Quote:
Originally posted by Undertoad
vsp, that's as strange a blind spot as I've ever seen. I played Duke 3D at work back in the day and it was a total blast.
There's nothing like hitting your boss with a rocket launcher and watching his head and torso fly in different directions.
Playing against real people instead of dumb AI bots really changes things, because eventually you figure out what the bots will do and then they become puzzle targets. People are not predictable like that.
|
And yet, they _do_ tend to be predictable like that, at least in my experiences in the multiplayer FPS world. (Read as: up until Quake, after which I had no one to challenge.) Nobody's a _total_ robot, but 95% of the people I've played against have certain behavior patterns and traits that are easily identifiable and that they'll rely on when in a pinch.
Does Bob take chances, or hang back, accumulate armor and weapons, and try harder to stay alive? Does Bill hunt others down aggressively, or sit back and snipe? Who has an idiosyncratic love for the grenade launcher or the axe, even though he knows they're not the most effective weapons? Who camps? Who's got better aim, or who tends to miss a lot? Getting to know most human opponents isn't that much more difficult than getting to know CPU constructions.
When you come down to it, a typical single-player FPS level is a heavily-armed obstacle course. Traverse from Point A to Point B, avoid or demolish the traps in your path, reach the goal/exit and move to the next. A well-crafted level is a thing of beauty. After long periods of challenging the same opponents, I found myself wanting something different, and new single-player levels (or new games, period) were more capable of providing that.
I'm not much for challenging people I don't know (pickup games on the net) -- usually they're either infinitely more skilled than I am, loud and obnoxious and l33t, or both. Then there's the whole online-cheating thing...
This is why, perversely, I prefer single-player mode on most fighting games, and have ever since the days of Street Fighter II. Granted, CPU chars were often absurdly one-dimensional back then, but on today's consoles, their AIs are immensely more complex and subtle opponents. (I'm looking at DC Soul Calibur and PS2 Virtua Fighter 4 as my two favorites -- PARTICULARLY the latter. Its AI-training mode lets you play "coach" and guide a CPU construct against all opposition, while its Kumite mode simulates a Japanese arcade and an endless stream of challengers suited to your skill level, instead of being blown off the machine by guys who've spent $8000 learning the timing of every single move and can dial up 120%-life combos on you at will. Play the game at _your_ pace, without needing a human opponent of similar skill to truly enjoy it.
Believe me, hitting your boss with the Freezethrower _was_ cathartic and fun. (A cow orker put together a Duke level based on the building's floor map, which added to the fun, right down to the beer in the mini-fridge in the boss's simulated office.) It just... got old.
Quote:
Originally posted by perth
vsp, how bout warcraft iii or nwn?
|
I actually own one of the Warcraft II battle packs... bought it for cheap at BJ's Wholesale a while back... but never got around to installing it. I read through the instruction book and got caught up in other games.
I looked at NWN, but its single-player mode is LITERALLY single-player (you can't build a party, or take direct control of the one NPC you can travel with, according to the review I read).
Morrowind is more my speed -- tons of solo wandering in an extremely open-ended environment. Sort of the anti-Diablo. (Oddly, I enjoy the single-player PS1 Diablo more than the single-player PC version -- the controls are more limited, but they just feel right to me. Net Diablo was never an option for me once the rampant cheating kicked in -- that is, on day one.)
I've avoided MMORPGs as a general rule (Evercrack, Ultima Online and their ilk), and not just for the monthly fee or marriage-destroying tendencies. Basically, they're highly-graphical modern variations of MUDs, which I dabbled in a decade ago but eventually abandoned. The MMORPG experience seems more about the people you play the game with more than the game itself -- which (a) doesn't say much for the game design, (b) makes your gameplay experience dependent on finding cool people to play with, and (c) is just as susceptable to cheaters and 24-hour-a-day obsessives. Then you get the people who start building emotional attachments to others' online personalities... do I even have to go there?
But hey -- I'm weird. I know this.
<a href="www.netrek.org">Netrek</a> was the only online game I ever got into for any length of time; I played three seasons in the Intercollegiate Netrek League, including one remotely for Team UPenn. (And, before anyone asks, I _hate_ Star Trek, but its only impact on the game is aesthetic.)
The game is primitive by modern standards, but that's a good thing; it rewards clever strategies more than supernatural joystick/mouse skills. Teamwork is absolutely vital to success, which helps weed out the yahoos. The message system allowed for both trash-talk, macro abuse of the airwaves and/or ignore features for fending off undesirable chatter. Pickup games could be just as much fun as formal scrimmages. Server-side client authentication keeps cheaters out. Accumulated ranks affect only one aspect of the game (the ability to pilot a starbase), meaning that grizzled vets and raw newbies have nearly equal capabilities. And clients are available for umpteen platforms. About once a year or so, I get back into the habit for a while.