Print

Add to Reputation:  

What do you think of this post?

I agree I disagree  
Comment:

[Imtnt]

Dude, do you understand how confusing it is when you first meet the invuln based damage model? It's horrendous and is completely off putting.  I understand that you're concerned about balance and I am willing to help in any way I can to make it better.  This being implemented would hugely benefit the mod, without cutting off hardcore.

[Entropy-Soldier]

Well, give that gamemode a shot and see what you think of GE:S without invulnerability.

[Imtnt]

Just finished trying it out; So much better.  Obviously the guns need a little balancing but overall I enjoyed the experience a lot more.

[Jonathon [SSL]]

Since when? Last time I've heard about it was:

Oops, must've misread KM's post then :p

[soupcan]

Just finished trying it out; So much better.  Obviously the guns need a little balancing but overall I enjoyed the experience a lot more.

If you think it's better with Bypass, you're in the minority.

[Imtnt]

I didn't say it was perfect, I said it was better.  Just needs some balance.

[Lord_Crow]

Did you even play the original? If you didn't, this mod isn't for you. I don't want GE:S becoming another generic run-and-gun FPS, even optionally. For people who don't want Invulnerability, there's Bypass, which sucks, by the way.

We don't need GE:S changing to accommodate the Call of Duty generation of players.

Finally.
Blunt Honestly, Something I've been waiting to read.

[Imtnt]

You know what, I'm done.  Unless this becomes an option, I see nothing here that I wouldn't just plug in my N64 for.

[namajnaG]

Just adding a quick something here ; Some games has tried to put a "Classic" mode in their game, notably Red Orchestra 2. Problem is, no server ever runs it, Which is a shame, really. RO1 mechanics we're great, even though RO2 mechanics are also great, but let's get back on topic here.

Whilst your idea is not bad to accommodate the newer players to get used to the game, or simply let players such as yourself and your pals play this gameplay as a whole, I think it would take a lot of time to actually balance every weapon for it to have a decent experience, because even you said it, Bypass is unbalanced. Anybody can take out someone with an RCP90 within half a second and destroy the whole server. It feels like Alpha/Beta 1 all over again, So it's perfectly understandable that some of us don't want that and crave the GE64 mechanics. But then, I think it is also perfectly understandable that some players want that change too, because they liked GE64, but not as a whole, such as the invuln system being annoying to those players.

Most open-minded (pun intended) servers run "Bypass" as a game mode, and as E-S said, it confuses the hell out of everybody when it comes up the rotation, and most people bailout or vote a different game mode when it comes on because the game wasn't planned to work out this way in the first place.

And as SSL pointed out earlier, sure, bringing in a wider audience would be a good thing, I agree with that, but the thing is... Even if a "Modern" gameplay style was added as an option to the game, I hardly think any server would run it, because the actual playerbase is used to the current mechanics, and the only active servers that actually survives off are ran by those who've been playing on the same mechanics for years; those mechanics evolving over time and updates, of course.

As a whole, I'm not against the implantation of an optional modern gameplay style at all, but I'm concerned it might not work out as intended.


Also, hello Crow!

[kraid]

I guess you really should plug in the N64 again to refresh your memories about the Multiplayer of the original game.
You say that firefights can take up to 20 seconds and several magazines?
That's exactly how it was in the original, maybe even longer there because of the more difficult aiming.

Another demage system wouldn't work very well with our weapons.
If you look at modern shooters, most of them 'balance' their arsenal by only allowing rapid fire guns as your primary weapon. Something we cannot do for several reasons.

A classic mode, like you suggested, would only divide our community even more.
Even if such a system could bring in a few new players, i doubt they would be hardcore enough to stay.
Because if they were, they'd allready be playing this mod and got used to the system.

Without the invuln system, it would be impossible to win a firefight with a pistol against someone spamming with automatic guns, but this is the intention. Teaching bullet spammers that they cannot succeed that way.

[Bashe]

Well I guess it's useless to chime in at this point since the guy already left (shocking!), but I think sticking with the current system is the best thing to do. For years, the mod has been balanced around it and while it can seem very annoying at times, it's true to the original and probably would be the best way to go about it. It has a learning curve surely, but practice makes perfect. Sadly, practicing is harder due to the fact that there's not as many players around anymore, and a good number of players who still play are veterans who know the game in and out and make it difficult for newer (and less patient) players to have a chance at getting better, and for those frustrated over this - believe me, I've been there.

I wasn't good with the invuln system at first either - I knew that there had to be some kind of system going on and I was aware of the invuln system from the original game, but I had trouble killing people because I was trying to play it like other FPS I had played over time. However, with practice and playing with people of varying skill levels, I managed to adapt to the system and get pretty good at the game overall, and I do appreciate the system now because it makes it more fair anyone using any weapon to get a kill, even the knife - my GOD even the knife.

An option wouldn't be the worst thing, since it already somewhat exists with Bypass and all, but Kraid has a good point - it would divide our already small, faltering community more because of the fact that, IMO, many of our vets and even relatively older newcomers would want to keep the invuln system due to its long-standing presence in the mod. I can't really complain about an option since it IS just an option, but I think dividing up the community more isn't the best idea.

TL;DR - the current system works best I think, and newcomers just need to practice to get it down. It's not as hard as it looks.

