<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->- Assuming most competitive players do not enjoy ambient sounds. Given an option, most competitive players would be happy disabling ambient sounds and only a small portion would be unhappy knowing that they must turn them off to remain competitive.
- Assuming most non-competitive players enjoy ambient sounds. Given an option, most non-competitive players would enable ambient sounds ignoring the fact that they would be at an extremely small disadvantage.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Do you realize that there is no disadvantage if there is no option to turn it off? If something doesnt have an option to turn it off everybody plays with equal settings - leading to a better overall balance. Just because ppl are used to play games that have flashy one colored skins, no textures, no sounds other then enemy footsteps doesnt mean that this is the only way competition is possible. No ambient sound, no music, no muzzle flash, no weapon models, low level textures with high model textures, etc. this things make big differences, every one point - and developers are aware of that.
Look at CoD5, ambient sound is under special effects (weapon, footsteps, etc) texture settings are just overall, so lowering the options doesnt popout the models, smoke nades are nearly equal in all options, etc.
Lets better focus on a list(if you think UWE will listen, what i dont really belive but well) that has a balance and works for lowend systems instead of turning a game into a quake arena pendant. As few as possible and as much as needed - thats how it should be.
only games with not to eye distracting textures are really usefull for competitive gaming. (pupular: quake, counterstrike usw)
(sure you can make carracing in old vw cars, - funny - but not such interessting like nscar or f1.)
if i play i want to rule with my skill. so i want to see my oponent as good as possible.
no hudguns - fov 130 - fast movement - advanced (team-)gameplay (not instagib in a cube map ;) )
thats how and where HUMANS can show what they got, everything else is for sundayplayers and ppl who dont want to strain oneself :) its okay for public, its okay for everything else, but competitive :)
<!--quoteo(post=1736027:date=Nov 4 2009, 05:38 PM:name=Loey)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Loey @ Nov 4 2009, 05:38 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1736027"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->a skulks eyes arent in his mouth so why should my view be from there? i would always use r_drawviewmodels 0 because the teeth just annoyed me.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> To paraphrase Charlie, it's because looking down his snout is just boring. And its a pretty iconic NS view.
<!--quoteo(post=1736040:date=Nov 4 2009, 02:55 AM:name=Voyager I)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Voyager I @ Nov 4 2009, 02:55 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1736040"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I wasn't looking at ambient sounds from the perspective of immersion; I'm talking about them as a gameplay element. I'm a bad player right now, but I'm still approaching this game with a competitive mindset. If there's an area where you can't hear skulks moving on the ceiling above you or gunfire the next room over, both teams have to change the way they play accordingly. It's not about 'spooky' atmospheric effects, but just another way players must adapt to their environment, the same way you're more careful in rooms with elaborate ceilings and you don't generally try to hold positions directly under a vent.
However, if there are going to be significant technical issues with this like the ones you've mentioned, or most people are simply going to find it more annoying than it's worth as a terrain feature, then I agree that it's not something that should be included (or at least enforced).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Ambient sounds don't really have a significant affect on gameplay in NS1, they just arn't that profound. However, the volume of gun shots, biting, and blinking do affect NS1 gameplay. Of course, ambient sounds could potential affect gameplay in NS2. Given that I don't like how gun shots, explosions, biting, or blinking affects gameplay in NS1 I would rather not see ambient sounds be introduced as a game element in NS2.
<!--quoteo(post=1736044:date=Nov 4 2009, 03:26 AM:name=Koruyo)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Koruyo @ Nov 4 2009, 03:26 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1736044"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Do you realize that there is no disadvantage if there is no option to turn it off? If something doesnt have an option to turn it off everybody plays with equal settings - leading to a better overall balance. Just because ppl are used to play games that have flashy one colored skins, no textures, no sounds other then enemy footsteps doesnt mean that this is the only way competition is possible. No ambient sound, no music, no muzzle flash, no weapon models, low level textures with high model textures, etc. this things make big differences, every one point - and developers are aware of that.
Look at CoD5, ambient sound is under special effects (weapon, footsteps, etc) texture settings are just overall, so lowering the options doesnt popout the models, smoke nades are nearly equal in all options, etc.
Lets better focus on a list(if you think UWE will listen, what i dont really belive but well) that has a balance and works for lowend systems instead of turning a game into a quake arena pendant. As few as possible and as much as needed - thats how it should be.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Do you realize that many players would be unhappy if there were no option to turn it off? That was actually the entire point of my post, the benefit of the option has to out-way the effect on game balance.
But anyways, yes, it goes without saying that there should not be an option for "turning off walls". If you want a formal list, we can start it with:
1) A full range of gamma and brightness settings 2) Range of options to modify graphical effects (including volumetric fog, shaders, texture detail, etc) 3) Adjustable ambient volume 4) Options to scale waypoints or any similar items 5) I'm sure I could think of more with time
<!--quoteo(post=1736055:date=Nov 4 2009, 08:07 AM:name=derWalter)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (derWalter @ Nov 4 2009, 08:07 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1736055"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->this is how i like it:
Wow, that's really completely destroying the work of the ones who made the game.
And on to the ambience... doesn't it involve more skill to actually plan out how loud a room is and use that to your advantage? Say a Skulk is moving around a player who's running in a loud room to attack him. He can do this because there's ambience that masks his sound up. There'll of course be ways to adjust your speakers for that, but it's still going to be such a minority that I think it's negligible. Is that such a bad design choice? I personally think it only improves and evolves the game since there's more to take notice of, and we can move away from the ridiculous downscaling just to make it easier for you.
