If any of you have played halo 3 you will know what I am talking about. You can turn on a scoring mode that tallies points for special kills and basicallly kicking ass. How about adding some kind of mode that you can turn on in the lobby, that adds points for every kill, objective, defense you neutralize, every merc you neutralize. This wouldn't affect the gameplay but it would be fun to compare high scores and such.
Of course it wouldn't be like flashing on your screen saying " OMG YOU GOT A KILL!! 100 POINTS!! " It would just be a small number on your HUD so it doesn't get so distracting. It would give you extra points for linking together such things like: Grabbing Merc + Taking Objective, or Put Merc To Sleep + Capturing Disc + Bombing Tech Room, etc... Your score of course would go down a few points when you die. Maybe there would be multipiers for last second objective taking? For mercs possibly it would add points for shooting/killing/charging/berserking/headshotting spies.
Anyone else think that this would be cool? I think it would be cool if it kept track of your best combos that you could brag about later on. Possibly it could keep your high scores for certain maps/gametypes in a folder, then you could admire them or compare your scores with friends. This would be an UP on the fun factor. Plus it would add some more things to work for other than just your rank.
Here is a pic with an example of how this could work, maybe with even smaller text. When the ledge grab is done, the " Ledge Grab + 200 " thing would fade away and be off your HUD. Again, I am trying to make it low profile so the nay sayers wouldn't care. Remember, you can always personally turn this feature off for yourself.
(https://community.projectstealthgame.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fxs320.xs.to%2Fxs320%2F07424%2Fscore.png&hash=cdd54fc74d91e7214501de3b340e37af68ea4262)
Again, this isn't Tony Hawk Pro Skater or anything, just a small addition that you can look back and remember things you did. This would be a nice to have feature.
This is the cheesy and gimmicky stuff I've never been into. Sorry Papa, I know you're an Xbox player and you're used to "achievements" and "points" but it....well.....sucks :P Just silly to put into our game in my opinion.
I don't know for sure but it doesn't seem like it would be all that hard to do though. Even if it was just a stat tracker and saved locally on your computer it might be an interesting feature. It could just keep track of how many necks, objectives or kills you got during a game. Like you said, the player could choose to enable stat tracking or disable it. Already normally with versus the game shows the results at the end of the match. It doesn't seem like it would be hard to just record those to a text file.
Yeah I forgot to mention that, a stat tracker as well as points.
NO. this game is not about about grabs and other fancy stuff, it's about teamwork, adaption, recon, tactics etc. a stat tracker will only be enjoyed by stupid dm or console kids, and i don't want to attract those people at all.
Quote from: Gawain on October 18, 2007, 09:11:05 AM
NO.
QFE
I HATE scoring systems. It prevents people from having fun, and makes them focus too much on getting the best score. You say that it can be turned off, but people without it may be looked at as "noobs" and won't be allowed into games.
Nay, I say!
i vote NO
Quote from: Gawain on October 18, 2007, 09:11:05 AM
NO. this game is not about about grabs and other fancy stuff, it's about teamwork, adaption, recon, tactics etc. a stat tracker will only be enjoyed by stupid dm or console kids, and i don't want to attract those people at all.
Agree. This game is too serious for things like this
Look, you can turn it off. What about getting points for teamwork, recon, and tactics as well? Say you revive your teammate, spot mercs with cams, get through games w/o losing lives or getting shot. And the only way you can get a good score is by focusing on the game and doing welll.
I don't see why you guys wouldn't want something you can look back at and go: Wow! I have taken the Lunch Room objective 84 times! Or - I have knocked 489 mercs unconscience with sticky cams!
Personally, I love stat trackers. People won't focus on their score, the only way you can get a high score is if you focus on the game, help your teammate, and do well. It isn't like you get points for jumping on a box or railing and staying there for a long time.
papa, what's the use of a scoring system like this? it gives you absolutely no information that would help you to improve or help other players to see your skill level.
The use is that it's cool. It does help other players see your skill level. Look at its success on Halo 3! Everyone is always checking their stats, scores, medals and bragging about them. It is fun and it makes it more social.
Quote from: Gawain on October 18, 2007, 09:11:05 AM
NO. this game is not about about grabs and other fancy stuff, it's about teamwork, adaption, recon, tactics etc. a stat tracker will only be enjoyed by stupid dm or console kids, and i don't want to attract those people at all.
Yeah, you're telling me.
Last thing we need is a flashing "HEAD SHOT +100 points!!" thing on the screen.
halo 3 is something totally different.
if you want to implement a sophisticated system like in bf2/2142 it's ok, but the time this would take to program would much better be invested in a fair replay system and hunting bugs - or simply enjoying to play the game without stupid points meant to boost the ego of low skilled players like papa skull (no offence just fact).
