Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
snoob

Can fps mechanics be fresh and still have a casual appeal?

Recommended Posts

I've been thinking about this for a long time, and squad has sparked my interest in the matter.

I have about average shooting experience IRL but I feel a reasonable argument is that the skill comes from the alignment of your sights, your breathing, heartrate, and your trigger finger's dexterity. This ignores specific cartridge knowledge, trajectory, drop, and windage. as these are out of your direct control and can be compensated for as done in IRL.

I think alot of gamers look at FPS games and expect certain mechanics to act a certain way, I mean alot of people hate on COD, but they ushered in the ADS mechanic that almost ALL realistic oreiented FPS games share. Even battlefield 2 didn't have these mechanics until dice had to compete with them, how good they felt, and the deeper experience they provided. There haven't been many games that have iterated into new territory since, as most large FPS communities highly covet their own mechanics, design, and gameplay see:everyfpsgame cs tribes cod bf quake ut doom. Red Orchestra 2 was the the most recent FPS that really decided to add some interesting and new aiming mechanics that brought something fresh to the design. Alot of people missed the aiming mechanics being so intuitive, because of the cover mechanic. RO2 struggled for a year after release with that mechanic, while the aiming system stayed largely the same, because no one thought it a problem. It felt good, made sense and tickled that sweet tender center of the spectrum squad is pointed towards. *Rips a belt of ammo through a mg42, couches in cover while deployed with bipod to hide from incomming fire and reloads a belt. squad leader's mortar coordinates are picked and mortars come raining in, enemies scatter -  that's the moment, pop up from cover in a heartbeat fully deployed and let loose,  squad flanking to the right to assault as soon as the mortars stop. Draw glorious attention with leagues of tracer fire and supression systems flipping out on every client! These are the RO2 moments no one can deny!*

So how do you iterate on the RO2 aiming system, and the successes it made?

All I could think of is the front post being your xhair, your view can turn instantly but the model needs to catch up, front and rear posts have to align, and there is jitter between the front and rear post. A small cirular zone can be fine tuned with mouse movements (always moving the front post as your xhair) within a stable rear sight picture(horizontally) since thats the best i can extrapolate my experience shooting IRL, there would be a cadence to shooting as the mechanic would be learning when to shoot as/when the front and rear posts stabilize/align. the speed of the mouse movement determines the front and rear post view bob, and lets say it takes a full second of stabilizing to get a dead on shot and that accuracy will decrease as you move the mouse around... and this time can be changed based on playtesting, perhaps even automate the zooming function as the front post zeros with the rear.

Idk I'm spitballing, I realize the pacing in this game is very important and the current mechanics are telling that they are meant to slow the game down. Would having a shooting cadence and discipline based on sight picture turn into fun and rewarding gameplay? I can say after my 100 hours of playing squad the weapon mechanics aren't rewarding due to their gimped nature (recoil currently, and how your eyes and gun are glued together), they constantly leave me puzzled and/or dragging my mouse down half my massive mouse pad. (some of us use low sensitivity :D)

I love squad and I have no intention of telling you how to make what you want to make, any of you. My only intention is to further the conversation and encourage thought.

I implore the developers to take the time they need, and don't be afraid to think outside of the box with tried and true mechanics, the community will remain patient and understanding, and absolutely be willing to test more outragous changes in mechanics at a larger scale, for periods of time. We are your virtual soldiers <3

Yall rock.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

simple answer yes,

 

the problem is that many Devs think "accessible" means making game mechanics shallow. what it means is making something easy to understand and easy to access. complex control system does not mean depth. so for Casual Gamers you make the game Accessible for them. easy to understand the core game, easy to controller, and a clean interface will do this. this is what they want. then having depth behind those simple system.

 

So the problem right now is most create "Fresh" system that are just so overly complex to use. in many cases they dont have to be at all. this complex effects the causal. if the new Fresh FPS mechanics is simple to use without playing trester then it be easier for the causal.

 

think of CoD aiming system and perks as you said. easier to use and (back in Cod 4 where they tried to balance the game before they speed that shit up to 100% fing everything up) had depth. talking about 4 guys not the other....CoD.

 

wait, CoD was not the first one to have iron sights, it just that sold the most and Devs copy the game thinking it means $$$ will come their way. how how stupid they were

Edited by RaulO4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/26/2016 at 0:13 AM, RaulO4 said:

simple answer yes,

 

the problem is that many Devs think "accessible" means making game mechanics shallow. what it means is making something easy to understand and easy to access. complex control system does not mean depth. so for Casual Gamers you make the game Accessible for them. easy to understand the core game, easy to controller, and a clean interface will do this. this is what they want. then having depth behind those simple system.

 

So the problem right now is most create "Fresh" system that are just so overly complex to use. in many cases they dont have to be at all. this complex effects the causal. if the new Fresh FPS mechanics is simple to use without playing trester then it be easier for the causal.

 

think of CoD aiming system and perks as you said. easier to use and (back in Cod 4 where they tried to balance the game before they speed that shit up to 100% fing everything up) had depth. talking about 4 guys not the other....CoD.

 

wait, CoD was not the first one to have iron sights, it just that sold the most and Devs copy the game thinking it means $$$ will come their way. how how stupid they were

I agree with you, complex systems become cumbersome, a perfect example of that is ARMA (I've only played 2 and its expansions). While it can be argued all these buttons are required within the mechanics of ARMA's core gameplay elements, It still discourages many players even carrying a stigma with some gamers before they try it.

That said, it would be a mistake to assume anything is overly complex or complicated without testing it and trying to streamline it.

I'm sure there was games prior that used similiar iron sight mechanics, but I can't think of a multiplayer game prior to COD1/2 that used it.

COD def made it the norm.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×