1. Marines have to run a lot in NS. 2. Running can get boring.
Then, if we want to avoid boredom in the long run, we should give something interesting to do to the marines while running. Holding shift key to sprint is not very interesting.
Here is a stupid idea that people could practice during all theses times they have to run : shift key could be used to focus weight or grip in one foot, and then mouse movement would allow to control impulse on this foot. A rhythmic pattern of shift key and mouse movement (around the correct period) would increase slightly your speed.
what you call bad design worked for years, and still does.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Good design is minimalistic, and intuitive. In what way is bunnyhopping minimalistic or intuitive?
Let's imagine that there were a game where if you wanted to sprint, you had to perform the following keypresses in the correct order, within a certain timeframe: A Ctrl P N+Down Space Ctrl+Shift+Alt F4 T Enter Space. Let's imagine that someone else created the exact same game, but if you wanted to sprint you simply need to hold Shift. Which of these two games is better-designed? The "pro" (scrub) would say the first game, because holding shift is "cheap" and takes no skill, while it "takes skill" to do all the keypresses. <i>I'm sure it does, buddy.</i>
Obviously that's a gross exaggeration, and bunnyhopping is nowhere near that level of convolution (though fighting games sometimes are). But the point is that the method (sequence of keypresses versus shift; bunnyhopping versus something else) is not important - the result (sprint; control) is. As long as the result is achieved (and this is actually quite arbitrary), the method should be as minimalistic - as intuitive - as simple to learn and use as possible.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->your opinion of skill based movement is nothing more than whining, something you hear from people who haven't learned how to do it.I read it, I get it and I simply do not agree with it, its based more on your own opinions or other people complaining about it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> lol, dismissal of facts as opinion. I can do that too. <b>Water isn't wet, that's just your opinion.</b>
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->the only thing I will agree with, marines should not have skill based movement but aliens require it - they depend more on mobility which is the reason they are falling behind so much. Their movement is crippled so much, its just not fair.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I'm pretty sure I never said this... so I'm not sure what you're <b>agreeing</b> with. I think <b>both</b> sides should have greater mobility and movement control, though obviously aliens should have greater mobility overall (which they actually already do - higher movespeeds, leap, flight, blink, charge?). Poor Gorge, really. :(
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->as for your ideas, the speed increase should be part of the alien movement <b>without the need to push or hold anything. think of it as a passive ability</b> what skill based movement was.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> So basically... your golden idea... is to simply increase the base alien movement speed. ... Sigh... what was all this effort for?
<!--quoteo(post=1859643:date=Jul 11 2011, 11:38 AM:name=Yuuki)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Yuuki @ Jul 11 2011, 11:38 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1859643"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Here is a stupid idea that people could practice during all theses times they have to run : shift key could be used to focus weight or grip in one foot, and then mouse movement would allow to control impulse on this foot. A rhythmic pattern of shift key and mouse movement (around the correct period) would increase slightly your speed.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Damn, you're so good :D
@Harimau you can hardly compare sprint and bunnyhop, sprint is only part of what bunnyhop achieves.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I’m afraid i don’t have an alternative to hopping that serves the same gameplay function through different means, in 15 years of FPS games nobody has developed one yet.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This might be the reason why some are so eager to keep the mechanic in.
Sigh..... I wasn't comparing sprint and bunnyhop. Do you actually read, or just skim and assume you understand? I was comparing sprint in two hypothetical games, and by way of analogy, making a comparison of a game with bunnyhop with a game that doesn't have it.
And you keep telling me that there's this huge arsenal of things that bunnyhopping can achieve! I'm absolutely bursting with curiosity! Let a brother in on the secret... I won't tell.
I have only read to page 10 and want to toss my two cent in.
<!--quoteo(post=1858473:date=Jul 7 2011, 03:12 AM:name=Underwhelmed)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Underwhelmed @ Jul 7 2011, 03:12 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1858473"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Agreed. It's a testament to how good of a game NS was that nearly a decade after release as a 3rd party mod of an game engine that was already a couple years old there are still people who play it. For those of you who play TF2, imagine how boring of a game it would be if rocket/sticky/double jumping were removed. The fact is that freedom of movement gives rise to complexity in gameplay.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree, that freedom of movement is very important and adds to complexity. But don't compare a cartoony game like TF2 (which I love) with NS2. The whole problem with bunny hopping (or call continuous jumping as you want) is NOT the balance or skill involved. This game is beta. UWE can tweak it until its balanced. With or without bunny hopping.
The Problem is that it looks silly. And as far as I like more control and more movement-related skill in any game, it simply does not fit into NS2. At least on the marine side! On the alien side you should rely on movement. Maybe even add strafe jumping and/or more air control for aliens.
Jumping more than 2 or 3 times as a marine in a close combat just looks bad and destroys the game atmosphere.
The only problem I see is, that fights could get boring if nothing is found to compensate this constraint in the marine gameplay. Something like an useful knock back attack has been mentioned.
Conclusion: Don't put the movement- and skill-related possibilities out of the game but stick them where they look good and don't destroy the atmosphere. Let bunny hopping for the alien team. But for marines more than 2 or 3 jumps close after another are ridiculous ugly.
<!--quoteo(post=1859827:date=Jul 11 2011, 10:48 PM:name=TrueVeritas)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TrueVeritas @ Jul 11 2011, 10:48 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1859827"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I really hope this slow on hit thing goes away. I'd much rather have it be like NS1 where your second jump slows you down.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I'd just like to have some system that allows marine to have good options of repositioning and dodging while keeping it purposeful instead of just having some kind of complete pogo 24/7. To me aliens are more of constant motion (leaps, whatever else they decide to add) while marines are quick bursts of dodging and repositioning, preferrably in some more interesting way than just sprinting.
<!--quoteo(post=1859956:date=Jul 12 2011, 03:14 PM:name=Bacillus)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bacillus @ Jul 12 2011, 03:14 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1859956"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'd just like to have some system that allows marine to have good options of repositioning and dodging while keeping it purposeful instead of just having some kind of complete pogo 24/7. To me aliens are more of constant motion (leaps, whatever else they decide to add) while marines are quick bursts of dodging and repositioning, preferrably in some more interesting way than just sprinting.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> This is what I also hope for.
This might be the reason why some are so eager to keep the mechanic in.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I read this, and watched the videos, and I can summarise his argument with two words: "Mastery" (supposed) "Speed"
In this case, the only <b>in-game benefit</b> from bunnyhopping that he's actually proposed is increased speed. However, speed itself opens up other avenues (<b>flexibility</b>) - other approaches to skulk play (meaningful options, depth). I believe that all of these approaches should <b>always</b> be available, not just after you've "mastered" a certain (I'll be generous) "feature". You could probably achieve the same thing with a "speed up" button, but of course "that takes no skill". <!--QuoteBegin-http://www.sirlin.net/ptw-book/intermediates-guide.html+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (http://www.sirlin.net/ptw-book/intermediates-guide.html)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The scrub has still more crutches. He talks a great deal about “skill†and how he has skill whereas other players—very much including the ones who beat him flat out—do not have skill. The confusion here is what “skill†actually is. In Street Fighter, scrubs often cling to combos as a measure of skill. A combo is a sequence of moves that is unblockable if the first move hits. Combos can be very elaborate and very difficult to pull off. But single moves can also take “skill,†according to the scrub. The “dragon punch†or “uppercut†in Street Fighter is performed by holding the joystick toward the opponent, then down, then diagonally down and toward as the player presses a punch button. This movement must be completed within a fraction of a second, and though there is leeway, it must be executed fairly accurately. Ask any scrub and they will tell you that a dragon punch is a “skill move.â€<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> <!--coloro:gray--><span style="color:gray"><!--/coloro--><i>(Imagine that, I've managed to equate "pros" with "scrubs".)</i><!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->
The problem (which the author of the argument you linked sees as a benefit) is that it requires "mastery" - if you can do it, you gain the benefits (faster speed, more options); if you can't do it, you don't gain the benefits (slower speed, less options). And what is it that determines whether you gain the benefits, what is it that needs to be mastered? A pattern of keypresses and mouse movements. And that's what Yuuki was saying with his sarcastic shift+mouse left&right idea - a pattern of keypresses and mouse movements that give you speed - neither he, nor anyone, considered it truly a good idea - so why is bunnyhopping? "Mastery" is not a sufficient argument, because mastery of a pattern of keypresses and mouse movements is not true mastery of the game.