Might be ok for Death Match. But that's not even certain.
I vote NO.
Ok a scoring system is one thing but a stat tracker is another. We had a stat tracker for versus for years that allot of people uesd. What is wrong with that?
A stat tracker would be nice. I've always wanted one because it'd be fun to know just how many mines i've run into. Being able too see that kind of stat, might make you. Hmm, this guy runs into a lot of mines. Or hmm, this guy has 2200 headshots. I better be careful, he'll snipe me. Or avg. Vision time per game. 98% in MT eh? This guys a motion whore.
Thus the stat tracker helps determine strategy.
Exactly daybreak. A way it would help you is if it told you how many times you were detected on EMF. This would help you realize that you need to be careful when you use visions/gadgets or use them less. wtf invisible man? I already said it wouldn't be that high profile. I said it would be a little number in the corner of your screen so it isn't so distracting, and you can turn it off. Plus points can lower your ego Gawain, if you play bad, you don't get a lot of points. I don't see why you think bad players would use it to boost their ego, when their scores would be bad anyways. And you can turn it off if you don't want it to.
How much programming would it take to make something add a number to your previous number anyways?
To be honest i have to say he is touching something that could be useful.
For tournaments, and other "Elimination" systems this could prove useful to get a winner without having to play 4 ties if two equal teams had a good night.
Not saying that i like the whole points for grabs and such but scoring "points" by doing objectives and maybe set higher risk objectives to a higher score.
Like Station:
If you bomb carpark you will get a bigger amount of points compared to the checkpoint altough its a very risky move since sector two will become HELL/nearly impossible for you.
So grab a big score if you think the game will be a tie anyways or chance on doing the smaller score to complete sector two.
Im just tossing ideas..
What i think CT was missing is a chance of making the game really competitive.
Things like:
- One slot for a observer/referee
- Possible to save replays
Are things i think would increase the chances of making it a competitive game, which i think will result in a bigger community.
There is usually a big skill gap between noobs and non-noobs. This feels like it will bring on lots of games with spies doing nothing than camming, grabbing and intimidating noobs more than they already are.
You would get more points for taking objectives then, rather than killing a merc, which wouldn't get you much points anyways. The faster you get objectives the more points you get, this would keep people from killing off most of the mercs and then taking an objective.
Points and a stat tracker would be for your own personal benefit. Examples:
You learn that you are using visions too much (and you keep getting detected my EMF) so you decide to not use them as much.
You learn that you keep getting killed by mines so you decide to bring chaff and be more careful.
You learn that your enemy has a lot berserk kills so you remember not to try and jump him too often.
Stat trackers would be useful, points would add some fun ( and like Nitro said, determining factors in a tie ).
I wasn't refering to points. What kind of 12 year old would take pride in hacks over cams/necks?
Quote from: Papa Skull on October 18, 2007, 05:10:40 PM
I don't see why you guys wouldn't want something you can look back at and go: Wow! I have taken the Lunch Room objective 84 times! Or - I have knocked 489 mercs unconscience with sticky cams!
Edit: And if it's only points, is that really any different than rank which we all seem to hate?
Yes, because it keeps things ONLY for your pride.
just to be clear. I'm for a stat tracker as I have always been mentioning it.
The points system is gimicky, and is reminicent of rank.
Stats are just stats. Used best for personal use.
EDIT: Overstatement beat me to it as i was typing.
It's absolutely not rank, of course it has some rank aspects, but its more of a detailed list of stats to help you realize what you need to improve on. Or it helps you see who is good at what particular aspect of the game, or what they use a lot etc... If you see that someone uses EMF 84% of the time before the game starts, you kind of have an idea of what you are going up against, and it helps you decide how you are going to play the game.
you are refering to the stats again. And not the point system.
The point system is a level in which opponents can be judged.
"i have 23300 points"
"I have 1000 points"
"HA, i'm better than you."
"no I am"
with stats it's
"dude you're in MT 90% of the time in an average map"
"so your in EMF for 30%"
"and?"
"shit"
Quote from: Papa Skull on October 18, 2007, 05:15:27 PM
The use is that it's cool. It does help other players see your skill level. Look at its success on Halo 3! Everyone is always checking their stats, scores, medals and bragging about them. It is fun and it makes it more social.
Yeah, but you see, its a pc game, not a console one and i would not like to put into the game any things which have something to do with consoles. Look what happenned to DA, thats a game made for consoles.
