Can't hate a man when he's right.Hiphophippo said:
But, if you got smacked in the face with a rifle stock in an actualy conflict, you're certainly screwed, one hit for sure. Possibly not death, but you're not fighting anyone.
What place does melee really have in shooters?
- Thread starter Westaway
- Start date
Recommended Videos
But, if you got smacked in the face with a rifle stock in an actualy conflict, you're certainly screwed, one hit for sure. Possibly not death, but you're not fighting anyone.
Okay, I approve of the insane people who can run around with a melee weapon and get kills. They provide a difference in combat from the traditional shoot shoot shoot, reload, shoot shoot some more.... I mean, if there was no melee in the fps, then you would have people running into each other just emptying clips. I don't have experience with MW2, but in Bad Company 1/2, you have to pull the knife out. I disapprove of the lunge in MW2 and BC2, heck, you should be able dodge or move out of the way.
i could see melee being fixed by the simple procedure of removing the lunge and making context sensitive kill detection... a knife in the back of the neck or throat or face or heart will probably kill you, but i think if you melee someone in the arm there is no point in it doing damage
by teh same token, gears of war melee stuns the opponent for a second, which is a nice touch; if you don't have a knife and you hit someone with their weapon, they should be stunned... i know i would be and so would you...
also a 3 hit kill with the knife is a bit much, that makes it completely useless, which kinda removes the point... it's much more efficient in a shooter game if you can just smack someone on the back of the neck for the kill, or if you turn the corner and find someone standing right there i know the first thing i would do is hit them very hard, and it should result in something other than you standing there like an idiot while whoever you hit laughs and shoots you without aiming
by teh same token, gears of war melee stuns the opponent for a second, which is a nice touch; if you don't have a knife and you hit someone with their weapon, they should be stunned... i know i would be and so would you...
also a 3 hit kill with the knife is a bit much, that makes it completely useless, which kinda removes the point... it's much more efficient in a shooter game if you can just smack someone on the back of the neck for the kill, or if you turn the corner and find someone standing right there i know the first thing i would do is hit them very hard, and it should result in something other than you standing there like an idiot while whoever you hit laughs and shoots you without aiming
Balance issues (in MW2) that should be remedied before complaining about knife-kills:
.50 Cal bullets actually ACT like .50 cal bullets. Seriously you're not gonna take a .50 cal to the arm and keep fighting.
.45's/7.62's also should be a little bit more powerful (except the UMP45 which is actually close to home)
9mm and 5.56 are less likely to incapacitate unless hitting vital areas, chest/head/torso.
.50 Cal bullets actually ACT like .50 cal bullets. Seriously you're not gonna take a .50 cal to the arm and keep fighting.
.45's/7.62's also should be a little bit more powerful (except the UMP45 which is actually close to home)
9mm and 5.56 are less likely to incapacitate unless hitting vital areas, chest/head/torso.
at the very least in campaign MW2 forces you to lead your shots (or at least MW1 did)... in multiplayer it's just ridiculous how an m9 somehow has the muzzle velocity to traverse 900 feet instantlyTherumancer said:
Play some Rainbow Six Vegas 1 or 2. No melee and the guns are all very powerful. Three torso shots from an Ak and your dead. Any head shot with any gun is an insta kill, unless you have a helmet on, and even then that will really only stop handgun fire. (Depending if you have body armor or not though, oh and yes your guy is full customizable)
One of the great problems with melee currently is that it's concluded too quickly. What I mean is that (like in MW2 for example) you lunge toward an enemy and stab them in the jugular when you melee them. In reality, it's not that simple. You lunge toward the enemy, and he's not going to stand there like an idiot. You initiate melee contact and you put yourself into risk as well; it's not a one sided affair. If your first lunge doesn't succeed (and it probably wouldn't), the other guy has a knife too.