That or just we make a pro setting available in a separate tab in the server-list where they can just downscale away all they want (to a certain extent of course), where clanners and tournaments can take place.
locallyunsceneFeeder of TrollsJoin Date: 2002-12-25Member: 11528Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1736058:date=Nov 4 2009, 08:16 AM:name=homicide)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (homicide @ Nov 4 2009, 08:16 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1736058"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Given that I don't like how gun shots, explosions, biting, or blinking affects gameplay in NS1 I would rather not see ambient sounds be introduced as a game element in NS2.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Funny, I especially like how that is a part of gameplay.
<!--quoteo(post=1735997:date=Nov 4 2009, 02:41 AM:name=a_civilian)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (a_civilian @ Nov 4 2009, 02:41 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1735997"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Conversely, if you let people disable ambient sounds, view models, or other such atmospheric effects, then suddenly everyone who wants to compete fairly has to disable them. For that reason I would prefer that such customization not be allowed (except where necessary).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
^ ^ ^ ^
This. In which case, why even bother making the pretty options in the first place if, in order to play fairly, you have to turn them off?
<!--quoteo(post=1736023:date=Nov 4 2009, 06:08 AM:name=homicide)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (homicide @ Nov 4 2009, 06:08 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1736023"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->For example: - Assuming most competitive players do not enjoy ambient sounds. Given an option, most competitive players would be happy disabling ambient sounds and only a small portion would be unhappy knowing that they must turn them off to remain competitive.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Now, is this because competitive players want to turn things off because they have a valid reason to do so, or is this because it's just something that they expect because "that's how it's always been"? I think they'd be more upset and start saying "Well we can do it in ____!" than start crafting arguments based around how crappy their computer is or how it's somehow unfair to be forced to run on the same settings as the next guy.
While I sympathize with those who (allegedly) have hardware issues, that's their problem, not mine, and when you adjust your game to overcome it it's now becoming my problem. Where do you draw the line? Maybe you have bad eyesight so you justify using fullbright models. As I've been aware of it, in all true competitive environments, you must be playing with the same settings or damn-near. Playing with tweaked models, skins, sounds would get you thrown out.
The entire point of competition is that you're all on the same playing field. Anything you do to make the map a little more visible unevens that playing field.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The problem with ambient sounds in NS1 is that most of them were just placed atmospherically to make a pretty map, not with gameplay in mind, so they get annoying.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Agreed. That was my entire point when making this thread is to connect map design and gameplay in a meaningful way. No other FPS I can think of has such a heavy reliance on map design and atmosphere. Unreal Tournament maps are pretty, but they're still just meaningless noise, as the driving force isn't map control or tactics but just flying around the map in technicolor armor at the speed of sound with your shock rifle.
if i play i want to rule with my skill. so i want to see my oponent as good as possible.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> You do realize your inability to play without cheating like that is an indicator of your LACK of skill, right? You're really not helping the point with examples like that.
The problem with ambient sounds in NS1 is that most of them were just placed atmospherically to make a pretty map, not with gameplay in mind, so they get annoying.
I'd have no problem with them in NS2 if they were actively balanced as part of map playtests as well.
The gaming community will choose what is right and what is wrong. There is a plugin which takes ingame screenshots to show any unwanted "graphic exploits" for example. If a pubber is unhappy with being disadvantagious (Is that a word? if not I just made it) he should just live with it and enjoy better graphics or join the club. The graphics and the "cool" feeling will lose its meaning but what keeps you playing is the gameplay and fun playing with your mates.
I'll use viewmodels in TF2 as an example of something that affects gameplay, but people still differ based on personal preference. (Turning off viewmodels used to be an exploit, but Valve has since added it as a proper option)
Most performance-oriented players genuinely prefer to disable viewmodels; they draw the eye away from the crosshair, occupy screen space, and are generally an annoyance to people who don't like them. If they were forced to play <i>with</i> viewmodels, they would be unhappy.
Most experience-oriented players genuinely prefer to enable viewmodels; looking at their weapon is part of the fun for them, and they couldn't imagine turning it off even if it would make it easier to aim.
By making it an option, Valve has managed to appease both parties. This <i>does</i> mean people without viewmodels have a small advantage over people who leave them on, but since most of that group cares about the experience of the game more than raw performance they don't necessarily care about being at a minor disadvantage. If you simply forced viewmodels on for everybody, you end up alienating one group where a compromise could have satisfied nearly everybody.
And Homicide, I disagree with your opinion about gunfire etc. Knowing that shootouts prevent your enemies from hearing is a gameplay mechanic.
This reminds me of right before I had upgraded my computer and still had a Radeon X1300, playing CoD4. Now I had to have low, crappy settings in that because my computer wouldn't allow me to play with anything higher. However, it got to the point where I didn't want to play because it gave me such an unfair advantage over those with better computers who rather see the intended product and not just ground textures after 5 feet from your view.
Call me weird, crazy, a nerd- Whatever, the list of reasons I play games are as followed <ul>-Be immersed in the game world by the graphics, sounds and movements. -Enjoy the gameplay.</li></ul> Now I'm not saying that you can have a good game with just great graphics and effects, but a big part of playing any game is immersion for me. Rarely do I play a game just to prove I'm better. I do it to have fun and my fun is from the immersion I experience with friends while playing.
-------------- Ambiance Shadows Sounds Viewmodels -------------- All parts of the immersion process that allow me to enjoy games to the fullest. Whenever things of the sort can be disabled to allow for a gameplay advantage, the game is no longer balanced and forces some people to do the same to not be at a disadvantage. So I personally feel that things like that should be something forced in the NS2Vanilla servers.
This brings me back to my favorite answer for any features people argue about though, "If you want it that bad, create a mod for it".
PS: @OP- Great post, nice to see a topic that is a real problem in games.
<!--quoteo(post=1736282:date=Nov 4 2009, 08:26 PM:name=Voyager I)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Voyager I @ Nov 4 2009, 08:26 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1736282"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->And Homicide, I disagree with your opinion about gunfire etc. Knowing that shootouts prevent your enemies from hearing is a gameplay mechanic.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Oh yes, it is certainly a game mechanic, just not a good one.