To make it clear, im not talking about a stattracker.. I am merely talking about points to help determine ties aswell as making the game easier to set up as competitive.
If you where to even consider setting up points its very important to keep the point focus on the correct matters.
Stattracker would show that I almost never bring gasmask on some maps and that would leave all my little plans useless.
Stattracker would show that a person is only using Uzi etc which will create alot arguing in lobby.
So, Stats/rank i am against
Points in order to give comebacks a chance and widen the possibilities i could support if used correctly.
Yes and you get points for completing the correct matters. Capturing tough objectives would be the best way to get a good score. And little multipliers would be grabbing mercs, disabling defenses etc...
No, this is not Tony Hawk's Pro Skater nor is it Halo 3. This isn't an FPS nor is it a sports simulation game. Points are gimmicky and stupid. I don't give a shit if I get +100 pts for rolling through a laser or +500 pts for a headshot or +9000 pts for getting an objective. There are many things that made SvM great, one of those things is the
atmosphere. It was serious, competitive, and fun - it wasn't ruined by some lame aspect to get the kiddies to buy the game. You
kill the atmosphere with this. It's like the DA announcer voice saying "headshot!" To no surprise, DA was a complete failure.
The whole idea of keeping a tally of how many necks, objectives, or whatever you can think of is lame
but better than points. I'll boycott both these ideas, but if one of them were to be included then I rather it be stats than points. Stats are still stupid and
shouldn't be public. Why do you ask? You shouldn't have a 1-up on your opponent. "I see you use MT 90% of the time, now I know your strategy." Whatever happened to the excitement of facing someone
you don't know. I can think of numerous complaints with a public stat system, but I won't list them all. How far are you going to go with the stats? 'This person uses frag grenades 95% of games.' Might as well make item selection public in the lobby, huh? FPS games like Halo 3 list weapon stats because everyone starts the game with the
same weapons.
Quote from: Nitro on October 18, 2007, 10:38:50 PM
Points in order to give comebacks a chance and widen the possibilities i could support if used correctly.
Are you saying that if a team is losing, that they have a better chance of getting more points? Thus winning by total points?
a personal (=non-public) stat tracker is the only thing discussed here that i'm ok with. but to have any use for actually improving oneself, it must be really sophisticated: how many kill with wich weapon on which map in which vision, where triggering the alarm and how often, in which area dying the most/the less, where and how often killed using camo or hiding in the shadows, how often one get's cammed and where, how much of one gadget is used/wasted .....
Stats like Kills/deaths/objectives/time played wouldn't give your opponents an advantage.
Quote from: Spekkio on October 19, 2007, 12:16:27 AM
Stats like Kills/deaths/objectives/time played wouldn't give your opponents an advantage.
Of course they won't, which is fine if you implement this (though still lame and pointless), but multiple people are saying that public stats should be used for a strategic advantage. This is wrong and should not happen.
I agree there. I gotta admit that I'd like a stats system, too (for myself, not to compare to others necessarily).
I'd like to have something like current log file in ct.
I vote no. The point of the game is not to ledge grab, or go out of your way to get a neck, it is about going out there and completing your objective with team work.
I vote no.
Yeah no shit. HOw many times do I have to say you get more points for objectives rather than necks.
See what about the extremely stealthy team where one person always acts as a distraction and missleads the mercs while the other team mate goes in and hacks the objectives. That presents a problem. Not to mention a points system may lead to the decline of the game. Peoplemay begin to think: "Ohhhh! I want some more points before this game is over so instead of taking the objective now I am gonna go and get necks!".
Any type of scoring system just ruins the game when people start to compare themselves. Now a stats system sounds good where only you can see your own stats, no comparing. It would allow people to see their weaknesses. A scoring system only makes people play for the points. I don't need points to tell me how well I did in a game, you know how well you did without points.
Christ some pc gamers have their heads stuck to far up their own asses. In halo 3 points are rarely turned on, you simply do it for fun or if theirs some kid who thinks he's amazing you can see at the end who got what, mine kills etc. Just because this comes from a console game it doesn't mean its non-strategic, noobish and should be disregarded straight away. Some of you should read all the posts before adding comments.
Quote from: psyichic on October 19, 2007, 01:42:18 AM
See what about the extremely stealthy team where one person always acts as a distraction and missleads the mercs while the other team mate goes in and hacks the objectives. That presents a problem. Not to mention a points system may lead to the decline of the game. Peoplemay begin to think: "Ohhhh! I want some more points before this game is over so instead of taking the objective now I am gonna go and get necks!".
