|
On August 21 2011 14:57 Active.815 wrote:
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
LMAO you're making opponent-based strategies in FPS seem like it's so complex. There is no person in the world that scrambles for a hard counter in reaction to seeing, say, a FAMAS instead of an M16. Screw you and your laundry list. The only time I've seen really deep analysis was that one guy running through what was going on through his mind during the finals of a Quake tournament, and even that was just based around powerup timing, map control, and pretty much good sniping locations based on timing and the other guy's patterns.
If you think that just because you know how much a marine costs it's less complicated strategically to carry out TvZ 1raxCC against ANY zerg timing versus aiming at a hitbox, you are sorely mistaken. Don't get cocky because you have to respond faster and you keep relying on a couple of central concepts to survive instead of mastering each and every single little thing just to play decently.
|
I don't play FPS or anything...but if you watch where you die you have almost no cover. It appeared you were dying a lot right when you spawned on the map, which is probably partially the game producers fault. However, the other times you died it was solely your fault you had no cover.
|
I played Halo PC, UT2004 and UT3 very strongly back in my day. But on a few rare occassions I was given the opportunity to play vs a friend of mine (who I've long since lost contact with) that was a competitor in CAL for UT2004. I think my K:D ratio vs him was 2:30. Holy shit did I get utterly destroyed. My kills were all luck shots. After my playtime with him I tried to engineer myself to become a stronger player and think of shooters as more than reflexes, as where he was destroying me was largely in strategy and approach. I kind of just ran around like a retard and reacted instead of trying to take map control.
Following this I played very strongly in Halo PC/CE and in UT3, though the latter I only played very shortly on release (mostly the pre-release demo). I was obliterating entire teams. These two experiences really gave me a lot of a greater appreciation for the mechanics within shooters.
I haven't played a shooter since then, though, at least not in multiplayer. The kind of community most multiplayer games have just isn't for me.
|
On August 21 2011 15:46 ymir233 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2011 14:57 Active.815 wrote:
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 LMAO you're making opponent-based strategies in FPS seem like it's so complex. There is no person in the world that scrambles for a hard counter in reaction to seeing, say, a FAMAS instead of an M16. Screw you and your laundry list. The only time I've seen really deep analysis was that one guy running through what was going on through his mind during the finals of a Quake tournament, and even that was just based around powerup timing, map control, and pretty much good sniping locations based on timing and the other guy's patterns. If you think that just because you know how much a marine costs it's less complicated strategically to carry out TvZ 1raxCC against ANY zerg timing versus aiming at a hitbox, you are sorely mistaken. Don't get cocky because you have to respond faster and you keep relying on a couple of central concepts to survive instead of mastering each and every single little thing just to play decently.
0_o
if you think that just because you know how much a marine costs it's less complicated strategically to carry out TvZ 1raxCC against ANY zerg timing versus aiming at a hitbox, you are sorely mistaken.
When did i ever compare shooting somebody to executing a 1raxCC? Aside from the fact that they are fundamentally different games, shooting a dude would be a lot more comparable to a 1-t-a by a terran :p
you keep relying on a couple of central concepts to survive instead of mastering each and every single little thing just to play decently.
because macro/micro aren't central concepts that you can rely on to play decently.... mhmm....
powerup timing, map control, and pretty much good sniping locations based on timing and the other guy's patterns.
Kind of like expansion timing, map control, good engagement spots based on timing and units...
There is no person in the world that scrambles for a hard counter in reaction to seeing, say, a FAMAS instead of an M16.
Seeing as how they are both assault rifles, and there's really no 'hard counter' to much in FPS's (except asplosions and bullets and melee attacks hard countering living)... not really a valid argument. If there's a guy with an smg running through yo' base, would you pick a sniper rifle or shotgun? If someone's covering an alleyway with an LMG do you charge them with an assault rifle/lmg/shotgun/pistol or use a grenade of some kind to cover your approach/just use a long-range weapon?
|
On August 21 2011 15:14 Existential wrote:I hope you're trolling.
No, Im not. Ive played BW for years but even so, I have far more experience in terms of time spent playing FPS. Ive played both these genres online and Ive found that with RTS games, you get a whole lot more time to think and react to the moves of your opponents. In an FPS you never really have more than a second to react to your opponents. The mechanics of an FPS are also far more demanding in areas of accuracy both in movement and in aiming. There are no such concepts in RTS games.