<!--quoteo(post=1736129:date=Nov 5 2009, 03:28 AM:name=MuYeah)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MuYeah @ Nov 5 2009, 03:28 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1736129"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The problem with ambient sounds in NS1 is that most of them were just placed atmospherically to make a pretty map, not with gameplay in mind, so they get annoying.
I'd have no problem with them in NS2 if they were actively balanced as part of map playtests as well.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Most of them were far too intrusive and and sometimes seemed to be coming from no where. I think if they were using sparingly, strategically and effectively it could be pretty interesting.
<!--quoteo(post=1736286:date=Nov 5 2009, 05:24 AM:name=homicide)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (homicide @ Nov 5 2009, 05:24 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1736286"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Oh yes, it is certainly a game mechanic, just not a good one.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Can you explain how it's a bad mechanic? I'm inexperienced with NS, so I'm willing to accept a convincing argument. Is there something inherently unfair about Marines being easier to ambush whenever they're fighting?
I also want to add that viewmodels are most definitely also a balance factor. Sure, maybe not a whole lot of thought went into making the LMG the size it is - I'm sure at some point they're never going to have a balance patch that shrinks the gun's size by 0.2% - but the point is the disadvantage of a big gun is extremely obvious right off the bat - it takes away a lot of viewable space on your right flank - and the advantages of a weapon that allows more visibility is also obvious. In other words, there's no way they didn't think of a large gun model having some sort of in-game impact. Maybe a balance facet of the minigun can be an enormous view model, a huge muzzle flash, and heat rippling the air. You can dispense lots of pain, but you can't see a god damn thing while you're doing it.
All this is moot however - the skulk's jaws are quite obviously the only real proof I need to provide that view models are a balancing aspect. The eyes are in the mouth, and a side-effect of that is that you go blind while biting. Which doesn't happen if you have the viewmodel turned off. Which makes skulking a hundred million infinity billion trillion times easier.
You know it seems to me that if people were so god damn skilled, turning things *OFF* would be the last things in their minds to do...
Yeah, I'll agree that the Skulk's bite-cam probably has too big an impact on gameplay to be disabled. However, I still don't like playing with viewmodels for guns.
<!--quoteo(post=1736062:date=Nov 4 2009, 02:22 PM:name=Triggerman)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Triggerman @ Nov 4 2009, 02:22 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1736062"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Wow, that's really completely destroying the work of the ones who made the game.
And on to the ambience... doesn't it involve more skill to actually plan out how loud a room is and use that to your advantage? Say a Skulk is moving around a player who's running in a loud room to attack him. He can do this because there's ambience that masks his sound up. There'll of course be ways to adjust your speakers for that, but it's still going to be such a minority that I think it's negligible. Is that such a bad design choice? I personally think it only improves and evolves the game since there's more to take notice of, and we can move away from the ridiculous downscaling just to make it easier for you.
That or just we make a pro setting available in a separate tab in the server-list where they can just downscale away all they want (to a certain extent of course), where clanners and tournaments can take place.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
i can understand what you are saying, but im talking about performance (not the computers, the gamers). a peacock, is nice to look at with his standing wheel, but totally useless in his daily routine. if he has to perform as good as possible and not as beautifull as possible he will duck, fold his wheel and run.
playing a game vanilla is always an adventure, especially in singleplayer games or vs computer (wow eg), but if i dont want to loose i will start to do everything possible my moral allows me to do. thats the point where cheating comes in, i never want to cheat! but i want to perform as goo as possible.
and there is also an other point. realism. i love games looking like games. i lovedboxmodels in cs, because they dont look human, i dont like shooting at human looking models. thats why in germany is the "killerspiel"controversy and they are right in some points and ofc in their basics. eg i love quake for their robot models, but i dont like the gameplay, so i have to stay with cs :| ns is too inaktive. sometimes we play 10 cs league matches at one evening.
A game where visibility and noise is not an issue is much more shallow. Stealth in particular suffers. <i>Thief</i> is an excellent example of making vision and sound part of gameplay. Ironically, you need stupid AI opponents to make that work, because in most games players can tweak the hell out of it and ruin everything. The thing is, <b>it is possible to effectively remove features by adding them</b>. It's called no-brainers. If a game has options which are vastly superior to others, only those are used. Example: weapons other than rocket launcher, railgun, chainguin in Quake2. The weapons are so good by comparison that machinegun, shotgun, double shotgun, grenade launcher, hyperblaster are no contest. Even more drastic example - quad damage and BFG. Many players agree to disable these things, because they are so powerful they warp the game around them, <b>reducing fun</b>. More options don't enhance gameplay. You need more <i>viable</i> options. Otherwise they're clutter and <i>dead code</i> (code that can't ever be executed when a program runs).
If a small portion of players disables shadows (say, 20% of server population), the rest of players soon learns that you can't hide in shadows. You're going to be shot instead. Just like you need a small number teamkillers and other jerks to ruin gameplay. In this case an option is a false choice.
For those saying that darkness and sound wouldn't create interesting gameplay - how do you know ? Have you actually played a game where these things are important ? Just because competitive players are shallow, can't adapt and are and close-minded and extremely conservative doesn't mean you have to be. Competitive players are enemies of innovation. If they had their way, we'd be stuck playing Quake1.*
Design is not a democratic process. 'Wisdom of crowds' works only for facts. When it comes to design, <i>votes become vetoes</i>. If you try to create a game which offends no one, you create a game that excites no one.
Try playing Splinter Cell series multiplayer for a perfect example of ambient sounds + light and dark affecting gameplay, especially as the Mercenaries which have a first person perspective.