Any type of scoring system just ruins the game when people start to compare themselves. Now a stats system sounds good where only you can see your own stats, no comparing. It would allow people to see their weaknesses. A scoring system only makes people play for the points. I don't need points to tell me how well I did in a game, you know how well you did without points.
Couldn't say it better myself.
Quote from: iservealot on October 19, 2007, 12:59:31 AM
I vote no. The point of the game is not to ledge grab, or go out of your way to get a neck, it is about going out there and completing your objective with team work.
I vote no.
Quote from: Papa Skull on October 19, 2007, 01:09:03 AM
Yeah no shit. HOw many times do I have to say you get more points for objectives rather than necks.
How many times will it take for you to realize that the above posters on this page (myself, spekkio, and iservealot) are talking about stats,
not points.
Quote from: Tidenburg on October 19, 2007, 01:48:20 AM
Christ some pc gamers have their heads stuck to far up their own asses. In halo 3 points are rarely turned on, you simply do it for fun or if theirs some kid who thinks he's amazing you can see at the end who got what, mine kills etc. Just because this comes from a console game it doesn't mean its non-strategic, noobish and should be disregarded straight away. Some of you should read all the posts before adding comments.
You're wayyy off, Tindenburg. I stated fair enough reasons why stats/points are lame. Not only that, but you state that "some pc gamers" need to read all the posts before adding comments. Want to give an example? I can label people too, take a look at Papa's posts; he's been repeatedly confused over what are
points and what are
stats. "GEE GOLLY, why can't you xbox players get your heads out of your asses?! /labeling" If you're going to call us out, at least state a reason why. So far your reasoning is that Halo 3, an FPS game, should compare to a Stealth Action Multiplayer Game when it comes to Stats/Points. Care to elaborate? Right now, you're comparing apples to oranges.
When I said "no shit" the guy above me was talking about points, if he wasn't he should've been more clear. I was confused at times about stats/points. It is a little confusing given that the two subjects are rather similar and you guys didn't care to "elaborate" as much as you should have about what you were talking aobut.
I agree with Tidenburg. Although PC games are better than xbox games (online), it doesn't mean that xbox games don't require strategy and skill to play. I have yet to see a hardcore gamer on PC go see if he can own on xbox live, not gonna happen. I have said MULTIPLE times that I wouldn't be good at PC games. A lot of PC players ( not saying all of them ), need to show more respect than just: OMG he plays console he sucks at games!
On topic - I see what you mean about only letting YOU see YOUR own stats. But it should give you stats such as:
How many times you were detected on vision modes.
How many times you were seen on Cam net.
How many times you were spy tracked.
How many times you were killed.
How many times you were killed by certain things (mines, charges, bullets, nades)
How many times you were berserked.
Etc...
All of those things would help you rethink how you play and get better. Like: Oh man, I was detected by motion tracker 6 times last game, I should be a little more careful of when I move.
Quote from: Papa Skull on October 19, 2007, 04:01:55 AM
It is a little confusing given that the two subjects are rather similar and you guys didn't care to "elaborate" as much as you should have about what you were talking aobut.
Quote from: Daybreak on October 18, 2007, 10:31:55 PM
you are refering to the stats again. And not the point system.
The point system is a level in which opponents can be judged.
"i have 23300 points"
"I have 1000 points"
"HA, i'm better than you."
"no I am"
with stats it's
"dude you're in MT 90% of the time in an average map"
"so your in EMF for 30%"
"and?"
"shit"
Points will have the same effect (it's not the same, but it's the same effect) as rank. I'm not sure about personal stats but I sure don't want my partner to go into a game with the mental mindset of getting more cams like what I do in TF2 (which has stats).
Edit: Yes, you get more points from hacking but that won't reduce the number of "N00bs h3r3 or k1ck" ranked servers.
>_< lame... ok im gonna lay this out quickly, Gawain you need to get your head out of the sand and realize that ya there is going to be noobs in the community, People had to start somewhere , not everyone was born a pro, oh and without noobs there would be no source of a learning gap / noobs replace the veterns when they decide to quit and the cycle goes on.
