[H]Titanfall just 6v6

[cmdrdredd]

the only advantage of having the steam overlay is f12 takes screenshots and saves them where steam has its screenshots, Shift tab takes you to the steam overlay so you can chat to your steamfriends or receive notification is someone talks to you but thats about it



edit: in other matters...yesterday i completed the IMC campaign without winning 1 single match LOL

When I did the IMC campaign I was always teamed with people new like myself and maybe someone lv 20. The militia was filled with people lv30+ and it made the match frustrating from the viewpoint of trying to win. We had almost no chance and I think we only won once because someone lv43 was on our team that one time.

 

[sze5003]

I'm 1/4 on the campaign matches. I dunno what my team mates are doing half the time. I was going after grunts and pilots most of the time.

 

[EDUSAN]

When I did the IMC campaign I was always teamed with people new like myself and maybe someone lv 20. The militia was filled with people lv30+ and it made the match frustrating from the viewpoint of trying to win. We had almost no chance and I think we only won once because someone lv43 was on our team that one time.

yeah the same happened to me. My team was 2 or 3 lvl 10- and my mates and I were 18-20 and we got matched to 1 lvl 39 that played pretty well, we couldnt beat him :S

 

[cmdrdredd]

I'm 1/4 on the campaign matches. I dunno what my team mates are doing half the time. I was going after grunts and pilots most of the time.

This is when communication comes in handy. I am basically a loner out there lol

 

[sweenish]

I've had better luck in campaign matches as far as evenly matched teams go.

But I've already been eclipsed. I thought I'd at least have a week of being pretty good (my team winning and usually in top 3). So many people with so much more time than me.

Leveling doesn't really affect me too much, although having to suffer with iron sights on new guns can be annoying. It only takes a couple matches to unlock new scopes, so it's a wash for me. It's not nearly annoying enough for me to complain about.

 

[ImpulsE69]

I grew up with the same games and I'm not overly keen on the all unlocks either but it's got nothing to do with short attention spans.

That's exactly what it is about! They are put there to drag out the "end game" so to speak. It's so that people who need something new every day have some sense of making progress and drive them to keep playing. Otherwise they are like..same old same old for 2 weeks and move on to something else. There is no other reason that leveling and unlocks are in multiplayer FPS games. They are essentially unneeded. All they do is add a sense of longevity and meaning to keep playing. (or change the meta if you will).

It's just a personal annoyance. I don't mind it in single player, because that is just part of the game. I just don't like it in multiplayer (not sure where it first came about...but I seem to recall it in COD4).

 

[Wingznut]

It's just a personal annoyance. I don't mind it in single player, because that is just part of the game. I just don't like it in multiplayer (not sure where it first came about...but I seem to recall it in COD4).

You make a good point about it being ok in single player... Because usually the enemies scale accordingly.

But in multiplayer, when I get killed by the nail gun, I want to immediately try it out. Until I find out I'm 10 levels too low to have it, and I'll have to get killed by it another thousand times before I get the chance to use it. And by that time, there will be another perk 10 levels above me that I want.

 

[irishScott]

I'm 1/4 on the campaign matches. I dunno what my team mates are doing half the time. I was going after grunts and pilots most of the time.

Depends on the matches. In Last Titan Standing teamwork is much more natural as there's less chaos and anyone who goes off on their own and doesn't use terrain is quickly gangraped. Attrition might as well be called "team free-for-all", but I'm fine with that as well. I just accept that I'm not going to get any real support and just focus on being as badass as possible.

Honestly that's one reason I love Titanfall, my team can lose round after round and I'll still have actual fun. Granted I prefer winning, but the rounds are short enough I don't get so invested that I feel bad for losing. It's a nice change of pace from more competitive shooters.

 

[Veliko]

That's exactly what it is about! They are put there to drag out the "end game" so to speak. It's so that people who need something new every day have some sense of making progress and drive them to keep playing. Otherwise they are like..same old same old for 2 weeks and move on to something else. There is no other reason that leveling and unlocks are in multiplayer FPS games. They are essentially unneeded. All they do is add a sense of longevity and meaning to keep playing. (or change the meta if you will).

The lack of self-awareness amongst the FPS crowd is staggering.

