GoldenEye: Source Forums
Debriefing => Impressions & Feedback => Topic started by: Flash2011 on July 26, 2011, 12:56:04 am
-
Well, this is really cool. I love GoldenEye:Source its super awesome and I think the devs did a bang up job on recreating a classic. Its almost exactly how I remember GoldenEye on the N64.
However, being exactly how I remember it might be good for nostalgia it doesn't exactly make for great gameplay and what I'm writing about here is about how in order for the game to be good in my opinion it needs to evolve.
First off, there is a reason no plays GoldenEye anymore and games today aren't made like it. It's a very outdated shooter.
The most popular styles of FPS today either utilize the ADS (Aim Down Sight) method or the tap burst fire method (Counter Strike). GE:Source uses neither and instead gives up the old school crosshair on shift.
What I have noticed with the crosshair is that it doesn't seem to do anything really. It isn't making my shots more accurate (if it is making shots more accurate, it's only because i can see where I'm aiming). If I use the crosshair and burst fire, it doesn't increase my accuracy, I can just full auto and its' the same, in or out of holding shift.
MOST people are going to say, "But GE:64 didn't have a normal crosshair and this source version is a perfect clone if it". This saying is exactly why FPS aren't made like this anymore, because it's bad mechanics.
The aiming is extremely flawed, no one can really control where they place their shots. You just point and shoot. Aiming and not aiming seem to be no different in how the bullets spread.
Secondly, the guns. The guns need to have more to them than what they are now because basically what this game has is just the same gun over and over just more powerful and who ever has the most powerful gun gets the most kills. An example of this would be the PP7 and DD4, the DD4 shoots a little faster and has 1 more bullet or the AR33 and the KF7, these 2 are almost the same gun. Without recoil there's no real way to differ from each gun. All i've done is search for AR33 or RCP90 and unload on people, which takes forever to kill someone.
Thirdly, the health. It seems like people last forever outside of License to Kill mode, you can unload clips on people and no one dies. There needs to be a better way to know if you're hitting people or not. Health needs to be scaled down or bullet damage increased (PP7 and DD4 I believe do the same damage and so does AR33 and KF7).
Lastly the mechanics. This is the huge part of my post because most of these mechanics are extremely dated and need to be revamped. You're releasing on the PC a game that was meant for 4 people with controllers. Most of the mechanics on the N64 were designed for the N64 and with only 4 people in mind, not up to 20 or more players. An example of this are the maps (some are huge and some are expanded upon), some of the maps remain the same size which is too small for the amount of possible players. The reloading is dated, the downside to unloading your gun is non-existent because all guns reload instantly which gives player the idea that spraying is the best possible method of killing.
Remaking a classic should never be remade word for word because what's the point in that? Movies that are remakes featuring about 99% of the exact same thing are terrible because movie goers feel that if they wanted the original they would just watch the original. Good remakes are movies such as Dawn of the Dead which follows the same plot but is HUGELY expanded on and involves new mechanics if you will, RUNNING ZOMBIES.
Please read this article from IGN. It was very interesting to read about how players act about old classics and why they're not fun anymore.
http://ps3.ign.com/articles/118/1183561p1.html
tl;dr: GE:Source needs to evolve beyond the original game, because the original is just too dated.
-
Thank you for you input, if we were talking about closeness to a retail game, would you say we should strive for Halo 3 or COD 4/5/6/GE: Wii?
-
I'm not saying that this needs to be exactly like Call of Duty or Halo at ALL (Though there is a reason outside of being AAA titles why people play and continue to play them). What i'm trying to say is that you should be evolving what GE:64 was. Take it to a new level expand on what you know.
I'm a game designer (going to school for it) and I do not at all want to sound like i'm hating on your mod, I like it for what is.
I guess what i'm saying is, if people wanted to play GoldenEye:Source they could just as easily pick up GE:64 and get almost the same exact game because very little has changed. Currently as it is I can only play GE:Source for a very short amount of time because I lose interest in it because of the old frustrating mechanics.
-
First off, there is a reason no plays GoldenEye anymore and games today aren't made like it. It's a very outdated shooter.
The most popular styles of FPS today either utilize the ADS (Aim Down Sight) method or the tap burst fire method (Counter Strike). GE:Source uses neither and instead gives up the old school crosshair on shift.
So, instead of using more original and faithful aiming mechanics a game should pander to the lowest common denominator and copy mechanics from the most popular games? What's the point in having different games if they are all mechanically the same game?