Vega i totally agree with you upon the fact.. that there shouldn't be stats , because as people mentioned before it would take out that factor.. the different level gaps of noob ,rookie or vetern ,
**off topic ** another thing as well is : i know there was a music thread pertaining to sound bytes and what have you.. I hate to compare the 2 games ,but I found back in the days of what made pandora really intense at those few seconds was the Military drum roll style of music , it actually made you feel as you were in trouble or infiltrating and actually got the heart beating really fast.. with Chaos theory maybe once or twice will that ever happen.. but in pandora it was all the time..
sorry off-topic response:
agentX, i'm all for supporting newcomers with a great tutorial and replays of better players/own games to find mistakes/missed opportunities. hell, we could also do commented replays or a tip of the week episode.
but rank, points and public stat system are stuff that would only make n00bs happy. by n00bs i mean people that won't enjoy playing better teams and trying to improve, but rather make up their own silly rules and think of everything better players do as "lame". it's the same people that cannot imagine that playing on competitive level offers so much more, because they won't try new things that could knock over their world view. if you play a game, you should try to win and improve, and if the game's good it'll be fun. playing for fun/points/other bs is just stupid.
about the music: the pandora soundtrack was simply perfect with it's "stealth feeling" and very intense moments. when i was younger, it really got my heartbeat higher.
Quote from: Gawain on October 19, 2007, 12:05:47 AM
a personal (=non-public) stat tracker is the only thing discussed here that i'm ok with. but to have any use for actually improving oneself, it must be really sophisticated: how many kill with wich weapon on which map in which vision, where triggering the alarm and how often, in which area dying the most/the less, where and how often killed using camo or hiding in the shadows, how often one get's cammed and where, how much of one gadget is used/wasted .....
I agree.
Programming things like what you have been killed by is easy... Making a program find out if you are detected is way harder. Although quite easy with MT.
Quote from: Tidenburg on October 19, 2007, 01:48:20 AM
Christ some pc gamers have their heads stuck to far up their own asses. In halo 3 points are rarely turned on, you simply do it for fun or if theirs some kid who thinks he's amazing you can see at the end who got what, mine kills etc. Just because this comes from a console game it doesn't mean its non-strategic, noobish and should be disregarded straight away. Some of you should read all the posts before adding comments.
It's not because it's a console feature PC players automatically hate it, it's because whoever the coders are they're doing it for nothing and setting priorities is what's important. Why bother with the candy floss to the gameplay we don't need. It's a waste of their time and effort that could be spent doing something more productive. A scoring system just sounds like a stupid e-peen thing to me so I vote no.
I don't see what's so bad about making stats public. Just don't include stupid stats like "you're in MT 90% of the time." Who fucking cares?
Quote from: psyichic on October 19, 2007, 01:42:18 AM
See what about the extremely stealthy team where one person always acts as a distraction and missleads the mercs while the other team mate goes in and hacks the objectives. That presents a problem. Not to mention a points system may lead to the decline of the game. Peoplemay begin to think: "Ohhhh! I want some more points before this game is over so instead of taking the objective now I am gonna go and get necks!".
Yeah, there are lots of problems associated with it.
Often times, the guy who runs distraction has the harder job, only he's actually getting less points than the guy who stands there and hacks in safety.
Personal score in general tends to discourage teamwork. Last thing you want is your partner shocking you because he wants to get the hack and the points. Then you may get some people who may quit before the game ends because they don't want their average points per game impacted.
And I'm not even certain what the benefit of a scoring system would be, aside from bragging rights. Lets save scoring system for ladder games, if we ever get that far.
no global scores - per game only.
i am not even going to read this stupid thread....
no scores, period.
BTB. Vega I never mentioned your name once in my post so im not sure why you think i'm talking about you?
I'm a PC gamer, you mentioned "some PC gamers" and didn't clarify. I'm just defending why some of us don't like the idea of a score/stats system.
Quote from: Papa Skull on October 19, 2007, 01:09:03 AM
HOw many times do I have to say you get more points for objectives rather than necks.
I say no, yes it can be implented, yes it will show who are newbies and pro's, but thats not the point. People should just play and experience a player, just as they will have to experience PS in the beginning.
Though, if people really want stats, we could make a personal stats menu, but in no way I am going to let it be shared through the game (unless the team agrees I have too).
For now I would say let it rest and wait for the game to be released.
QuoteThough, if people really want stats, we could make a personal stats menu, but in no way I am going to let it be shared through the game (unless the team agrees I have too).
Would it be that difficult to program stats to be global, and then have an option to "hide stats"?
Quote from: Spekkio on October 24, 2007, 07:33:59 PM
QuoteThough, if people really want stats, we could make a personal stats menu, but in no way I am going to let it be shared through the game (unless the team agrees I have too).
Would it be that difficult to program stats to be global, and then have an option to "hide stats"?
I'm sure I can send like every piece of information to everyone in a server, but I just don't feel like doing it. This will make servers go: "People with good stats only!" or "Bad stats/Hiden = Kick" etc. We (ahum, I) wan't that everyone has to get a change and is treated equal, good or bad. I will probably do a lot not to get this through, unless I really have a good potentional for it.
