I also wish that unconsciousness was implemented in the game. It would make for an interesting mechanic...

Something like in L4D when your teammate is incapacitated, you need to help him back on knees.

I also wish that unconsciousness was implemented in the game. It would make for an interesting mechanic...

Something like in L4D when your teammate is incapacitated, you need to help him back on knees.

yea, that would work... except your teammate would pretty much be out of the fight for that mission, and getting your incapacitated teammate to a evac station as quick as possible would determine whether or not he/she dies or recovers.

no, my point is a different one Tacitcalspoon. Look at for example Half-Life 2. EVERYTHING in the enviroment is reflected on a watersurface BUT YOUR CHARACTER!

If there are reflections, you need to reflect your character as well BASTA!

Yes, again, that is for performance. Reflecting static objects is much less intensive than reflecting all that AND reflecting everything that moves. Find a game with a ridiculous amount of video options that lets you turn off unit water reflections. Your FPS goes up, and depending on the game it can be by a substantial amount.

Good one. lol

Okay, to the original thread intent: Weak weapons sounds. This is the number one for me. I want the guns to be loud, staccato, and believable. MW2 is okay at this. BFBC2 was a bit better except for the annoying echo. One of the best I've come accross is actually Transformers War for Cybertron (yes you should try this one). The pistol sound is perfect although probably better suited to a battle rifle. The only ones Halo got right were the sniper rifles and the Halo 1 shotgun.
I bring this up because the current SMG in IM sounds a bit... lacking. Just not as sharp as I'd hoped. On the other hand, the silenced SMG sounds perfect.

Rocket speed. From page 1 I definitely agree. Rockets need to be way faster than what you generally see out there.

Recoil on full auto in futuristic games. Okay, this bucks the trend but look at the advances we're making in the real word to cut recoil down. I don't think it's totally unreasonable to expect the trend to continue to where recoil is reduced such that full auto is actually useful. I hated how much recoil there was in BF2142. Made the feature worthless. For contemporary games like MW2, BFBC2, yeah recoil is fine. But it is a little less fun. And in the IM future, why not?

Inaccurate weapons for the sake of balancing. MW2 is the worst offender here. Guns are nowhere close to there real-world counterparts. The medium machine guns are weaker than ARs. Ever see anyone shrug off a couple hits from a real M240? Me neither. Strangely Halo is also pretty bad at this. Assault rifles should be assault rifles, not glorified SMG's.

Well that's all I can think of at the moment. Oh yeah, and lack of giant walking land sharks. That really bugs me about most of the shooters you see out there today.

Okay, to the original thread intent: Weapons sounds. This is the number one for me. I want the gun to be loud, staccato, and believable. MW2 is okay at this. BFBC2 was a bit better except for the annoying echo. One of the best I've come accross is actually Transformers War for Cybertron (yes you should try this one). The pistol sound is perfect although probably better suited to a battle rifle. The only one Halo got right was the sniper rifle and the shotgun from Halo 1.
I bring this up because the current SMG in IM sounds a bit... lacking. Just not as sharp as I'd hoped. On the other hand, the silenced SMG sounds perfect.

Rocket speed. From page 1 I definitely agree. Rockets need to be way faster than what you generally see out there.

Recoil on full auto in futuristic games. Okay, this bucks the trend but look at the advances we're making in the real word to cut recoil down. I don't think it's totally unreasonable to expect the trend to continue to where recoil is reduced such that full auto is actually useful. And come on, it should be useful for something other than just spray & pray. BF2142 was nearly ruined for me because of the ridiculous recoil when firing anything on auto at a target more than 10m away. It's the future for goodness sake. Have some fun with it. For contemporary games like MW2, BFBC2, yeah recoil is fine, just less fun. And I'm well aware that the M-16A2 didn't have full auto for just this reason. But in the IM future, why not?

Inaccurate weapons for the sake of balancing. MW2 is the worst offender here. Guns are nowhere close to there real-world counterparts. The medium machine guns are weaker than ARs. Ever see anyone shrug off a couple hits from a real M240? Me neither. Strangely Halo is also pretty bad at this (and I'm a big Halo fan) where you have pistols that function like heavy rifles, assault rifles that work like SMG's,and SMG's that, well, don't do much of anything. I do like the Battle Rifle/DMR and but the AR has always been inordinately weak.

