GoatLove

Not a sr vs h3 thread.....more like is halo 3 a competitive shooter thread.

__________________

Exiled Bandit

Well after reading on how much info was given about the actual thread idea, I would have to disagree on it for a few things.

My first thing is how, depending on how competitive the game gets, the game is going to support 8+ plus in one game (10 is an example). The amount of time that would take for the game to load could vary, it could be longer since the data system can't handle that many people in one room, or it could lag due to all the people in the room.

My second thing is the file size of the "arcade game". Just how big of a file does the game exactly have to be? I can't possibly see it going over 300mb, that's just rediculious for an arcade game. If it is more than 300mb, it's going to cost more, since it'll have more to offer, and you want it to be within a $10 price range (not technicially saying, more stating out).

What POV would the game be played in? Would it be like Doom and be a FPS, or would you give a twist and make it into a BEV, where you can see a whole layout of the area and your team/enemies? Either one of these varieties would work well, it just depends on how you pull it off. And I think you're just crying to have Quake come out on XBLA, aren't you ?

And finally, how do you expect people to buy this game? For example, say about 80% of the XBL population doesn't download trial demos for arcade games, while the other 20% is going to be your "hit-or-miss" customers. Would you atleast develop a trial, showing how it can be fun, yet competitive, at the same time? Bringing Quake up again, that game was fun, yet competitive at the same time, plus the only thing iD can try to go is give it a graphics boost for the arcade, so that's your $10 investment right there. Hell, they should of had a free copy of Quake/Quake 3 when you bought 4, instead of the shit-tastic Quake 2.

__________________
We've broken down
We've broken out
But you will never follow
You've watched us drown
You've pushed us out
But we will never follow


Will Photograph for Food......

SheiK

Whilst reading this thread, I found so many great ideas for what a "competitive shooter" is. But, it also dawned upon me that we shouldn't stray so far from the original notion of Hitzel, which is what would make a competitive game, rather than a Shadowrun vs. Halo 3 thread. In all honesty, both games are superb and competitive in their own rights. It's harder to compare them because they both require different mental dexterity skills and whatnot.

Which leads to my "point." Competitive, harder skill, more depth, larger activity, or whatever, is all RELATIVE. In actuality, there is no defining terms of competition; it all comes from the person. One man's dream and be one man's nightmare. Your opinion is just that: your opinion. It isn't fact, or fiction, but just a thought. So thinking about it, is a competitive game a compromise between defined terms (weapons, map layout, etc.) and amusement factor (the variety of people whom the game appeals to.) I know many people that think BTB is competitive, because there is competition.

I remember reading Hitzel saying that "Halo3 is not competitive because it is the majority, and Shadowrun failed because it is the minority." That itself presents a paradoxical situation, which can conclude that indeed a competitive game is a compromise...

__________________

Hitzel

These are blanket statements that don't say anything. Every game is competitive to some extent because there can be a winner and a loser. A good player will always beat a bad player, arguing otherwise is stupid (this goes for you too, Goose). The real focus is on when skilled players play each other.

Because remember, in this thread competitive doesn't mean "people compete." It's a relative term to rate how much skill it takes to succeed against other players at a high level of play, based on what I've listed earlier.
I didn't say that. I said that Halo 3 isn't competitive because it appeals to the majority (noobs/casuals/scrubs/whatever you want to call them), and that Shadowrun died because it didn't appeal to that demographic. Wanted pretty much understands what I was trying to say.

No dude, 8 players wouldn't lag the game. The same hardware runs all 360 games. If anything, the game would run better online with less unneeded junk running in the background.

The max size for an Arcade game is 500 mbs (.5 gigs). The CoD 4 beta was 1.1 gigs. The PC game Cube 2 is only 250 mbs (.25 gigs) and comes with a single player campaign, great netcode, 30+ default maps, 10+ default gametypes, and a fully functioning map editor. It's extremely possible to built a competent game for Arcade.

I don't mean to be a jerk, because you're actually replying to my original point and i appreciate that... but this common kind of outlook on Arcade games is exactly the reason I think that people would be easily impressed by my theoretical game. People don't expect much from them, and if one was made "like a real game," people would eat it up despite it's gameplay demanding more skill.

I'd make it a normal FPS, just like Halo, CoD 4, CS, Quake, whatever. I want to stick with tried and true design, since console games can't be modded like PC games can.

Nope.

Well yeah, we'd have to make a trial for it. I think a good, but effective trial for this kind of game would have a "montage" of sorts, showing awesome headshots, nicely placed rockets, good shortcuts around the map, etc. Pretty much showing how fun and exciting the game is to play and watch, while also showing off how fluid the game's base mechanics play.

I'd also advertise the shit out of it. I'd go for advertisement on sites like MLG, obviously, but I'd also aggressively go for major gaming sites like gamespot/ign/1up/etc with plenty of pre-release videos, interviews, screenshots, etc. (MLG, too) to show players a real, exciting game working smoothly on the arcade in ways that actually get them excited and impressed. The premise of this working would be a game that's fun to play to win and has a large player base, and in order to get that player base you gotta advertise hard as hell.