From personal experience I say this, the level of mental and physical agility required to really
dominate in an FPS is far in excess of that necessary to competently play any RTS game. Dont mistake me though, Im not saying that RTS games are easy but compared to FPS, id say its way easier.
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
Not really surprising. If I posted on an FPS site that RTS games are harder. Im absolutely certain
that someone would eventually say that they disagree and that every RTS fansite would support such a claim. Ultimately, there is no way that you would ever get supporters of both claims to all agree to the truth of one and the falsehood of the other. Bearing that in mind, debating my claim based soley on how many agree or disagree is utterly pointless. It would better submit your own experiences along with conclusions drawn from said experiences to illuminate the perspectives that caused your disagreement.
On August 21 2011 14:23 LOcDowN wrote:
Obviously a troll, no one can be this stupid.
I posted an opinion based on my personal experience and instead of being a more marture individual like id expect from a quality site like this, you chose a most inelegant method to convey your disagreement with my statement. Seriously ? Calling me stupid is really the best you got ? If you have nothing positive to add then I suggest you keep your faggot ass quiet.
On August 21 2011 14:17 eviltomahawk wrote: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 
LOL yea, one of them already called me stupid.
User was warned for this post
|
Hmm well Sireph you're playing on Xbox so I can't really judge(only play on PC myself)...That situation in the video was prettty unfortunate but to be fair your team was busy ragequitting, getting spawn camped and not taking the helicopter down. If you want to get better you're just going to have to play more but if you're not enjoying it there's not much point.
And wow at the arguing over whether RTS or FPS is harder, it's apples and oranges so don't bother trying to say one is harder or not. It really depends on your own strengths, weaknesses and experience. Personally I find FPS much easier than RTS since I've plugged a lot more hours into it and quite frankly I just don't have to think, I just react. It's pretty much all instinct but I would imagine that's the same for someone who becomes experienced at RTS as well.
|
United States22883 Posts
SarR, you'd have to show that you've mastered either. Playing BW for a long time doesn't mean you're respectable at it and we don't know what FPS you're talking about.
I was barely C- on iCCup but I have a much, much easier time playing FPS games since I grew up on Quake 2 and later CS. I wouldn't really say I've mastered either, even though I've played in CAL-i. And while keeping a high K:D is incredibly easy in Black Ops or TF2 pubs, I still get absolutely destroyed in QL. Anyways, it's such a subjective statement and there's probably so few people in the world capable of backing it up that it's kind of pointless. Maybe Rambo or Xeqtr, but neither have played SC2 at that high of a level.
|
I heavily disagree. I feel like FPS is the game where my true genius comes out, where I wander aimlessly into every single area and then scream and shoot when I see someone. Thank God my RTS skills have refined my reaction time so I usually win those "chance encounters."
God Bless FPS
|
On August 21 2011 17:26 SarR wrote:No, Im not. Ive played BW for years but even so, I have far more experience in terms of time spent playing FPS. Ive played both these genres online and Ive found that with RTS games, you get a whole lot more time to think and react to the moves of your opponents. In an FPS you never really have more than a second to react to your opponents. The mechanics of an FPS are also far more demanding in areas of accuracy both in movement and in aiming. There are no such concepts in RTS games.
"...in movement and in aiming. There are no such concepts in RTS games" - The same principles are actually blatantly the same in RTS. It's called hand-eye coordination and speed in reactive/reflexive accuracy and precision. In the same way you must "aim" and move" via toggle stick or mouse (through whatever console you use), you must jump to different situations and click things with precision.
"Whole lot more time to think and react" - Not at all, there are dozens if not hundreds of split-second decisions that have to be made in SC1/SC2. I'm curious what level you play at in those two, because you're constantly doing split-second decisions, especially in the middle of a fight. So RTS encompasses the same demand for that skill PLUS the undeniably higher level of multitasking that has to be done. Even if you have a lot to do in terms of looking around and moving in an FPS, it's the entirely same function. In SC, you have different spellcasters, different areas of the map, different functions of groups on the map (scouting, gathering, fighting, etc.).
On August 21 2011 17:26 SarR wrote:
From personal experience I say this, the level of mental and physical agility required to really
dominate in an FPS is far in excess of that necessary to competently play any RTS game. Dont mistake me though, Im not saying that RTS games are easy but compared to FPS, id say its way easier.