Well that's all I can think of. at the moment Oh yeah, and lack of giant walking land sharks. That really bugs me about most of the shooters you see out there today.

I agree with you mostly. Just recoil is for balancing. Why use anything else if full auto is as accurate as a sniper rifle? Yes, future tech will likely make things accurate and yes the future will likely result in full auto sniper rifles being the only combat weapons. But one weapon type doesnt make for an interesting game. So, as long as its done well, recoil is something I can accept for the sake of creating multiple different but equal weapons.

I agree with you mostly. Just recoil is for balancing. Why use anything else if full auto is as accurate as a sniper rifle? Yes, future tech will likely make things accurate and yes the future will likely result in full auto sniper rifles being the only combat weapons. But one weapon type doesnt make for an interesting game. So, as long as its done well, recoil is something I can accept for the sake of creating multiple different but equal weapons.

I see your point but there are other ways of balancing. Damage per hit, effective range, things like that. But yeah, you do run the risk of just having everyone run around with AR's because it's the perfect gun. Tricky line there I guess.

But yeah, you do run the risk of just having everyone run around with AR's because it's the perfect gun.

What, like real life?

But yeah, you do run the risk of just having everyone run around with AR's because it's the perfect gun.

What, like real life?

Right. At this point the AR is the best all-around weapon for the standard soldier. And you already have some weapons like the AUG that can kinda/sorta function as an LMG, SMG, or long range rifle with a simple barrel change. The G36 comes to mind as well. Continued development will only make the standard AR more versatile and more capable.

But back to the game. Even with a recoil-less AR you'd still want different weapons for different scenarios. Outdoors with long sight-lines would be great for AR's and Snipers. Indoors in confined spaces you'd tend to favor SMG's or shotguns. MW2 actually did a decent job of accounting for weapon mobility where SMG's and pistols take less time to recenter after movements (like going around a corner) than an AR or LMG. Essentially, you can bring a smaller gun to bear quicker after making a large movement than a larger, bulkier weapon. So you'd still have different situations where different weapons would be better.

Anyway, I'm just kinda tired of recoil basically negating anything after the first one or two shots in an auto burst. I'd like to see an AR where I can burn through a 30 round clip while still keeping a reasonably tight shot pattern at 100 yds. Possible today? Not really. Possible for the Interstellar Marines 100+ years from now? That's a possibility.

I kind of agree with Aevaris. If we make a game set in the future that is TOO realistic, it will not be any fun. Things that are considered cheats in FPSes like auto-aims and wallhacks will become a reality of warfare eventually, and the 100+ years between now and IM time would theoretically be enough to field that kind of stuff. That's why I really like IM. It's got an aesthetic that is not hard to swallow, yet it does not take a wholly realistic view of the future.

If someone were to make a game that is a really good guess at what the future of warfare is like, I don't think it would be an FPS. Maybe an FPS/RTS hybrid where you are a human squad commander in power armor that manages a squad of combat robots or something, but men shooting other men with guns at close distances will be gone for the most part.

I kind of agree with Aevaris. If we make a game set in the future that is TOO realistic, it will not be any fun. Things that are considered cheats in FPSes like auto-aims and wallhacks will become a reality of warfare eventually, and the 100+ years between now and IM time would theoretically be enough to field that kind of stuff. That's why I really like IM. It's got an aesthetic that is not hard to swallow, yet it does not take a wholly realistic view of the future.

If someone were to make a game that is a really good guess at what the future of warfare is like, I don't think it would be an FPS. Maybe an FPS/RTS hybrid where you are a human squad commander in power armor that manages a squad of combat robots or something, but men shooting other men with guns at close distances will be gone for the most part.

I agree. If someone made a game like that, while it might be ground-breaking I don't think it would be a good game.

I kind of agree with Aevaris. If we make a game set in the future that is TOO realistic, it will not be any fun. Things that are considered cheats in FPSes like auto-aims and wallhacks will become a reality of warfare eventually, and the 100+ years between now and IM time would theoretically be enough to field that kind of stuff. That's why I really like IM. It's got an aesthetic that is not hard to swallow, yet it does not take a wholly realistic view of the future.

