EPTThe above happened while I was at a friends house :C
You ever feel like you just can't win in an FPS
| Blogs > Sireph |
|
Sireph
United States43 Posts
The above happened while I was at a friends house :C | ||
|
RogerX
New Zealand3180 Posts
| ||
|
epikAnglory
United States1120 Posts
| ||
|
eviltomahawk
United States11135 Posts
Although I find it fun to play more adrenaline-pumping FPS games like Halo and CoD, I also find quite a bit of fun in slightly slower-paced, team-focused FPS games like Battlefield and TF2. IMO, if you're having trouble shooting people, perhaps healing teammates may be a more relaxing way to be productive for the team. | ||
|
SarR
476 Posts
| ||
|
eviltomahawk
United States11135 Posts
On August 21 2011 14:13 SarR wrote: FPS are wayyy harder to master than RTS games like BW. Watch your words around here, as there is a horde of BW fans who would pounce on anyone who claims that there is a game harder than BW  | ||
|
Bippzy
United States1466 Posts
On August 21 2011 14:13 SarR wrote: FPS are wayyy harder to master than RTS games like BW. Fps are reactionary and easier mechanically and strategically. Rts are reactionary to drops, etc. And are much more taxing mechanically, esp. BW, and strategy is much more fluid and certain loss can be turned to triumph at even a pro level. In short , I disagree with you. | ||
|
Chairman Ray
United States11903 Posts
On August 21 2011 14:13 SarR wrote: FPS are wayyy harder to master than RTS games like BW. The entirety of TL disagrees with you, but don't worry, every fps fansite supports your claim | ||
|
LOcDowN
United States1015 Posts
On August 21 2011 14:13 SarR wrote: FPS are wayyy harder to master than RTS games like BW. Obviously a troll, no one can be this stupid. | ||
|
Bippzy
United States1466 Posts
On August 21 2011 14:22 Chairman Ray wrote: The entirety of TL disagrees with you, but don't worry, every fps fansite supports your claim Honestly its the difference between positioning one marine and shooting with good reaction time(FPS) and producing, positioning, and controlling many things that vary on your opponent and the map with good endurance and reaction time.. | ||
|
rebuffering
Canada2436 Posts
| ||
|
Incanus
Canada695 Posts
On August 21 2011 14:10 epikAnglory wrote: I got a 2.1 KDR and higher in every single FPS I played over 15 hours in, I find that they involve no strategy and is pure experience (as long as you are not lagging and have decent peripherals). I'd like to see you get a 2.1 KDR in a Quake 3 duel against anyone decent... I'd be willing to test this. | ||
|
GTPGlitch
5061 Posts
On August 21 2011 14:26 Bippzy wrote: Honestly its the difference between positioning one marine and shooting with good reaction time(FPS) and producing, positioning, and controlling many things that vary on your opponent and the map with good endurance and reaction time.. I think i have to side on the FPS thing here RTS's are fairly static: If you're playing a terran, you know exactly what they can build, what kind of damage it does, what abilities it has, how much food it takes etc. SC/sc2 strategies are also fairly well known, fleshed out, and widely left alone. Innovation is limited by effectiveness of units, map, and opponent. One off-time reaction in an RTS will not kill you (unless you completely miss a nuke on your army). In an FPS you have to be on the ball at all times~more tense than waiting for an attack/drop/response to your attack as you have a lot more area to cover, with a slower rate of vision-change. The FPS's themselves are a lot more variable~power-ups, abilities, addons, weapon loadouts etc change from player to player, making the game a lot more interesting as you need to analyze each enemy individually, figuring out the player and their weapons (and then do it 11-23 more times). Strategies can also change a ridiculous amount by taking advantage of said powerups/weapon loadouts. It's not difficult to show up with a team comp that nobody/hardly anyone has seen/used before and use some innovative strat to make a team off-balance and easy to beat. SC/sc2 there's certainly a number of variable strategies, but the limits of variation are much smaller | ||
intrigue
Washington, D.C9934 Posts
| ||
|
xHassassin
United States270 Posts
On August 21 2011 14:10 epikAnglory wrote: I got a 2.1 KDR and higher in every single FPS I played over 15 hours in, I find that they involve no strategy and is pure experience (as long as you are not lagging and have decent peripherals). You can't treat fps and rts the same. In Starcraft, every game is competitive, you play by the same rules as all pros do. One on one, same resource gathering rates, six starting workers. In fps, the vast majority of players play a completely different game than pros. Example, tf2, most players play on 24+ servers. Real competitive tf2 is six on six. Cod series, join a lobby and play some sixteen player game, real competition is five on five. Basically, there's no difference between competitive and casual Starcraft gameplay wise, but for fps there's a huge jump, one that it seems you haven't made if the deepest you can go is pub stomp on noobs. Personally I think one on one rts is harder than one on one fps like quake, but once you go into team games fps becomes much harder as the communication and coordination needed to move five or more players in a perfect strategy is staggering. | ||
|
Sireph
United States43 Posts
RTS's are fairly static: If you're playing a terran, you know exactly what they can build, what kind of damage it does, what abilities it has, how much food it takes etc. SC/sc2 strategies are also fairly well known, fleshed out, and widely left alone. Innovation is limited by effectiveness of units, map, and opponent. One off-time reaction in an RTS will not kill you (unless you completely miss a nuke on your army). In an FPS you have to be on the ball at all times~more tense than waiting for an attack/drop/response to your attack as you have a lot more area to cover, with a slower rate of vision-change. I feel that this isn't entirely accurate. In both FPS's and RTS's there are static elements. It's what you do with these static elements that makes creative play. Despite the fact that certain units may have solid roles in play or certain guns are most effective at certain ranges or whatever, questioning the limits of what people commonly use units/things for is what leads to creativity. | ||
|
Existential
Australia2107 Posts
On August 21 2011 14:13 SarR wrote: FPS are wayyy harder to master than RTS games like BW. I hope you're trolling. | ||
Juliette
United States6003 Posts
i know the feeling, but to be fair you're playing blackops aka shit hit detection sooo ;;. i stopped playing console cause reach + blackops are shit and i dont wanna go back to h3/mw2  .glhfyo | ||
|
Sireph
United States43 Posts
| ||
|
Disquiet
Australia628 Posts
| ||
| ||
