Would you play a game like this?

[Retardinator]

Bottom line is: I would be far more likely to enjoy the game if I was capable of cleaning the guns like a professional before each mission and knowing for sure all my kit was in order, rather than being like some amateur shmuck who strolls out there willy nilly with a 'if it breaks, it breaks' attitude.

Far Cry 2 had the armory where you could restock on guns in prestige condition, so that's pretty much what you said except there's no cleaning. As for degradation, that's why you can carry so many weapons. (In this hypothetical game, not in Far Cry 2)

I like both the concept for the health system as well as the weapon system. Far Cry 2 is, in fact, the first thing I thought of when I saw this. If this sort of thing is well integrated and streamlined it might be very good.

 

[MASTACHIEFPWN]

I think guns are a lot more durable than you give them credit for. Far Cry 2 is very unrealistic in this.

A good military rifle can go 1000 rounds without cleaning and then, once cleaned, be as good as new. There are still perfectly functioning 1932 M1s.

Yeah, I know, but a lot of these weapons in the game are some 50 years (Sorry for the error) old, used every day by soldiers, never really cleaned or fixed.
With the newer rifles, It just comes down to limiting the players advantage.

Like I said before, Newer guns can burn through around 9000 rounds before breaking, older ones, about 1000.

 

[Batou667]

It sounds like a really, really unforgivingly difficult game. If the action was paced right and you had enough opportunity to hide from enemies or defend yourself some other way, it might work. But overall these gameplay mechanics might be better suited to a survival game than a run-and-gun shooter.

 

[Michael Hirst]

Nah give me good old fashioned Unreal Tournament shooting. Add depth by giving players many ways to avoid being hit and make the more powerful guns have slow velocity so that killing becomes a skill (leading them successfully accounting for your slow velocity) rather than place dot on person (with aim assist) and hold trigger until dead.

Oh and give me all the weapons, I want to have fun and muck around with the guns, not have to keep the all round assault rifle all the time.

Realism can really drag a game down and make people forget that entertainment is the goal here. Giving me lots of extra bits to worry about just clogs up and slows down the experience.

That's completely opposite of the system he's talking about. It's much better to have games all across the realism scale than all on the side you want.

I agree it's nice to have variation but when the market is crammed with "realistic contempory shooters" and the only way to get something fast paced and fun is the indie crowd then something is wrong and we need more balls to the wall fun shooters. We need to fight more Dinosaurs and Demons etc.

 

[])rStrangelove]

I was expecting to see an explanation of gameplay in here, where's the 'game' in the OP you're talking about?

I only know what happens when i get hit from a bullet and what equipment i carry. Where's the fun factor?

 

[MASTACHIEFPWN]

Unless it was a ton a fun, probably not. If the game is supposed to be fast-paced, then I feel like all of the complicated mechanics would slow it down. Such mechanics would work much better in an RPG or MMORPG than your typical FPS.

Open world FPS, a bit like farcry, but larger. The main story missions are usually infiltrate large, well protected area, and free play is basically go from point A to point B without dying, simple enough, but enemies would be smart enough to ambush you.

So it would be fast past at times (In combat), a rather sluggish speed at others. (In a base)

 

[Squilookle]

I wouldn't buy it just off that, I'd need to hear more about the story, the setting, the characters. I don't buy games just for their health bars.

Also you should never, ever, EVER have weapon deterioration in a game unless you give the player the ability to clean/mend the guns themselves, so they are not forced to switch them up all the time. There's nothing wrong with growing fond of a particular gun, and games should foster that.

Well, that's how the game keeps you on your toes, you're gun will break on you, no matter what, and players who like using the rare, more modern weapons will have more trouble than the quick adapting "Begars can't be choosers" characters, who stick to the starting assault rifle. Now, most likely if you have a gun, you got it from an enemy, and finding a replacement to a broken one wont be to hard, there would also be an armory system, where every few days, if you put a gun into the armory, and then used that gun, a new one of that rifle will fill it's spot.

Note that the rarer weapons deterate slowly, like a 500 clip cycle, whilst older , more common weapons have about 150 clips to burn through.
(And note, reliable guns like a Glock would have a turtle deteration speed compaired to a rather unreliable gun)

Have you played FarCr... OK, yes, I see you have.

It comes down to preference, but I found the weapon degradation one of the most frustrating parts of the game. It's THE game that actually decided me that degrading guns should aboslutely always be repairable under any and every circumstance. Stretching out the time it takes them to deteriorate is good, but it's still only a short term solution.

I want to be able to take a particular gun, and keep it throughout the game. Like a good mountain bike, if I look after it with care, it will look after me in return. All the guns in FarCry 2 were like toffees. Fun while they lasted, but inevitably you'd be left with just a useless wrapper.

I do understand the tension arising from the fear of the gun breaking, but it doesn't make it any more fun- especially when that all important shot that will blow your cover misfires on you and leaves you a sitting duck with a busted gun. Realistic, perhaps, but only for representing stupid fools who don't take care of their equipment.

Bottom line is: I would be far more likely to enjoy the game if I was capable of cleaning the guns like a professional before each mission and knowing for sure all my kit was in order, rather than being like some amateur shmuck who strolls out there willy nilly with a 'if it breaks, it breaks' attitude.