What I have noticed with the crosshair is that it doesn't seem to do anything really. It isn't making my shots more accurate (if it is making shots more accurate, it's only because i can see where I'm aiming). If I use the crosshair and burst fire, it doesn't increase my accuracy, I can just full auto and its' the same, in or out of holding shift.
Wrong. Using your crosshair increases your bullet accuracy.
Secondly, the guns. The guns need to have more to them than what they are now because basically what this game has is just the same gun over and over just more powerful and who ever has the most powerful gun gets the most kills. An example of this would be the PP7 and DD4, the DD4 shoots a little faster and has 1 more bullet or the AR33 and the KF7, these 2 are almost the same gun. Without recoil there's no real way to differ from each gun. All i've done is search for AR33 or RCP90 and unload on people, which takes forever to kill someone.
All I can say to this is learn to play. We use an invulnerability and damage system that rewards aim and precision and taking careful shots, if you spray at people with powerful weapons you are just going to waste bullets. Use the crosshair, aim for the head, use small bursts of fire.
Lastly the mechanics. This is the huge part of my post because most of these mechanics are extremely dated and need to be revamped. You're releasing on the PC a game that was meant for 4 people with controllers. Most of the mechanics on the N64 were designed for the N64 and with only 4 people in mind, not up to 20 or more players. An example of this are the maps (some are huge and some are expanded upon), some of the maps remain the same size which is too small for the amount of possible players. The reloading is dated, the downside to unloading your gun is non-existent because all guns reload instantly which gives player the idea that spraying is the best possible method of killing.
GE:S isn't a clone of GoldenEye 64, our gameplay is suitably adapted for more players and is more scalable. Your gripe about level size is so far the only one that has any validity or sense to it, we're currently working on new features that will solve this, including integrated map voting and dynamic map layout changes allowing areas of maps to be locked off or opened up dynamically depending on player count and game mode.
I'd be interested to know exactly what it is about modern aiming mechanics that makes them superior to older arcade style mechanics, given that games like Quake are still played in professional tournaments.
-
Suggested reading: http://wiki.goldeneyesource.net/index.php/V4.1_Release_Documentation#Gameplay_Fundamentals
I appreciate your angle, however you are not a "game designer" if you are still in school. You are a student who someday, hopefully, will be a game designer. I am not a game designer, this is a hobby of mine.
Anywho, I hope you learn from our game design and apply it in some of your classes!
-
Again, I'm not saying you guys NEED to use modern style aiming systems, but check out Duke Nukem Forever that just came out. No body i've spoken with has said it was fun, the majority of people hate the game.
Why though? Most people say it's because it utilized outdated mechanics and also that the gameplay hasn't aged very well. (Make sure to read the link I posted)
As for the aiming, I've played a good amount and I have BARELY noticed a difference in accuracy when using crosshairs and not (keep in mind i'm the player and not a designer i'm telling you what i'm experiencing). This isn't as much fun because to me it seems to promote more of a "just run and gun". Run and Gun is about as much fun and skillful as button mashing.
Also, Quake being played in competitions still. I don't know, but I've heard others say the same thing and that's cool and all, but how many play Quake to how that don't play Quake?
-
As a future game designer you should not be asking the question of "how many this, whos going to like that, am I cool enough to hang with the COD crowd?"
You should ask: "what makes my game stand out from the crowd?"
In the end, when this COD, pre-teen fueled, lust for immediate reward phase passes you will see games reverting back to the old-style framework that has bolstered so many of these "franchises." When you look deep inside all these AAA titles, they have NOTHING but good graphics. No story, no feeling, no depth, no skill required.
I read the article you posted, and i instantly dismissed it because he said "Half-life 2" as being a "classic" and not Half-Life (original) you know, the game that spawned an entire GENERATION of gaming, or even DOOM for fucks sake. He is an idiot, his opinion was refuted instantly.
-
Interesting point of view.
I keep saying that this game doesn't need to be like COD or anything like it. Valve has manage to avoid the COD play style and still make their games challenging yet fun with aiming.
You say In the end, when this COD, pre-teen fueled, lust for immediate reward phase passes you will see games reverting back to the old-style framework that has bolstered so many of these "franchises." When you look deep inside all these AAA titles, they have NOTHING but good graphics. No story, no feeling, no depth, no skill required.
