Preview Rock Paper Shotgun's Massive Wasteland 2 Preview

[Oesophagus]

Now I'm worried that I'm too hyped for W2, to the point where it can't possibly be as good as I want it to be

 

[Turjan]

Now I'm worried that I'm too hyped for W2, to the point where it can't possibly be as good as I want it to be

To be honest, that's a good approach to anything you are hyped for.

 

[Balor]

The point is, WHY do you need melee weapons when you have firearms and magic? Just to stay true to 'high-tech fantasy with guns AND swords' genre?
There is no 'realistic' way to balance melee with firearms, if you have ready access to both.
Now, if there was an easy way to counter bullets, like shields from Dune and whatnot, that would be viable.

 

[undecaf]

The point is, WHY do you need melee weapons when you have firearms and magic? Just to stay true to 'high-tech fantasy with guns AND swords' genre?
There is no 'realistic' way to balance melee with firearms, if you have ready access to both.

I'd say it's for varietys sake. If it offers a variety of fun gameplay choices with interesting mechanics, who gives a damn if it on some level defies realism (obviously while not going too much overboard with that).

 

[Absalom]

Armed law enforcers have been stabbed to death by knife wielding attackers running at them from 15 feet away. The knife attackers even suffered numerous gunshot wounds during their charge. They say most urban shootouts happen within 10 feet, with shooters often missing. This is almost always when pistols are involved though.

And that's just with knives. A combatant can potentially still be operative while receiving multiple wounds from a small knife, enough to keep unloading their handgun or counter with a melee weapon of their own. Not so much after a katana slash or sledge to the head.

The advantage still lies with firearms. But reality does provide a basis for which to make melee effective in game.

Ja only in urban situations or in ambushes. I'm also willing to bet alot of those successful knife-wielding "charges" were under the influence of PCP or other drugs. A bullet pushes you back quite a bit.

Any old club doing more damage than a high powered sniper rifle round is RETARDED tho

 

[Machocruz]

The point is, WHY do you need melee weapons when you have firearms and magic? Just to stay true to 'high-tech fantasy with guns AND swords' genre?

Depends on the in game systems. Silent assassinations or sentry removal if sound attracts NPCs. Unarmed, pre-emptive CQ strikes if gun drawing is a factor (ie character can possibly get a crit with already available fist while target's weapon is holstered, or because it requires a turn to draw a weapon).

But yeah, mostly for variety and situations where you just want to take joy in cutting/bashing someone.

 

[Kz3r0]

The point is, WHY do you need melee weapons when you have firearms and magic? Just to stay true to 'high-tech fantasy with guns AND swords' genre?
There is no 'realistic' way to balance melee with firearms, if you have ready access to both.
Now, if there was an easy way to counter bullets, like shields from Dune and whatnot, that would be viable.

Please enough of this:

 

[SCO]

The point is, WHY do you need melee weapons when you have firearms and magic? Just to stay true to 'high-tech fantasy with guns AND swords' genre?

D&D strongman meme zeitgeist

and even there, mages are the late-game cannons. Until games ditch this non-sense for a JA2 approach of knives == situational or challenge-run, things will continue.

 

[Dreaad]

If you get within hand to hand distance with some and you have a knife... well at that point there is no advantage to having a gun. There is a reason they teach close combat in modern day armies and it's not just for dealing with unarmed civilians. There are also times where a gun is simply impractical, due to the weight, or the environment you are going into. Stealth is also another consideration.

I'm not saying close combat is better or equal to a gun, just that there are situations where close combat has viable advantages. Also I don't mean close combat with a samurai sword or some other cheese like that.

 

[OSK]

A bullet pushes you back quite a bit.

No they don't. You've been watching too many Hollywood movies.

 

[Delterius]

The point is, WHY do you need melee weapons when you have firearms and magic?

Because sometimes a gentleman wants to use a more elegant weapon, as to reminisce about a more civilized age.

 

[Absalom]

No they don't. You've been watching too many Hollywood movies.

LOL ok bro

So where does all the momentum go from the speeding bullet? Does it bleed back into the fucking ether?

And Hollywood doesn't show this at all, so I don't even know wtf you're talking about

 

[Infinitron]

LOL ok bro

So where does all the momentum go from the speeding bullet? Does it bleed back into the fucking ether?

And Hollywood doesn't show this at all, so I don't even know wtf you're talking about

Here, let TVTropes explain!

 

[Absalom]

Yeah ok. It doesn't push you back. It does stop you however.

You want melee weapons, fine. But have them be a Proton Axe or some high tech shit, not just any old fucking club

 

[Charles-cgr]

The point is, WHY do you need melee weapons when you have firearms and magic? Just to stay true to 'high-tech fantasy with guns AND swords' genre?
There is no 'realistic' way to balance melee with firearms, if you have ready access to both.
Now, if there was an easy way to counter bullets, like shields from Dune and whatnot, that would be viable.

There's also the issue of saving ammunition (which was pretty critical in Wasteland 1).

 

[dunno lah]

They could also put severe accuracy penalties with ranged weapons when the target is 2 spaces from you. Fallout should've had that IMO.

 

[Infinitron]

They could also put severe accuracy penalties with ranged weapons when the target is 2 spaces from you. Fallout should've had that IMO.

