"Consoles are not responsible for the decline of the shooter"

[Ash]

In part thanks to its unique control scheme and lock-on mechanism. It's not a typical console fps.

What makes the forced lock-on a good thing? It was what made me put the game down. I can think of no excuse for it. Made sense in Tomb Raider because of the primitive control of the time (mouselook and analog sticks came onto the scene just around that time). Made sense in Devil May Cry and other such third person hack and slash because of the mix of fixed and dynamic camera angles. And in the old metroid games you had to aim yourself. The only functional purpose that comes to mind is to free up the players aim hand to focus on other input, which I highly doubt is anything much of value. Furthermore the NDS sequel, Metriod Prime: Hunters, rectified this and had manual aiming, which if true to its predecessors showed no legitimate reason for the lock-on at all. Even popamole shooters of today do not go that far. So, what is it? What makes Metriod Prime the only First Person game in existence that forces you to lock-on, and is it legitimate? That I highly doubt.

You are assuming that moving in 360 directions is superior to moving in 8 directions. It's not. That's about as stupid as assuming that real-time games are better than turn-based games "because you get 60 turns a second".

Lol. Ridiculous analogy.

 

[sullynathan]

What makes the forced lock-on a good thing? It was made me put it down. I can think of no excuse for it. Made sense in Tomb Raider because of the primitive control of the time (mouselook and analog sticks came onto the scene just around that time). Made sense in Devil May Cry and other such third person hack and slash because of the mix of fixed and dynamic camera angles. And in the old metroid games you had to aim yourself. The only functional purpose that comes to mind is to free up the players aim hand to focus on other input, which I highly doubt is anything much of value. Furthermore the NDS sequel, Metriod Prime: Hunters, rectified this and had manual aiming, which if true to its predecessors showed no legitimate reason for the lock-on at all. Even popamole shooters of today do not go that far. So, what is it? What makes Metriod Prime the only First Person game in existence that forces you to lock-on, and is it legitimate? That I highly doubt.

Actually the Wii version allows you to manual aim and have fill control over the camera, that's why I think its the superior version. Too bad my PC can't play it properly.

 

[J1M]

In part thanks to its unique control scheme and lock-on mechanism. It's not a typical console fps.

What makes the forced lock-on a good thing? It was made me put it down. I can think of no excuse for it. Made sense in Tomb Raider because of the primitive control of the time (mouselook and analog sticks came onto the scene just around that time). Made sense in Devil May Cry and other such third person hack and slash because of the mix of fixed and dynamic camera angles. And in the old metroid games you had to aim yourself. The only functional purpose that comes to mind is to free up the players aim hand to focus on other input, which I highly doubt is anything much of value. Furthermore the NDS sequel, Metriod Prime: Hunters, rectified this and had manual aiming, which if true to its predecessors showed no legitimate reason for the lock-on at all. Even popamole shooters of today do not go that far. So, what is it? What makes Metriod Prime the only First Person game in existence that forces you to lock-on, and is it legitimate? That I highly doubt.

You are assuming that moving in 360 directions is superior to moving in 8 directions. It's not. That's about as stupid as assuming that real-time games are better than turn-based games "because you get 60 turns a second".

Lol. Ridiculous analogy.

Did anyone ever make a PC "spiritual successor" to a Metroid FPS?

 

[anvi]

Must be some crazy coincidence then that PC gaming went to shit the moment the Xbox showed up, right?

This is so true.

meh, Halo is/was good for what it is.

It was neutered Unreal Tournament for sticky fingered dudebox retards.

 

[Ash]

var Actor LockPawn;
var vector LockPawnHeight;

function LockOnInit()
{
 local Actor HitActor;
 local vector HitLocation, HitNormal, EndTrace, StartTrace, Extent;

  StartTrace = Location;
  Extent = CollisionRadius * vect(0.5,0.5,0.5);
  EndTrace = Location + (vector(ViewRotation) * 2000);
  HitActor = Trace(HitLocation,HitNormal,EndTrace,StartTrace,True,Extent);
  if (HitActor != None && HitActor.IsA('ScriptedPawn'))
  {
      LockPawn = HitActor;
      LockPawnHeight.X = 0;
      LockPawnHeight.Y = 0;
      LockPawnHeight.Z = LockPawn.CollisionHeight*0.5;
      BroadcastMessage("Lock-On Activated");
      ViewRotation =  Rotator(LockPawn.Location - Location);
  }
}

exec function LockOn()
{
   if (LockPawn != None)
   {
       LockPawn = None;
       BroadcastMessage("Lock-On disabled");
   }
   else
       LockOnInit();
}

state PlayerWalking
{   
event PlayerTick(float deltaTime)
 {
        if (LockPawn != None)
        {
            if (LockPawn.IsA('ScriptedPawn') && ScriptedPawn(LockPawn).LineOfSightTo(self))
                ViewRotation =  Rotator(LockPawn.Location - Location - LockPawnHeight);
            else
                LockPawn = None;
        }
       super.PlayerTick(DeltaTime);
}
}

state PlayerSwimming
{   
event PlayerTick(float deltaTime)
 {
        if (LockPawn != None)
        {
            if (LockPawn.IsA('ScriptedPawn') && ScriptedPawn(LockPawn).LineOfSightTo(self))
                ViewRotation =  Rotator(LockPawn.Location - Location - LockPawnHeight);
            else
                LockPawn = None;
        }
       super.PlayerTick(DeltaTime);
}
}

Spoiler

Someone asked me to code a Lock-On feature for their mod.