<!--quoteo(post=1736285:date=Nov 5 2009, 05:10 AM:name=EnragedPlatypus)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (EnragedPlatypus @ Nov 5 2009, 05:10 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1736285"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><ul>-Be immersed in the game world by the graphics, sounds and movements. -Enjoy the gameplay.</li></ul><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Who wouldn't.
At least my problem is that I enjoy understanding various systems and their logic too much. Combine that with huge amount of gaming experience and multiplayer games just stop working immersion wise. For example in public NS every other marine is doing something so useless or blatantly stupid that any illusion of trained space marines shatters instantly. After that the next skulk just runs right into without being harmful in any way and the survival feel is gone.
By all mean I recommend enjoying the NS atmosphere if you can, but you it's necessary to understand that not everyone is even capable of doing that. For me the thrill in NS is to learn to adapt my thinking so that I understand as much of the game as possible and simultaneously learn the FPS skills to shape the gameplay flow into my liking. A little like playing Chess, but with 1 second turns at max.
<!--quoteo(post=1736344:date=Nov 5 2009, 04:26 PM:name=borsuk)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (borsuk @ Nov 5 2009, 04:26 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1736344"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><i>Thief</i> is an excellent example of making vision and sound part of gameplay. Ironically, you need stupid AI opponents to make that work, because in most games players can tweak the hell out of it and ruin everything. [/url]<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thief is an absolute thing of beaty when it comes to atmosphere, but I could never see it working as a multiplayer, not at least Player vs Player. Thievery UT was interesting and fun on LAN, but it was mostly just the interesting mind games between the thieves and guards, not because of the immersion.
Broadly speaking, players can be grouped into two separate categories based on their primary motivation for gaming; Performance and Immersion.
Immersion gamers play for the experience; they want to lose themselves in the atmosphere of the setting. The world of the game is very much alive to them, and any sort of eye candy or special effects that can deepen that immersion are a plus, even if it's a little harder to see the aliens when the all particle effects are maxed out.
Performance gamers play to compete. To them, the game is a game, and the setting matters much less than the fact that they're playing it against other people. Anything other than a certified game mechanic that makes it more difficult to play at their best is an annoyance to be removed wherever possible.
Nearly all competitive players are Performance-oriented, while the majority of casual gamers are most likely more concerned with immersion. Neither perspective is 'wrong' and most gamers fall somewhere between either extreme. Very few competitive players actually want to play with bright skins even if that is the most 'pure' competitive option, and the simple fact that a multiplayer game must be played against human opponents means that most casual gamers are at least a little competitive about it; if the special effects get truly out of hand, you can rest assured that even Immersion gamers will complain. However, in general terms, these two groups will have conflicting preferences over many possible settings. Furthermore, both parties <i>enjoy</i> playing the way they do, and forcing one to abide by the decisions of the other will make the game genuinely less fun for them. As such, if you want to make as many people happy as possible (and I'm assuming this is the general policy of most developers), it's best to offer compromises wherever you can. Decide what is merely aesthetic rather than an actual game mechanic, and allow players to customize their experience as much as possible without allowing the Performance players to gain an unacceptably broad advantage over those who play for immersion.
As far as darkness and sound being gameplay elements...the question isn't so much "are these good elements?" as "can these be practically enforced from player to player?" Since gamma settings can essentially negate most attempts at using shadow as a mechanic and, as explained by Homicide, the actual effect of sounds can vary wildly between hardware configurations without any malicious intent (or even knowledge), the answers so far point to "no". If there's no way to ensure they function identically for everyone involved, they certainly can't be used as a significant gameplay mechanic.
"If they had their way, we'd be stuck playing Quake1"
Borsuk nearly nailed it. _______________________________
Its just false that someone wouldnt like/buy a game just because you dont have these "competative" options. People want this options because they know some wont change them, and some wont even recognize that there are such options. Its an advantage over the average crowd. (more or less like insider knowledge) (A.e. it took me months to find out, that i could turn of viemodels in ns, adjust this and that, write an pistol fast/autoshot script whatever... it really improved my gameplay by 200% - but i knew it was unfair, still not a cheat i could have been banned for - so for sure i did it)
BE HONEST, AND THINK ABOUT IT!
Is it really the ambient sound(insert random) you cant live with? Remember, everybody else has them too!
Its not about graphics shadows ambient, its about fairness! And competition needs more fairness, and not wasting weeks to figure out the best configs to gain andvantages!
So st*u with your false excuses and be honest to yourself.
The more options you give, the more ppl will try to exploit them into the biggest advantage possible.
I still think the logical thing is to simply not design the game so that the visual experience and the playability are in direct opposition to each other.
If a lot of people are turning off viewmodels because they find them obstructive then you need to make them smaller. If people are turning up the gamma to see in the dark you need to make it brighter, and if people are using scripts to fire pistols faster, I would suggest making the pistol automatic and balancing it around that because that's obviously the best way to use it.
<!--quoteo(post=1736377:date=Nov 5 2009, 06:41 PM:name=Koruyo)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Koruyo @ Nov 5 2009, 06:41 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1736377"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The more options you give, the more ppl will try to exploit them into the biggest advantage possible.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But this doesn't ring true for everyone, some people will crank the graphics up to maximum, enabling every visual flair and some others will even choose options to put themselves at a disadvantage for a more fun/challenging game.
For example in every source game I own I disable the crosshairs, singleplayer and multiplayer. I'll do the same with other games if I can too.
<!--quoteo(post=1736055:date=Nov 4 2009, 08:07 AM:name=derWalter)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (derWalter @ Nov 4 2009, 08:07 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1736055"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->this is how i like it:
if i play i want to rule with my skill. so i want to see my oponent as good as possible.