Your weapons can be "Cleaned" To temporarely slow deteration rates, but the point your missing is if a player has a rare gun, and cleans it every mission, it would never break.

That's not a point that I missed, that's specifically the very exact point that I've been trying to make all along. Being rewarded for meticulous care of your weapon by your weapon getting an indefinite lifespan is a good thing. And being able to clean guns yet still have them break down regardless would be even worse than not being able to clean them at all.

Far Cry 2 had the armory where you could restock on guns in prestige condition, so that's pretty much what you said except there's no cleaning. As for degradation, that's why you can carry so many weapons. (In this hypothetical game, not in Far Cry 2)

Which, again, was pretty stupid. Having sheds everywhere filled with an endless supply of the same guns, but no ability to just clean your own instead? And what are you saying- you can carry more weapons because they...degrade? What does that even mean?

 

[JET1971]

I wouldnt play it at all. the jamming weapons in FC2 was not fun but frustrating, nothing like having a perfect shot on someone and your weapon jams on you and you have no other ammo for anything else. the realism in ARMA(2) made the learning curve to steep for new players to just join in and have fun. med packs are hard enough to find when you have a steady healthbar and medics are usualy not around unless they have an overpowered weapon or medding gives uber points. as for single player, medics are annoying because they get in the way and dont actualy help you. hell any AI that would need to be close enough to be a medic would be more a hindrance in a firefight than help.

I do like the decrease in capabilities depending on where the wound is and how severe idea, as well as a slow bleedout, but in no way shape or form should an FPS ever have a complicated med system above small, medium, and large medpacks that med a certain amount of the health bar regardless of the wound. and full medpacks should always be readily available after intense combat.

 

[everythingbeeps]

Way too complicated. I don't want to have to manage all that crap.

 

[Jedoro]

I like your health idea, but I'd love a game that took an approach to inventory similar to the MOLLE system most tactical vests use: put what you want, where you want, but carry capacity and ease of access will depend on where everything is. The MOLLE system literally allows for infinite combinations of weapons, ammunition, and/or tools. One could carry a rifle and combat load of magazines with a handgun as backup, while another could just fill every spot with handguns at every angle and no extra magazines. The second would have less ammunition overall, but would perform "New York Reloads" and be able to fire again quicker once their initial handgun went empty. That's the kind of inventory system I want in a game: where what you carry and how you carry it actually matters.

 

[MASTACHIEFPWN]

I wouldnt play it at all. the jamming weapons in FC2 was not fun but frustrating, nothing like having a perfect shot on someone and your weapon jams on you and you have no other ammo for anything else. the realism in ARMA(2) made the learning curve to steep for new players to just join in and have fun. med packs are hard enough to find when you have a steady healthbar and medics are usualy not around unless they have an overpowered weapon or medding gives uber points. as for single player, medics are annoying because they get in the way and dont actualy help you. hell any AI that would need to be close enough to be a medic would be more a hindrance in a firefight than help.

I do like the decrease in capabilities depending on where the wound is and how severe idea, as well as a slow bleedout, but in no way shape or form should an FPS ever have a complicated med system above small, medium, and large medpacks that med a certain amount of the health bar regardless of the wound. and full medpacks should always be readily available after intense combat.

The Jam system would be more like STALKERS, if your gun jams, it takes a few seconds to unjam. The game would be programmed to intelligently jam the gun, for instance, if you are firing a pistol like it's a machinegun, it's going to jam up more often. If your gun jams, it's not the end of the world, just a few seconds to add in difficulty and realism.

Also, you'd be your own medic, and learn the crap first hand, unless you have enough in game currency to pay for a doctor to patch you up.

 

[CrimsonBlaze]

I think you just described Metal Gear Solid 3 & 4 (particularly the 2 health bars). The only difference is that they are both full, with one measuring fatigue (hunger, injuries, poisoned, etc.) and the other measuring health (when you take damage). If one of the two bars is completely empty, you die.

I could be wrong, but based on what your described, these two games come to mind. Also, you game might have more of a action oriented pacing rather than the stealth approach from MGS.

 

[Eggbert]

Honestly, I don't think I would. Games need to be simple to grasp.
If you overwhelm people with realism and complicated mechanics,
they will give up faster rather than perfecting their performance.

Objection: Have you seen the followings Dwarf Fortress and Nethack have?
I might play it. Depends on how well done the rest (plot, characters, level design, is it actually just a movie, etc.) is.

 

[Westaway]

How can you have realism with dual wielding. Makes no sense

 

[Takoshake]

Sounds fun and would be a nice change.
Just a few things,
1. the AI can't hip fire head shot you from a mile away
2. if you shoot an enemy they can't go all "HULK SMASH" and act like their not in pain. Even with a vest on a 9mm hurts and will stun.

I think it could be done but the AI in games like COD are just too stupid. OP enemies would ruin it. The idea reminds me of Splinter Cell but less stealthy. And yes I would play a game like this.


oh one more thing, I think that's too many weapons. I'm thinking you would always have a pistol, and maybe like 3 other slots. An assault rifle ( with attachments), shot gun/smg slot, and a sniper/heavy weapon slot?