795
submitted 2 months ago by simple@lemm.ee to c/gaming@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip 161 points 2 months ago

I hate bullet sponges in FPS especially. Really makes your guns feel stupid when you shoot someone a dozen times in the head and it doesn't do much.

[-] OhNoMoreLemmy@lemmy.ml 84 points 2 months ago

I remember playing Max Payne. There was some battle in a bar against a guy with a shotgun. If you timed it right between reloads you could run up to the guy, stand on the bar so your guns were exactly level with his face and empty two Uzi clips point blank into his face before he could reload.

Then you would run out of ammo and he would one shot kill you.

[-] GeneralEmergency@lemmy.world 14 points 2 months ago

It's bad that I know the exact guy you're talking about.

[-] blazeknave@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

Iirc you had to watch the death in slow Mo and wait forever to play?

[-] Funwayguy@lemmy.world 31 points 2 months ago

This plus constantly running out of ammo because apparently the inside of every enemy skull is just hammerspace for more ammunition than the US military budget could ever afford. God forbid a stray shot hits your porcelain character, Thanos snapping you to dust at so much as a stubbed toe.

[-] DaddleDew@lemmy.world 25 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

The old RainbowSix games (pre-Vegas) were absolutely brutal in difficulty. Enemies died in one or two shots, depending on what part you hit. Even a non-mortal wound would cripple them permanently. But the same rules applied to you.

[-] pyre@lemmy.world 12 points 2 months ago

the only real R6 games. when everyone was raving about Vegas i was excited to play it and... the intro mission was just a shooter level... i thought ok this is the intro to basic combat... then there was the next mission and no planning section there either. i was puzzled. i closed the game and went on some forum i don't remember and asked whether i did something that made the game skip the one thing that set the series apart... nope. it doesn't exist!

from the people who made a heroes game without the town screen, introducing a rainbow six game without planning! i cannot believe reviews i saw weren't screaming that about the game.

fuck Ubisoft so much. who needs AI in games when we have Ubisoft the ultimate slop machine.

[-] DaddleDew@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I never really cared for the planning myself but Vegas ruined it for my by introducing that stupid cover system to make it like Gears of War which was popular at the time. They completely removed the ability to lean. You couldn't properly peek around a corner to take a shot without almost fully exposing yourself anymore. This meant you couldn't avoid absorbing bullets all the time. This made the game unplayable so to counterbalance that, they've added regenerating health. But then it became too easy so they kept putting you in tactically completely unfair positions against hordes of extremely aggressive enemies that can see you and shoot you through walls. They also had a lot of visually busy environments where the enemies are difficult to spot even when they're shooting at you because the sound mixing was so botched up that often you couldn't even tell when you were being shot at.

They turned it into a mindless arcade shooter where you constantly absorb bullets like it's normal and fight a whole army on your own. I wouldn't be surprised if all of this is because some Corporate dipshit forced the inclusion of that cover system because Gears of War made money.

[-] pyre@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

it's mind boggling that it was so well received. 8s and 9s flying for the most forgettable hodgepodge.

it's ok if you don't like the planning but that was what made R6 what it was. you could just go in guns blazing and try to improvise but that wasn't what the game was about. meticulously planning an infiltration, executing it in real time, communicating and coordinating with bots, and seeing all of it work out at the end was a uniquely satisfying experience that no other game provided, and made you feel like a tactical genius.

the tactical depth of Vegas was boiled down entirely to "go here" commands. tactical shooter gameplay was better implemented by games like mass effect 1 which wasn't even primarily a shooter, let alone a tactical shooter.

[-] FlihpFlorp@lemm.ee 2 points 2 months ago

I love this game because it feels like the game is actually playing by rules

Yeah you can cripple someone by shooting their legs, reduce accuracy by shooting arms, or go for a good ol headshot. You can really feel like a tactical badass. Oh by the way same goes for you

It just makes me really happy seeing that

Ofc in practice I am horrible so that sometimes undoes all my excitement

[-] Geth@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 2 months ago

I remember the hype around the division, it looked so cool and tactical. Then the game came out and every enemy was a bullet sponge. Instantly killed any interest I had in it.

[-] tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip 4 points 2 months ago

Minus the pre release hype, this was how I felt about shadow warrior 2. The first one was so good with the retro updated FPS feel, and even made your starting sword relevant throughout the game. Then 2 came out and it was a bullet spongey, bad craft system crapfest. I didn't even make it a couple hours after the dozens I spent in the first.