Back in the old days that you hold in such high esteem, it was deathmatch players like yourselves who were labelled as having short attention spans.

Spawn.
Shoot some players until you die.
Spawn.
Shoot some players until you die.
Spawn.
Shoot some players until you die.

Nothing about that process strikes me as being something that requires a long attention span.

It's just a personal annoyance. I don't mind it in single player, because that is just part of the game. I just don't like it in multiplayer (not sure where it first came about...but I seem to recall it in COD4).

You need to make your mind up about all this.

Levelling is either an indication of a short attention span or it isn't; the fact it might be in single player or multi player doesn't make any difference. The fact you don't personally like it is fine as I'm not overly keen on it myself, but going on about the attention spans of modern players is daft; it's just the usual "youth of today" trope placed into a modern context.

 

[ImpulsE69]

The lack of self-awareness amongst the FPS crowd is staggering.

Back in the old days that you hold in such high esteem, it was deathmatch players like yourselves who were labelled as having short attention spans.

Spawn.
Shoot some players until you die.
Spawn.
Shoot some players until you die.
Spawn.
Shoot some players until you die.

Nothing about that process strikes me as being something that requires a long attention span.

I do actually get your point, but it doesn't address my point at all. You are STILL doing that with today's FPS, that part hasn't changed.

Holding the old days in high esteem doesn't mean much when I've played the newer games and don't find them enjoyable.

And you keep saying I need to make up my mind. I think maybe you just need better comprehension of what I'm saying. It is clear you don't understand, and that is fine, but I know exactly what I mean. People have shorter attention spans today. It's not exactly an unknown. It has made its way into gaming, in many different ways. It doesn't mean there's not reasons for that, I don't even have that much patience these days, but people have many more options today than in the past.

Let me ask it this way...

Suppose Quake 1 came out today - with todays graphics, but yesterdays gameplay. How long would most people enjoy playing the same levels, the same weapons, etc etc over and over and over and over (because that's what we did)? No leveling, no unlocking. Nothing to artificially make you wait to get to try something new. I don't recall ever getting bored even though nothing new was introduced except the actual players themselves. (just using it as an example).

 

[Mondozei]

The lack of self-awareness amongst the FPS crowd is staggering.

Back in the old days that you hold in such high esteem, it was deathmatch players like yourselves who were labelled as having short attention spans.

Spawn.
Shoot some players until you die.
Spawn.
Shoot some players until you die.
Spawn.
Shoot some players until you die.

Nothing about that process strikes me as being something that requires a long attention span.



You need to make your mind up about all this.

Levelling is either an indication of a short attention span or it isn't; the fact it might be in single player or multi player doesn't make any difference. The fact you don't personally like it is fine as I'm not overly keen on it myself, but going on about the attention spans of modern players is daft; it's just the usual "youth of today" trope placed into a modern context.

Well said, Veliko, even though I don't like the levelling system myself, as a general rule.
But you're right about the rant'ish content of that post that makes little to no sense.

I do actually get your point, but it doesn't address my point at all. You are STILL doing that with today's FPS, that part hasn't changed.

Holding the old days in high esteem doesn't mean much when I've played the newer games and don't find them enjoyable.

He did adress your point, you just don't the implications of what he said.
And that you don't find something enjoyable isn't an indication that the games today are worse - in many ways we are in a golden age - but that you have old tastes and difficulty adapting to the new world, ergo everything becomes "bad". This happens to a lot of people as they get older, in all kinds of fields. I say a lot, not "all", because some people avoid this kind of degeneration of their mind.

 

[Veliko]

I do actually get your point, but it doesn't address my point at all. You are STILL doing that with today's FPS, that part hasn't changed.

Holding the old days in high esteem doesn't mean much when I've played the newer games and don't find them enjoyable.

What actually is your point? Is it:

- You don't like the newer games.
- You think modern FPS gamers have short attention spans.

And as you said, the modern FPS games are still doing the same things (to one degree or another) that the old ones did, meaning that the current crop of 15-year old gamers are still doing the same things that the previous crop of 15-year old gamers were doing.

The only difference is that the new players can level up.

 

[ImpulsE69]

What actually is your point? Is it:

- You don't like the newer games.
- You think modern FPS gamers have short attention spans.

