+- Xonotic Forums (https://forums.xonotic.org)
+-- Forum: Creating & Contributing (https://forums.xonotic.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Forum: Xonotic - Suggestion Box (https://forums.xonotic.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=20)
+--- Thread: [SUGGESTION] Game-models to try for? (/showthread.php?tid=3206)
Pages:
1
2
Game-models to try for? - MajorYokoyurik0 - 06-28-2012
I've noticed that Xonotic is lacking in many ways. And instead of trying to reinvent the wheel, why not try using some of the concepts and ideas of other games -> game-models. It would help with balance and gameplay issues, and make something that is known to work and be successful. I know the main focus has been toward a Unreal Tournament model atm, but even that's lacking for now. I'm NOT saying "copy this game"; I'm saying, use other games' solutions to help fix and expand/add to Xonotic. (Besides if you copy a lot of games at once, you'll be copying no game.
)*Problems:
1.) Most weapons are useless. So far the Nex and Rocket Launcher are the most damaging and most functional. Anything else is cumbersome, WAY too short range, WAY too slow firing rate (especially for the low damage), low accuracy, and low damage. They also don't have any "specific" purpose, meaning that a missile launcher is specifically for taking out vehicles at some range, but I don't think any weapon meets that purpose atm, for example. Of course, there are anti-ground vehicle missile launchers and anti-air vehicle missile launchers. There need to be more "specialized" weapons instead of "generalized" or "all-purpose" weapons. Even Red Eclipse has some nicer and more interesting weapons, such as a sword that actually functions reasonably, and an implosion weapon that sucks nearby enemies into it. There is too much focus on a "spam arena" type game (and that FPS-arena genre has been beaten to death and beyond), and personally I don't see anything special about this one except vehicles. Consider why the quake-based games that have stepped away from the "FPS spam arena" genre are more successful: ET:QW, Tremulous, and Urban Terror (despite being evil, thieving, anti-mod, bastoidly, etc.).
2.) Not enough vehicles and vehicle types. I would say it's about the same as I said for weapons as well: There need to be more "specialized" vehicles instead of "generalized" or "all-purpose" vehicles. Think Command and Conquer: Renegade (C&C:Ren). There were different vehicle classes and each had its own purpose and function in a battle, and amazingly even different per team. Right now, I choose a vehicle because it's closest or because I like the look, not because it has a specific purpose in particular. With larger maps, a troop mass-transport seems useful. Tanks and anti-vehicle vehicles (MRLS and Tunguska) also seem relevant to add.
*Game-Models and specific items to focus on:
-Tribes 2: Particularly the mod aspects (I can help out on some of the older ones that are now gone), but at least the basis. The mods had tons more than the basic, so I don't think you can get into too much trouble copying some aspects of mods. Classes, auto-recharging jetpacks, chosen weapons, deployables, special packs, etc. In the mods, vehicle modules (equipping vehicles), deployable teleports, deployable turrets, deployable bases, deployable forcefields, etc. Note that you can play it free now, for those not that familiar with it ... although it's developed into something of a vicious monster due to the loss of good and nice players ... I recommend trying the mods, for better people and ideas. Vehicles and turrets especially in the basic game, designed for long-range combat.
-Battlefield 2142: Anti-vehicle rifle and magnetic anti-vehicle mines, as well as short-range EMP grenades (would be nice to stop the spawn-killing spam of the walkers ... I think it's been suggested in the vehicles post). Some of the vehicles would be nice too, especially troop transports. I've noticed united assaults seem to be pretty effective, so a way to transport a greater number of people at once may help, particularly in these larger maps that seem ridiculous to walk across (jet-pack maybe, but not walk).
-Command and Conquer Renegade: Honestly, Xonotic already seems pretty close to it, except for the specific destroyable buildings. The flying vehicles already match mostly. The weapons are kind of similar, but again, C&C:Ren had more functional weapons. Map sizes and even looks match as well. Just need some multiple classes of tanks and MRLS.
