General Discussion - Page 33

On September 29 2015 14:11 JieXian wrote:


You are misinformed. If you play enough quake you know "spamming" itself is a whole body of knowledge. In quake I think rockets aren't as strong though so it's more balanced out. Ammo is limited. Time is limited. If you spam an area you're not spamming another area. And if you miss you've just wasted a rocket (the rocket gun only comes with 10 rockets).

I admit I have never played TF2 and I could be wrong on certain things. In quake the opponent could be anywhere, and if you spam like an idiot you're wasting ammo, revealing your position, and you risk not being able to shoot if you need an important shot due to cooldown. When I play I need to keep track of my opponent's location. At the same time it's our job to dodge and avoid the spammed rockets/plasma gun

I do realise that there is also another difference in quake where everyone can use all the weapons.

Also, in quake, prediction shots are also used with non hitscan weapons.

They only appear random to the uninitiated. I play quake at a low level and I applaud and cheer when my brother hits me with a well timed and aimed prediction rocket. Of course I cheer like crazy too when I manage to predict his movements correctly. Spamming is also used to prevent or discourage a person from moving into an area, or at least to slow him down, while you go on doing something else.

Check this out this video commentary by the top quake pro. Everything I've mentioned will be apparent in this clip. Projectile shots increase the depth of the game by so much, at least for quake. They manage to land quite a number of prediction shots too because well they are great at reading each other.

On October 01 2015 16:35 papaz wrote:
IMBA commentating!!!

I can't believe Quake isn't a top e-sport anymore. Damn that game takes so much skill on the highest level. Pure joy watching and listening to the pros.The depth to a game where you have a couple of weapons, some armor and hp is mind boggling. Listening to the commentating was just "wtf that depth of knowledge".

On October 08 2015 21:38 Dekker wrote:


The sad truth is that the skill based shooters are a dead franchise sadly... All the kids go for the newest installment of Duty Calls... um I mean Call of Duty... This also shows in viewer numbers for these kind of events, sadly. "Realistic" shooters is where it's at, at least at the moment..

Since there is no real demographic for these good old skill shooters at the moment, no publisher is even trying to get a decent one out. Or we get shitty games like the Quake 4 MP or Shootmania (which is imho the worst shooter I have ever seen...). Not even the last Unreal Tournament was any good...

On October 01 2015 14:49 lestye wrote:

Uhhh. You can't possibly mean The lost Vikings, are you?

On October 08 2015 22:05 KillerSOS wrote:


CS:GO has one of the highest viewerships of any game at the moment. Do you really not consider it a "skilled based shooter??"

I suppose it would be accurate to say that "arena based" shooters are at an all time low, but that's an incredibly small subset of the FPS genre.

On October 08 2015 22:42 Velr wrote:



CS did never really compare to Quake. The skillset used is WAY diffrent.

Just look at the moussettings a CS Player uses compared to a quake Player. They require entirely diffrent skillsets, its like comparing Starcraft to Warcraft 3. There are a ton of similarities but they play not even remotely the same.

On October 08 2015 23:09 Dekker wrote:
I have a feeling a hit some cs players feelings and made them cry without even intending to do so... Yes, CS takes skill, I never denied that. And dont try to read it that way to get offended. CS still is part of the "Realistic" type of shooters. But I guess arena type shooters would have been the better word. Though I am not sure if the multiplayer of games like Quake 1 and 2, Half Life etc. can actually be described as such. But for further discussion they will.

I am not sure what bullshit plansix is trying to put together here actually... I never said I wont play Overwatch or that it wont be a great game... What I said is that the market for FPS games changed.

Anyway, back to topic on overwatch...

On October 08 2015 21:38 Dekker wrote:


The sad truth is that the skill based shooters are a dead franchise sadly... All the kids go for the newest installment of Duty Calls... um I mean Call of Duty... This also shows in viewer numbers for these kind of events, sadly. "Realistic" shooters is where it's at, at least at the moment..

Since there is no real demographic for these good old skill shooters at the moment, no publisher is even trying to get a decent one out. Or we get shitty games like the Quake 4 MP or Shootmania (which is imho the worst shooter I have ever seen...). Not even the last Unreal Tournament was any good...

On October 08 2015 23:09 Dekker wrote:
I have a feeling a hit some cs players feelings and made them cry without even intending to do so... Yes, CS takes skill, I never denied that. And dont try to read it that way to get offended. CS still is part of the "Realistic" type of shooters. But I guess arena type shooters would have been the better word. Though I am not sure if the multiplayer of games like Quake 1 and 2, Half Life etc. can actually be described as such. But for further discussion they will.

I am not sure what bullshit plansix is trying to put together here actually... I never said I wont play Overwatch or that it wont be a great game... What I said is that the market for FPS games changed.

Anyway, back to topic on overwatch...

On October 13 2015 21:44 Dingodile wrote:
wow announcing a game and still not out after one year?! not even beta.

Is this a new way of announcements in gaming industry?

On October 13 2015 21:44 Dingodile wrote:
wow announcing a game and still not out after one year?! not even beta.

Is this a new way of announcements in gaming industry?

On October 13 2015 22:10 Plansix wrote:

Its Blizzard. They announced work on WC3 in 1999 and it was released in 2003. Its how they roll.