There are many games out there that supply stats for their players. Never have I seen a server for "good stats only". Let's be reasonable. The only reason statistics shouldn't be included in the game is because there wouldn't be time to implement them. The stats themselves can be simple.
Killed most by:
Weapons killed with:
Weapons died from:
Suicides:
Shots fired:
Terminals hacked:
Necks broken:
Games played:
Kill death ratio as spy:
Kill death ratio as Merc:
We don't even have to advertise that there's stat tracking. That's not what the game is about. So why have it you ask? Because it's fun to look at stats. I say, if there is time to implement it. It should be included. Don't get confused, I am not condoning the scoring system that as others have stated is just as bad as ranking. However as a completely separate and stand alone system Stat Tracking isn't a bad idea at all.
Good post spekkio. And honestly, I do not see how this would be as bad as rank. It is just fun to see what you've accomplished over the time you've played the game really.
Quote from: Daybreak on October 24, 2007, 09:54:37 PM
There are many games out there that supply stats for their players. Never have I seen a server for "good stats only". Let's be reasonable. The only reason statistics shouldn't be included in the game is because there wouldn't be time to implement them. The stats themselves can be simple.
Killed most by:
Weapons killed with:
Weapons died from:
Suicides:
Shots fired:
Terminals hacked:
Necks broken:
Games played:
Kill death ratio as spy:
Kill death ratio as Merc:
We don't even have to advertise that there's stat tracking. That's not what the game is about. So why have it you ask? Because it's fun to look at stats. I say, if there is time to implement it. It should be included. Don't get confused, I am not condoning the scoring system that as others have stated is just as bad as ranking. However as a completely separate and stand alone system Stat Tracking isn't a bad idea at all.
QFE.
And really, a "bad/hidden stats = kik" server just saves me time from joining it.
all these stats are quite pointless as they dont help you improve in any way and also aren't very great to estimate your skill level (except for played games).
I think it should give you stats like:
How many times detected on EMF:
How many times spy tracked:
How many times killed by mine:
How many times Security Laser were set off:
Things like that would help you rethink how you play the game. I have already posted something like this but whatever. If a spy sees that he was detected on EMF a lot, then he will now know that he has to use visions less, and that would improve his game. Ect with all the other examples.
Those stats aren't easy to add.
And the point of stats aren't to estimate skill level. They are stats and unless you are the user you have no idea how they are appointed.
An example is being detected by MT, as I have no idea how you can actually gauge you've been seen in EMF and when you weren't. If i've been seen in MT, or set off the MT, 288 times. You don't know if it's because I've played 200 games, and was only seen once in agame. Maybe i've done well and played 500 games. Or maybe I've play 2 games and just aggro'd the crap outta the merc. You really don't know.
Only the user knows how affective the stats are. That's the beauty about stats, they only tell half the story. With time, you'll see that someone might be a good sniper, or good at killing mines, but it doesn't not reflect skill what so ever. Just how rank doesn't express skill.
i for one am against a scoring system for a stealth game .
but even though i am against it , the idea of recording successes might be a good idea . it could be like an actual government agency or Private Military Corporation's ranking .
you start out as a "private" (for lack of a better , unique name) , you dont miss anything and you dont "rank up" to gain gadgets but the ranking system allows the community to recognize what level you are at .
in CT most of the time the server list was mixed with "pro's only" , "no n00bs" , or "no pro's" ... a filter in your server could allow only players in certain brackets of skill level to join and would allow gamers to avoid the bs of naming servers and restarting servers to clear out players .
How about having thousands of fakes?
Quote from: Papa Skull on October 25, 2007, 03:35:52 PM
I think it should give you stats like:
How many times detected on EMF:
How many times spy tracked:
How many times killed by mine:
How many times Security Laser were set off:
Things like that would help you rethink how you play the game. I have already posted something like this but whatever. If a spy sees that he was detected on EMF a lot, then he will now know that he has to use visions less, and that would improve his game. Ect with all the other examples.
Thank you for providing the list of things "what not to add."
The stats that could/should be added are:
General Stats-Time played (spy/merc/total)
-Average game length (merc/spy/total)
-Games played (spy/merc/total)
-Wins/losses (spy/merc/total)
-Win % (spy/merc/total)
-Kills for merc
-Necks for spy
-Objectives taken for spy
-Suicides (merc/spy/total)
Map Specific Stats-breaks down the above stats by map
Partner specific stats-Breaks down the above stats according to a teammate(s) you enter.