- my opinion.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Your definition of skill is much narrower than mine. Yours excludes tactical thinking required to utilize such gameplay mechanics as shadows and sounds to your advantage. Your definition of skill is less deep than mine.
So i had an idea about this whole shadows thing. I have no idea if this is posible, but hear me out:
What if the game could "know" how much "light" any given spot on the map had. If you enter an area that goes below a certain light threshhold then you are considered to be "in shadow." Now this "shadow coefficient" would be different depending on how dark a shadow you are in.
Now that we've got the framework, lets work out a mechanical system that will allow this to be fair to everyone.
The higher your shadow coefficient, the more transparent your model becomes. If you are in pure darkness, your model is invisible. Even someone will full gamma on using some special driver and super bright monitor will not know you are there. Whats worse, they probably will not know to check that location because they can't tell how dark it actually is. Perhaps if they'd set their gamma correctly they'd be better able to know where the dark spots on the map are, and shoot blindly when they suspect an ambush.
"But Bridger," you say, "won't this mean that the semi-transparent models in semi-darkness will still be easier to spot by the super-gamma'd player?" Yes, they will, and that's why your gamma setting will determine how transparent people are. The higher your gamma setting, the more transparent you become in darkness. Maybe there's no feasable way to do this and have it work effectively. But damned if I don't want to try. :P
Gamma can be adjusted outside of in-game settings, so there's really no way to police it without actually being able to see everybody's screen, and Homicide already gave a pretty clear explanation of how sound doesn't work consistently across different hardware configurations in a way that developers cannot even begin to regulate.
This isn't to say that they would be bad mechanics, but simply that there's no way to ensure that everyone's playing the same game. Unfortunately, this means the only fair option is not to include them as significant elements.
i know i make an idiot of myself talking english :////////
skill for me is a compilation of such things like: aiming, map knowledege, movement, teamplay, discipline and ofc intelligence (ever played with godlike aim but dumb as a stone? *puke^23*) my english skills are limiting me.
if i start here, to try to express my thougts i got called a TROLL :/// i srsly want to talk about this topic, because it means so much to me (and ofc i played from 1998 to 2001 competitive sc and from 1999 on cs)
voyager hitted the nail on his head, i always played diablo2 or sc1 single missions and funmaps for atmosphere!!!!
also saying in q2 ssg and gl are naer useless, cmon... i loved to pwn ppl infight with ssg doing up to 120damage per shot! (thats close to the railguns 150dmg!) so pls stop talking about topic u dont know well. i played q2 competitive as well, but not as successful as sc || cs ;)
I should also point out on DerWalter's behalf that his screenshot appears to be from some iteration of Quake or another Arena-Style shooter. Those sorts of games are essentially pure competition and performance with little to no attention given to immersion. Different standards apply to them than more casual or atmospheric games like Natural Selection. While Bright Skins would be ridiculous in the context of NS and are banned in competition, in Quake Live you aren't really playing properly until you're forcing enemy models. DerWalter's screenshot takes it about a half-step further than that, but it's still well within the acceptable bounds for the game it was taken in. In Arena games, they want to focus on being able to hit your opponent rather than struggling to pick him out from his environment. NS has different gameplay and a different community, so obviously the same standard of appropriate customization doesn't apply.
I think one things that consoles have over home computers regarding gaming is the fixed experience. Everyone has one piece of hardware, running the game the exact same way.
They should not allow players to turn off ambient sounds or dynamic shadows. The competitive and casual experience should be as close as possible in my opinion.
Comments
Given an option, most competitive players would be happy disabling ambient sounds and only a small portion would be unhappy knowing that they must turn them off to remain competitive.
- Assuming most non-competitive players enjoy ambient sounds.
Given an option, most non-competitive players would enable ambient sounds ignoring the fact that they would be at an extremely small disadvantage.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Do you realize that there is no disadvantage if there is no option to turn it off? If something doesnt have an option to turn it off everybody plays with equal settings - leading to a better overall balance.
Just because ppl are used to play games that have flashy one colored skins, no textures, no sounds other then enemy footsteps doesnt mean that this is the only way competition is possible.
No ambient sound, no music, no muzzle flash, no weapon models, low level textures with high model textures, etc. this things make big differences, every one point - and developers are aware of that.
Look at CoD5, ambient sound is under special effects (weapon, footsteps, etc) texture settings are just overall, so lowering the options doesnt popout the models, smoke nades are nearly equal in all options, etc.
Lets better focus on a list(if you think UWE will listen, what i dont really belive but well) that has a balance and works for lowend systems instead of turning a game into a quake arena pendant.
As few as possible and as much as needed - thats how it should be.
<a href="http://www.derwalter.com/games/bilder/sauertroopermodelscreenshot_big.jpg" target="_blank">http://www.derwalter.com/games/bilder/saue...eenshot_big.jpg</a>
only games with not to eye distracting textures are really usefull for competitive gaming.
(pupular: quake, counterstrike usw)
(sure you can make carracing in old vw cars, - funny - but not such interessting like nscar or f1.)
if i play i want to rule with my skill. so i want to see my oponent as good as possible.
no hudguns - fov 130 - fast movement - advanced (team-)gameplay (not instagib in a cube map ;) )
thats how and where HUMANS can show what they got,
everything else is for sundayplayers and ppl who dont want to strain oneself :)
its okay for public, its okay for everything else, but competitive :)
- my opinion.
To paraphrase Charlie, it's because looking down his snout is just boring. And its a pretty iconic NS view.
However, if there are going to be significant technical issues with this like the ones you've mentioned, or most people are simply going to find it more annoying than it's worth as a terrain feature, then I agree that it's not something that should be included (or at least enforced).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ambient sounds don't really have a significant affect on gameplay in NS1, they just arn't that profound. However, the volume of gun shots, biting, and blinking do affect NS1 gameplay. Of course, ambient sounds could potential affect gameplay in NS2. Given that I don't like how gun shots, explosions, biting, or blinking affects gameplay in NS1 I would rather not see ambient sounds be introduced as a game element in NS2.