Implement gun kata?

 

[dunno lah]

Implement gun kata?

if you ask me. Man, I gotta watch this movie again...

 

[I_am_Ian]

They could also put severe accuracy penalties with ranged weapons when the target is 2 spaces from you. Fallout should've had that IMO.

The problem is that a gun is more accurate the closer you are to the target. Maybe if you're within arms reach it becomes unwieldy but still easier to kill with than any melee weapon.

 

[OSK]

So where does all the momentum go from the speeding bullet? Does it bleed back into the fucking ether?

Yeah ok. It doesn't push you back. It does stop you however.

The worst part about deer hunting, is when you shoot the deer and it goes flying backwards, end over end, into the woods.

Newton's third law of motion says that for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. That means if a bullet were to strike someone with enough force to knock them back, that same force would be applied to the shooter in recoil. In fact, it's significantly less thanks to friction and heat. Or what you like to call "ether."

Let's do some math, courtesy of Wikipedia:

Example: A .44 Remington Magnum with a 240 grain jacketed bullet is fired at about 1180 fps [2] at a 170 lbs target. What velocity is imparted to the target?

240 grain = 0.016 kilograms
1180 fps = 360 m/s
170 lbs = 77 kilograms
Mass of bullet * Velocity of bullet = Mass of target * Velocity of target
(0.015) * 360 = 77 * Vt
Vt = 0.07 m/s
Vt = 0.16 mph

This example shows the target barely moves at all.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_of_firearms

Ooh boy. Considering average walking speed is about 2.9 mph, that -0.16 mph is really going to stop you in your tracks!

Psh. Like you'd even argue about guns with an American!




...Sorry bro. I couldn't pass up the opportunity to be a smug asshole.

 

[Absalom]

gunfetishist talk

I wouldn't know I've only hunted with bows. I just don't want to see some dumbass with a club doing more damage than a gun

 

[Excidium]

Oh man those retarded arguments

None of this shit matters because there is no realistic damage model and because you're a super strong mexican that can cross the map and chop a guy's arm off with a machete before he can even get a shot

 

[Balor]

Heh, it is not about 'realism', it is about balance without dumbass, arbitrary stats on weapons we know quite well in RL.
If the setting includes magic shields that can easily stop bullets but have trouble averting a well-aimed hammer to the face - a class of melee-equipped mage killers would be expected, without being 'realistic', there are no magic shields in RL.
Having special powers that would be negated by using a tech weapon (like in Arcanum) also would be balanced and logical.

But even if you posses 'magical' powers that give you incredible speed and stamina, so you can close distance with a shooter and take a few shots in the process without flinching... why should you try to carve him up, instead of filling him with buckshot, for instance? Same effect, but more versatile.
Ok, perhaps stealth would explain it. But again, why use melee? There are ranged weapons that are silent and reliable, and do no require you to be breathing down your enemy's neck, risking detection.

So, there are ways to make melee and ranged weapons coexist if some wacky special powers (or circumstances) are involved, but in Shadowrun those are simply not implemented to satisfaction. They rarely are.

 

[Excidium]

They're not meant to coexist equally. Guns at the very least have a range advantage.

I'm fine as fuck with rule of cool or fiction reasons but making shit up with the only purpose of melee being "balanced" with guns is some sawyerian bullshit

 

[Dreaad]

Heh, it is not about 'realism', it is about balance without dumbass, arbitrary stats on weapons we know quite well in RL.
If the setting includes magic shields that can easily stop bullets but have trouble averting a well-aimed hammer to the face - a class of melee-equipped mage killers would be expected, without being 'realistic', there are no magic shields in RL.
Having special powers that would be negated by using a tech weapon (like in Arcanum) also would be balanced and logical.

But even if you posses 'magical' powers that give you incredible speed and stamina, so you can close distance with a shooter and take a few shots in the process without flinching... why should you try to carve him up, instead of filling him with buckshot, for instance? Same effect, but more versatile.
Ok, perhaps stealth would explain it. But again, why use melee? There are ranged weapons that are silent and reliable, and do no require you to be breathing down your enemy's neck, risking detection.

So, there are ways to make melee and ranged weapons coexist if some wacky special powers (or circumstances) are involved, but in Shadowrun those are simply not implemented to satisfaction. They rarely are.

If we are talking about shadowrun returns specificly, then yeah the close combat/ranged combat just comes of gamey i.e. not in any realistic. Then again with a world of magic and spirits it's kind of hard to say something is unrealistic...

As I said earlier however in real life there are situations where close combat is preferable, or rather necessary. For example, what if you are trying to be stealthy and the guy you need to kill is wearing full body Kevlar and a helmet? In that situation, you can't be sure that 1 shot will be enough, you have a higher control over hitting him in the right spot with a knife than a bullet. What if you do not want to kill said target? Once again shooting him is not an ideal option for stealth/silence AND incapacitating them. Obviously in all those types of situations however you are likely to carry a gun and be trained to use it, I would say there are few professionals these days that focus solely on close combat because that would just be silly.

Full realism of combat in a game that includes guns/magic/samurai swords is pretty much impossible, unless you make very heavily scripted sequences that can only have 1 solution. Especially if on top of that you offer the player the ability to customize their char.