Honestly, the argument of "mastery" is simply [what's another word for "elitist" that won't 'cause some people to froth at the mouth?] and really doesn't add to the game as much as you and others seem to think it does. But is (supposed) mastery the problem? I know I just said it was, but no, not really. What's the underlying problem, then? That this pattern of keypresses and mouse movements is neither obvious, nor intuitive - that this pattern of keypresses and mouse movements is entirely arbitrary, and detracts from the real game.
His "mastery" argument is essentially "I played 200 hours of this game while you only played 100 hours, so I should be twice as good as you". No, the better player should be better, the smarter player should be better. Reward quality over quantity. A person who plays less shouldn't be disadvantaged - shouldn't have less options - just because he hasn't learned the right pattern of key-presses to do a super-move. If it's a case of knowing that the options exist (options that can be learned or taught easily, in-game or out, by yourself or by another) then certainly, the person who has played more will (and should) naturally have the advantage - but he'd still have to choose the right options. But those options should never be hampered by anything other than knowledge of them, and the game situation.
And the "game within a game" argument... my word. How often does an idea like [solving a logic puzzle or welding the lines, in order to build or repair] get shot down? That's as poor an argument as I've ever heard.
<!--coloro:#99FF99--><span style="color:#99FF99"><!--/coloro-->I'm not arguing for the removal of jump (I think skulks should jump a lot, as necessary), and I'm not arguing for the removal of air control; however, bunnyhop is a different beast. "Mastery" of an arbitrary pattern of inputs, that scales with the time put into it, is not a benefit, because it's not true mastery - it's superficial, and is aside to the real game. So if the only benefit of bunnyhopping is 'more options' (flexibility, depth - which I acknowledge is an excellent example of a benefit) SIMPLY DUE TO 'more speed', then there are many other ways to achieve that which aren't exclusive.<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->
Feel free, of course, to type <!--coloro:red--><span style="color:red"><!--/coloro-->"YOU'RE WRONG! BECAUSE YOU'RE A BLIND TRIBESMAN WHO HATES THE DEVIL! EVEN THOUGH I HAVEN'T ACTUALLY READ OR UNDERSTOOD YOUR POST!"<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->, but don't expect me to take you seriously.
<!--quoteo(post=1859958:date=Jul 12 2011, 02:18 AM:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Harimau @ Jul 12 2011, 02:18 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1859958"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This is what I also hope for.
I read this, and watched the videos, and I can summarise his argument with two words: "Mastery" (supposed) "Speed"
In this case, the only <b>in-game benefit</b> from bunnyhopping that he's actually proposed is increased speed. However, speed itself opens up other avenues (<b>flexibility</b>) - other approaches to skulk play (meaningful options, depth). I believe that all of these approaches should <b>always</b> be available, not just after you've "mastered" a certain (I'll be generous) "feature". You could probably achieve the same thing with a "speed up" button, but of course "that takes no skill".
<!--coloro:gray--><span style="color:gray"><!--/coloro--><i>(Imagine that, I've managed to equate "pros" with "scrubs".)</i><!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->
The problem (which the author of the argument you linked sees as a benefit) is that it requires "mastery" - if you can do it, you gain the benefits (faster speed, more options); if you can't do it, you don't gain the benefits (slower speed, less options). And what is it that determines whether you gain the benefits, what is it that needs to be mastered? A pattern of keypresses and mouse movements. And that's what Yuuki was saying with his sarcastic shift+mouse left&right idea - a pattern of keypresses and mouse movements that give you speed - neither he, nor anyone, considered it truly a good idea - so why is bunnyhopping? "Mastery" is not a sufficient argument, because mastery of a pattern of keypresses and mouse movements is not true mastery of the game.
Honestly, the argument of "mastery" is simply [what's another word for "elitist" that won't 'cause some people to froth at the mouth?] and really doesn't add to the game as much as you and others seem to think it does. But is (supposed) mastery the problem? I know I just said it was, but no, not really. What's the underlying problem, then? That this pattern of keypresses and mouse movements is neither obvious, nor intuitive - that this pattern of keypresses and mouse movements is entirely arbitrary, and detracts from the real game.
His "mastery" argument is essentially "I played 200 hours of this game while you only played 100 hours, so I should be twice as good as you". No, the better player should be better, the smarter player should be better. Reward quality over quantity. A person who plays less shouldn't be disadvantaged - shouldn't have less options - just because he hasn't learned the right pattern of key-presses to do a super-move. If it's a case of knowing that the options exist (options that can be learned or taught easily, in-game or out, by yourself or by another) then certainly, the person who has played more will (and should) naturally have the advantage - but he'd still have to choose the right options. But those options should never be hampered by anything other than knowledge of them, and the game situation.
And the "game within a game" argument... my word. How often does an idea like [solving a logic puzzle or welding the lines, in order to build or repair] get shot down? That's as poor an argument as I've ever heard.
<!--coloro:#99FF99--><span style="color:#99FF99"><!--/coloro-->I'm not arguing for the removal of jump (I think skulks should jump a lot, as necessary), and I'm not arguing for the removal of air control; however, bunnyhop is a different beast. "Mastery" of an arbitrary pattern of inputs, that scales with the time put into it, is not a benefit, because it's not true mastery - it's superficial, and is aside to the real game. So if the only benefit of bunnyhopping is 'more options' (flexibility, depth - which I acknowledge is an excellent example of a benefit) SIMPLY DUE TO 'more speed', then there are many other ways to achieve that which aren't exclusive.<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->
Feel free, of course, to type <!--coloro:red--><span style="color:red"><!--/coloro-->"YOU'RE WRONG! BECAUSE YOU'RE A BLIND TRIBESMAN WHO HATES THE DEVIL! EVEN THOUGH I HAVEN'T ACTUALLY READ OR UNDERSTOOD YOUR POST!"<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->, but don't expect me to take you seriously.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I tried to read through that but got pretty bored halfway through.
Bunnyhopping on alien side was just so much fun. It was super easy to learn too, people were just lazy and didn't care much.
Anyway, if you don't have quirks with the engine that raise the skill ceiling games get boring rather quickly. TF2 for example has rocket jumping/demo jumping, but can we really say that it makes it a worse game? Can players not have fun in Hat Fortress 2 if they don't know how to rocket jump properly?
<!--quoteo(post=1859964:date=Jul 12 2011, 03:46 PM:name=TrueVeritas)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TrueVeritas @ Jul 12 2011, 03:46 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1859964"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I tried to read through that but got pretty bored halfway through.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> That's why I've highlighted some text at the bottom in green, for the benefit of the short-attention-span riffraff (or the executives - which are you?).
<!--quoteo(post=1859964:date=Jul 12 2011, 03:46 PM:name=TrueVeritas)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TrueVeritas @ Jul 12 2011, 03:46 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1859964"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Bunnyhopping on alien side was just so much fun. It was super easy to learn too, people were just lazy and didn't care much.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Ok.