Also either do the stats by CD-key, or allow the player to integrate multiple accounts into a stats page (same goes for partner).
Then allow sort abilities...sort your stats by best map, best side, most kills, whatever.
Allow people to lookup stats, including the above functions, but add an option to hide stats.
And there you have it. Now, if any of that information can be used to gain an unfair advantage on an opponent, I'd love to hear that far-fetched explanation.
nice1
Quote from: InvisibleMan999 on October 18, 2007, 05:26:14 PM
Last thing we need is a flashing "HEAD SHOT +100 points!!" thing on the screen.
That would be a great easter egg if we got the unreal tournament voice going off every now and then "HEADSHOT!"
I can think of nothing more annoying than the Q3/UT voices. I know I got a headshot because my enemy is dead, I do not need a loud annoying voice screaming it at me.
No spekkio, I was telling stats that could be added for only yourself and not for others to see. Letting others see those kinds of stats wouldn't help you now would it? I am talking those stats should be for your eyes only. If you notice that you have been killed by mines a lot, then you should be more careful of mines. It would help you.
Implementing those stats would be nearly impossible.
Quote from: Papa Skull on October 26, 2007, 12:59:11 AM
If you notice that you have been killed by mines a lot, then you should be more careful of mines. It would help you.
You need stats for that?
It should be a good indicator when you blew half your lives in the first 2 minutes running past proxies.
Tell me one good reason why it would be bad if it showed how many times you were detected on EMF. If you look back at a game and wonder how that guy detected you, and it says that you were detected 7 times one EMF, you would know that he used EMF to detect you and kill you. It isn't that easy to tell if you were detected on EMF.
Not it's not. So how do you want us to tell a computer to distiguish the difference between a Merc seeing you in the ceiling versus not seeing you in the ceiling.
In order to track the stat. Something has to occur. For instance, you can track how many times you set off MT because you'd trigger the box animation. However in EMF nothing happens. The merc sees you or he doesn't. It'd be impossible to track.
Plus a lot of the other stuff, really isn't helpful as it is bound to happen and almost necessary. Thus, trying to reduce such stats or improve such stats is not always benificial.
code ?
rofl
Quote from: Daybreak on October 26, 2007, 03:35:34 AM
Not it's not. So how do you want us to tell a computer to distiguish the difference between a Merc seeing you in the ceiling versus not seeing you in the ceiling.
In order to track the stat. Something has to occur. For instance, you can track how many times you set off MT because you'd trigger the box animation. However in EMF nothing happens. The merc sees you or he doesn't. It'd be impossible to track.
Plus a lot of the other stuff, really isn't helpful as it is bound to happen and almost necessary. Thus, trying to reduce such stats or improve such stats is not always benificial.
They did it in SCDA, when you died from EMF it said that you died from it.
LOL really? I can't even begin to think how they would set the difference. Unless they cheated and used some sort of code that if the merc killed you while in EMF vision you were told you were killed by it. But even then...
Anyway, I really didn't think a stat system would have been such a hard sell. The scoring system ya, but stats? really? Com'on.
Well, if you lit up on a merc's screen on EMF then it would count it as you being detected on EMF whether he saw you or not.
Quote from: Daybreak on October 26, 2007, 04:39:43 AM
LOL really? I can't even begin to think how they would set the difference. Unless they cheated and used some sort of code that if the merc killed you while in EMF vision you were told you were killed by it. But even then...
Yeah that's all they did. If you got killed while the merc (or merc's drone) was in EMF, then it just registered as an EMF kill.
There really is no way to tell if you were "detected" by EMF or not, just the merc's state at any one given time.
This is the reason why we don't let X-Box people interfere =/.. . / this isn't street fighter.
prime example .. papa no offense but heres the proof :
http://youtube.com/watch?v=6yehAZkO36A (http://youtube.com/watch?v=6yehAZkO36A)
There are even more pc videos like this.
Quote from: kronf on October 26, 2007, 10:03:49 PM
There are even more pc videos like this.
Yeah, it's not like people on PC don't play deathmatch.
I really don't think PC players are nearly as superior as they think they are. Last I checked the majority of servers on PC are DM too.
That was a fucking retarded post agent. Plenty of PC DM players from what I've heard and seen. No shit this isn't street fighter, neither is halo, but it has a scoring system.
scoring sux. if i am lucky i will get 125 ping at the lowest. high ping does nothing good for scores. where as hosting does everything good for your scores. scores smores dont mean anything to me.
lagggger!
OMGZERS PWNT LYKE TEH HOSTIN NUB U ARGH!!!