Normally I'd decline based on principle alone, but it's a mod, one that will probably never see the light of day, and I felt like just giving it a shot to keep my programming skills in check so whatever.

My first ever decline feature, and hopefully my one and only.

 

[sullynathan]

python?

 

[Ash]

No. Don't just spout a random name you heard somewhere. It's the same language used to script your favorite "ultimate dude-bro shooter".

 

[Siveon]

Did anyone ever make a PC "spiritual successor" to a Metroid FPS?

Only thing that comes to mind was Gentrieve 2. It doesn't play much like Metroid though, the developer just borrowed a few ideas and made a roguelike thing out of it.

 

[Ash]

That's a p.cool concept:

The year is 3080. Mass Generators are creating everything, everywhere. However, thieves often steal Mass Generators in hopes of creating robot armies & fortresses. Thieves are terrible programmers, though, and their creations become uncontrollably hostile & fortresses wildly convoluted. It is your job to clear out these fortresses & return the faulty Mass Generators. Be warned, when the Mass Generator is taken offline, the fortress will soon implode!

Shame the level design is randomly generated though.

 

[J1M]

No. Don't just spout a random name you heard somewhere. It's the same language used to script your favorite "ultimate dude-bro shooter".

Looks like unreal script. I thought epic was forcing people into using C++ these days.

 

[sullynathan]

Anyone tried SOCOM? It's a tactical third person shooter on playstation, I tried it a bit and it seems to have some nice mechanics.

No. Don't just spout a random name you heard somewhere. It's the same language used to script your favorite "ultimate dude-bro shooter".

I'm an amateur.

 

[HansDampf]

In part thanks to its unique control scheme and lock-on mechanism. It's not a typical console fps.

What makes the forced lock-on a good thing? It was what made me put the game down. I can think of no excuse for it. Made sense in Tomb Raider because of the primitive control of the time (mouselook and analog sticks came onto the scene just around that time). Made sense in Devil May Cry and other such third person hack and slash because of the mix of fixed and dynamic camera angles. And in the old metroid games you had to aim yourself. The only functional purpose that comes to mind is to free up the players aim hand to focus on other input, which I highly doubt is anything much of value. Furthermore the NDS sequel, Metriod Prime: Hunters, rectified this and had manual aiming, which if true to its predecessors showed no legitimate reason for the lock-on at all. Even popamole shooters of today do not go that far. So, what is it? What makes Metriod Prime the only First Person game in existence that forces you to lock-on, and is it legitimate? That I highly doubt.

Because aiming with an analog stick is shit. Instead of using an aimbot that the player isn't supposed to notice, the game plays it straight and just gives you a lock-on function. And the game is designed around it. Some enemies can escape your view or you can't lock-on to them at all, and you can quickly switch targets while strafing around and dodging projectiles. It actually leads to pretty fast-paced gameplay for a console shooter. Aiming isn't supposed to be a challenge here.
Maybe that wasn't the intention by the developers, but I like the result. And of course, Hunters had manual aiming because Nintendo wanted to push their touchscreen gimmick like they did with motion controls in Corruption. Though Corruption still had a lock-on function (thankfully).

 

[Lyric Suite]

Camera lock-on is also why people playing Dark Souls with mouse and keyboard are misguided. You don't need to have precise camera movement, once the camera locks in the game turns into a beat'em up of sort.

 

[Ash]

Because aiming with an analog stick is shit. Instead of using an aimbot that the player isn't supposed to notice...

It actually leads to pretty fast-paced gameplay for a console shooter.

I like the result

Ignorant 'tards gonna ignorant.

I played Doom in 1993 with lock-on because keyboard aiming is shit. Instead of using a z-axis aimbot.

It actually leads to fast paced gameplay.

I like the result.

I can say dumb things too.

....

The reality is something like this:

                   Aiming
                 Efficiency

Mouse              100%  (optimal)
Stick              75%   (competent)
D-pad              20%   (shit, but still playable)
Keyboard           20%   (shit, but still playable)

If everyone could play the FPS classics at 20% efficiency without complaint, playing at 75% is a huge improvement and not something to point the finger at. And for the record very few console shooters force aim assist on you. It's almost always an option (as on PC), and sometimes it doesn't exist at all.

Anyhow, I've been playing PC & console shooters since the 90s, pretty much every one of note, and in my observations the decline is a result of commercialization, much of it brought about by PC developers. Consoles, its audience and console developers still had a hand, but the horrific garbage design of today...that's a result of increasingly appealing to non-nerds and striving for realism, plain as day.

 

[an Administrator]

^

Everyone forgets Delta Force, I thought it was p. good.

I always liked that Delta Force game where enemies were speaking in Farsi