I think some of those ideas would be more annoying than cool. If I get shot in the leg in an fps, I DON''T want to bleed to death because I can''t find a place to heal, or a bandage or whatever. Its fine if you are slowed down a bit, but thats about as much as I can take.

Shaky aim is ok in a really realistic game but has no place in the standard deathmatch.

Being shot in the eye and getting your vision decreased would be real annoying. This would be particularly annoying if you were decent and had to go half-blind for half the game after getting hit with a freak shot.

Realism can help gameplay, but add too much realism and it detracts from it. Keep it fun, even at the expense of realism, not the other way around.

-Evan

quote: Original post by terminate
I think some of those ideas would be more annoying than cool. If I get shot in the leg in an fps, I DON''T want to bleed to death because I can''t find a place to heal, or a bandage or whatever.

There are games (action quake\Half-life and Opera) where you can bleed to death and you need to put on bandages, it''s not annoying, it can be interesting and adds some tension.

Everyone is aware of the realism sub genre aren''t they? Lot''s of people love it. Like strike force, if your not careful the first shot from the other team could hit you in the right spot and that''s it, your out. It does kind of hieghten the urgency of the situation, though I have to say I like the new TO 300, one of the good features it has is a round reset so you don''t have to wait for the bots to kill eachother.

My opinion is that this idea is wonderful, and I would love a game for this. For instance many FPS games have an ''auto aim'' feature. Perhaps this feature will slowly get more accurate with practice. Although as for the shakiness of a weapon I would leave this up to a strength thing. In tribes2 terms I could see a scout armor having more trouble with a grenade launcher than a juggernaut. Although I would think skill has little to do with your ability to hold a weapon steady (speaking with a lack of experience myself here though). Possibly a first experience with a given automatic rifle would be startling but after that np.

As for the issues with the learning curve, when I play a FPS its the movements of my character that take getting used to. NOT the aiming. I believe in 99% of FPS the idea is to put the crosshairs on a target and pull the trigger right? Granted the two go hand in hand, but here we are talking about the wobbling of crosshairs not the movement of the player.

~Vendayan

1.FPS Games are action and skill games. So player plays these games to improve his/her aiming and short terms choice making skills. So shaking something or making something out of the players control creates frustration. The idea of the shaking crossair should be applied to a FPS game with great care.
2.These ideas are not new. These can be apllied to FPS games in some ways but FPS games needs a revolution. And I see this revolution in:
a) AI
b) deeper single player modes that allows the player to make long and short term choices,
c) Sound usage that effects the gameplay (For mind, not for ear)
d) More chaoice making (For example the players can make desicions to carry which weapon or eqp. )

Some of other gameplay ideas for FPS
-Ear damage (Player cant hear sound properly)
-Eye damage (Blurry and darker screen)
-Inventory choices
-Increased Usage of enviroment to beat the enemies (Physic)

Now how can a realistic aiming system be frustratiing but not damaged sounds or blurry vision?

quote: Original post by Caravaggio
Now how can a realistic aiming system be frustratiing but not damaged sounds or blurry vision?

Because sound and blurry vision doesnt make anything outof the players control. If you make something out of players control you make him/her frustrated(It is an action game). And I dont sayu that it is totaly wrong to implement this aiming system. It should be applied very carefully. It sounds good but it can also kill the gameplay. At least there should be an option to remove this feature.

Here's a thought:
Use a shaky aim style thing in a horror-themed FPS - as the character gets more scared, have their hands start to shake - their aim goes slightly awry. Maybe introduce a tunnel vision effect as well. As long as it wasn't overdone, it might be a nice feature - the player would have to avoid getting his character too scared - eg, stop and rest for a second, don't get too close to the ghosts, don't spend too much time teetering on high ledges, etc. Maybe have a stat bar for 'fear factor' that increases or reduces depending on circumstances.
Wouldn't use this much in a pure action FPS, though - detracts from the central point of the gameplay.

As regards your other suggestion, special damage effects from location based damage can be interesting, but as has been mentioned, they can also be very frustrating if not used carefully. Personally, I find limping/slowdown effects from leg hits very irritating - takes forever to get anywhere. I like the Counterstrike system though - when you're hit on the run, you temporarily slow down a lot. This has a big effect on the gameplay dynamic - makes it much harder to do the usual tactic of racing past a hostile, taking a few hits and staying running. Allows for much better 'supression fire' and 'pinned down' scenarios - you can't just race out from cover and make a hundred yard dash to the next rock - the minute you're hit you're temporarily very vulnerable, especially from snipers.

[edited by - NeverSayDie on June 19, 2002 8:45:31 AM]

quote: Original post by Dirge
Location based damage is really cool (SOF 2 is sick!) but it doesn''t make a game any better. AT ALL. How is it advancing game play, or driving the story???

I agree it doesn''t add anything to the game. In fact, the bad guys in SOF are the most loyal bad guys I''ve ever seen!, you blow their leg, and they start jumping in the same place, and then they fire to you: they don''t run somewhere else, they don''t frighten... geez! :-)

quote: Original post by munkie
The gun skill factor is pointless, and would prove to be very aggrevating.

The physics for nearly every FPS is different; thus, you can''t be a god at playing Quake 3, and expect to have good aim in, say, Counter-Strike.

The people playing your game will have to spend enough time adjusting their OWN skills to your game. You would just be adding a needless hassle. If a player eventually becomes good with your game''s handling, why should he have to suffer needlessly because his kill count isn''t up to your game''s "standard"?

<SPAN CLASS=editedby>[edited by - munkie on June 14, 2002 5:48:10 PM]</SPAN>

Everyone''s afraid of something different.