<!--quoteo(post=1859964:date=Jul 12 2011, 03:46 PM:name=TrueVeritas)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TrueVeritas @ Jul 12 2011, 03:46 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1859964"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Anyway, if you don't have quirks with the engine that raise the skill ceiling games get boring rather quickly.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Right... like chess, for instance. It has no quirks, so it's such a boring game. Once they know all the game rules, people can't improve in chess.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->TF2 for example has rocket jumping/demo jumping, but can we really say that it makes it a worse game? Can players not have fun in Hat Fortress 2 if they don't know how to rocket jump properly?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Rocket-jumping isn't on the same level as bunnyhop, is it? Is there an arbitrary pattern of keypresses that you have to use to rocket-jump in TF2? But really, more importantly than that, it's internally consistent to TF2 - it adds to the game. Now, if rocket jumping required you to fire a rocket up in the sky, control it with your mouse, loop it back under you, jump, aim your mouse straight down at the explosion, then continue to face the explosion as you alternately tap the backward and jump keys and move backward from the explosion - AND this opened up options not available to the people who didn't do it, that might be a more appropriate analogy. If this were the case, I would also argue for the removal of rocket-jump in TF2 (if I cared).
You're a total ###### ############ who in a single post manages to completely distort the arguments of, not one, but two separate sources, which makes you either incompetent or a liar. The ENSL article even has the main argument conveniently bolded for people who have trouble reading, but apparently you managed to miss that too. So, for everybody's sake, let me repeat the actual thesis: <!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><b>Bunnyhopping is FUN!</b><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I won't rehash the article; anybody interested in the actual arguments made would do well to read it for themselves instead of relying on ridiculous Harimau's strawmanning.
Now let's turn our attention to Harimau's out-of-context quote of Sirlin. Sirlin has a pretty simple philosophy: If it's there, use it. Bhop is in NS1, and if you didn't use it out of some misguided sense of how the game should be played, by Sirlin's reckoning, that makes you the scrub. Knowing how to bhop alone doesn't necessarily make a good player, but one can't help but notice all the good players, with maybe two exceptions, knew how to bhop.
Your argument that "A pattern of keypresses and mouse movements" shouldn't confer advantages to those who can pull it off is, frankly, absurd. The fact that NS2 is a FPS can't have possibly escaped even your inattention; rewarding players with better aim and movement is practically the crux of gameplay. You can't take away the advantage of technically better players without turning the game into something else entirely. But here you are, trying to turn a FPS into chess. One only need watch the videos of the ENSL article to see the options that bhop opens up, which I think is a big addition to the game. You could argue bhop execution is an unnecessary barrier to entry (An idea that in multiple paragraphs you have failed to communicate clearly), but then the onus would be on you to present an alternative that doesn't dilute gameplay. And so far, you have failed spectacularly in this effort, largely, I suspect, because your inability to bhop leaves you with zero starting point and because you're simply not interested in a system with more than simple linear movements.
By the way, Sirlin is a competitive fighting game player who does inputs like 6321478963214789+LP+MP+HP with timing windows measured in 1/60th of a second, which some would say is much more "arbitrary" than bhop. If we transplanted you into a fighting game debate, you'd be the guy arguing that fireballs should be removed because 236P is an arbitrary input and rewards players who can pull it off!
<!--quoteo(post=1859986:date=Jul 12 2011, 03:42 AM:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Harimau @ Jul 12 2011, 03:42 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1859986"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Right... like chess, for instance. It has no quirks, so it's such a boring game. Once they know all the game rules, people can't improve in chess.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's just a terrible comparison. People like FPS games for different reasons than chess. I realize NS2 isn't solely an FPS, but the RTS element would be nothing without the players. If you took out all player skill (aim/movement) it would just end up being boring as ###### for the marines and somewhat interesting for the commander.
<!--quoteo(post=1859986:date=Jul 12 2011, 03:42 AM:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Harimau @ Jul 12 2011, 03:42 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1859986"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Rocket-jumping isn't on the same level as bunnyhop, is it? Is there an arbitrary pattern of keypresses that you have to use to rocket-jump in TF2? But really, more importantly than that, it's internally consistent to TF2 - it adds to the game. Now, if rocket jumping required you to fire a rocket up in the sky, control it with your mouse, loop it back under you, jump, aim your mouse straight down at the explosion, then continue to face the explosion as you alternately tap the backward and jump keys and move backward from the explosion - AND this opened up options not available to the people who didn't do it, that might be a more appropriate analogy. If this were the case, I would also argue for the removal of rocket-jump in TF2 (if I cared).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Rocket-jumping absolutely is on the same level as bunnyhopping. Just being able to jump in the air is one thing, but controlling the damage it does to you, where you land, how high you go, all while actually aiming in midair are all definitely skills acquired over many hours of play. For example, watch this video:
You wouldn't be able to do that immediately. At high levels of soldier play, mastering rocket jumping is <b>extremely </b>important. Simple to learn, hard to master.
<!--quoteo(post=1859990:date=Jul 12 2011, 05:08 PM:name=Underwhelmed)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Underwhelmed @ Jul 12 2011, 05:08 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1859990"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Now let's turn our attention to Harimau's out-of-context quote of Sirlin. Sirlin has a pretty simple philosophy: If it's there, use it. Bhop is in NS1, and if you didn't use it out of some misguided sense of how the game should be played, by Sirlin's reckoning, that makes you the scrub. Knowing how to bhop alone doesn't necessarily make a good player, but one can't help but notice all the good players, with maybe two exceptions, knew how to bhop.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I know. But in what way is that an argument for the inclusion of Bhop in NS2? If you've read much, you'd realise that Sirlin's design philosophy and his winning philosophy are, half the time, at odds with one another. I value both. If UWE does a 180 and decides to put bunnyhop back in - and it does confer advantages, well, I'll grit my teeth and learn it. Sirlin would advise as much. If UWE doesn't, and yet manages to approach the same level of flexibility and control, then they've made a better game. Sirlin would advise as much.
You've also managed to completely miss the point. The point is that such an arbitrary sequence of button pressing should <b>not</b> give a player more options - there SHOULD be more options, but those options should be available from the start.
TrueVeritas: Some people like rhythm games. You get all the patterned button pressing you want there.
Rocket-jumping itself has a very, very simple concept. The explosion sends you up. That's why rocket-jumping is not on the level of Bhop.
<!--quoteo(post=1859998:date=Jul 12 2011, 04:32 AM:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Harimau @ Jul 12 2011, 04:32 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1859998"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Rocket-jumping itself has a very, very simple concept. The explosion sends you up. That's why rocket-jumping is not on the level of Bhop.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Bunnyhopping itself has a very, very simple concept. Strafing in the air accelerates you.
<!--quoteo(post=1859999:date=Jul 12 2011, 10:38 AM:name=TrueVeritas)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TrueVeritas @ Jul 12 2011, 10:38 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1859999"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Bunnyhopping itself has a very, very simple concept. Strafing in the air accelerates you.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> ah, the logic..
<!--quoteo(post=1859534:date=Jul 10 2011, 10:37 PM:name=Bacillus)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bacillus @ Jul 10 2011, 10:37 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1859534"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Do the collisions work good enough that you can actually use your body to restrict skulk movement?
Can marines somehow track better at targets under them?
Is it more difficult to actually realize the marine jumping and adjust biting to it? For example is the bitecam different and blocks more visibility?
Does the bite reg properly on jumping targets?
Does the jump work differently? For example can you get faster acceleration from standing pose so that you can do weird leapfrogging instantly from standstill?
My guess would be that such predictable dodging as marine jumping gets a lot less effective once the game gets smoother and more responsive. Unless there's some absolutely crazy leapfrog from standstill I can't see marine going too quickly anywhere before you've got 2-3 bites in, especially without some little magic thingies with HL1 physics and knockback. All this is pure theorycrafting though.
I don't particularly like the idea of slowdowns on bite to patch the issue. As juice said in another thread: it feels like a bit of a quick hack approach that easily leads into more quick hackjobs to fix the issues the first quickfix caused.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I dont think anyone has answered these so I'll give it a go.
No unlikely in NS1 where you had short of "range" in the bite in NS2 you need to go inside the marine literally usually losing sight to land a bite.
No it is very hard because you can just walkthrough
Biting the spot he'll land is much more effective so I really dont know.
Nope the jump is quite small feels like the marine is jumping against gravity 3 times of the normal and it is always the same length (spammy)
You are right, but because it is very easy to lose target (go through) and ends up in messy combat unlike NS1 only stillstanding targets die "fast". The server reg if 200 ping or higher does not work correctly, the client approves skulk bites giving you an ok but you usually end up with 7 hits that registered for you to a normal a0/a1 guy anyway.