Mental and physical agility? You mean adrenaline and reflex. RTS seems to win hands-down here, seeing as how the actual fitness of RTS gamers is required when games can go on for an hour. From personal experience, I find FPSes way easier to play than RTSes. My brother, a much more hardcore FPS player than I, easily scores 2+ kdrs, yet struggles to beat my Silver friend in SC2.
And is it me, or is there a lot more unfit players seen in the competitive FPS scene than SC2 scene? Just a passing thought when I saw the MLG highlights, nothing conclusive, though. All of this is anecdotal, of course, but that's all you have supporting your point, too.
On August 21 2011 17:26 SarR wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2011 14:23 LOcDowN wrote:
Obviously a troll, no one can be this stupid. I posted an opinion based on my personal experience and instead of being a more marture individual like id expect from a quality site like this, you chose a most inelegant method to convey your disagreement with my statement. Seriously ? Calling me stupid is really the best you got ? If you have nothing positive to add then I suggest you keep your faggot ass quiet.
To be fair, here is all you posted: On August 21 2011 14:13 SarR wrote:
FPS are wayyy harder to master than RTS games like BW.
...Nothing in that post reflects you acknowledging that as your opinion or personal experience, nor do you really substantiate the post beyond a simple one-liner. So it's not too shocking to see someone dismiss the quality of your post as "trolling."
|
On August 21 2011 18:14 Jibba wrote:
SarR, you'd have to show that you've mastered either. Playing BW for a long time doesn't mean you're respectable at it and we don't know what FPS you're talking about.
I was barely C- on iCCup but I have a much, much easier time playing FPS games since I grew up on Quake 2 and later CS. I wouldn't really say I've mastered either, even though I've played in CAL-i. And while keeping a high K:D is incredibly easy in Black Ops or TF2 pubs, I still get absolutely destroyed in QL. Anyways, it's such a subjective statement and there's probably so few people in the world capable of backing it up that it's kind of pointless. Maybe Rambo or Xeqtr, but neither have played SC2 at that high of a level.
Well, I grew up on Wolfenstein, Doom, Quake and many of their clones. I also played some UT(classic and later 2004). Playing online in any of these games was always far more overwhelming to me than playing BW online. RTS games in general are comparably more forgiving. FPS games are not forgiving at all. You just cannot make any mistake.
Think of it this way. An RTS game when you think about it, is about gaining slight advantages over the course of the match. Its the cumulative effect of these gains that finally gives you a victory. In this scheme you are allowed a few mistakes.
In an FPS, you literally have only seconds to respond when you confront your opponents and skilled opponents will punish you after a single mistake, maybe two.
|
United States22883 Posts
Again, what level were you playing BW and those FPS games?
|
On August 21 2011 18:26 LlamaNamedOsama wrote:
Not at all, there are dozens if not hundreds of split-second decisions that have to be made in
SC1/SC2.
Split second decisions are only needed at specific points in an RTS match. Split second decisions are needed ALL THE TIME in an FPS.
Example:-
If you scout a Toss going FE in BW, from that time until his first timing attack you dont need to make snap, split second decisions. You generally follow a set pattern(your build order) to prepare for the time when split decisions become necessary such as an engagement with his storm-backed army.
In an FPS you gotta be ready at any second. Its a very fast paced affair. A deathmatch in games like Doom and UT come to mind.
On August 21 2011 18:26 LlamaNamedOsama wrote:
Mental and physical agility? You mean adrenaline and reflex. RTS seems to win hands-down here...
I dont know what FPS games you are talking about here but if you played any FPS in the old days, you'd not make such a statement. If you ever seen old-school monsters like Yonatan Donner tear up shit in a speed-run you'd surely retract that.
On August 21 2011 18:26 LlamaNamedOsama wrote:
"...in movement and in aiming. There are no such concepts in RTS games" - The same principles are actually blatantly the same in RTS. It's called hand-eye coordination and speed in reactive/reflexive accuracy and precision.
Compare the mechanics of muta-micro to the mechanics necessary to pull of UT2004's shock-combo effectively and you will see just how wrong your statement is. It took me like 10 minutes to understand the basics behind muta-micro. Took me months to be able to kill shit with a shock combo in UT 2004 standing still. You go online and you see guys doing this while moving and even jumping. Some can even do that shit at various angles. Its one of the most intimidating skills to even get a basic understanding of. Oh and guess what....you need to be able to do that in mere seconds without thinking to stand a chance.