-Savage: You may be thinking "wait! that's an RTS" but actually it's an FPS, Hack and Slash, and RTS all rolled into one. Sadly, it's closed-source and very buggy (Savage 2 is worse on that aspect). Adding an RTS aspect to Xonotic would add a whole new level of gameplay, with commanders, sub-commanders, captains and squads. You wouldn't always need all of that always, just if it seems like some organization would help. Heck, it would be cool to play Xonotic entirely as an RTS, commanding bots (and players if willing) to certain tasks and roles (defense, offense, repair, vehicles, etc.). Of course, this leads to C&C RTS games, which I wont mention more than this.
*Possible Limitations (mainly efficient performance issues):
-So far, player limits have been pretty low on servers. Tribes 2 used to host 64 and even 128 players per server, at one time, with only little and rare lag if all players were on broadband. Can anything host that many at once on Xonotic? I suppose it's not much to worry about anytime too soon. Just the number of interacting players may lead to issues.
-System requirements: I have to compare Xonotic to Savage 2's system requirements, because it really uses about the same RAM -> it can use up to a full 2 GB RAM, if not more. This seems like a potential problem, but lowering system requirements should suffice for most.
-Large maps that need to use fog. With vehicles come larger maps, which can only so far be done with fog. Even with fog, it can sometimes be laggy. Can fog ranges be changes to allow for better performance? Will these be problems in the future? Do some vehicles need faster speeds (walker) to get to the enemy bases, or should it be left to mainly stay as a defensive tool, or is it enough?
*Again, I'm not saying copy; I'm saying to try out the concepts ... concepts not graphics, not anything specific, just the ideas and concepts that anyone can try and many that have been tried before (even in quake-based games from what I've read). What is there to lose by adding features? From them, and in combination especially, a very unique game can be made. Maybe they should be options instead of full-fledged, integrated features. At the very least, if these game-models don't fit anyone's intent for Xonotic, someone could try going for these as mods.
RE: Game-models to try for? - Majki - 06-28-2012
FYI
Xonotic is voluntary, Open Source project
it's currently at version 0.6 - that means 60% of planned features have been implemented so far
RE: Game-models to try for? - rafallus - 06-28-2012
I take it you write 1) in context of vehicle play.
FYI, weapon balance is to undergo some major changes. And vehicles themselves are subject to quite a few changes recently.
RE: Game-models to try for? - hutty - 06-28-2012
ok ... a couple things ...
1 ... having rocket and nex better than everything is an old nexuiz problem ... that ... from my point of view HAS BEEN FIXED ... for example ... have you even seen the crylink? (primary fire) ... that thing does a mad amount of damage ... and distance doesn't matter much because movement is so fast... also ... the HLAC has a good refire rate (but its not on very many maps)
2 ... be happy we even have vehicles ... they are very new and have been getting improvements in the passed few weeks actually ...
3 ... as for big servers ... that is all up to the server hoster ... get a big enough map ... a strong enough server ... ad 128 players (hardest part) and you can have you 128 player server...
RE: Game-models to try for? - MajorYokoyurik0 - 06-29-2012
Well, that's just it. 60% of the way, and already there are some problems. I'll go ahead and wait to see how it ends up at completion before trying to push for changes, but I certainly hope rebalancing works. I understand it's open-source, and I support open-source more than you, likely. The problem is the design-thought associated with open-source games, especially quake based. It's as if, when the quake engines were released open-source, something akin to the following conversation occurred:
A: "WOW! Awesome! Now it's all free and open! Now we can develop everything we could ever want!"
B: "Yeah! So damn cool! But wait ... what do we make?"
A: "Oh .... ummmm .... how about something different from any paid games, just to show we're different! That we don't squeeze the money out of people with crappy games that can't be modded usually! That we can make a better-looking game with better gameplay than any of theirs combined!"
B: "Awesome dude! So .... like what?"