(The atmospheric garble was not directed at you)
Just because ppl are used to play games that have flashy one colored skins, no textures, no sounds other then enemy footsteps doesnt mean that this is the only way competition is possible.
No ambient sound, no music, no muzzle flash, no weapon models, low level textures with high model textures, etc. this things make big differences, every one point - and developers are aware of that.
Look at CoD5, ambient sound is under special effects (weapon, footsteps, etc) texture settings are just overall, so lowering the options doesnt popout the models, smoke nades are nearly equal in all options, etc.
Lets better focus on a list(if you think UWE will listen, what i dont really belive but well) that has a balance and works for lowend systems instead of turning a game into a quake arena pendant.
As few as possible and as much as needed - thats how it should be.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Do you realize that many players would be unhappy if there were no option to turn it off? That was actually the entire point of my post, the benefit of the option has to out-way the effect on game balance.
But anyways, yes, it goes without saying that there should not be an option for "turning off walls".
If you want a formal list, we can start it with:
1) A full range of gamma and brightness settings
2) Range of options to modify graphical effects (including volumetric fog, shaders, texture detail, etc)
3) Adjustable ambient volume
4) Options to scale waypoints or any similar items
5) I'm sure I could think of more with time
<a href="http://www.derwalter.com/games/bilder/sauertroopermodelscreenshot_big.jpg" target="_blank">http://www.derwalter.com/games/bilder/saue...eenshot_big.jpg</a><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Wow, that's really completely destroying the work of the ones who made the game.
And on to the ambience... doesn't it involve more skill to actually plan out how loud a room is and use that to your advantage? Say a Skulk is moving around a player who's running in a loud room to attack him. He can do this because there's ambience that masks his sound up. There'll of course be ways to adjust your speakers for that, but it's still going to be such a minority that I think it's negligible.
Is that such a bad design choice? I personally think it only improves and evolves the game since there's more to take notice of, and we can move away from the ridiculous downscaling just to make it easier for you.
That or just we make a pro setting available in a separate tab in the server-list where they can just downscale away all they want (to a certain extent of course), where clanners and tournaments can take place.
Funny, I especially like how that is a part of gameplay.
^ ^ ^ ^
This. In which case, why even bother making the pretty options in the first place if, in order to play fairly, you have to turn them off?
<!--quoteo(post=1736023:date=Nov 4 2009, 06:08 AM:name=homicide)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (homicide @ Nov 4 2009, 06:08 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1736023"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->For example:
- Assuming most competitive players do not enjoy ambient sounds.
Given an option, most competitive players would be happy disabling ambient sounds and only a small portion would be unhappy knowing that they must turn them off to remain competitive.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Now, is this because competitive players want to turn things off because they have a valid reason to do so, or is this because it's just something that they expect because "that's how it's always been"? I think they'd be more upset and start saying "Well we can do it in ____!" than start crafting arguments based around how crappy their computer is or how it's somehow unfair to be forced to run on the same settings as the next guy.
While I sympathize with those who (allegedly) have hardware issues, that's their problem, not mine, and when you adjust your game to overcome it it's now becoming my problem. Where do you draw the line? Maybe you have bad eyesight so you justify using fullbright models. As I've been aware of it, in all true competitive environments, you must be playing with the same settings or damn-near. Playing with tweaked models, skins, sounds would get you thrown out.
The entire point of competition is that you're all on the same playing field. Anything you do to make the map a little more visible unevens that playing field.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The problem with ambient sounds in NS1 is that most of them were just placed atmospherically to make a pretty map, not with gameplay in mind, so they get annoying.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Agreed. That was my entire point when making this thread is to connect map design and gameplay in a meaningful way. No other FPS I can think of has such a heavy reliance on map design and atmosphere. Unreal Tournament maps are pretty, but they're still just meaningless noise, as the driving force isn't map control or tactics but just flying around the map in technicolor armor at the speed of sound with your shock rifle.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><a href="http://www.derwalter.com/games/bilder/sauertroopermodelscreenshot_big.jpg" target="_blank">http://www.derwalter.com/games/bilder/saue...eenshot_big.jpg</a>
if i play i want to rule with my skill. so i want to see my oponent as good as possible.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You do realize your inability to play without cheating like that is an indicator of your LACK of skill, right? You're really not helping the point with examples like that.
I'd have no problem with them in NS2 if they were actively balanced as part of map playtests as well.
Most performance-oriented players genuinely prefer to disable viewmodels; they draw the eye away from the crosshair, occupy screen space, and are generally an annoyance to people who don't like them. If they were forced to play <i>with</i> viewmodels, they would be unhappy.
Most experience-oriented players genuinely prefer to enable viewmodels; looking at their weapon is part of the fun for them, and they couldn't imagine turning it off even if it would make it easier to aim.
By making it an option, Valve has managed to appease both parties. This <i>does</i> mean people without viewmodels have a small advantage over people who leave them on, but since most of that group cares about the experience of the game more than raw performance they don't necessarily care about being at a minor disadvantage. If you simply forced viewmodels on for everybody, you end up alienating one group where a compromise could have satisfied nearly everybody.
And Homicide, I disagree with your opinion about gunfire etc. Knowing that shootouts prevent your enemies from hearing is a gameplay mechanic.
Call me weird, crazy, a nerd- Whatever, the list of reasons I play games are as followed
<ul>-Be immersed in the game world by the graphics, sounds and movements.
-Enjoy the gameplay.</li></ul>
Now I'm not saying that you can have a good game with just great graphics and effects, but a big part of playing any game is immersion for me. Rarely do I play a game just to prove I'm better. I do it to have fun and my fun is from the immersion I experience with friends while playing.