And as you said, the modern FPS games are still doing the same things (to one degree or another) that the old ones did, meaning that the current crop of 15-year old gamers are still doing the same things that the previous crop of 15-year old gamers were doing.

The only difference is that the new players can level up.

Both.

You tell me why levelups and unlockables are in todays FPS games. Explain it to me, because you obviously think there is some other reason, and maybe there is. (and I'm being sincere here).

 

[Veliko]

Both.

You tell me why levelups and unlockables are in todays FPS games. Explain it to me, because you obviously think there is some other reason, and maybe there is. (and I'm being sincere here).

Because people like them.

It's part of the reason why players will spend months and months playing repetitive MMOs - the lure of seeing a bar inching it's way towards the edge of the screen has a strange attraction to it.

 

[ImpulsE69]

Well said, Veliko, even though I don't like the levelling system myself, as a general rule.
But you're right about the rant'ish content of that post that makes little to no sense.



He did adress your point, you just don't the implications of what he said.
And that you don't find something enjoyable isn't an indication that the games today are worse - in many ways we are in a golden age - but that you have old tastes and difficulty adapting to the new world, ergo everything becomes "bad". This happens to a lot of people as they get older, in all kinds of fields. I say a lot, not "all", because some people avoid this kind of degeneration of their mind.

Sigh..No, he didnt.

 

[ImpulsE69]

Because people like them.

It's part of the reason why players will spend months and months playing repetitive MMOs - the lure of seeing a bar inching it's way towards the edge of the screen has a strange attraction to it.

OK, I gave you the benefit of a doubt that you had some insight as to why they are in them now, but I expected a better reason than that. They didn't know people liked it when they added it to a FPS the first time. There are many people out there who don't like them. Comparing them to MMO's is not the same thing at all, but I understand the concept...why? because it's an artificial end game extender, just like I originally stated. If your only complaint is me stating it's there because of short attention spans you really haven't shown any reason to show me otherwise.

I could argue if they belong in a multiplayer FPS or not, but it doesn't matter because it is now mainstream. I simply do not like them and haven't liked a single game I've played that does have them. Again, personal preference. Has nothing to do with me not making up my mind (or getting older as someone said). I still play other games, just not those that have these features.

 

[Veliko]

OK, I gave you the benefit of a doubt that you had some insight as to why they are in them now, but I expected a better reason than that.

Then your expectations were far too high in the first place.

They didn't know people liked it when they added it to a FPS the first time.

John Romero didn't know people liked FPS games before he sat down and designed one.

There are many people out there who don't like them. Comparing them to MMO's is not the same thing at all, but I understand the concept...why? because it's an artificial end game extender, just like I originally stated.

No, you originally stated that they were for people with short attention spans.

 

[ImpulsE69]

Then your expectations were far too high in the first place.



John Romero didn't know people liked FPS games before he sat down and designed one.



No, you originally stated that they were for people with short attention spans.

LMAO I swear there's one in every crowd. Can't simply accept that someone has a different thought process and opinion on things and has to pick every sentence apart trying to make them look bad. It's so bad on this forum.

Yes, they are for people with short attention spans. That is the ONLY reason they are there. Period. Does that mean everyone who plays them has short attention spans? No. (which is probably why you are getting bent out of shape about it). There is NO other explanation other than to keep people getting new things artificially so that they continue to play. The reason being the "masses" (no not hardcore gamers) would move on within a few weeks due to "having done everything" which is as you said:

Spawn/Kill/Die/repeat

Go back to my question about Quake 1 (maybe you missed it).

 

[sze5003]

It's also valid that they are in there because people like them and like to feel like they achieve something for doing the same thing over and over again. By the definition, if you are doing the same crap over and over and over but expecting a different result when you clearly don't get one, thats insanity.

 

[Veliko]

LMAO I swear there's one in every crowd. Can't simply accept that someone has a different thought process and opinion on things and has to pick every sentence apart trying to make them look bad. It's so bad on this forum.

I'm well aware that people have different opinions on things and I've stated a number of times now that I'm not too keen on the levelling systems myself.