A: "Ummmmm .................................. since quake is now open-source, and already different by being an arena game, lets just make that! Just everything better! And then an even better arena game!"
B: "Sweet! Quake arena forever, dude!"
A: "Forever, man."
I have yet to see anything straying from this idea, in all the years since, except for the few ones I mentioned. And again, they were successful compared to the arena games. Xonotic has the graphics, the resources, the licensing, and the setup to become big. I want an answer (yes, from you the reader): Why in the world is just another quake spam arena being made instead? WHY? Thank about what you do: just bounce around at top speed and spam the most damaging weapon you can find. No strategy, no tactics, no choices, no plan, no setup, no nothing. This is NOT the design of a game; It's a free-for-all that just happened within a sandbox area (you put players in an random area, give them weapons at random, people inevitably start using them against each other => you got quake).
Sure, offer quake spam arena, as a game mode like CTF, but if you're gonna rely on that for the whole game, you shouldn't expect the game to last too long. Nexuiz had its time, and that's mostly faded. It's about time for something more, NOT more of the same.
As for the weapons, yes, I have seen the crylink (the rocket launcher problem I think was an old quake problem overall from what I remember). The firing area is very wide horizontally that expands over distance, but the damage is low, as is the range considering the growing spread, and considering your opponent is not a walking pancake, it's questionable whether even a single shot will hit an opponent. The projectile speed is also relatively low. In essence, you have something close to the UT2k4 Scorpion's green energy bola, only much less damage, and no sticking. It is slightly faster I think, but again, the fire spreads and is too low damage past a distance of less than 100 feet. I think primary fire is meant for a flying pancake, maybe something like a UFO, of course on the broad-side only.
The fact that you can contract the projectiles at will really doesn't change anything, especially since everybody is basically a cyclops (no binocular vision to tell distance, and when to contract the shots). Honestly, I too believed it was awesome at the beginning, but it just didn't work. It's very difficult to actually kill anything with it unless you're within a few feet of it, and even then, the fire spread hinders you. I can aim incredibly well, so I'm guessing the intent is to help those who can't or who lag (not that it can really help in lag either).
The HLAC, is actually pretty good, although accuracy drops to almost nil after only a few hundred feet. I've had problems hitting even at close range at times, although it's still pretty good. Overall, I'd still usually use the Nex over that, particularly on larger maps, considering the limited mobility. Again, Tribes 2 solved the mobility problem associated with faster vehicles and longer ranges by allowing limited jetpacks that recharge over time, and skiing/sliding down slopes. The terrain usually was hilly so that you jet up a hill and then slide down the other while the jet pack recharges enough for the next hill, with plenty of momentum helping.
I am very happy and glad there are vehicles, and they're relatively well balanced against each other. Although, I have yet to find a way to effectively stop a rapidly moving speeder with any other vehicle than another speeder (and difficult at that). Other than that, I love the walker. It has vertical-viewing limitations, but they can pretty easily be overcome by a small inclination, and again, it might need grappling hooks to climb with, or something, so it can speed up. The flyer, just maybe a little slow sometimes (might need a speed boost to catch the speeders).
Glad to hear about the server capabilities.
I can go in-depth into any of the items and weapons, as well as the vehicles, I just didn't mention them specifically to keep it short (yes, what you see is very short). I'm asking for change for the better. Let's go ahead and see if some of the changes planned pan out, but I really hope they're not for another arena.
RE: Game-models to try for? - _Subzero_ - 06-29-2012
@MajorYokoyurik0
Xonotic didn't came out of nowhere. Devs and old player base are mostly folks fond of arena shooter. Where manual skills, learnt reflexes and intuitive gaming matters most. So don't expect this project to suddenly become something it wasn't meant to be.
If you are mainly into strategy, tactics, choices, plan and setup, there are dozens titles out there to enjoy.
RE: Game-models to try for? - rafallus - 06-29-2012
Quote:60% of the way, and already there are some problems.
I absolutely hate that attitude.