[StupidMarioBros1Fan[1138]]

Even though it's been a while since I've played Bypass, the only thing I'd ever notice is that the armor refilled your health and never added to the armor meter. I never noticed that the invulnerability system was turned off in that, so I'm not exactly sure if that means about me except I love going to the armor spawns to refill my health and armor to avoid dieing. lol I never found the system annoying in the original because all I ever played against was my dad which years ago I was okay, now I'm better than him due to me playing more often than him so it was just two on two between uneven players which both of us would go easy on the other who was worse to avoid hurting their feelings. xD Anyways because of this I've never been into a hardcore match on the original and never gave the invulnerability system much of a thought. Hell the only times I "hate" the system is when I hit someone who gains blood/paint and doesn't take the damage, but as someone else pointed out on another thread that wasn't because of the system but because of the game not sending the information that I hurt the player fast enough to me. And I've played CoD at my school and got into it as much as I could which wasn't that great because of the other students...so immature, always yelling at each other, disgusting name calling and conversations and just wasn't that enjoyable for me. Anyways I've played CoD and GE: Reloaded so I've got experience without the system and never noticed a difference...so is that a good thing? I think maybe if it was possible it should be an OPTION, NOT REMOVING for atleast LAN servers because as Imtnt said, he and his friends were newcomers. While the system works like it did in the original, I think it might not had been as noticeable as in here since well....this game supports like 8 times the amount of players, so I think newcomers notice more because they're shooting at more people in a shorter timespan compared to original. I always thought the system as sort of a balance so you couldn't just destroy a guy at full health with an AR33 or RCP-90, even as a kid (though maybe without realizing it or maybe because me and my dad didn't really choose Assault Rifles). I would like to know if it applied to soldiers in single player mode because I know it works on the player otherwise I'd be completely destroyed by soldiers like with the turrets on harder difficulties and was always grateful for it. The funny thing is I'd only think about that I was grateful for the system when I'm getting destroyed in a match in Source, but never think about how it was preventing me from killing someone, just assumed they had a lot of health or armor. lol
Anyways what I'm suggesting like Imtnt was, if it is possible, that the system could be OPTIONAL...I'm not exactly sure how to make it more obvious that I'm saying for it to be an OPTION because he said he wanted it as an OPTION for him and his friends and any newcomers that would enjoy it to play but then was backslashed with stuff about why the system should stay when he never asked for it to be removed completely.
I do not prepose that we split the audience but we do also need to look at newcomers so we don't keep the same audience size, and a lot of those newcomers are not hardcore GE64 fans that had tons of experience with the invulnerability system, some of them have more experience without it and if there's one thing I know about a good amount (not all) of CoD gamers, it's that they run away when something is completely different and don't try to adapt. Again a good amount, not saying that every CoD gamer does this, but a lot of them like having things the same, probably because a lot of the CoD games now are basically the same, though they have made changes with Ghosts that I've heard, I hope they begin to make changes to each game now.
When I got this game and got murdered on servers, I knew that I'd have to practice and play them over and over again to get better, though not everyone is like this, hell like only a couple of the CoD gamers at my school are because people get kicked left and right if they're doing good. Apparently to them if someone is beating them, they need to kick the person instead of just playing against them more often to get better, if they're camping or cheating or just using the grenade launcher add on (which is seriously OP and the RPG is like really weak O.o) then I understand, but when the person winning is playing fair then he shouldn't be kick. *facepalm*
ANYWAYS I'm not saying to let the invulnerability system go, but to add an option to turn it off on like LAN servers or maybe some sort of message that says that if you're annoyed at the invulnerability system, then to keep playing and try to get used to it instead of just rage quitting or something. I don't find it a problem, but as Imtnt has shown us, a good amount of newcomers do. God I ramble a lot, sure hope I didn't lose anybody in there.

[Imtnt]

Just for the record, I didn't leave.  I care about this mod too much.  I am simply going to let the discussion continue without me.

P.S.  I thought we went over this already, but I AM NOT A "COD GAMER". I just like to hit people more than once a second. For instance, I was always a fan of Arma (Through its terrible control scheme) and Red Orchestra.  Two games that couldn't be more different from the "Run-n-Gun" standard of Cod.  Not to say that I don't enjoy run-n-gun style of games, just not CoD mostly because of its horrible community.

[StupidMarioBros1Fan[1138]]

I wasn't saying that you were, I was saying that some newcomers are.

[killermonkey]

You know what, I'm done.  Unless this becomes an option, I see nothing here that I wouldn't just plug in my N64 for.

This is the best compliment this mod has ever received! Thanks

Listen, it boils down to this. If you don't like the game, don't play it. Just because **YOU** think something should be in it, doesn't mean it will happen. Stamping your feet about it doesn't help.

I see removing invuln like taking a turn-based strategy game and turning it into a Real-time strategy game. You can't just "flip that switch" and bam everything works.

You need to approach the game the way it was designed to be played.
The game does bend to the way **YOU** want to play.

If this were the case, then every game in the world would be exactly the same, catering to the majority and not the game and it's creators.


Here is the technical reason for invulnerability (partially stated in the release docs):

Invuln ensures damage is applied at a constant rate regardless of the gun you are using. What does that mean?

Instead of relying on the rate of fire of a weapon to deal maximum damage (spray and pray) you must rely on the accuracy and timing of your shots to deal maximum damage.

This concept is CORE to GoldenEye because it shifts focus away from the weapon and puts it squarely on your SKILL with that weapon. This is why a PP7 in skilled hands can take down an RCP-90 wielder.

This is also the reason why there are 8 weapon choices in each weapon set with varying degrees of damage and fire rates. Depending on the scenario, you have to choose the right one and wield it effectively. The sets are balanced off this fact and the invulnerability mechanic, believe it or not.

Without invulnerability, your skill requirement is reduced to general aiming and whether or not you have the better weapon in a firefight. It also encourages fighting through duck and cover and other cheesy mechanics.

In short, the invuln system provides a level of uniqueness when compared to other games because it enforces the skill of the player and not the relative superiority of their weaponry.