I liked the whole way DA felt alot like a movie with the flashes when you caught a terminal etc etc.
I think a really cool thing to add would be if a merc is near you then you hear a faint heartbeat. As you get real close the beat sounds faster and the screen turns slightly greyscale.
This would be cool because if a merc is walking past your hiding spot, sound can make things much more intense. and if your sneaking up on a merc then it would add more suspense there aswell.
Comment and list other "cinematic-style" ideas which give the gameplay somthing extra.
No, Mercs also need surprise actions. Like Spy looks the wrong way and the Merc ambushes him from the other side.
That would be like a DA presence detector working for the spies instead. Hell I wouldn't need spy bullets ever again. :o
No to the spy presense thingy. Yes to the cinematice "feel" of DA, it gives it some more suspense.
No fucking up my screen with super-duper blur filters for that more "cinematic" feel, thank you.
Yeah, never mind. I just thought about it. Just the gameplay should give you a good amount of suspense. The only reason that DA did that was because their game was garbage and it was the only way to add suspense to it. Maybe, however, within the last 10 seconds your HUD gauges and things flash red. Also, make the terminals flash red when they are close to being totally hacked. That should be it though...
instead of learning from da, we should learn from pt. it felt way more intense to me.
Gawain that was just the atmosphere of the maps imo. They were mostly dark, kind of creepy, and more stealth was involved in PT. Like instead of CT where usually all the fights took place in a cloud of smoke with the spy running around you, in PT it wasn't usually like that. More stealth, the bigger the level of intensity.
you're wrong, the spies got way better aggro capabilites in pt:
-no mask (=> cams can block narrow areas for mercs)
-no berserk (counter argument: tazer)
-SS+jump
-doublejump
-as far as i remember no auto aim for charge
i think it was the darkness and the cinematic music/sounds that created pt's awesome athmosphere.
Quote from: Gawain on December 04, 2007, 03:35:13 PM
you're wrong, the spies got way better aggro capabilites in pt:
-no mask (=> cams can block narrow areas for mercs)
-no berserk (counter argument: tazer)
-SS+jump
-doublejump
-as far as i remember no auto aim for charge
i think it was the darkness and the cinematic music/sounds that created pt's awesome athmosphere.
Well that depended on who you played with. CT was a much more aggro "cluster fuck the mercs" sort of deal in my experience. PT I relied on shadows much more than CT. Why? Because there were more shadows, there weren't enough in CT for me to rely on them.
I do know that spies were much more able to perform aggro tactics in PT, but it didn't really happen as much as CT.
well, aggro (not host aggro/on a good server) is way easier to counter in ct (besides chaff working through walls)
Yes, but for some reason it still happens more often. That reason would be the limited shadows.
As I remember as a merc in PT you were the guy who had to be careful.
Quote from: Papa Skull on December 03, 2007, 08:27:46 PM
Gawain that was just the atmosphere of the maps imo. They were mostly dark, kind of creepy, and more stealth was involved in PT. Like instead of CT where usually all the fights took place in a cloud of smoke with the spy running around you, in PT it wasn't usually like that. More stealth, the bigger the level of intensity.
I'm not sure what version of PT you're playing...
Now, I'm aware that on xbox you can't jump on a shocked merc like you could on the PC version of PT. But in the xbox version, it was all about smoking/chaffing the merc and circling him. The fact that there was no gas mask made it an uber tactic. When I played PT on xbox, all I could remember thinking was how the mercs have almost no chance against an aggro spy.
On PC, PT was basically a SS+double jump match. As a merc you had to know every spot where the spy could jump off onto you and stay the hell away from it.
So really, regardless of what version you're playing, it was much easier to aggro in PT.
On CT it's just triple nade and run straight at the merc and elbow him until you get a neck. Aggro is on both games, it's just more frequent in my experience on CT. Whether it's because limited shadows and stealth capabilities or because people don't know how to be sneaky idk.
wow, I see that the same game is played different depending on platform.
Quote from: Papa Skull on December 04, 2007, 08:44:26 PM
On CT it's just triple nade and run straight at the merc and elbow him until you get a neck. Aggro is on both games, it's just more frequent in my experience on CT. Whether it's because limited shadows and stealth capabilities or because people don't know how to be sneaky idk.
it's totally different in the pc version.