Guess what? Every single goddamned piece of software on Earth has some problems. Most, if not all of them, of them leave some problems even AFTER they are released - and we're talking about commercial stuff no less - think of games with budget to spend, where devs are paid to do their job, yet plenty of problems get pushed for patching later. Ever heard, how bad Diablo III launch was with dreaded Error 37 messages? We're not talking about some little free indie game here - we're talking about sth akin to blockbuster of a gaming world.
What were you expecting? Perfection @60%? If it was perfection already, why even bother with the rest FFS? And if you think there are problems, contribute! Send some bug report, create some media, if you can. And don't just whine "OMG, there are problems @60% down the road!!!!1!1!!1!1!one"
Quote:As for the weapons, yes, I have seen the crylink (the rocket launcher problem I think was an old quake problem overall from what I remember). The firing area is very wide horizontally that expands over distance, but the damage is low,
You think crylink damage is low? LOL. You can one hit kill (or almost) a guy with well focused shot. HINT: hold down fire and release just before hitting the enemy for particles to focus. This is not a shotgun incarnate, this is a skillshot weapon.
Quote:No strategy, no tactics, no choices, no plan, no setup, no nothing.
Guess what, screw all I wrote earlier. I vote for a troll cave.
RE: Game-models to try for? - K__ - 06-29-2012
1. RL are meant to be OP, nexrifle too. You have to learn the movement so you can be the first to pick it up. The other guns are for certain purposes. For example, mortar you can spam while your on the run. electro perfect in tight corridors etc.
2. Vehicles are new and constantly under development, it's already one of the most popular modes in xonotic so why change it?
3. If you want more strategic gameplay become good at CTF, I dont mean playing CTF pubs all day and getting nr 1 all the time i mean really good, play pickup matches, join a clan/team and use VoIP and text messages. If you play CTF more competive and in-depth you will relize that its a mode that got classes, commanders etc. loads of tactiv in there.
BTW: i know you just a big fat troll who think you know more than you do ^^ enjoy your trolling
RE: Game-models to try for? - CuBe0wL - 06-29-2012
Everybody - let's not be hostile!
RE: Game-models to try for? - PinkRobot - 06-29-2012
I second that. There are probably some valid points worth discussing, even though in my opinion they could have been brought up with a little less force.
RE: Game-models to try for? - K__ - 06-29-2012
Well the core idea is good, take insperation from other games, but the way he presents it and discuss it? No.
RE: Game-models to try for? - hutty - 06-29-2012
1 -- the HLAC's accuracy can be greatly increased by ducking while shooting
2 -- There are other game-modes that have much more strategy ... like ONS ad Assault ... we just need people to make maps for them
RE: Game-models to try for? - MajorYokoyurik0 - 06-29-2012
Ugh ... so now any argument (as in discussion) for any point defines a troll ... Can anyone even clearly define a troll anymore, or is it anyone that pisses anyone else off for any reason? Maybe it's the CAPS, as I use them for emphasis like italics, but italics are less visible. I never yell ... it's not worth the effort or bother. Exclamation marks are supposed be yelling more than CAPS.
@rafallus: All the answers to your comments are in the previous post I made. It seems like you did not read it, or not very well. I don't know if superficiality qualifies as trolling, but I encounter it a lot (I'm not kidding), especially from angry people that don't know how to discuss anything and like calling others trolls. If I was really trolling, I would be be very blunt and not discuss things so much and so thoroughly. Problems @60% not in the sense of bugs, but in the sense that the game is heading toward the wrong direction, in my opinion based on observation and experience of other games in the genre, and I argue toward the point of changing that direction.
@K__: Some of the same applies to you. I discuss it in this way because I'd like people to understand how essential it is to NOT make yet another quake arena type game. I have seen many fall for not understanding what's missing. I'm trying to point out what's missing early on, so maybe someone's lightbulb will go on and say "Hey you know he's right. That game was successful." and in the hope that someone will ask "Why exactly was it successful, while so many others died out so quick?" I mentioned such games. What have I said that is inadequate and/or inaccurate? I tried to cite examples as much as possible.