--------------
Ambiance
Shadows
Sounds
Viewmodels
--------------
All parts of the immersion process that allow me to enjoy games to the fullest. Whenever things of the sort can be disabled to allow for a gameplay advantage, the game is no longer balanced and forces some people to do the same to not be at a disadvantage. So I personally feel that things like that should be something forced in the NS2Vanilla servers.
This brings me back to my favorite answer for any features people argue about though, "If you want it that bad, create a mod for it".
PS:
@OP- Great post, nice to see a topic that is a real problem in games.
Oh yes, it is certainly a game mechanic, just not a good one.
I'd have no problem with them in NS2 if they were actively balanced as part of map playtests as well.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Most of them were far too intrusive and and sometimes seemed to be coming from no where. I think if they were using sparingly, strategically and effectively it could be pretty interesting.
Can you explain how it's a bad mechanic? I'm inexperienced with NS, so I'm willing to accept a convincing argument. Is there something inherently unfair about Marines being easier to ambush whenever they're fighting?
All this is moot however - the skulk's jaws are quite obviously the only real proof I need to provide that view models are a balancing aspect. The eyes are in the mouth, and a side-effect of that is that you go blind while biting. Which doesn't happen if you have the viewmodel turned off. Which makes skulking a hundred million infinity billion trillion times easier.
You know it seems to me that if people were so god damn skilled, turning things *OFF* would be the last things in their minds to do...
And on to the ambience... doesn't it involve more skill to actually plan out how loud a room is and use that to your advantage? Say a Skulk is moving around a player who's running in a loud room to attack him. He can do this because there's ambience that masks his sound up. There'll of course be ways to adjust your speakers for that, but it's still going to be such a minority that I think it's negligible.
Is that such a bad design choice? I personally think it only improves and evolves the game since there's more to take notice of, and we can move away from the ridiculous downscaling just to make it easier for you.
That or just we make a pro setting available in a separate tab in the server-list where they can just downscale away all they want (to a certain extent of course), where clanners and tournaments can take place.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
i can understand what you are saying, but im talking about performance (not the computers, the gamers).
a peacock, is nice to look at with his standing wheel, but totally useless in his daily routine.
if he has to perform as good as possible and not as beautifull as possible he will duck,
fold his wheel and run.
playing a game vanilla is always an adventure, especially in singleplayer games or vs computer (wow eg),
but if i dont want to loose i will start to do everything possible my moral allows me to do.
thats the point where cheating comes in, i never want to cheat! but i want to perform as goo as possible.
and there is also an other point. realism. i love games looking like games.
i lovedboxmodels in cs, because they dont look human, i dont like shooting at human looking models.
thats why in germany is the "killerspiel"controversy and they are right in some points and ofc in their basics.
eg i love quake for their robot models, but i dont like the gameplay, so i have to stay with cs :|
ns is too inaktive. sometimes we play 10 cs league matches at one evening.
sry 4 my english :/
If a small portion of players disables shadows (say, 20% of server population), the rest of players soon learns that you can't hide in shadows. You're going to be shot instead. Just like you need a small number teamkillers and other jerks to ruin gameplay. In this case an option is a false choice.
For those saying that darkness and sound wouldn't create interesting gameplay - how do you know ? Have you actually played a game where these things are important ? Just because competitive players are shallow, can't adapt and are and close-minded and extremely conservative doesn't mean you have to be. Competitive players are enemies of innovation. If they had their way, we'd be stuck playing Quake1.*
Design is not a democratic process. 'Wisdom of crowds' works only for facts. When it comes to design, <i>votes become vetoes</i>. If you try to create a game which offends no one, you create a game that excites no one.
<a href="http://blog.asmartbear.com/ignoring-the-wisdom-of-crowds.html" target="_blank">http://blog.asmartbear.com/ignoring-the-wi...-of-crowds.html</a>
* I fully intend to offend competitive players. They deserve it.
-Enjoy the gameplay.</li></ul><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Who wouldn't.
At least my problem is that I enjoy understanding various systems and their logic too much. Combine that with huge amount of gaming experience and multiplayer games just stop working immersion wise. For example in public NS every other marine is doing something so useless or blatantly stupid that any illusion of trained space marines shatters instantly. After that the next skulk just runs right into without being harmful in any way and the survival feel is gone.
By all mean I recommend enjoying the NS atmosphere if you can, but you it's necessary to understand that not everyone is even capable of doing that. For me the thrill in NS is to learn to adapt my thinking so that I understand as much of the game as possible and simultaneously learn the FPS skills to shape the gameplay flow into my liking. A little like playing Chess, but with 1 second turns at max.
<!--quoteo(post=1736344:date=Nov 5 2009, 04:26 PM:name=borsuk)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (borsuk @ Nov 5 2009, 04:26 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1736344"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><i>Thief</i> is an excellent example of making vision and sound part of gameplay. Ironically, you need stupid AI opponents to make that work, because in most games players can tweak the hell out of it and ruin everything. [/url]<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thief is an absolute thing of beaty when it comes to atmosphere, but I could never see it working as a multiplayer, not at least Player vs Player. Thievery UT was interesting and fun on LAN, but it was mostly just the interesting mind games between the thieves and guards, not because of the immersion.
Immersion gamers play for the experience; they want to lose themselves in the atmosphere of the setting. The world of the game is very much alive to them, and any sort of eye candy or special effects that can deepen that immersion are a plus, even if it's a little harder to see the aliens when the all particle effects are maxed out.
Performance gamers play to compete. To them, the game is a game, and the setting matters much less than the fact that they're playing it against other people. Anything other than a certified game mechanic that makes it more difficult to play at their best is an annoyance to be removed wherever possible.