Yes, they are for people with short attention spans. That is the ONLY reason they are there. Period. Does that mean everyone who plays them has short attention spans? No. (which is probably why you are getting bent out of shape about it). There is NO other explanation other than to keep people getting new things artificially so that they continue to play. The reason being the "masses" (no not hardcore gamers) would move on within a few weeks due to "having done everything" which is as you said:

Spawn/Kill/Die/repeat

This is what I mean about you not being able to make your mind up; there's two or three different arguments mixed up here, all mashed up into one confused conclusion.

Suppose Quake 1 came out today - with todays graphics, but yesterdays gameplay. How long would most people enjoy playing the same levels, the same weapons, etc etc over and over and over and over (because that's what we did)? No leveling, no unlocking. Nothing to artificially make you wait to get to try something new. I don't recall ever getting bored even though nothing new was introduced except the actual players themselves. (just using it as an example).

Modders were constantly creating new levels and changing aspects of the games because they became bored with the old ones.

 

[Kev]

Both.

You tell me why levelups and unlockables are in todays FPS games. Explain it to me, because you obviously think there is some other reason, and maybe there is. (and I'm being sincere here).

It's basic human psychology. When people are rewarded for something it fires off signals in the brain that makes you feel good, thus adding to the addictive quality of the game. It doesn't have anything to do with attention span.

 

[12andy]

I'm going to have to side with Impulse on this one.

I think the reason why unlocks have become to popular is because the core gameplay is, how should I say it nicely, lame as fck (IMO). By core, I'm referring to gunplay, physics, movement, etc.

Quake/ UT did NOT need any of these, due to the fact that movement and weapons handling was an art form in itself. Every fight was unique, and nailing weapon combos were just way too satisfying. You'd train your wrists to nail those snap shots, and to track LG more effectively onto your opponent.

So much depth, that I'm sure you guys are already aware about, assuming you played FPS in that "era".

Most modern shooters play too similarly: sprint, duck, ADS, burst fire, odd strafing here and there. Fairly lame in comparison, thus we need unlocks to keep the interest going.

Sort of like the physical sports we have today: there's so much depth and science behind the tasks, that improving upon these elements are achievements in themselves. If a child were to get a badge for every 3-pointer they've scored... yeah, pretty absurd, ain't it?

/biased grouchy arena-whore

 

[Veliko]

I'm going to have to side with Impulse on this one.

I think the reason why unlocks have become to popular is because the core gameplay is, how should I say it nicely, lame as fck (IMO). By core, I'm referring to gunplay, physics, movement, etc.

Quake/ UT did NOT need any of these, due to the fact that movement and weapons handling was an art form in itself. Every fight was unique, and nailing weapon combos were just way too satisfying. You'd train your wrists to nail those snap shots, and to track LG more effectively onto your opponent.

So much depth, that I'm sure you guys are already aware about, assuming you played FPS in that "era".

Most modern shooters play too similarly: sprint, duck, ADS, burst fire, odd strafing here and there. Fairly lame in comparison, thus we need unlocks to keep the interest going.

The exact same criticisms were made about FPS games back then as well, that they all played the same.

If Quake didn't need anything extra why did the players move onto the sequels? If it was such a perfect game why aren't you all playing it still?

 

[ImpulsE69]

It's also valid that they are in there because people like them and like to feel like they achieve something for doing the same thing over and over again. By the definition, if you are doing the same crap over and over and over but expecting a different result when you clearly don't get one, thats insanity.

Much like people say console games and their players have dumbed things down, it might be similar subject matter. Companies want MASSES to buy their games, not niches. So yes, I agree people like them. The short attention span people (sorry..had to put that).

In an FPS you are doing the same crap over and over but the playerbase should dictate what happens (which changes the outcome). Perks, Level Ups, new weapon unlocks, as someone said, are a reward. To keep you playing.

Is it not a reasonable conclusion then that if those were not in place the masses (again, not the hardcore gamers) would bore faster and move onto something else?

Sure people moved onto Quake 2, then 3 etc.....but that was YEARS in happening. Not day 1.

 

[ImpulsE69]

It's basic human psychology. When people are rewarded for something it fires off signals in the brain that makes you feel good, thus adding to the addictive quality of the game. It doesn't have anything to do with attention span.

That is directly related to attention span.