That's not how I play, but I see a lot of people do it. Most of the time I see people try to evade the merc, or distract him, or kill him, and then take an objective. The smart people don't try to come into direct contact with a merc everytime, the guys who do are idiots who only want deathmatch and no depth to the game other than killing your opponent.
I'm not saying that aggro is in 100% of every game, I'm just saying that in my experience there is more aggro tactics on CT than PT even though PT it was much easier.
i don't care how n00bs play the game. the way i understand aggro it's not solely going for necks/quickcam, it's rather strategies that involve the merc knowing where you are. it's a good thing that aggro is part of the game because otherwise it would be pretty boring for the mercs.
You understand it differently. When watching havoc and weezer play I usually ALWAYS see them atleast try to cam the guy or smoke him to sleep. If not, they break his neck or choke him out cold.
havoc and weezer are the only guys i know capable of playing like this. you will also notice that they are host most of the time <=> host being able to grab in the animation after pushing back or charge
Yes, but people still attempt it regardless of its possibility. Sometimes, they prevail.
Quote from: Papa Skull on December 05, 2007, 02:18:44 AM
I'm not saying that aggro is in 100% of every game, I'm just saying that in my experience there is more aggro tactics on CT than PT even though PT it was much easier.
Well, on PC there's a great deal of aggro. I don't know if it's more than PT, since PT was a full blown aggro game too.
The thing with CT is that aggro is certainly harder, the problem is that stealth is harder too. With EAX superhearing and high resolution MT whoring, a lot of people playing CT just gave up on stealth. So it's why on PC a lot of the games you'll have are going to be against aggro rushers. It's not really that aggro is that powerful, it's just that a lot of times stealth is barely an option. When you run out and triple nade people you at least have a chance of getting objectives. If you happen to get lucky you may get to hack something.
The one thing I don't like about aggro is that it's unfair. The host gains such a big advantage such that it's really only a viable host strategy against good players and that sucks.
Yeah, the stealth was harder too because limited amounts of shadows. darker maps should help decrease the amount of aggro anyways.
the thing with shadoes is that it's easy and tempting for a lot of people to turn gamma high. the only wayto prevent this is making most shadows pitch black possibly resulting in no smooth transitions.
Who needs smooth transitions? Shadows typically aren't smooth, they are usually cut off by objects are walls and are pretty defined. How about, like you said, making them pretty damn dark and faster transitions between becoming invisible in the darkness.
Like the ones in SC1... I still like to watch Sam disappear in darkness.
Quote from: Papa Skull on December 06, 2007, 09:22:47 PM
Who needs smooth transitions? Shadows typically aren't smooth, they are usually cut off by objects are walls and are pretty defined. How about, like you said, making them pretty damn dark and faster transitions between becoming invisible in the darkness.
ever heard of light dispersion and shadows from several light sources/non point-shaped light sources?
Just make the shadows go pitch black when less than x light is in that place.
That's why I said "usually". It's easier to dissapear if you are just suddenly gone then if it takes some time to become invisible. Kind of stupid imo. If you should be invisible in x light then you should be invisible, shouldn't take time to become blended in.
I used 100% stealth in PT, people accused me of cheating because was soo good at it. I got tons of stealth grabs and such because everyone was used to agressive play. But ct I used lots of waiting stickies and stealth with a little aggresion to get away because lack of shadows. Please make PS maps much darker people.
Quote from: Tidenburg on December 02, 2007, 11:51:51 PM
I liked the whole way DA felt alot like a movie with the flashes when you caught a terminal etc etc.
I think a really cool thing to add would be if a merc is near you then you hear a faint heartbeat. As you get real close the beat sounds faster and the screen turns slightly greyscale.
This would be cool because if a merc is walking past your hiding spot, sound can make things much more intense. and if your sneaking up on a merc then it would add more suspense there aswell.
Comment and list other "cinematic-style" ideas which give the gameplay somthing extra.
Made me think of the Speed-Kill in Prince of Persia: The Two Thrones