But I feel like instead of copying COD series, you're copying Half Life series or Doom series or Duke Nukem series. However, If you're goal for this game is to be like those series, you've succeeded. Though I feel that the main reason most people are attracted to this mod is for simple nostalgic reasons, like myself.
Let me ask you a question? Did you play the new Duke Nukem? Did you like it or dislike it? How long were you able to play it before you put the controller down?
-
I'll be honest, I didn't buy the new Duke Nukem because of complaints of the gameplay. Although, I never played the original Duke Nukem (honest to god) so this is not a nostalgia thing.
I only revert back to COD because that's the "shit" right now, if you catch my drift. Everyone wants to emulate COD... or name some other half-baked console game.
I have seen plenty of reviews recently that are getting fed up with the "regurgitation" of the genres. Mark my words, you will start to see cash cows like COD, GTA, Fallot X DLC #200 start to decline. It has reached the saturation point where gamers are like, wtf this is the same shit I bought 2 months ago.
Like most fads, they fall back on their roots, and that is classic gameplay action.
GoldenEye is far from perfect, building this mod has shown a lot of its weaknesses, but it has also shown a tremendous amount of strength and foresight into what was put into the game that no modern game has in it.
If you want an example of a classic game, revived, and for the most part kept untouched besides a new story and graphics I refer you to Donkey Kong Country Returns: http://wii.ign.com/objects/143/14354707.html
-
You're absolutely right about he COD series right now, it is shit right now and that saddens me.
But I believe what the largest problem of the series (outside of some fucked up marketing tactics) isn't how to play the game, but what the game offers and i'll explain.
When COD4 came out, people I went nuts. It was so much fun, even regular DM was fun because of the game played. As the series progressed though, the magic had begun to wear thin, why though? Because the devs aren't giving their players anything more to do with the mechanics.
Black Ops is seriously just a slightly fixed, non broken, less buggy version of ModerWarfare 2, wow... There are NO new gameplay modes (zombies doesn't count). It's still DM, TDM, CTF etc... They've catered to the new players by giving players really easy ways to get kills and streaks. They've also limited the amount of options players have to customize their own games. Lastly, instead of giving players more during patches, they just make maps and overprice them, woohoo...
Left4Dead uses an older style of firing but because of how they allow their players to use it is what makes it so much fun. Make it into a COD type game and you get something kind of boring and frustrating.
I dunno, I think i'm rambling now. Anyways, I'm just a player playing your game and I just wanted to put my 2 cents in because I felt that some of the gameplay was frustrating (mainly the aiming and firing spread).
p.s. Is their going to be a better/easier way to tell who is on your team?
-
They've catered to the new players by giving players really easy ways to get kills and streaks.
You hit the nail on the head. This is what separates the men from the boys, the classics from the stale. GE:S refuses to cater to this need, call us niche, but you need to EARN your kills with your skill.
p.s. Is their going to be a better/easier way to tell who is on your team?
Yes, serious design flaw in the mod ATM, will definitely be rectified in the next release.
Maybe you might have a future with our mod and your gameplay design ideas.... never know. Play some more, let us know what you think, and we'll be listening. Just don't try to change our core mechanics, cause we won't budge on that. :-)
For the record, I think COD 4 is one of the best games ever made.
-
They've catered to the new players by giving players really easy ways to get kills and streaks.
You hit the nail on the head. This is what separates the men from the boys, the classics from the stale. GE:S refuses to cater to this need, call us niche, but you need to EARN your kills with your skill.
I feel the same is true in your mod because people don't have to really do anything to get kills. They just hold down the fire button until one of you dies, this may be because of how much life each player has as it allows people to "tank" a lot of bullets. Counterstrike is a shooter that doesn't cater to new players, but it's also at time super difficult to get kills unless you've played for a long time.
-
Did you read my suggested material? http://wiki.goldeneyesource.net/index.php/V4.1_Release_Documentation#Gameplay_Fundamentals
It's not "tanking", in fact the swiftness of your kill is entirely dependent on how YOU do the killing. Feel free to pump bullets in my chest all day long, but two well timed shots to the head with my PP7 will take you down very fast.
-
I forgot to mention. COD series is only easy because of the dumb crap implemented, like the Tac knife and super shotties and Kill Streaks (which promote camping).
Most "hardcore players" prefer COD2 because of Rifles Only. I prefer shooting rifles and pistols (MW2 with shotgun and SMG secondaries...wtf), grenades were fine if used in moderation and not spammed.
