to whatever suits your hands better is definately a good thing, i personally get very confused about why so many ps3 games have L1 nd R1 as the iron sights and fire button, that maybe due to me spending alot of time exclusively playing xbox at the start of this console cycle. Though again i wont subscribe to the "its a good idea so everyone should do it" argument, sometimes its jarring going from a game with my preffered set up to a game that i can't remap, but at the same time it can make me rethink my playstyle to suit the control sheme.

I agree that player customization can take some time and resources to implement, and it's not a simple add-on so not every game should do it. I do think online games should at least let you use the player models from the single player as that is easy to add in to the multiplayer. I think player models in Metal Gear Solid are created differently (and in smaller pieces where pieces of clothing can be easily swapped) compared to most games since you've been able to change character appearances a great deal in the single player game since Metal Gear Solid 3. That character creation method lends itself to easily allow for lots of customization options in the online game without a lot of additional work, most of the clothing options in the online game come from what what enemies and characters are wearing in the single player game.

However, game rooms are a simple add-on. COD already allows private rooms, if you just make those public rooms, you have a lobby/room system in COD, most of the code is already there. Plus, I would think the PC version of COD has game rooms (I don't play PC games but I pretty sure that's how online works on the PC), so the console version literally removes those features. Also, FPSs on the PC give the player the ability to lean while aiming/shooting and that's removed from the console version, and there's enough room on a controller to fit in the game mechanic, MGS4 and MGO fit in FPS leaning in it's control scheme and it's not even a FPS.

L1 and R1 just feels natural for shooting for me, it could be because I've only had Playstation systems the last 2 console gens. I guess the triggers on the DualShock 3 aren't that good as I don't like them for shooting but they work fine for everything else. But, yeah, there's no reason why a player should have to be stuck using a button layout that isn't comfortable to them.