[-] conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works 11 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

IMO what it should do is:

A) Increase damage falloff. For precision guns that means non precision shots do less. For short range weapons that means the penalty for working outside the effective range is higher.

B) Add more enemies. Especially if there's any stealth element, you close windows and change how you approach encounters.

C) Depending on the game, increase the range enemies respond at. If that's sound based, they have better hearing. If it's enemies calling for help when alerted, they get assistance/raise alert levels from longer range.

Perfect play should be comparable. Mistakes should be punished harder.

[-] brygphilomena@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago
  • Enemies should have more moves, particularly bosses.
  • Enemies should use more cover.
  • Enemies coordinate better.
[-] conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I also agree with all that. That takes more work though.

Bullet sponges are usually companies who can't be bothered, so I focused on the low cost options. But IMO you should be building for high difficulty, then simplifying by inverting the things I suggested and your removing moves/exposing themselves more, actually slowing movement speed and animations, etc, to make encounters more forgiving at lower levels.

I think even after cutting down, easier difficulties can tell the game is better crafted that way.

[-] Maestro@fedia.io 9 points 2 months ago

Fallout 4 is the worst with this. I never found nished the game because of that. Multiple nukes square in the face of a supermutant and he's just at half health? I ain't got time for that.

[-] teft@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

Meanwhile i finished FO4 on hardest difficulty with just the Deliverer. 2 or 3 shots to the dome in VATS gets shit done. But i agree the difficulty is weird in that game. God Of War is pretty bad for this too.

[-] where_am_i@sh.itjust.works 7 points 2 months ago

The only game that did the difficulty right was doom eternal

[-] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 7 points 2 months ago

All the Dooms got it right. More monsters.

[-] where_am_i@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 months ago

No, no, it's literally about pathing, aggressiveness, rate of shooting and special abilities, and of the enemy macro.

The extra damage on a higher difficulty is almost not worth mentioning.

[-] tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip 5 points 2 months ago

I'll not cotton any slander against Doom of any stripe, be it I, II, Final, TNT, Plutonia, or 2016. (Note that we don't talk about Doom 3 round these parts.)

[-] SynopsisTantilize@lemm.ee 4 points 2 months ago

There was a doom3? You mean doom64?

[-] knatschus@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 2 months ago

Yes there was a doom 3 in the early 00s. It was atleast a good game great graphics fun gameplay etc. But it was more like a horror shooter instead of an action shooter like the other dooms

[-] SynopsisTantilize@lemm.ee 3 points 2 months ago

Did you read the comment above mine?

[-] knatschus@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 2 months ago

Yes and I'm against gatekeeping and used the opportunity to write a bit about Doom 3

[-] MutilationWave@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

I liked doom 3. But I liked the games after that much more.

[-] SynopsisTantilize@lemm.ee 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

It was a joke on mine and the other guy. We don't like doom 3 so we excluded it from the party.

Doom 3 is ass.

[-] Quetzalcutlass@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

Metro also comes to mind. The highest difficulty level made both you and the enemies squishier, while also making ammo (which doubled as currency) much rarer. It played so much better that the community even recommended that difficulty level to complete newcomers.

... And then they made the Ranger difficulty a paid DLC in the sequel...

[-] dQw4w9WgXcQ@lemm.ee 6 points 2 months ago

Borderlands 3 (don't know about the others) had a brutal postgame of this. Even though new difficulty stuff was added, the real challenge seemed to be collecting enough ammo to actually finish fights. At some point, the sponginess was too much for me to care about continuing.

[-] tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 months ago

The BL series just got worse and worse for sponginess as it continued.

[-] umbrella@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 months ago

big disappointment with cyberpunk because of this.

fallout games comes to mind too.

[-] Psythik@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

Everything about Cyberpunk was a big disappointment. The entire game is a glorified tech demo to show off your $1800 GPU. Which is ironic because it somehow manages to still have mediocre graphics, despite using all the latest path tracing tech to its fullest. RDR 2 looks more realistic than Cyberpunk, and it doesn't use RT at all!

this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2024
795 points (98.9% liked)

Gaming

3127 readers
44 users here now

!gaming is a community for gaming noobs through gaming aficionados. Unlike !games, we don’t take ourselves quite as serious. Shitposts and memes are welcome.

Our Rules:

1. Keep it civil.


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only.


2. No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia or any other flavor of bigotry.


I should not need to explain this one.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Try not to repost anything posted within the past month.


Beyond that, go for it. Not everyone is on every site all the time.



Logo uses joystick by liftarn

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS