No aiming down the sights? : Fallout 3

» Mon Sep 28, 2009 11:01 pm

Iron sights are supposed to block a large portion of the screen, you can't aim at one thing, and retain perfect peripheral vision as you can when you rely on HUD elements and a crosshair. Games that lack those generally svck for firing from the hip, which is pretty realistic considering firing from the hip does tend to svck. The very fact that you're focusing through the rear sight to the front... on the target... means all you're really seeing, all your focusing on... when you take aim to sight your target... is your target. You don't sight until you've got a target out of that 'aiming' view.

I think it'd be a good feature for FO3, but I don't miss what isn't there. I never approached it as an FPS, and I don't generally play FPSs like CoD, or MoH... the PC is too slow (as with FO3), and the sprint is too direct and unrealistic, you can't sprint and turn in one motion without the sprint being interrupted back to the slow-ass crawl you're forced to move at at all times. Whilst the freedom of shooters like Unreal and Quake aren't realistic, they're closer than the CoDs and MoHs. Feels like I'm wearing a straightjacket when I play those. "FPS" for me is strafe-jumping (not realistic) and high-speed gunning (more realistic than the CoDs and MoHs and Crys) though... so... meh.

FO3's aiming works for me, third and first person. Aiming decreases the chances of stray shots by a long way. Can't say I've ever had shots at the head I'm aiming at (not just putting the crosshair over and firing from the hip - but aiming at) move to the target's torso instead. That does sound odd. For the Hunting Rifle and 10mm at least, even in third-person, when I aim and shoot without VATS, I tend to hit whatever the crosshair is on. 9 out 10 times that's the head. With less than 100 Skill in Small Guns more often than not many shots go astray, with seemingly no apparent logic beyond the skill level thing, since my crosshair is on the target's head and I'm pulling the trigger. Not much I can do beyond that as a player. lol

Those stray shots do creep in occasioanlly even when you have max skill though, and it's frustrating when using the Hunting Rifle which has a slow rate of fire, and the AI - if not toting a big gun and standing stock still letting fly - just runs right at you and closes the distance in no tme flat with whatever weapon in hand. The video linked in one of the posts isn't a real reflection of anything except animation skewing the effectiveness of the AI.

If that was a video of an FPS the enemy would be spinning on the spot or even flipping to face the PC, with no animation. At least the Mutie is taking steps,constrained by the world he occupies, he just isn't as a BOT would be in most FPSs, blessed with the ability to change tactics whilst toting a Big Gun and lacking other weapons. I reckon once looted he'd have the minigun, some rounds of minigun ammo... and some Ant Meat, probably. If they were all equipped with melee to switch to when the PC gets too close... that video could have been avoided.

I'd still rather see enemies being physically restricted by weapons and forced to move accurately, rather than spinning on the spot with no effort and drilling a couple of hundred rounds into me with a Big Gun as with most FPSs.

The "having to stand still to reload a weapon and still take damage" thing? Not sure why whoever said that doesn't just hotkey an alternate weapon and save on the reload time by bringing up a 'sidearm' as they mentioned, or a better weapon if one is handy. S'not a problem for me flipping from HR to 10mm or scoped SR or magnum. Usually when I encounter different enemies you'll see the weapon on my PC's back change before he even pulls it out to fight. S'no point drawing a Hunting Rifle when there are several ghouls coming at you, 10mm will deal with them more rapidly and has a faster rate of fire. Right gun for the job against more enemies than the rifle would be. *shrug*

» Tue Sep 29, 2009 12:59 am

* sigh*

F3 may not be an FPS, but that's pretty much irrelevant to my argument (that it's FPS aspect is significantly worse than the current average), isn't it? Also, I'm amazed as to how can you possibly claim you know about how a gun sound IRL and still say F3 comes close to it. Back when I lived in Switzerland, my boyfriend would take me to his army training almost every week, and they would often let me shoot a few guns myself. So I *am* talking from personal experience. But just go to You-tube and watch any gun-shooting video, then come back tell me any gun in F3 comes close to it

.