XNA? Yes, but it takes know-how.

Roth, you know that I have a ton of respect for you, but H3 doesn't take individual skill, and the teamwork it requires is all basic and dumbed down. The game is too slow and limited to take mental skill. Aside from the Sniper (and that's debatable), there is only one range with one weapon where the game takes technical skill (I'm ignoring the fact that teamwork completely negates that skill.) I know my Halo. The slope from Halo 1 to Halo 3 has been a downwards spiral, starting at a deep game and ending with a noob's playground, all for $$$ Money.

I remember some post by some H1 fan saying something like "Bungie always does what's best for the majority. We know this because it hasn't been us." I thought it was funny as hell at the time, but it really holds water if you think about it.

__________________

WAN73D

Originally I was going to say that the file size could be bumped up to about that of an Xbox Original, but, given this, I'd say it would be reasonable for the game to be around 450mb. That 450 would give plenty of room for the devs to create a gameplay experience as fun as Cube 2, but with increased graphical output.


I think you're going to need two trials. The first would be a video, like you mentioned. The second would have to be one or two playable maps. That trial would have to end with some sort of a glimpse at things (maps/weapons/customization/etc.) that weren't playable in the demo.


I still say that, given the audience you're aiming for, your best bets are gonna be viral marketing and word-of-mouth. That's not to say you should ignore mainstream advertising, but you should put just as much effort into the underground stuff. There are alot of things you could do virally (I'm not sure that's actually a word @_@) depending on your setting/theme/etc.

__________________

"This city deserves a better class of criminal."
Waiting for APB

GoatLove

The teamwork is not dumbed down. It is only dumbed down if you look at it that way. Why did final boss do so good? Because they were notorious for coming up with their own strats. igoturpistola was the reigning ffa champ...but his teamwork wasnt good. Saiyan did most of the objective..but he didnt practice...so his skill lacked. So saying halo takes neither skill or teamwork makes no sense to me.

Halo does take mental skill. If there are are two enemies in front of you...and they are about to touch return the flag...what do you do? I see all the time in pro gameplays someone do something and think "wow, that was a genius play."

Hitzel, i would sex you up if you would let me...thats how much i like you. But i completely disagree with you.

__________________

WAN73D

I agree and disagree. Dumbed down? I think it is. Eliminated? Definitely not. I think what Hitzel is trying to say is that H3's level of competition in terms of teamplay is simply sub-par. Yes, strats will help you win. Yes, communication will help you win. Yes, there are split-second decisions that need to be made. But all of that is true in ANY team-based multiplayer game. Hitzel is talking about a game that takes the necessity for mental capacity, skill, and teamwork to new heights.

__________________

"This city deserves a better class of criminal."
Waiting for APB

GoatLove

I dont think its dumbed down. Halo isnt all about teamwork....and its not all about skill. Its a good mix of both. Teamwork is as good as you want it to be. FB has the best teamwork and wins. When someone does something...they work as a team to counter it. Yeah, other games need more teamwork but halo doesnt lack in teamwork.

There can be a better competitive shooter...im just saying that halo is one of the best ones we have at the moment.

__________________

Exiled Bandit

Remember there's a major difference between a PC game and a beta of a game. I don't know the specifications for Cube 2, but we all know on how high of framerate and whatnot the CoD4 beta used, visually and gameplay wise, plus there is the somewhat limited amount of data that you have to unlock in the game, which also fills in for the rest of the 1.1Gs used.

Reasonable, since you do want to make the game for the "competitive" people.

Also, they're actually making a Quake game for arcade? Nice.

Most of the general people who download Arcade games that offer multiplayer support only do it for the achievements, then they delete it right afterward. You atleast want to make a video that'll make those people say "Damn, I want to play this game none stop". Sure doing all these headshots is good for the competitive people, but the casual people don't give a fuck how good people can get at the game.

Gamespot? Please, they don't know shit if it came up to them and smack them in the face. The community there wouldn't even give a fuck about the whole "MLG/Good Gameplay" aspect of it, and might even shun it. 1up is no different, but they'll atleast go into a indepth review/preview about it, plus with them being teamed up with Gamevideos, if you do it the 1up way, your bound to also get an ingame review/preview up as well.

To have a good player base, you have to have a game that sastifies the needs of both MLG players and casual gamers. I honestly think the whole MLG/"getting paid to play games" idea is just stupid as hell in general, but if all these people have fun doing it, than whatever.

__________________
We've broken down
We've broken out
But you will never follow
You've watched us drown
You've pushed us out
But we will never follow


Will Photograph for Food......

Hitzel

Goose, IMO Halo 3 takes only the bare basic teamwork skills and sub-par individual skills, and most respectable games involve what Halo 3 does + more. But I can agree to disagree. Let's think about the future now instead.

I'll respond to Tom and to goose some more later, but VoD is back up now =)

__________________