Also BF series is boring to me cause I think a lot of the newer players just jump in tanks to get easy kills because using anything else is just too darn difficult (lol).
-
Did you read my suggested material? http://wiki.goldeneyesource.net/index.php/V4.1_Release_Documentation#Gameplay_Fundamentals
Myyyy mistake, i didn't notice it, sorry, i will read now.
-
A thing that really urks me is when people complain that the crosshair does not stay on the screen at all times...and then they complain about game realism.
There is no crosshair in real life. You slow down, you aim and you shoot. That is how it works.
To me, that is what GES is simulating when you bring up the crosshair. It is forcing you to slow down and aim, unlike just running around, spraying bullets everywhere with the crosshair there.
Or, with time, you learn how to shoot properly without using the crosshair at all. Mangley is correct in saying that using the crosshair increases your bullet accuracy, but overtime, you rely on your own accuracy. I for one rarely use the crosshair and I prefer it this way.
And no, there is not a dot on my screen to show where the crosshair would be (I know people that do that, and that is so sad).
My point is, I think people rely so much on the mechanics of one game that when they try something new, they just don't like it. GoldenEye 64 was the FPS that started it all. If anything, I think the mechanics of games these days make shooting way too easy. And I don't think GES is outdated. I think it is a game of skill.
PS: If you played GE 64 with auto-aim off, you are a legend. Puts COD players to shame :P
-
The game doesn't NEED a static crosshair, that's more of a tactile feature that most people appreciate, much like the bumps on your F key and J key. It's just a way to say "hey your bullets go down the center of the screen and crosshairs allow you to tell where the center is."
About it being realistic or not shouldn't even be debated, it's a video game...game. It's a game and unless stated that it's designed to be a simulator, realism shouldn't even be brought up.
As for crosshairs, aiming and making you move slower. You should be able to have a much much higher amount of accuracy compared to when you aren't aiming. As you even stated, I for one rarely use the crosshair and I prefer it this way.
It shouldn't be a matter of whether your the type of player who prefers aiming to players who don't.
It should be a matter of mechanics and gameplay. If Run and Gun has an accuracy near comparable to aiming with crosshair then whats the point of aiming?
In more recent FPS series, having gun classes highly separates players and play styles. The SMG (D5k and ZMG) should fire fast but low accuracy and a high drop off in damage over distance while rifles (AR33 and KF7) should have a bit slower fire rate with more accuracy and more damage over distance. These "realistic" aspects are in my opinion a LOT of fun to tinker with and only get more interesting when you add in firing through walls and the damage with that.
All of that said begins to make people start to make decisions on what type of player they want to be by simply utilizing what the devs gave them, not by what they demand them to be. If i want to be the run and gun fast guy I can use a ZMG, but if I want to be the round about guy I might use an AR33 and lastly maybe I feel like being a sniper or a sneaky SOB and use a silenced PP7.
What'd yah think? Maybe I'm crazy.
-
I have noticed a drop in accuracy since 4.0 Beta, I did this test back then to see the difference in accuracy between aiming and not and it was much more significant back then than it is now:-
http://imgur.com/a/eGXDN
See if you can guess which one was using aim.
-
I think that no damage falloff means you aren't fucked just because you spawned with a pistol at a distance.
I think that anyone who is running and gunning in GES better run fast and gun hard because their damage output is lower than mine.
I think that you have made a great example of reporting on perception instead of reality. Nothing to be ashamed of, we had a lot of people here doing what they thought Goldeneye 007 was like, instead of going back and checking like I did. Then they fought me on it. Fun fun fun.
Take DD44 to an empty room, tap fire it without sighting, then with. You will see the difference. Sighting helps, but it is not supposed to be required if you know where the center of your screen is and can follow the tracers.
Take ZMG to an empty room. Tap off one bullet at a time for 16 shots, then spam the other 16. You will see the difference. Recoil matters. It's not huge, but it's often a lot compared to stable firing's accuracy.
Run-and-gun has a place in GES. It's what you use when you are retreating to cover, or need to finish someone you've wounded when you are also one headshot from your own death. Yes, you can mow down a room with a power weapon like RCP90 because it's meant to be a sweeper, but a guy with the starting pistol can knock his health down 50, 50, 50, dead (or just 50, dead if he didn't have armor) by doing it right.
-
As an avid Battelfield supporter since 1942 i feel i have to chime in with...