Whether the devs intended combat to be it's main selling point or not is immaterial. The fact is, the vast majority of the gameplay involves, if not revolves around, combat. And given that combat is (or turned out to be :shrugs:) such a prominent part of the game, I think it's pretty reasonable of me to expect said combat to be at least up-to-par with current games. And for the reasons I stated, it's not. Again, that doesn't mean the game is bad. I never said that, nor was my point to prove that. Just that there are several flaws in the *combat design*, and I, and anybody else for that matter, are perfectly entitled to point out and request those flaws to be addressed. Are we not?

i'm beginning to think that your fallout 3 copy has a fast forward function where you can skip all the other things and just goes straight to PEW PEW STAB BOOM so that maybe why combat is the prominent feature in your fO3 gameplay.

And , of course, you are entitled to voiced your opinion. It's the way you presented them...at least the way it comes across to me...was pretty condescending * shrugs*

That's pretty much the behaviour I mentioned The NPC wasn't really taking cover, just ran around, randomly ducked, and ran away from you. Coincidentally, that happen to lead it down the stairs and unexpectedly in front of you. Again, personal-experience-bias. If you take a glass with muddy water and drip your finger, you'll see the particles moving away from your finger. So you might interpret it as if the dust was sentiently avoiding you -- while it's really all just simple brownian motion.

If you want, you can make this experiment: go to the GECK, create a room with an hostile NPC and a waist-high crate in the middle. Navmesh the room and set one side of the crate as cover area. Now play the room, and you'll see at some point the NPC run to behind the crate (it may duck or not, it's random), then get back out and shoot at you. Now do the same with Far Cry 2's world editor: the NPC will immediately run behind the crate, duck, stand up to shoot and back ducking. It won't leave the cover unless you use flame, explosives, or approach it. *That* is taking cover. What happens in F3 is just a level above brownian motion.

Taking cover is taking cover..five seconds or five minutes...or maybe the characters in my game are just cowards since take cover is usually what they do when in combat...behind cars...long enough for it to explode and gets them killed :biglaugh:

Thanks for the science lesson though ( and they say internet forum rots your brain)

But we're going in circles here. Let's just agree to disagree.

» Mon Sep 28, 2009 8:42 am

I think some people need a 'chill pill' and a good lie down. Alternatively, take F3 disc, insert in garbage bin, go play Empire Total War, and then really remember the good old days of relatively bug free, minimal game ruining annoyances in Fallout 3.

» Mon Sep 28, 2009 11:41 pm

Mainly because FPS combat and action in general are the most overwhelming aspects of the whole game, and secondarily because I'd like Fallout to move away from FPS as much as possible while still keeping the gameplay interesting. Now, I wouldn't mind if I could oneshot people, but I'd like the same rules to apply to myself too (a headshot is a headshot, playercharacter or not) - and regarding combat skills, I'd like to see an actual difference when I invest in it (other than in extreme ends) - in the accuracy to be specific. Maybe I too have played too much FPS games.

Just throwing my two cents into this, but I think FO4 should run the same as the STALKER system. By this, I mean their realistic combat system. On hard mode with Oblivion Lost mod, STALKER was the most realistic FPS around. One shot to the head kill you or anyone. Bullets hurt and could damage you easily and combat was rough. FO3 on hard mode is just annoying. Takes a ridiculous amount of shots to the head to down anything. In STALKER, combat made you feel involved, hiding in the corner to wait and realize this could be your last stand before death. A FPS-RPG like FO and STALKER should be hard and not number based. Though VATS is still my favorite system, it needs a rework to make a realistic game based more on skill then constant stacking numbers like Borderlands.

» Mon Sep 28, 2009 10:58 am

go play Empire Total War, and then really remember the good old days of relatively bug free, minimal game ruining annoyances in Fallout 3.

Heh hah ha! Cool. D'you think it's time that on top of the award ceremonies they should start handing out gongs for buggiest product and stuff? Just to balance things out like, "Sure, Empire will blow your socks off! 100% 10 out of 10 RTS experience! Blah blah! But it will also frustrate you to no end, crash on you without warning, and have you pondering the mysteries of the maps that used to work, and the AI that didn't consider TOTAL WAR to be its only course throughout the game." Gong for most bugs goes to [insert game as voted for by the grumbling mases]...

... might have an impact on sales. FO3 could have won a couple whilst still being a GOTY. T'would o' raised some eyebrows. Heh.

» Mon Sep 28, 2009 8:08 pm

I think some people need a 'chill pill' and a good lie down.

Take this as an instruction from the moderator, too.

If you cannot discuss the topic without belittling other members who disagree with you, these forums are not the place to discuss it.