On August 21 2011 18:26 LlamaNamedOsama wrote:To be fair, here is all you posted: Show nested quote +On August 21 2011 14:13 SarR wrote:
FPS are wayyy harder to master than RTS games like BW. ...Nothing in that post reflects you acknowledging that as your opinion or personal experience, nor do you really substantiate the post beyond a simple one-liner. So it's not too shocking to see someone dismiss the quality of your post as "trolling."
You have a point there.
On August 21 2011 19:09 Jibba wrote:
Again, what level were you playing BW and those FPS games?
On my best day I can only play BW at the C- level. I dont really have an accurate way to indicate my skill in FPS since there are different modes of play in FPS games. Personally I have more of a knack for speedrunning moreso than I do for deathmatches and my weakest mode of play in an FPS would be in a team scenario like CTF.
|
Dude I got to C- on iccup with just mechanics and a little bit of build orders/thinking. However that's not even close to "competitive play". On the highest level people are still worrying about mechanics while formulating strategies/tactics/economy management, and I didn't see any of that in BW because I had my hands full just macro'ing and micro'ing.
You are looking at BW like the only aspects you should think about is individual mechanical ones. Well yea, playing an FPS is harder than micro'ing mutas, that's expected. But that's not even like 5% of what the skillset is for a single BW game. What makes it so hard is you have to make decisions while tirelessly utilizing mechanics and managing your economy and attack/defend multiple places at once. Multitasking is a lot harder than you give it credit for.
|
Germany / USA16648 Posts
On August 21 2011 17:26 SarR wrote:
From personal experience I say this, the level of mental and physical agility required to really
dominate in an FPS is far in excess of that necessary to competently play any RTS game.
And the level of mental and physical agility required to really to dominate in an RTS is far in excess of that necessary to competently play any FPS game.
See what I did there?
|
On August 21 2011 18:14 Jibba wrote:
SarR, you'd have to show that you've mastered either. Playing BW for a long time doesn't mean you're respectable at it and we don't know what FPS you're talking about.
I was barely C- on iCCup but I have a much, much easier time playing FPS games since I grew up on Quake 2 and later CS. I wouldn't really say I've mastered either, even though I've played in CAL-i. And while keeping a high K:D is incredibly easy in Black Ops or TF2 pubs, I still get absolutely destroyed in QL. Anyways, it's such a subjective statement and there's probably so few people in the world capable of backing it up that it's kind of pointless. Maybe Rambo or Xeqtr, but neither have played SC2 at that high of a level.
.___. Why do people feel the need to say crap like "I played cal-i" in cs years ago as if it means much by current standards. CS/quake and any other fps are exactly the same as bw where the game actually moves on and the skill level rises every year. BW 5 years ago vs BW now? And q3 5 years ago vs ql now are on 2 completely different levels. The basic mechanics required to play at a high level increase every year. 5 years ago you wouldnt need 40% lg to play at a high level. Now you have monsters like strenx who do that on a bad day. Even coollers running around with 70% rail on some maps and hes not even famous for his rail.
Anyways theres no point arguing whats harder cos its fruitless and even if pros did change games people will never accept their results and background. Just like when bw people said wc3 players had no chance at sc2 despite the best foreigners atm being war3 players .__.
|
Just get the imba scorp next time. On normal it's a joke. On hardcore it's retarded.
|
Germany / USA16648 Posts
On August 21 2011 22:06 T0fuuu wrote:
[...] Just like when bw people said wc3 players had no chance at sc2 despite the best foreigners atm being war3 players .__.
Uh, what? That's bullshit and you know it.
There are a lot of great players from both games, you'd be hard pressed to make a clear case for either WC3 or BW having "produced" the best SC2 players.
Foreigners from the first two pages of the international SC2 TLPD (Elo ranking):
Stephano - WC3
Sase - WC3
Sen - BW
White-Ra - BW
Mana - BW
Nerchio - BW
Naniwa - WC3
Ret - BW
Strelok - BW
Huk - I have no idea?
Thorzain - WC3
Sheth - BW
Dimaga - BW
Idra - BW
Hasuobs - WC3
Bratok - BW
Tarson - BW
Morrow - BW
Qxc - BW I think?