Ok, I hate being the grammar Nazi, and yeah, I know I'm cheating anyway because I've got spell check on my FF browser, but come on dude:
Why must you add an "e?" I forgave it at first, but you're doing it on purpose!Sup I said:
Lunge, maybe? This isn't the only place it comes up. And then your space bar stopped working at one point --Sup I said:
Sorry for taking so much space to ***** off topic, but it irritates me when people come to talk and don't watch what they say. Not re-reading before you post is just like not listening to yourself as you talk (although, the former is admittedly a lot easier to pull off).Sup I said:
Now then,
OT: (finally)
I agree with the OP completely. Melee combat in shooters is incongruous and often defeats the purpose of the primary gameplay mechanic. I can't say I would want it gone outright, because I think it would really break the immersion if you and your opponent were standing face to face with sniper rifles and just stood there (or, even more ludicrously, slowly walked around in little circles) trying to get a bead. The space marine or psycho killer or steam-punk Amazon warrior you're pretending to be would at least smack the other across the tits before backing up to take a good shot.
The remedies offered by the OP, however, are... a tad confusing, IMO....
At least at first, I got: "If your going to have melee in a shooter, you should let everyone have it, or only let some people have it," which is called a tautology if I'm correctly interpreting the definition I Googled. I don't think the first suggestion would work though, if all other conventions are the same. In that case, you'd have the reverse problem of the guns vastly over-powering the melee, making it useless. "Yeah, it's supposed to be useless, it's a knife (or whatever)!" I know this, but if no one's going to use it, it's just taking up button space and money to implement it in a game. The problem, I think, is that the melee is being judged by the same standards as the guns. It should serve an entirely different purpose (from killing folks).Sup I said:
Maybe it works exclusively as a knockback, or a stun. Maybe it could smack the target's gun away, messing up his aim, or disarming him entirely. If it facilitated the gun play, rather than replacing it, it would make more sense and be easier to balance. And that's all I've got to say about that.
[small]Incidentally, does anyone else think an shooter about steam-punk Amazons might be totally sweet?[/small]
Unreal tournament had a melee weapon that had to be equipped. It took time to charge, so you couldnt just tap a button to kill anything, but if you just tapped it pushed them away, hold it in long enough and you obliterate them. But what stopped people from running around holding in the button insta killing all, the weapon made a shitload of noise when fully charged so the enemy can point and laugh at the suicidal tard attempting to sneak on them with a gun that screams like a banshee. So that was a good thing to have in that game, although it was rarely used.
But to answer your question: Yes melee has a place in fps games, it just has to be done right. I think halo, gears and ut were the best at doing the melee. But I havent played alot of fps games so I could be off on my judgment. Melee might seem pointless with a shotgun, but you have to aim shoot and pump, and youll run out of ammo eventually so what do you do when theres a million enemies in 1 cramped space? Id love to be able to smack/shove/knife/etc. some of them when my ammos low. Also the sub genre of fps fighter that condemned is in, melee is mandatory all the time. So imagine that game without melee. Itd be impossible unless you unlocked infinite ammo mode.
But to answer your question: Yes melee has a place in fps games, it just has to be done right. I think halo, gears and ut were the best at doing the melee. But I havent played alot of fps games so I could be off on my judgment. Melee might seem pointless with a shotgun, but you have to aim shoot and pump, and youll run out of ammo eventually so what do you do when theres a million enemies in 1 cramped space? Id love to be able to smack/shove/knife/etc. some of them when my ammos low. Also the sub genre of fps fighter that condemned is in, melee is mandatory all the time. So imagine that game without melee. Itd be impossible unless you unlocked infinite ammo mode.
What's wrong with getting knifed in the back by someone around the corner? I think assassins do that. Now if you start firing AT them as they come at you and you come out dead? That's a problem.
I don't mind if direct hits with a knife or blades are lethal, as they should only be close combat weapons and are often used in combat that way (depending on armor).
Blunt Objects should take a few more hits, of course. Like they do in TF2.
The problem is not melee, it's the primary gameplay. Bullets shouldn't just deal damage, they should force back or stumble the player on impact. It's the least they should do if they're not going to instant kill for balance sake. That way someone running around with a knife, dashing at gunners to stab them, will find there are many holes in his plan.
I don't mind if direct hits with a knife or blades are lethal, as they should only be close combat weapons and are often used in combat that way (depending on armor).
Blunt Objects should take a few more hits, of course. Like they do in TF2.
The problem is not melee, it's the primary gameplay. Bullets shouldn't just deal damage, they should force back or stumble the player on impact. It's the least they should do if they're not going to instant kill for balance sake. That way someone running around with a knife, dashing at gunners to stab them, will find there are many holes in his plan.