You predicted right, it did not bring a joyable result although jump spam was consirerably reduced. Alien slowdown probably didnt even cross your mind? Me neither.
BHop is a relic of a bygone era and it's pretty much going to disappear as a concept altogether in a few years.
My theory is unchanged - the reason people want BHop back is because they're a bunch of nostalgic drama queens who mastered the skill a long time ago and want things to be 'like they used to be' not because they were actually superior gameplay concepts in any way, but so they can leverage their skill monopoly.
Generally the same people who want BHop are the same collection of ###### who ruined NS with 'play to win' mentalities. You know, exploits are fine because 'anyone can do them' and 'they're part of the game'. Yeah, nothing like hitting marine spawn with an early Onos and then getting glued in spot with a well-placed CC.
As for the topic: I've always been opposed to marines getting some sort of 'advantage' in close combat, which is why crackjumping (as it used to be known) has always sucked. See the problem is, when in close fighting, the marines are still unimpeded by a skulk nipping at their ankles, while a skulk is blinded every time it bites. Additionally, let's not forget the oh-so incredibly moronic knockback melee attacks would do, so a badly timed bite would hurl a marine across the room, where he could then riddle you with bullets.
As much as it destroys atmosphere, it also gave marines too much of a chance when put in a situation where they deserve to lose. If you can't kill the alien with your bullets at range, where you have the advantage, your odds of killing the alien should drop significantly when subject to close range attacks. Letting the marines leap around like retards shooting at their toes has always sucked.
<!--quoteo(post=1859958:date=Jul 12 2011, 08:18 AM:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Harimau @ Jul 12 2011, 08:18 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1859958"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->His "mastery" argument is essentially "I played 200 hours of this game while you only played 100 hours, so I should be twice as good as you". No, the better player should be better, the smarter player should be better. Reward quality over quantity. A person who plays less shouldn't be disadvantaged - shouldn't have less options - just because he hasn't learned the right pattern of key-presses to do a super-move. If it's a case of knowing that the options exist (options that can be learned or taught easily, in-game or out, by yourself or by another) then certainly, the person who has played more will (and should) naturally have the advantage - but he'd still have to choose the right options. But those options should never be hampered by anything other than knowledge of them, and the game situation.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I'm not really for or against bunnyhoping but your argument interested me from a game design standpoint.
"The person who plays less <b>shouldn't</b> be disadvantaged?" Says who? Why not? They will always be disadvantaged because they will have less knowledge and experience of the game.
Why shouldn't a player be required to do something difficult in order to achieve a benefit?
If you were arguing about the game of pool you'd be saying, "The player shouldn't need to practice for hours and hours in order to be able to pull off these impressive shots, they should be able to play all shots right from the start and only be required to choose the right ones." That would make for a boring game because everyone would be able to play it optimally.
The harder the game is to master the bigger the difference there can be between two individual players skill levels. This makes a game enjoyable and competitive because you are always trying to improve. If you hit a plateau where you had mastered everything and all you had to do was make correct decisions then it would become boring very quickly.
This is also what makes games and sports interesting to watch. When a golfer pulls off an unbelievable shot everyone can appreciate it and they know that he has spent thousands of hours playing in order to get that good. If everyone could do it, it wouldn't be a big deal and the game would be boring.
A game being difficult to master and rewarding players who practice is good. It makes people come back and play again and again. It makes people enjoy watching good players. It makes the game fun and competitive to test your abilities against your opponents.
I challenge you to name one good game that is played competitively that doesn't require practice and mastery. It doesn't exist.
<!--quoteo(post=1860013:date=Jul 12 2011, 05:25 AM:name=Temphage)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Temphage @ Jul 12 2011, 05:25 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1860013"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If you can't kill the alien with your bullets at range, where you have the advantage, your odds of killing the alien should drop significantly when subject to close range attacks. Letting the marines leap around like retards shooting at their toes has always sucked.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Good thing leap is a base ability making nearly every encounter a close range one.
Tribes 1 - Jetpacks are for flying from Point A to Point B. Then you land, and let it recharge. Eventually someone discovered that due to an exploit in the movement code, if you spammed your spacebar to such a degree that it was about to break off and stab you in the eye, you could slide up and down terrain and retain your momentum. Thus, skiing was born, using terrain like ski jumps to slide down a mountain, across open terrain, and up another.
Tribes 2 - Skiing, having become a vital aspect of movement in Tribes, was retained - however, the spacebar spam aspect was removed and it was explained even in the tutorials, so that everyone was aware of it and could do it all the time. However, you still had to actually land your ski jumps on terrain and feather your jetpack properly to do it successfully. The ridiculous esoteric bull###### 'strafe in the air with perfect timing' aspect was removed, yet the concept was retained, which by making it easier for everyone to do it meant the game was that much richer overall.
<!--quoteo(post=1860015:date=Jul 12 2011, 10:34 AM:name=Wilson)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Wilson @ Jul 12 2011, 10:34 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1860015"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I challenge you to name one good game that is played competitively that doesn't require practice and mastery. It doesn't exist.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> That isn't what he said at all.
As someone who has played NS1 competitively (yes bias opinion, bla bla), I can understand the frustration of people who are unfamiliar with the concept (or more accurately, the execution) of bunnyhopping. But it's honestly not that hard to pick up, if you're worried, then you're obviously aiming to be competitive, which means you have to put crap loads of game hours in anyway & hey presto! you have heaps of time to learn
I would absolutely adore unknown worlds if they decided to put bunnyhopping into the game, it would add that extra touch of special that we all love about watching skilled NS1 players play. (Don't tell me you ever watched someone in NS on aliens bunnyhop from their perspective and subsequently thought how boring the game was).
It's a skill, a technique which can be utilized to cover area quickly - a concept which is absolutely brilliant in the context of a dynamic FPS strategy game!
And, just as a side note to UW (incase they are actually reading this, but given the considerable whining in the thread, I doubt it) - if BH is considered for implementation, 1 hive leap = too much momentum early game to feed into bunnyhopping & will result in a very large skill gap between players early on in the game.
(and on the 1 hive leap, I feel that it's discouraging skulk ambush tactics early on - where's the ALIENS atmosphere!? thud..... thud..... beep..... thud.... beep....beep...beep..beep.beep OH S#@T!) haha
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->And that's what Yuuki was saying with his sarcastic shift+mouse left&right idea - a pattern of keypresses and mouse movements that give you speed - neither he, nor anyone, considered it truly a good idea - so why is bunnyhopping?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Actually I was serious, to some degree. I'm actually a proponent of some sort of bunnyhopping-like mechanism in the game. I would like however that 1) it makes some sense physically and 2) it should be explained clearly with a tutorial or such.
There is also a bit of confusion about this "pattern of keypresses". The idea is not to have a stiff "if" condition that check you made the correct pattern, but to have a dynamical system (the laws of physics that control the dynamics of your body in the game) which shows some kind of resonance phenomena to periodic inputs. It's something much more soft and natural than just a sequences of keys.
I'm quite convinced that a lot of stuff could be done along theses lines. For example for the skulk you could do a gait transition (from trot to gallop) that could be easily be feedbacked to the user with camera movement.
<!--quoteo(post=1859998:date=Jul 12 2011, 01:32 AM:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Harimau @ Jul 12 2011, 01:32 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1859998"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You've also managed to completely miss the point. The point is that such an arbitrary sequence of button pressing should <b>not</b> give a player more options - there SHOULD be more options, but those options should be available from the start.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> You can't have options available without a way to execute them. Like I said, if you don't like it, the onus is on you to present a viable alternative. You keep insisting the current control scheme is "arbitrary" (Which as far as I can tell, is just codeword for "Anything I don't understand"), so why don't you come up with an non-arbitrary alternative?