Bling - Halo
Major - BW
Darkforce - various
NamhciR - dunno
Goody - BW
Demuslim - WC3
Lucifron - WC3
Socke - BW
Xlord - WC3
Slush - BW/CS
Happy - WC3
Sjow - WC3
Foreign major tournament champions, from here, let's say in 2011:
Sjow - WC3
Ret - BW
Thorzain - WC3
Naniwa - WC3
Xigua - dunno
Huk - dunno
White-ra - BW
Dimaga - BW
Ret - BW
Major - BW
Xigua - dunno
And from here here:
Socke - BW
Sarens - BW
Sarens - BW
White-ra - BW
Kas - WC3 I think
TLO - neither
White-ra - BW
White-ra - BW
Naniwa - WC3
Strelok - BW
Socke - BW
Tod - WC3
Naniwa - WC3
Strelok - BW
Hasuobs - WC3
Sheth - BW
Lalush - BW I think
Hasuobs - WC3
Laslu - BW I think
Adelscott - BW
Kas - WC3 I think
Sjow - WC3
Idra - BW
Nerchio - BW
Nerchio - BW
dde - no idea
Sarens - BW
Huk - dunno
Nerchio - BW
dde - dunno
Hasuobs - WC3
Sase - WC3
Socke - BW
|
On August 21 2011 17:26 Active.815 wrote:
When did i ever compare shooting somebody to executing a 1raxCC? Aside from the fact that they are fundamentally different games, shooting a dude would be a lot more comparable to a 1-t-a by a terran :p
lol glad you didn't flame back...was kinda angry at the time. But your point misses the fact that stimming and a-moving isn't the crux of RTS. Shooting somebody accurately...IS the crux of FPS.
because macro/micro aren't central concepts that you can rely on to play decently.... mhmm....
Well yes, they are. But you can't just tell someone to "macro up a few factories to keep up with Protoss" and then expect them to play decently at all. There are so many little tricks besides that, especially timings dependent on opponent reactions/builds, that you simply have to embed via experience, not just a few tricks of the trade + shooting skills + knowledge of good locations in the map.
Kind of like expansion timing, map control, good engagement spots based on timing and units...
Same argument as above. Those may be the blanket generalizations, but RTS has much more deviance inside those subsets as opposed to FPS powerup timings, map control, etc etc, since it not only varies due to map, but also to opponent and strategies, early/mid/late game.
Seeing as how they are both assault rifles, and there's really no 'hard counter' to much in FPS's (except asplosions and bullets and melee attacks hard countering living)... not really a valid argument. If there's a guy with an smg running through yo' base, would you pick a sniper rifle or shotgun? If someone's covering an alleyway with an LMG do you charge them with an assault rifle/lmg/shotgun/pistol or use a grenade of some kind to cover your approach/just use a long-range weapon?
But that's the point, there are many more just blanket 'hard counters' in FPS than in RTS. In FPS you're not going to look at a specific weapon and prepare for that - you're going to be prepared to fucking run away if you have anything not-sniper-rifle-related and the other guy's across the map with their sights set on you with a sniper rifle.
Compare this with the Protoss response to hydra bust, where you have to make lots of cannons if they're busting. But oh no! They're faking. This means that you can only make 3 cannons or you're gonna be behind and they're gonna just drone up on 4 bases. But then they could do a delayed timing push after they get lair, in which case you have to put up more cannons later instead of making more gateways in order to get that faster army, which you would do in a normal fake bust. There's just so many different responses to so many different things.
|
On August 21 2011 22:44 Carnac wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2011 22:06 T0fuuu wrote:
[...] Just like when bw people said wc3 players had no chance at sc2 despite the best foreigners atm being war3 players .__. Uh, what? That's bullshit and you know it.
Thats exactly the point. WC3 players are doing fine if not better than their bw peers in sc2 despite coming from an "inferior game". Same arguments can be made for wc3 and fps as being less mechanically demanding and with less strategic depth. Unless you think I am talking about THE BEST PLAYER ATM! Which is another pointless argument cos nobody is undisputed the best until they win back to back GSL or something ridiculous like that.
|
I will tell you what is really hard.
I haven't played Black Ops for a while. I log on, and play, and I still get +3 kdr no prob in TDM and somewhat similar in Domination, never mind freeforall!
All you need is good gun, good placement of claymore, and some thinking regarding the map (i use galil and commando)
However, I find PC FPS A LOT HARDER!!!
I play sudden attack, and my kdr is like 40%....
its so damn difficult. console fps doesnt require as fast reaction time, while PC FPS .. its just crazy how good ppl are with their headshots and reactions..
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