DM shows that you're Ub3r L33t.
:-\
Quote from: AgentX_003 on October 26, 2007, 09:55:20 PM
This is the reason why we don't let X-Box people interfere =/.. . / this isn't street fighter.
prime example .. papa no offense but heres the proof :
http://youtube.com/watch?v=6yehAZkO36A (http://youtube.com/watch?v=6yehAZkO36A)
I liek the halo song on the second half (3:42) :P
I still cant imagine playing this game with pad.
Scoring beyond who won the match and kills is an ego/epeen trip. If you want to improve your game don't rely on a scoring system, pay attention to how you have been bested and learn from it.
I'm not sure what the deal is between console and pc players of this game but I have played with a number of people coming over from xbox (Even some using an xbox controler on the PC) and they get wtf pwned. It's not a skill thing it's just simply that the keyboard and mouse prove time and time again to be much more precise faster reacting controls.
It retarded to insult someone because they play on a console. If any one of these PC players had started playing it on a console they would be in the exact same situation.
Quote from: neth on November 01, 2007, 07:37:24 PM
I still cant imagine playing this game with pad.
Actually, I like the console controller for FPS games. While it's clearly inferior to a mouse, that doesn't even matter when everyone is using it.
The nice thing is that it does slow the game down a bit, which tends to equalize lag a bit more. So you've got a bit more time to react to a merc coming around the corner for instance, which reduces host advantage a bit, since you don't get nearly as many lag snipers or sudden host uzi attacks. The little extra time it takes to aim with a controller gives you some time to make a quick dive out of the way.
As odd as it may sound, sometimes inferior controls can improve the game.
Quote from: InvisibleMan999 on November 01, 2007, 09:37:01 PM
As odd as it may sound, sometimes inferior controls can improve the game.
No, that just means that the overal gameplay was too fast-paced or not balanced/targeted.
If inferior controls make something playable, and superior controls dont work out, it's a game design failure.
Ive got nothing against console players im just saying that its hard to play CT on console because:
1. You cant turn back immediatelly when you need it
2. you cant aim precisly
3. You cant move forward with your back to wall
4. As a spy, you cant see whats behind you when you do something, cause its too slow to move the camera
5. PLacing mines is not that precise
6. You cant fast cam
etc.
Well you can do most of those things, but it is just harder to pull of sometimes. Shouldn't that give console players MORE respect? Since moves are HARDER to pull off? Unlike PC where it is easy to do those things? Not trying to start a flamewar or anything but why?
Pulling of those moves on a console is not impossible, the console controls just do not have the ability to perform them with the accuracy and speed of a keyboard and mouse. Console players don't get any more respect because the moves aren't harder per-se, they are performed either accurately and slowly (Usually only successful when it is a pre planned move) or quickly and inaccurately. This is just the way an analogue thumb-stick works, it's a double edged sword. Either you sacrifice accuracy for speed or speed for accuracy. Not in every game but for CT this holds true (At least Xbox, never played the PS2 version but I assume it is the same). Don't forget, it makes it harder to play both merc and spy so it evens out quite a bit.
I don't see a difference in skill levels whatsoever. I see two players accustomed to two different control styles.
That being said, mouse and keyboard DO promote much more refined skills but that in no way means the console player doesn't posses the same skill, he or she just needs to adjust to the mouse and keyboard which can take time.
Edit: I should also point out that it is not easy to do those things on a PC. If it was easy you would see absolutely everyone slap camming and sniping like a pro and that's just not the case. PC controls are not easier, they are more versatile and provide fine tuned but quick control that still requires time and skill to acquire.
It is harder to pull them off. Take for example triple nading: It is harder to do this on console because the series of buttons you have to push to do it. There is more room for error and it takes longer. Now on PC, you can code it all to one single button. It takes pretty much no practice and there is no room for error. Same can be said with quick turning and a lot of other KEY moves.
I don't use macros. Tripple nading with macros... weak.
The funny thing about the triple-nade macro is that the flashbang usually doesn't work.
its all memory muscle training, and efficient use of the keys. The keyboard itself is designed for the most efficient possible layout for minimum finger movement.
I cannot use the number keys because my fingers just dont work that way. They are much more adapt at tab, shift, ctrl, alt keys from years of using Photoshop and 3d apps. I find it easier to press shift+R or shift+T then pressing 1,2, or 3 because my fingers would get lost on the keyboard, while my index finger does not. The reason is that if I press the number keys I inevitably move 2 fingers, and they get in knots when trying to return to the normal position.
And to compensate, i ended using the extra buttons on the mouse.
that was some of kebab's anatomy