<!--quoteo(post=1860021:date=Jul 12 2011, 11:54 AM:name=Temphage)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Temphage @ Jul 12 2011, 11:54 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1860021"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->That isn't what he said at all.
He said "A person who plays less shouldn't be disadvantaged - shouldn't have less options - just because he hasn't learned the right pattern of key-presses to do a super-move."
Please tell me why this is true? And what makes bunny hoping a super-move?
Tribes 1 - Jetpacks are for flying from Point A to Point B. Then you land, and let it recharge. Eventually someone discovered that due to an exploit in the movement code, if you spammed your spacebar to such a degree that it was about to break off and stab you in the eye, you could slide up and down terrain and retain your momentum. Thus, skiing was born, using terrain like ski jumps to slide down a mountain, across open terrain, and up another.
Tribes 2 - Skiing, having become a vital aspect of movement in Tribes, was retained - however, the spacebar spam aspect was removed and it was explained even in the tutorials, so that everyone was aware of it and could do it all the time. However, you still had to actually land your ski jumps on terrain and feather your jetpack properly to do it successfully. The ridiculous esoteric bull###### 'strafe in the air with perfect timing' aspect was removed, yet the concept was retained, which by making it easier for everyone to do it meant the game was that much richer overall.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Even further than that:
Tribes 3: (actually my favorite, despite it being being a popular un-game nowadays) Ski-jumping was made a <b>vital skill</b>. Maps were designed with many hills and open areas to facilitate ski-jumping. Feathering the jetpack wasn't even needed - you had a button to press that turned on your "anti-grav" boots, which made you hover in the air and slide down the hills. 'Skill' was still present. It simply shifted focus: skilled players knew how to land on the inside curve of a hill to develop speed, and when to jump and jetpack at the right moment to take off at the apex of the crest for a huge speed and altitude increase. Fights shifted and became much more fast-paced and aerial: skilled players could land incredible midair spinfusor shots with great accuracy from long distances while in midair themselves, or midair sniping. I spent plenty of hours on that desert map (i forget the name) where in order to get the red flag, you needed to perform a perfect 2-hill skijump to get the correct height.
The focus of the skill shifted, you didn't have to use scripts or mouse/keyboard trainers anymore. The skill was put back into actual combat and fast target aquisition and tracking/leading.
<!--quoteo(post=1859410:date=Jul 10 2011, 05:45 AM:name=NurEinMensch)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NurEinMensch @ Jul 10 2011, 05:45 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1859410"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Movement in real life is a lot more dynamic than in video games. There's so many things beyond simply moving in direction x that are hard if not impossible to model in a video game today. You can move your limbs independently, hold onto things to make turns, change your center of gravity and do a lot more than just going forward, backward, left, right and jump. So while things like bunny hopping, strafe jumping and and air control are not realistic from a purely physical point of view, they <i>are</i> realistic in that they increase your freedom of movement so that it is closer to what you can do in real life. It makes you feel more like a person instead of a tank.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Comments
1. Marines have to run a lot in NS.
2. Running can get boring.
Then, if we want to avoid boredom in the long run, we should give something interesting to do to the marines while running. Holding shift key to sprint is not very interesting.
Here is a stupid idea that people could practice during all theses times they have to run : shift key could be used to focus weight or grip in one foot, and then mouse movement would allow to control impulse on this foot. A rhythmic pattern of shift key and mouse movement (around the correct period) would increase slightly your speed.
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resonance" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resonance</a>
what you call bad design worked for years, and still does.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Good design is minimalistic, and intuitive. In what way is bunnyhopping minimalistic or intuitive?
Let's imagine that there were a game where if you wanted to sprint, you had to perform the following keypresses in the correct order, within a certain timeframe: A Ctrl P N+Down Space Ctrl+Shift+Alt F4 T Enter Space.
Let's imagine that someone else created the exact same game, but if you wanted to sprint you simply need to hold Shift.
Which of these two games is better-designed?
The "pro" (scrub) would say the first game, because holding shift is "cheap" and takes no skill, while it "takes skill" to do all the keypresses. <i>I'm sure it does, buddy.</i>
Obviously that's a gross exaggeration, and bunnyhopping is nowhere near that level of convolution (though fighting games sometimes are). But the point is that the method (sequence of keypresses versus shift; bunnyhopping versus something else) is not important - the result (sprint; control) is. As long as the result is achieved (and this is actually quite arbitrary), the method should be as minimalistic - as intuitive - as simple to learn and use as possible.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->your opinion of skill based movement is nothing more than whining, something you hear from people who haven't learned how to do it.I read it, I get it and I simply do not agree with it, its based more on your own opinions or other people complaining about it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
lol, dismissal of facts as opinion. I can do that too. <b>Water isn't wet, that's just your opinion.</b>
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->the only thing I will agree with, marines should not have skill based movement but aliens require it - they depend more on mobility which is the reason they are falling behind so much. Their movement is crippled so much, its just not fair.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm pretty sure I never said this... so I'm not sure what you're <b>agreeing</b> with. I think <b>both</b> sides should have greater mobility and movement control, though obviously aliens should have greater mobility overall (which they actually already do - higher movespeeds, leap, flight, blink, charge?). Poor Gorge, really. :(
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->as for your ideas, the speed increase should be part of the alien movement <b>without the need to push or hold anything. think of it as a passive ability</b> what skill based movement was.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So basically... your golden idea... is to simply increase the base alien movement speed.
...
Sigh... what was all this effort for?
Yuuki: That was sarcasm, right? :P
Damn, you're so good :D
@Harimau you can hardly compare sprint and bunnyhop, sprint is only part of what bunnyhop achieves.
@Harimau <a href="http://www.ninelegends.com/the-argument-for-bunnyhopping/" target="_blank">http://www.ninelegends.com/the-argument-for-bunnyhopping/</a>
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I’m afraid i don’t have an alternative to hopping that serves the same gameplay function through different means, in 15 years of FPS games nobody has developed one yet.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This might be the reason why some are so eager to keep the mechanic in.
I was comparing sprint in two hypothetical games, and by way of analogy, making a comparison of a game with bunnyhop with a game that doesn't have it.
And you keep telling me that there's this huge arsenal of things that bunnyhopping can achieve! I'm absolutely bursting with curiosity! Let a brother in on the secret... I won't tell.
<!--quoteo(post=1858473:date=Jul 7 2011, 03:12 AM:name=Underwhelmed)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Underwhelmed @ Jul 7 2011, 03:12 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1858473"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Agreed. It's a testament to how good of a game NS was that nearly a decade after release as a 3rd party mod of an game engine that was already a couple years old there are still people who play it. For those of you who play TF2, imagine how boring of a game it would be if rocket/sticky/double jumping were removed. The fact is that freedom of movement gives rise to complexity in gameplay.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree, that freedom of movement is very important and adds to complexity. But don't compare a cartoony game like TF2 (which I love) with NS2. The whole problem with bunny hopping (or call continuous jumping as you want) is NOT the balance or skill involved. This game is beta. UWE can tweak it until its balanced. With or without bunny hopping.
The Problem is that it looks silly. And as far as I like more control and more movement-related skill in any game, it simply does not fit into NS2. At least on the marine side! On the alien side you should rely on movement. Maybe even add strafe jumping and/or more air control for aliens.
Jumping more than 2 or 3 times as a marine in a close combat just looks bad and destroys the game atmosphere.
The only problem I see is, that fights could get boring if nothing is found to compensate this constraint in the marine gameplay. Something like an useful knock back attack has been mentioned.
Conclusion:
Don't put the movement- and skill-related possibilities out of the game but stick them where they look good and don't destroy the atmosphere. Let bunny hopping for the alien team. But for marines more than 2 or 3 jumps close after another are ridiculous ugly.
If he jumps he can not firing and it takes longer to "ready" the weapon.
I'd just like to have some system that allows marine to have good options of repositioning and dodging while keeping it purposeful instead of just having some kind of complete pogo 24/7. To me aliens are more of constant motion (leaps, whatever else they decide to add) while marines are quick bursts of dodging and repositioning, preferrably in some more interesting way than just sprinting.