If youre in a tank youre pretty much dead :P
-
As VC said, it's about knowing how effective each weapon is depending on circumstance and using it properly in that circumstance. It takes me only a 3-5 seconds to kill an unarmored player with weapons like the PP7 because i make sure to hit the head rather than just dumping a bucket of bullets all over them. With stronger weapons like the AR33 and P90, you can just spam head level and win every time; with most you need to be on target.
Our weapon selection is varied enough without it being intrusive. Perfect dark, for instance, had a lot of weapons no-one(or often just one person) wanted to use because of how gimmicky they managed to be. Sure, it's interesting to have a game with mostly farsights...but the weapon is pretty much avoided because of how annoying it is to be killed by someone sitting on the facility toilet when you're in the lab hallway. Sure, some weapons are essentially upgraded versions of other weapons, but it allows for variety and set balance. GE:S does not allow players to choose their loadout or even start with a powerful weapon in most cases; if all of the weapons were equal in power there wouldn't be much incentive to seek a better out after spawning.
-
I just played another couple of games and I can't get over how I feel about the aiming.
The aiming bothers me because I feel that it's fairly inaccurate when zoomed in. I also hate that since you can quick reload that at most times it's just easier to unload your gun on someone and just keep reloading.
An example of this was that I was about 2 feet from someone with a Klobb aimed on their head and it took me like 5 seconds to kill him.
P.S. Moonraker is bull, 1 shot headshots. People were using that gun and it was just wrecking everyone. Shotguns feel really weak, the auto-shotgun doesn't seem all that auto when compared to the regular shotgun.
Have you guys toyed with the idea of a radar that doesn't always show where players are?
-
The Klobb is known for its horrible accuracy so it will miss the target in close combat, better off switching to the Hunting Knife honestly. The shotguns will shred you up close.
-
I want to play with you. Killermonkey1313
-
P.S. Moonraker is bull, 1 shot headshots. People were using that gun and it was just wrecking everyone. Shotguns feel really weak, the auto-shotgun doesn't seem all that auto when compared to the regular shotgun.
Have you guys toyed with the idea of a radar that doesn't always show where players are?
Well, I think youd say that about Quake III's railgun as well, but it is balanced. Unfortunately it isn't as powerful as before. ;-)
Concerning shotguns: they both can deal some good damage, but it's rather for close quarters, but that's just how shotguns are by definition.
The radar thing is a server setting. You can set it to: disable radar, show only team, show all. Yet it's a strategic element when it's enabled. You see from where people move to you and you can nade-shot them coming around a corner if you time it right.
-
Hey I added you on steam, Killer.
Moonraker isn't really a rail gun because the rail gun was more of a sniper rifle type weapon and raker isn't (not from what i noticed).
Shotguns shouldn't be awful from mid-far range. I do agree up close it's really powerful. Shotguns though have a decent amount of range (not to get realistic cause i hate that term). I just don't want them to seem gimmicky.
COD4 shotguns were bad, MW2 ranged between balanced to overpowered (Spas, AA12, 1887).
-
I want to play with you. Killermonkey1313
Literally!?, now that is what I am talking about!
-
Just waiting on invite acception.
-
I was doing the same things you are doing now, but 4 years ago before beta 3. I insisted ges should use "realistic" damage, spread, and rate of fire. Then VC came along and implemented actual values from ge64 and it made a HUGE positive difference to the gameplay.
Trust me, after my little lesson with you, you will understand.
I am at work atm, I will be home in a few hours.
-
Ok, cool. I'll be home for most of the day, i'm going to friends house, but i have a laptop and i'll be sure to get some games in with you.
-
I suppose I should attend as well.
-
I suppose I should attend as well.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v232/nullasalus/blog/film/preston-2.jpg)
"A party ill be attending, a party she'll be attending?"
I can't hardly wait..
-
You missed out, it was a dope ass party. See you all next time.
-
theBunT "A party ill be attending, a party she'll be attending?"
(http://cdn.buzznet.com/media/jj1/2008/12/timberlake-jizz/justin-timberlake-jizz-in-my-pants-12.jpg)
-
You say I'm premature I just call it ecstasy
I wear a rubber at all times it's a necessity
Cuz I
Jizz... in... my pants
-
Everyone knows that the klobb is @#$%. It is GoldenEye's humour weapon.
-
As for Klobb Junior, he only misses on purpose.