It sounds so forceful because I was straining to stop myself from saying that I got bored with Nexuiz in about a week or two. The original Nexuiz presented nothing really new or interesting compared to any other quake arena game (especially prior ones). Improving graphics or changing them is NOT enough. It does not improve the gameplay. I did not like it. I never really liked any spam arenas. I gained better "manual skills, learnt reflexes and intuitive gaming" from the strategic and tactical games that I mentioned than I could ever from quake arena type games. Arena games are less than what they could be. Tactical and strategic games ARE the arena games, PLUS other features to add new types and levels of play, often ones that take more planning and experience, not only good skills and reflexes (already obviously necessary to play them).
In essence, you can think of it as a progressive evolution of games and features, over time, due to "natural selection" (what works survives, despite being ugly, wrong, silly, mad, etc.). In general, here's a mini-outline for FPS game features:
Single weapon -> Single level of play -> Multiple random weapons -> Multiple levels of play (underground, side-routes, ladders, platforms, etc.) -> Basic Packs (health, armor, ammo) -> Armor Classes (light, heavy) -> Start-up selectable weapons -> Player Classes (sniper, assault, etc.) -> Specific items, packs, and deployables for each (selectable; mines, forcefields, sensors, cloaking, etc.) -> Basic transport (elevators, moving platforms) -> Short-Range Vehicles -> Short-Range Anti-Vehicle Weapons -> Bigger Maps -> Chain of Command (to manage ppl and resources on such large maps) -> Long-Range Vehicles (Multi-personnel transport, faster vehicles, etc.) -> Long-Range Anti-Vehicle Weapons -> Advanced player mobility (Jet Packs, sliding, hoverboards, etc.) -> ???
Yes, there are many games that have picked only certain aspects from this chain of features. They could have done better with the ones they lacked.
The way I see it, things become more specialized and selective, with more choices, allowing you to define your own success based on your own decisions as well as others' decisions. I am suggesting to move away from the "arena" aspect of gameplay because they have reduced success over time, especially more recently. There are already plenty arena games, why make another? Vehicles do NOT fit nicely into an arena type game with a random chance to get a good anti-vehicle weapon (short-range at that usually). Vehicles DO fit nicely into other types of FPS games (particularly ones where you can choose your weapon at start), and have very great success. Non-arena type games have had great success commercially and even as FOSS games, particularly ones with vehicles and ones that have progressed to the latter half of the "mini-outline for FPS game features". UT2k4 was not really an arena-type game, even though you often didn't have a much of a pick of weapons (many maps, especially later ones, made full inventory pickups at the spawn area, and earlier maps had multi-weapon pickup lockers near bases).
My overall suggestion: "Stop with the arena. Keep going even farther with the non-arena."
I was explaining how and particular details of how and which ways to go toward. Of course, it's necessary to explain why it's a bad idea to continue with the arena type considering the limited fan-base that exists for arena games, in the modern age of games. Understand that because of the vehicles, the game is already drawing people from many other fan-bases. Featuring all the vehicles and giant maps in images and videos, on the front page and many gaming sites (linux and otherwise) would draw even more of them. They would ALSO not be so much for arena-type games considering they come from other fan-bases.
P.S. Is it just me or is it that people have gotten more stubborn and more prone to yelling over time, where a discussion automatically becomes an enraged argument? I see it in most forums nowadays.
RE: Game-models to try for? - K__ - 06-29-2012
Well many ppl are now searching for new arena games actually. QL is a great example, it got thousends of players but it is now dying. I think we should focus to enlight these ppl about Xonotic, someone with good reputation in the QL community could do a post on their forum. I also know another problem. Telling about the nexuiz fork and all that strongly confuse ppl. IMO we should not be the next nexuiz we should just be Xonotic and make Xonotic uniqe.