This is what I also hope for.
<!--quoteo(post=1859658:date=Jul 11 2011, 06:56 PM:name=TrC)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TrC @ Jul 11 2011, 06:56 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1859658"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->@Harimau <a href="http://www.ninelegends.com/the-argument-for-bunnyhopping/" target="_blank">http://www.ninelegends.com/the-argument-for-bunnyhopping/</a>
This might be the reason why some are so eager to keep the mechanic in.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I read this, and watched the videos, and I can summarise his argument with two words:
"Mastery" (supposed)
"Speed"
In this case, the only <b>in-game benefit</b> from bunnyhopping that he's actually proposed is increased speed. However, speed itself opens up other avenues (<b>flexibility</b>) - other approaches to skulk play (meaningful options, depth). I believe that all of these approaches should <b>always</b> be available, not just after you've "mastered" a certain (I'll be generous) "feature". You could probably achieve the same thing with a "speed up" button, but of course "that takes no skill".
<!--QuoteBegin-http://www.sirlin.net/ptw-book/intermediates-guide.html+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (http://www.sirlin.net/ptw-book/intermediates-guide.html)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The scrub has still more crutches. He talks a great deal about “skill†and how he has skill whereas other players—very much including the ones who beat him flat out—do not have skill. The confusion here is what “skill†actually is. In Street Fighter, scrubs often cling to combos as a measure of skill. A combo is a sequence of moves that is unblockable if the first move hits. Combos can be very elaborate and very difficult to pull off. But single moves can also take “skill,†according to the scrub. The “dragon punch†or “uppercut†in Street Fighter is performed by holding the joystick toward the opponent, then down, then diagonally down and toward as the player presses a punch button. This movement must be completed within a fraction of a second, and though there is leeway, it must be executed fairly accurately. Ask any scrub and they will tell you that a dragon punch is a “skill move.â€<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--coloro:gray--><span style="color:gray"><!--/coloro--><i>(Imagine that, I've managed to equate "pros" with "scrubs".)</i><!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->
The problem (which the author of the argument you linked sees as a benefit) is that it requires "mastery" - if you can do it, you gain the benefits (faster speed, more options); if you can't do it, you don't gain the benefits (slower speed, less options). And what is it that determines whether you gain the benefits, what is it that needs to be mastered? A pattern of keypresses and mouse movements. And that's what Yuuki was saying with his sarcastic shift+mouse left&right idea - a pattern of keypresses and mouse movements that give you speed - neither he, nor anyone, considered it truly a good idea - so why is bunnyhopping?
"Mastery" is not a sufficient argument, because mastery of a pattern of keypresses and mouse movements is not true mastery of the game.
Honestly, the argument of "mastery" is simply [what's another word for "elitist" that won't 'cause some people to froth at the mouth?] and really doesn't add to the game as much as you and others seem to think it does. But is (supposed) mastery the problem? I know I just said it was, but no, not really. What's the underlying problem, then? That this pattern of keypresses and mouse movements is neither obvious, nor intuitive - that this pattern of keypresses and mouse movements is entirely arbitrary, and detracts from the real game.
His "mastery" argument is essentially "I played 200 hours of this game while you only played 100 hours, so I should be twice as good as you". No, the better player should be better, the smarter player should be better. Reward quality over quantity. A person who plays less shouldn't be disadvantaged - shouldn't have less options - just because he hasn't learned the right pattern of key-presses to do a super-move. If it's a case of knowing that the options exist (options that can be learned or taught easily, in-game or out, by yourself or by another) then certainly, the person who has played more will (and should) naturally have the advantage - but he'd still have to choose the right options. But those options should never be hampered by anything other than knowledge of them, and the game situation.
And the "game within a game" argument... my word. How often does an idea like [solving a logic puzzle or welding the lines, in order to build or repair] get shot down? That's as poor an argument as I've ever heard.
<!--coloro:#99FF99--><span style="color:#99FF99"><!--/coloro-->I'm not arguing for the removal of jump (I think skulks should jump a lot, as necessary), and I'm not arguing for the removal of air control; however, bunnyhop is a different beast. "Mastery" of an arbitrary pattern of inputs, that scales with the time put into it, is not a benefit, because it's not true mastery - it's superficial, and is aside to the real game. So if the only benefit of bunnyhopping is 'more options' (flexibility, depth - which I acknowledge is an excellent example of a benefit) SIMPLY DUE TO 'more speed', then there are many other ways to achieve that which aren't exclusive.<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->
Feel free, of course, to type <!--coloro:red--><span style="color:red"><!--/coloro-->"YOU'RE WRONG! BECAUSE YOU'RE A BLIND TRIBESMAN WHO HATES THE DEVIL! EVEN THOUGH I HAVEN'T ACTUALLY READ OR UNDERSTOOD YOUR POST!"<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->, but don't expect me to take you seriously.
Very nice read! sums it up very good.
Now get your flame proof jacket on.
I read this, and watched the videos, and I can summarise his argument with two words:
"Mastery" (supposed)
"Speed"
In this case, the only <b>in-game benefit</b> from bunnyhopping that he's actually proposed is increased speed. However, speed itself opens up other avenues (<b>flexibility</b>) - other approaches to skulk play (meaningful options, depth). I believe that all of these approaches should <b>always</b> be available, not just after you've "mastered" a certain (I'll be generous) "feature". You could probably achieve the same thing with a "speed up" button, but of course "that takes no skill".
<!--coloro:gray--><span style="color:gray"><!--/coloro--><i>(Imagine that, I've managed to equate "pros" with "scrubs".)</i><!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->
The problem (which the author of the argument you linked sees as a benefit) is that it requires "mastery" - if you can do it, you gain the benefits (faster speed, more options); if you can't do it, you don't gain the benefits (slower speed, less options). And what is it that determines whether you gain the benefits, what is it that needs to be mastered? A pattern of keypresses and mouse movements. And that's what Yuuki was saying with his sarcastic shift+mouse left&right idea - a pattern of keypresses and mouse movements that give you speed - neither he, nor anyone, considered it truly a good idea - so why is bunnyhopping?
"Mastery" is not a sufficient argument, because mastery of a pattern of keypresses and mouse movements is not true mastery of the game.
Honestly, the argument of "mastery" is simply [what's another word for "elitist" that won't 'cause some people to froth at the mouth?] and really doesn't add to the game as much as you and others seem to think it does. But is (supposed) mastery the problem? I know I just said it was, but no, not really. What's the underlying problem, then? That this pattern of keypresses and mouse movements is neither obvious, nor intuitive - that this pattern of keypresses and mouse movements is entirely arbitrary, and detracts from the real game.
His "mastery" argument is essentially "I played 200 hours of this game while you only played 100 hours, so I should be twice as good as you". No, the better player should be better, the smarter player should be better. Reward quality over quantity. A person who plays less shouldn't be disadvantaged - shouldn't have less options - just because he hasn't learned the right pattern of key-presses to do a super-move. If it's a case of knowing that the options exist (options that can be learned or taught easily, in-game or out, by yourself or by another) then certainly, the person who has played more will (and should) naturally have the advantage - but he'd still have to choose the right options. But those options should never be hampered by anything other than knowledge of them, and the game situation.
And the "game within a game" argument... my word. How often does an idea like [solving a logic puzzle or welding the lines, in order to build or repair] get shot down? That's as poor an argument as I've ever heard.