Nearly all competitive players are Performance-oriented, while the majority of casual gamers are most likely more concerned with immersion. Neither perspective is 'wrong' and most gamers fall somewhere between either extreme. Very few competitive players actually want to play with bright skins even if that is the most 'pure' competitive option, and the simple fact that a multiplayer game must be played against human opponents means that most casual gamers are at least a little competitive about it; if the special effects get truly out of hand, you can rest assured that even Immersion gamers will complain. However, in general terms, these two groups will have conflicting preferences over many possible settings. Furthermore, both parties <i>enjoy</i> playing the way they do, and forcing one to abide by the decisions of the other will make the game genuinely less fun for them. As such, if you want to make as many people happy as possible (and I'm assuming this is the general policy of most developers), it's best to offer compromises wherever you can. Decide what is merely aesthetic rather than an actual game mechanic, and allow players to customize their experience as much as possible without allowing the Performance players to gain an unacceptably broad advantage over those who play for immersion.
As far as darkness and sound being gameplay elements...the question isn't so much "are these good elements?" as "can these be practically enforced from player to player?" Since gamma settings can essentially negate most attempts at using shadow as a mechanic and, as explained by Homicide, the actual effect of sounds can vary wildly between hardware configurations without any malicious intent (or even knowledge), the answers so far point to "no". If there's no way to ensure they function identically for everyone involved, they certainly can't be used as a significant gameplay mechanic.
Borsuk nearly nailed it.
_______________________________
Its just false that someone wouldnt like/buy a game just because you dont have these "competative" options.
People want this options because they know some wont change them, and some wont even recognize that there are such options. Its an advantage over the average crowd. (more or less like insider knowledge)
(A.e. it took me months to find out, that i could turn of viemodels in ns, adjust this and that, write an pistol fast/autoshot script whatever... it really improved my gameplay by 200% - but i knew it was unfair, still not a cheat i could have been banned for - so for sure i did it)
BE HONEST, AND THINK ABOUT IT!
Is it really the ambient sound(insert random) you cant live with? Remember, everybody else has them too!
Its not about graphics shadows ambient, its about fairness! And competition needs more fairness, and not wasting weeks to figure out the best configs to gain andvantages!
So st*u with your false excuses and be honest to yourself.
The more options you give, the more ppl will try to exploit them into the biggest advantage possible.
If a lot of people are turning off viewmodels because they find them obstructive then you need to make them smaller. If people are turning up the gamma to see in the dark you need to make it brighter, and if people are using scripts to fire pistols faster, I would suggest making the pistol automatic and balancing it around that because that's obviously the best way to use it.
<!--quoteo(post=1736377:date=Nov 5 2009, 06:41 PM:name=Koruyo)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Koruyo @ Nov 5 2009, 06:41 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1736377"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The more options you give, the more ppl will try to exploit them into the biggest advantage possible.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But this doesn't ring true for everyone, some people will crank the graphics up to maximum, enabling every visual flair and some others will even choose options to put themselves at a disadvantage for a more fun/challenging game.
For example in every source game I own I disable the crosshairs, singleplayer and multiplayer. I'll do the same with other games if I can too.
<a href="http://www.derwalter.com/games/bilder/sauertroopermodelscreenshot_big.jpg" target="_blank">http://www.derwalter.com/games/bilder/saue...eenshot_big.jpg</a>
if i play i want to rule with my skill. so i want to see my oponent as good as possible.
- my opinion.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Your definition of skill is much narrower than mine. Yours excludes tactical thinking required to utilize such gameplay mechanics as shadows and sounds to your advantage. Your definition of skill is less deep than mine.
So i had an idea about this whole shadows thing. I have no idea if this is posible, but hear me out:
What if the game could "know" how much "light" any given spot on the map had. If you enter an area that goes below a certain light threshhold then you are considered to be "in shadow." Now this "shadow coefficient" would be different depending on how dark a shadow you are in.
Now that we've got the framework, lets work out a mechanical system that will allow this to be fair to everyone.
The higher your shadow coefficient, the more transparent your model becomes. If you are in pure darkness, your model is invisible. Even someone will full gamma on using some special driver and super bright monitor will not know you are there. Whats worse, they probably will not know to check that location because they can't tell how dark it actually is. Perhaps if they'd set their gamma correctly they'd be better able to know where the dark spots on the map are, and shoot blindly when they suspect an ambush.
"But Bridger," you say, "won't this mean that the semi-transparent models in semi-darkness will still be easier to spot by the super-gamma'd player?" Yes, they will, and that's why your gamma setting will determine how transparent people are. The higher your gamma setting, the more transparent you become in darkness. Maybe there's no feasable way to do this and have it work effectively. But damned if I don't want to try. :P
This isn't to say that they would be bad mechanics, but simply that there's no way to ensure that everyone's playing the same game. Unfortunately, this means the only fair option is not to include them as significant elements.
i know i make an idiot of myself talking english :////////
skill for me is a compilation of such things like: aiming, map knowledege, movement, teamplay, discipline and ofc intelligence (ever played with godlike aim but dumb as a stone? *puke^23*)
my english skills are limiting me.
if i start here, to try to express my thougts i got called a TROLL :/// i srsly want to talk about this topic, because it means so much to me (and ofc i played from 1998 to 2001 competitive sc and from 1999 on cs)
voyager hitted the nail on his head, i always played diablo2 or sc1 single missions and funmaps for atmosphere!!!!
also saying in q2 ssg and gl are naer useless, cmon... i loved to pwn ppl infight with ssg doing up to 120damage per shot! (thats close to the railguns 150dmg!) so pls stop talking about topic u dont know well. i played q2 competitive as well, but not as successful as sc || cs ;)
gn8 ^^
They should not allow players to turn off ambient sounds or dynamic shadows. The competitive and casual experience should be as close as possible in my opinion.