Sorry for being rude before, some of your points are good and if you were the project manager we would get a great game, but we would not get Xonotic, we would get a more slow-past tactic based game I believe.
RE: Game-models to try for? - rafallus - 06-29-2012
Quote:Stop with the arena. Keep going even farther with the non-arena.
NO.
You want vehicles? Fine by me. By all means, keep giving feedback in what direction should vehicle part go.
But hands off arena part. You don't like it? Then don't play it. Just like I don't play vehicles, because I genuinely don't like them. There is already a [MoN] vehicle server for you - and it's heavily populared one too, so you shouldn't complain about not having anyone to play vehicle stuff with. And if you have problems with specific parts of vehicular gameplay, go ahead and tell it, or contribute more actively, if you can.
I don't have a problem with people playing vehicles - their choice. But nothing gives them right to say arena part should be abandoned, period. That would be absolutely awesome... if your goal was to alienate decent part of a player base.
Hopefully that will be clear enough for you now.
Quote:P.S. Is it just me or is it that people have gotten more stubborn and more prone to yelling over time, where a discussion automatically becomes an enraged argument? I see it in most forums nowadays.
Pot. Kettle. Black.
RE: Game-models to try for? - Majki - 06-29-2012
Quote:Stop with the arena. Keep going even farther with the non-arena.
Xonotic is more or less like Unreal2004. You have typical "small" gamemodes, designed for "arena shooting" - like TDM, CTF, CA. Those gamemodes require "arenas".
But on the other hand, Xonotic devs have prepared guts for "bigger" gamemodes, like VCTF, Onslaught, Assault. With time, Xonotic community will learn how to make levels for those "bigger" gamemodes.
In the end, in the 1.0 Relase, players will have 2:1 - Quake (arenas) + Unreal (big maps with vehicles).
So throwing away what's OPTIONAL is like throwing out the baby with the bath water.
![[Image: qvww0.gif]](http://i.imgur.com/qvww0.gif)
RE: Game-models to try for? - rocknroll237 - 06-29-2012
Quote:throwing baby with a water.
This made me laugh inside...
RE: Game-models to try for? - Halogene - 06-29-2012
(06-29-2012, 11:12 AM)MajorYokoyurik0 Wrote: P.S. Is it just me or is it that people have gotten more stubborn and more prone to yelling over time, where a discussion automatically becomes an enraged argument? I see it in most forums nowadays.
I think we all have gotten more stubborn over time and are having a hard time accepting that others like what we don't, except maybe for you who, fortunately, presents your opinions so much in a open-minded way that leaves room for alternative thoughts.
While some of your points may be valid, I allow myself to refuse most stubbornly to give up my affinity to arena style gameplay.
RE: Game-models to try for? - Mr. Bougo - 06-29-2012
Honest question there: I have to wonder why you're targeting Xonotic from not being X while leaving alone every other opensource shooter that isn't X either. Is Xonotic the closest project to your ideal game?
EDIT: I guess that's why some people might think you're a troll, too.
RE: Game-models to try for? - Majki - 06-29-2012
@Mr. Bougo
Good point - I guess some ppl must blame cat for not being dog.
RE: Game-models to try for? - PinkRobot - 06-30-2012
Quote:Stop with the arena. Keep going even farther with the non-arena.
As a counter statement I request that Arena gameplay and its maps, vehicles, Domination, Keyhunt, Overkill, Nexball, mutually inexclusive gameplay and the f&#king tuba are all to be removed. All I personally need is CTS, so there is no reason for you to need anything else either
RE: Game-models to try for? - tZork - 06-30-2012
Meh all I need is coding and modeling. So lets do away with playing altogether. Lets not forget that's finally fix *all* balance issues! xD
RE: Game-models to try for? - K__ - 06-30-2012
Va menar do?
RE: Game-models to try for? - tZork - 06-30-2012
I mean that i could not help myself from joining in on the sarcasm. scnr.
RE: Game-models to try for? - K__ - 06-30-2012
AA okey