<!--coloro:#99FF99--><span style="color:#99FF99"><!--/coloro-->I'm not arguing for the removal of jump (I think skulks should jump a lot, as necessary), and I'm not arguing for the removal of air control; however, bunnyhop is a different beast. "Mastery" of an arbitrary pattern of inputs, that scales with the time put into it, is not a benefit, because it's not true mastery - it's superficial, and is aside to the real game. So if the only benefit of bunnyhopping is 'more options' (flexibility, depth - which I acknowledge is an excellent example of a benefit) SIMPLY DUE TO 'more speed', then there are many other ways to achieve that which aren't exclusive.<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->
Feel free, of course, to type <!--coloro:red--><span style="color:red"><!--/coloro-->"YOU'RE WRONG! BECAUSE YOU'RE A BLIND TRIBESMAN WHO HATES THE DEVIL! EVEN THOUGH I HAVEN'T ACTUALLY READ OR UNDERSTOOD YOUR POST!"<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->, but don't expect me to take you seriously.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I tried to read through that but got pretty bored halfway through.
Bunnyhopping on alien side was just so much fun. It was super easy to learn too, people were just lazy and didn't care much.
Anyway, if you don't have quirks with the engine that raise the skill ceiling games get boring rather quickly. TF2 for example has rocket jumping/demo jumping, but can we really say that it makes it a worse game? Can players not have fun in Hat Fortress 2 if they don't know how to rocket jump properly?
That's why I've highlighted some text at the bottom in green, for the benefit of the short-attention-span riffraff (or the executives - which are you?).
<!--quoteo(post=1859964:date=Jul 12 2011, 03:46 PM:name=TrueVeritas)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TrueVeritas @ Jul 12 2011, 03:46 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1859964"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Bunnyhopping on alien side was just so much fun. It was super easy to learn too, people were just lazy and didn't care much.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ok.
<!--quoteo(post=1859964:date=Jul 12 2011, 03:46 PM:name=TrueVeritas)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TrueVeritas @ Jul 12 2011, 03:46 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1859964"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Anyway, if you don't have quirks with the engine that raise the skill ceiling games get boring rather quickly.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Right... like chess, for instance. It has no quirks, so it's such a boring game. Once they know all the game rules, people can't improve in chess.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->TF2 for example has rocket jumping/demo jumping, but can we really say that it makes it a worse game? Can players not have fun in Hat Fortress 2 if they don't know how to rocket jump properly?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Rocket-jumping isn't on the same level as bunnyhop, is it? Is there an arbitrary pattern of keypresses that you have to use to rocket-jump in TF2?
But really, more importantly than that, it's internally consistent to TF2 - it adds to the game.
Now, if rocket jumping required you to fire a rocket up in the sky, control it with your mouse, loop it back under you, jump, aim your mouse straight down at the explosion, then continue to face the explosion as you alternately tap the backward and jump keys and move backward from the explosion - AND this opened up options not available to the people who didn't do it, that might be a more appropriate analogy.
If this were the case, I would also argue for the removal of rocket-jump in TF2 (if I cared).
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><b>Bunnyhopping is FUN!</b><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I won't rehash the article; anybody interested in the actual arguments made would do well to read it for themselves instead of relying on ridiculous Harimau's strawmanning.
Now let's turn our attention to Harimau's out-of-context quote of Sirlin. Sirlin has a pretty simple philosophy: If it's there, use it. Bhop is in NS1, and if you didn't use it out of some misguided sense of how the game should be played, by Sirlin's reckoning, that makes you the scrub. Knowing how to bhop alone doesn't necessarily make a good player, but one can't help but notice all the good players, with maybe two exceptions, knew how to bhop.
Your argument that "A pattern of keypresses and mouse movements" shouldn't confer advantages to those who can pull it off is, frankly, absurd. The fact that NS2 is a FPS can't have possibly escaped even your inattention; rewarding players with better aim and movement is practically the crux of gameplay. You can't take away the advantage of technically better players without turning the game into something else entirely. But here you are, trying to turn a FPS into chess. One only need watch the videos of the ENSL article to see the options that bhop opens up, which I think is a big addition to the game. You could argue bhop execution is an unnecessary barrier to entry (An idea that in multiple paragraphs you have failed to communicate clearly), but then the onus would be on you to present an alternative that doesn't dilute gameplay. And so far, you have failed spectacularly in this effort, largely, I suspect, because your inability to bhop leaves you with zero starting point and because you're simply not interested in a system with more than simple linear movements.
By the way, Sirlin is a competitive fighting game player who does inputs like 6321478963214789+LP+MP+HP with timing windows measured in 1/60th of a second, which some would say is much more "arbitrary" than bhop. If we transplanted you into a fighting game debate, you'd be the guy arguing that fireballs should be removed because 236P is an arbitrary input and rewards players who can pull it off!
That's just a terrible comparison. People like FPS games for different reasons than chess. I realize NS2 isn't solely an FPS, but the RTS element would be nothing without the players. If you took out all player skill (aim/movement) it would just end up being boring as ###### for the marines and somewhat interesting for the commander.
<!--quoteo(post=1859986:date=Jul 12 2011, 03:42 AM:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Harimau @ Jul 12 2011, 03:42 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1859986"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Rocket-jumping isn't on the same level as bunnyhop, is it? Is there an arbitrary pattern of keypresses that you have to use to rocket-jump in TF2?
But really, more importantly than that, it's internally consistent to TF2 - it adds to the game.
Now, if rocket jumping required you to fire a rocket up in the sky, control it with your mouse, loop it back under you, jump, aim your mouse straight down at the explosion, then continue to face the explosion as you alternately tap the backward and jump keys and move backward from the explosion - AND this opened up options not available to the people who didn't do it, that might be a more appropriate analogy.
If this were the case, I would also argue for the removal of rocket-jump in TF2 (if I cared).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Rocket-jumping absolutely is on the same level as bunnyhopping. Just being able to jump in the air is one thing, but controlling the damage it does to you, where you land, how high you go, all while actually aiming in midair are all definitely skills acquired over many hours of play. For example, watch this video:
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLjKaTtJlok#t=2m47s" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLjKaTtJlok#t=2m47s</a>
You wouldn't be able to do that immediately. At high levels of soldier play, mastering rocket jumping is <b>extremely </b>important. Simple to learn, hard to master.
I know. But in what way is that an argument for the inclusion of Bhop in NS2?
If you've read much, you'd realise that Sirlin's design philosophy and his winning philosophy are, half the time, at odds with one another.
I value both.
If UWE does a 180 and decides to put bunnyhop back in - and it does confer advantages, well, I'll grit my teeth and learn it. Sirlin would advise as much.
If UWE doesn't, and yet manages to approach the same level of flexibility and control, then they've made a better game. Sirlin would advise as much.
You've also managed to completely miss the point. The point is that such an arbitrary sequence of button pressing should <b>not</b> give a player more options - there SHOULD be more options, but those options should be available from the start.
TrueVeritas:
Some people like rhythm games. You get all the patterned button pressing you want there.
Rocket-jumping itself has a very, very simple concept. The explosion sends you up. That's why rocket-jumping is not on the level of Bhop.
Bunnyhopping itself has a very, very simple concept. Strafing in the air accelerates you.
ah, the logic..
Can marines somehow track better at targets under them?
Is it more difficult to actually realize the marine jumping and adjust biting to it? For example is the bitecam different and blocks more visibility?
Does the bite reg properly on jumping targets?
Does the jump work differently? For example can you get faster acceleration from standing pose so that you can do weird leapfrogging instantly from standstill?
My guess would be that such predictable dodging as marine jumping gets a lot less effective once the game gets smoother and more responsive. Unless there's some absolutely crazy leapfrog from standstill I can't see marine going too quickly anywhere before you've got 2-3 bites in, especially without some little magic thingies with HL1 physics and knockback. All this is pure theorycrafting though.
I don't particularly like the idea of slowdowns on bite to patch the issue. As juice said in another thread: it feels like a bit of a quick hack approach that easily leads into more quick hackjobs to fix the issues the first quickfix caused.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I dont think anyone has answered these so I'll give it a go.
No unlikely in NS1 where you had short of "range" in the bite in NS2 you need to go inside the marine literally usually losing sight to land a bite.
No it is very hard because you can just walkthrough
Biting the spot he'll land is much more effective so I really dont know.
