DescentBB

i will start with a question: why do some people love military 'sims' and others whatever fps comes out with pretty colors?

i base this on myself. i fall into the sim category, and don't get me wrong i love the ut series, and doom and half-life, but, i have always preferred a more realistic type of game, especially online. i played sof2 for a very long time, and america's army nearly as much. i have however seen the converse and known people who are obsessed with ut2k4, but i have fun playing rainbow six. also i have never gotten into mmorpg games either.

what's up with that.

(keep in mind i was obsessed with Descent... a physics defying game that is truly 'unrealistic' but whatever )

I love games with gibs. So non-sim games for me. HL1 had some of the greatest gibs, like the skull with one eyeball still in it, missed that in HL2.

I can't say I'm a big fan of anything in the FPS genre. After playing Descent for so long, all of those games just seem too limiting. I've had a somewhat enjoyable experience with Halo once in a while, and I do enjoy Goldeneye and some of the PS2 Bond games. I'd definitely prefer the more arcadey style to something that's ultra-realistic; who wants to worry about your gun jamming or overheating, anyway?

Quake 3 is the greatest competitive deathmatch fps ever made.

BF 1942 / DC / BF2 ... awesome ... wish I had more time to play them.

Iceman wrote:BF 1942 / DC / BF2 ... awesome ... wish I had more time to play them.

Yessssssssssssssssssssss.

Ice, play ranked?

Classics.

DooM, Starcraft, Nethack, D&D, Descent... the only thing they have in common is they're really freakin' good games.

UT2K4 has awesome furious deathmatch.

Tetrad wrote:Quake 3 is the greatest competitive deathmatch fps ever made.

Tetrad and I ... OMFG....

/me faints.

Iceman wrote:BF 1942 / DC / BF2 ... awesome ... wish I had more time to play them.

I can agree with the first two, but BF$ lost it for me. '42 and DC especially throw reality to the wind in order to keep gameplay from suffering. For example, in DC the highly inferior T-72s of the Iraqi army are not only on par with the M1A1s of the Americans, but due to some coding quirks they're usually considered better. BF$ on the other hand decided that it was unrealistic to have the M16 fire in full automatic mode, so the US grunts find themselves standing in the middle of a fully automatic video game with a three round burst M16. WTF?

Oh. Uh, I voted non-sims fps.

Because the M16 DOES fire in 3 bursts....


Im more into games that get you involved more than brainless shooters like Quack 3. KOTOR, Deus Ex, then theres Simcity 4. I always got a kick out of Descent 2 because of the atmosphere and the kickass soundtrack. Everything about that game clicked even though it had no storyline.

gotta shout it out ... M-16 is single fire or three round burst.... M4 is fully auto tho.

The M-16 was limited to three round bursts to force grunts to shoot better and conserve ammo. If you are Navy and Air Force, you get the full auto M16A3.

Its a three round-burst in the R6 series too.

BF2 goofs up in the fact the M16 *should* be phased out of service by the time the F36 is in service, replaced by at least the M4, or the X-8.

Top Wop wrote:Because the M16 DOES fire in 3 bursts....

That's my point. They made it realistic, but they fucked up the gameplay. If you have an M16, you have the only assault rifle in the game that doesn't do automatic fire, and three direct hits won't kill anyone in BF$.

i could never get into the bf series (i have vietnam... but thought it was lame....) mostly because of the images it cojures concerning the 'acronym' bf...

Wow that sucks.

i voted retro coz it's all about gameplay.

It greatly depends on which game, but generally I play RPG games more than most at the moment. There are plenty of great side-scrollers out there, though, and a few good FPS games - although not nearly as many retain their value for as long.

About the BF series:

For me one some of the greatest games I've ever played (except BF:V), despite all its short comings. What would be the good of one team having completely inferior equipment? The T72 btw. is by no way superior to the M1A1 in DC. Actually, it is inferior, because it cannot rotate the turret 360 deg due to the rear mounted gas tanks.

The M16 in BF2 really sucks - but only in close quarters combat (which admittedly make up the bulk of infantry fights). It's more precise than the AK 47 on mid range. But once you've unlocked the G3, you can forget about the other infantry guns anyway (unless you need the gren launcher). The G3 is a heck of a gun: Precise and powerful. I *love* it. In the hands of a skilled player, it is superior to every other rifle or hand gun in the game at short and mid range, even to the big shot guns.

Oooh man, I dig BF2. I dig it because it is not a fully arcadish shooter, but really leaves room for thought and tactics. I have outplayed so many players with better reflexes than I have in BF. I can even applaude to players tricking me.