Nope the jump is quite small feels like the marine is jumping against gravity 3 times of the normal and it is always the same length (spammy)
You are right, but because it is very easy to lose target (go through) and ends up in messy combat unlike NS1 only stillstanding targets die "fast". The server reg if 200 ping or higher does not work correctly, the client approves skulk bites giving you an ok but you usually end up with 7 hits that registered for you to a normal a0/a1 guy anyway.
You predicted right, it did not bring a joyable result although jump spam was consirerably reduced. Alien slowdown probably didnt even cross your mind? Me neither.
My theory is unchanged - the reason people want BHop back is because they're a bunch of nostalgic drama queens who mastered the skill a long time ago and want things to be 'like they used to be' not because they were actually superior gameplay concepts in any way, but so they can leverage their skill monopoly.
Generally the same people who want BHop are the same collection of ###### who ruined NS with 'play to win' mentalities. You know, exploits are fine because 'anyone can do them' and 'they're part of the game'. Yeah, nothing like hitting marine spawn with an early Onos and then getting glued in spot with a well-placed CC.
As for the topic: I've always been opposed to marines getting some sort of 'advantage' in close combat, which is why crackjumping (as it used to be known) has always sucked. See the problem is, when in close fighting, the marines are still unimpeded by a skulk nipping at their ankles, while a skulk is blinded every time it bites. Additionally, let's not forget the oh-so incredibly moronic knockback melee attacks would do, so a badly timed bite would hurl a marine across the room, where he could then riddle you with bullets.
As much as it destroys atmosphere, it also gave marines too much of a chance when put in a situation where they deserve to lose. If you can't kill the alien with your bullets at range, where you have the advantage, your odds of killing the alien should drop significantly when subject to close range attacks. Letting the marines leap around like retards shooting at their toes has always sucked.
I'm not really for or against bunnyhoping but your argument interested me from a game design standpoint.
"The person who plays less <b>shouldn't</b> be disadvantaged?" Says who? Why not? They will always be disadvantaged because they will have less knowledge and experience of the game.
Why shouldn't a player be required to do something difficult in order to achieve a benefit?
If you were arguing about the game of pool you'd be saying, "The player shouldn't need to practice for hours and hours in order to be able to pull off these impressive shots, they should be able to play all shots right from the start and only be required to choose the right ones." That would make for a boring game because everyone would be able to play it optimally.
The harder the game is to master the bigger the difference there can be between two individual players skill levels. This makes a game enjoyable and competitive because you are always trying to improve. If you hit a plateau where you had mastered everything and all you had to do was make correct decisions then it would become boring very quickly.
This is also what makes games and sports interesting to watch. When a golfer pulls off an unbelievable shot everyone can appreciate it and they know that he has spent thousands of hours playing in order to get that good. If everyone could do it, it wouldn't be a big deal and the game would be boring.
A game being difficult to master and rewarding players who practice is good. It makes people come back and play again and again. It makes people enjoy watching good players. It makes the game fun and competitive to test your abilities against your opponents.
I challenge you to name one good game that is played competitively that doesn't require practice and mastery. It doesn't exist.
Good thing leap is a base ability making nearly every encounter a close range one.
Tribes 1 - Jetpacks are for flying from Point A to Point B. Then you land, and let it recharge. Eventually someone discovered that due to an exploit in the movement code, if you spammed your spacebar to such a degree that it was about to break off and stab you in the eye, you could slide up and down terrain and retain your momentum. Thus, skiing was born, using terrain like ski jumps to slide down a mountain, across open terrain, and up another.
Tribes 2 - Skiing, having become a vital aspect of movement in Tribes, was retained - however, the spacebar spam aspect was removed and it was explained even in the tutorials, so that everyone was aware of it and could do it all the time. However, you still had to actually land your ski jumps on terrain and feather your jetpack properly to do it successfully. The ridiculous esoteric bull###### 'strafe in the air with perfect timing' aspect was removed, yet the concept was retained, which by making it easier for everyone to do it meant the game was that much richer overall.
That isn't what he said at all.
Strawman much?
I would absolutely adore unknown worlds if they decided to put bunnyhopping into the game, it would add that extra touch of special that we all love about watching skilled NS1 players play. (Don't tell me you ever watched someone in NS on aliens bunnyhop from their perspective and subsequently thought how boring the game was).
It's a skill, a technique which can be utilized to cover area quickly - a concept which is absolutely brilliant in the context of a dynamic FPS strategy game!
And, just as a side note to UW (incase they are actually reading this, but given the considerable whining in the thread, I doubt it) - if BH is considered for implementation, 1 hive leap = too much momentum early game to feed into bunnyhopping & will result in a very large skill gap between players early on in the game.
(and on the 1 hive leap, I feel that it's discouraging skulk ambush tactics early on - where's the ALIENS atmosphere!? thud..... thud..... beep..... thud.... beep....beep...beep..beep.beep OH S#@T!) haha
Aliens would've been way better if Hicks just jumped a lot.
Actually I was serious, to some degree. I'm actually a proponent of some sort of bunnyhopping-like mechanism in the game. I would like however that 1) it makes some sense physically and 2) it should be explained clearly with a tutorial or such.
There is also a bit of confusion about this "pattern of keypresses". The idea is not to have a stiff "if" condition that check you made the correct pattern, but to have a dynamical system (the laws of physics that control the dynamics of your body in the game) which shows some kind of resonance phenomena to periodic inputs. It's something much more soft and natural than just a sequences of keys.
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resonance" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resonance</a>
I'm quite convinced that a lot of stuff could be done along theses lines. For example for the skulk you could do a gait transition (from trot to gallop) that could be easily be feedbacked to the user with camera movement.
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gait" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gait</a>
You can't have options available without a way to execute them. Like I said, if you don't like it, the onus is on you to present a viable alternative. You keep insisting the current control scheme is "arbitrary" (Which as far as I can tell, is just codeword for "Anything I don't understand"), so why don't you come up with an non-arbitrary alternative?
Strawman much?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm just trying to understand his argument.
He said "A person who plays less shouldn't be disadvantaged - shouldn't have less options - just because he hasn't learned the right pattern of key-presses to do a super-move."
Please tell me why this is true? And what makes bunny hoping a super-move?
Tribes 1 - Jetpacks are for flying from Point A to Point B. Then you land, and let it recharge. Eventually someone discovered that due to an exploit in the movement code, if you spammed your spacebar to such a degree that it was about to break off and stab you in the eye, you could slide up and down terrain and retain your momentum. Thus, skiing was born, using terrain like ski jumps to slide down a mountain, across open terrain, and up another.
Tribes 2 - Skiing, having become a vital aspect of movement in Tribes, was retained - however, the spacebar spam aspect was removed and it was explained even in the tutorials, so that everyone was aware of it and could do it all the time. However, you still had to actually land your ski jumps on terrain and feather your jetpack properly to do it successfully. The ridiculous esoteric bull###### 'strafe in the air with perfect timing' aspect was removed, yet the concept was retained, which by making it easier for everyone to do it meant the game was that much richer overall.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Even further than that:
Tribes 3: (actually my favorite, despite it being being a popular un-game nowadays) Ski-jumping was made a <b>vital skill</b>. Maps were designed with many hills and open areas to facilitate ski-jumping. Feathering the jetpack wasn't even needed - you had a button to press that turned on your "anti-grav" boots, which made you hover in the air and slide down the hills. 'Skill' was still present. It simply shifted focus: skilled players knew how to land on the inside curve of a hill to develop speed, and when to jump and jetpack at the right moment to take off at the apex of the crest for a huge speed and altitude increase. Fights shifted and became much more fast-paced and aerial: skilled players could land incredible midair spinfusor shots with great accuracy from long distances while in midair themselves, or midair sniping. I spent plenty of hours on that desert map (i forget the name) where in order to get the red flag, you needed to perform a perfect 2-hill skijump to get the correct height.
The focus of the skill shifted, you didn't have to use scripts or mouse/keyboard trainers anymore. The skill was put back into actual combat and fast target aquisition and tracking/leading.
Beautiful.