For me also gameplay >> realism. You don't know what 'realism' is until you have played a truly realistic sim. I remember a tank sim coded by a retired tank driver. Heck, that was realistic! I died all the time, and the tank was a PITA to control. But it was indeed *very* realistic. That type of game only appeals to a very small number of ppl.

For me, Operation Flash Point was an extremely well done compromise between playability and realism. It's more realistic than BF, yet very playable (tanking is an art of its own in OPF though).

The only FPS i can stan longer than 10 mins is GUNZ cause of it's Matrix style dodging and "fairly" cool community. The graphics aren't nowt to write home about but we all know that dosn't mean much if the gameplay is good.

Never played much other than D1, D2 and D3 - could not dredge up the motivation to learn 'em.

Probably explains my meager skills. *sigh*

Diedel wrote:The T72 btw. is by no way superior to the M1A1 in DC. Actually, it is inferior, because it cannot rotate the turret 360 deg due to the rear mounted gas tanks.

On that point I can not agree. I spend almost all of my time in DC as a tanker, and the T-72 is always my tank of choice. It has a lower profile, a much smaller turret, and a beautiful arc that can lob shells over some obstacles to hit things behind them. Also, due to some weired quirks in the coding, the M1 has trouble climbing steep hills. If you try to turn while going up steep inclines, the tank actually moves backwards down the hill. The T-72 does not do this. Also, the BF42 engine calculates damage based on the angle your shell hits a tank. I've had M1's skip shells off the curves of my T-72 without doing any damage, but since the M1 consists almost entirely of flat faces, you can always get a solid hit on one.

Just my over-analyzation as a tanker. The M1 does have the advatage when getting shot in the ass, but you have bigger problems then gas tanks if your enemy is always shooting you in the back.

Now back to your regularly schedualed discusion of ground pounding already in progress!

I played a ton of Q2 back in the day. I made it into the top 1000 online players once.

I kinda miss that type of fun, but then I found D3! (thanx Neitzl!)

I wanna try BF1942 when I get my new CPU setup for Xmas.

Perfect,

if you know your maps, you will not have trouble with the M1A1. I never aim for a T72 turret, I am for the wheels or the gap between turret and body. If we were pitted against each other in a T72 vs. M1A1 battle, you in the T72, me in the M1A1 you'd need to be very careful not to ever have me in your rear and finish you off while you're still trying to turn your tank to get your barrel free. I must admit that I consider myself an expert tanker - it's my weapon of choice in BF:DC.

In BF2, I am currently starting to get more and more proficient with air planes ... recently I shot down a guy 9 times in one match. He was a very good bomber pilot and annoyed the heck outta me, so after being killed by him the third time I grabbed a jet and started to hunt him ... poor guy started a kick vote against me after having died the 9th time, ROTFLOLOL! Well, he may have been a good bomber pilot, but he couldn't really fly, or he had survived longer. The AA missiles are crap, imho.

But imagine that: Starting a kick vote because you're getting butt whooped ... ts, ts.

/me walks away, shaking head in disbelief

Sarge,

BF1942 or BF2?

Diedel wrote: Sarge,

BF1942 or BF2?

Whatever, I'd hafta look'n see what's out there.

BF1942 is the first game of the franchise, BF2 is the most recent one.

We may have to have that 'lil tank match sometime. You can even take your plane, since I can shoot those down too.

Diedel wrote:BF1942 is the first game of the franchise, BF2 is the most recent one.

I see.... thanx for the info!

RPG's, I'll admit there are a lot I don't like but many stand out, and those tend to be the classics in my mind. They require pateince, timing, and a lot of strategic thinking and problem solving skills. It's like chess or stratego compared to checkers. Some like the fast paced, simple gameplay and others love the thinking and stratagy. Also, RPG's tend to have more storyline and a free-roaming world where you can explore anything and do anything.

Good examples are:

KOTOR
Dues Ex
Morrowind
And hopefully, Oblivion and S.T.A.L.K.E.R.

I liked the Descent series because it involved flying, the controls were very complex, involving a lot of thinking and unlimited motion, not to mention it was the only flying game that involved an element of exploration. I also agree that D1 and D2 had a fantastic eye and ear catching atmosphere to it. The multi was what kept me going for so many years after that.


Simulators:

I think the reason I love wargames so much is that they tend to make some of the best and most strategicly involving multi-player games. In the case of Counter Strike Source, I love it because It is realistic in physics and movement, it is simple and it contains team-based goals and you can't survive unless you act as a team. You're goal is to protect and defend your team members even more than yourself.

Does "Leisure Suit Larry" count as a fps?

woodchip wrote:Does "Leisure Suit Larry" count as a fps?

hooah son! i would guess more of an 'rpg'???

Messenjah,

if you're into RPGs and haven't played Gothic, or Gothic 2, you've missed what imo is one of the best RPG series ever.