If someone were to make a game that is a really good guess at what the future of warfare is like, I don't think it would be an FPS. Maybe an FPS/RTS hybrid where you are a human squad commander in power armor that manages a squad of combat robots or something, but men shooting other men with guns at close distances will be gone for the most part.

I agree. If someone made a game like that, while it might be ground-breaking I don't think it would be a good game.

Actually it sounds like this talking a lot about something similar to supreme commander. Which, I might add is a phenomenal game, just not a FPS.

I'm thinking overall ZPS has been taking IM in a very good direction, they've managed to avoid many of the short comings of modern FPS's. So far, I'm happy :)

I agree. If someone made a game like that, while it might be ground-breaking I don't think it would be a good game.

Eh, I realize I didn't expand upon my idea properly, but what if instead of what you were thinking of, you thought of a game wholly in first person that has you managing the combat of 2-5 combat drones of varying uses and specialties through armor hud and/or a pipboy-esque device. No RTS commander view. All in perspective and totally immersive. When I said RTS hybrid, I realized after reading your comment that the phrase really does not give a good picture of what I was thinking.

My idea is that the few humans on the battlefield (like the one you play) will be much weaker than all the scary death-machines that make up 95% of the fighting forces of both sides. So basically the opposite of Supreme Commander and its... supreme commander. The game will be all about optimally managing your units while maintaining good situational awareness and keeping your leader under the radar. A struggle between making sure your units are doing what they should be, that your leader has a good vantage point/good intel, and that the commander constantly stays on the move so the enemy doesn't wipe him out (cuz they'll be looking for him with specialized kill teams). That's what I want.

I agree. If someone made a game like that, while it might be ground-breaking I don't think it would be a good game.

Eh, I realize I didn't expand upon my idea properly, but what if instead of what you were thinking of, you thought of a game wholly in first person that has you managing the combat of 2-5 combat drones of varying uses and specialties through armor hud and/or a pipboy-esque device. No RTS commander view. All in perspective and totally immersive. When I said RTS hybrid, I realized after reading your comment that the phrase really does not give a good picture of what I was thinking.

My idea is that the few humans on the battlefield (like the one you play) will be much weaker than all the scary death-machines that make up 95% of the fighting forces of both sides. So basically the opposite of Supreme Commander and its... supreme commander. The game will be all about optimally managing your units while maintaining good situational awareness and keeping your leader under the radar. A struggle between making sure your units are doing what they should be, that your leader has a good vantage point/good intel, and that the commander constantly stays on the move so the enemy doesn't wipe him out (cuz they'll be looking for him with specialized kill teams). That's what I want.

Interesting. It certainly takes the usefulness of the run-and-gun tactics many people use and throws it away. That would be a fun game but I think some people that play first-person shooters and have no strategy other than spray and pray would have a hard time adjusting to that style of gameplay. A fun idea, but how long would it take to catch on?

I say that it's always a tricky balancing act between realism and fun. Some games could stand to be more realistic and some games appeal to a niche population of masochists (Arma). However, IM looks to be hitting that tricky middle mark. Great work guys and keep it up.

Man... Every time I enter one of these threads, TacticalSpoon always takes the words right out of my mouth and I never have anything to say. D=

Man... Every time I enter one of these threads, TacticalSpoon always takes the words right out of my mouth and I never have anything to say. D=

Saves you a lot of work though.

I say that it's always a tricky balancing act between realism and fun. Some games could stand to be more realistic and some games appeal to a niche population of masochists (Arma). However, IM looks to be hitting that tricky middle mark. Great work guys and keep it up.

ARMA felt pretty unrealistic in the attempt to be realistic...

I mean, come on... I know we have a good military, but ARMA always has the player go up against it. They always do something like make you attack a town with a squad while the enemy is battalion strength, dug in and has more support than you...

Over exaggeration, but you get my point. ARMA is like black hawk down without blackhawks, little birds, delta force... and oh, you can only bring 12 "regulars" and one unarmored truck...

Problem with most FPS at all... You don't want to play a soldier in a game where you don't get any sight of an enemy 99% of the mission time, and come home with five or six kills if you're lucky. A game where a bullet in your thigh will end the mission for you because even if you survive, there won't be much fighting for you any more. A game where you don't make a run for a machine gun nest and whipe them out (okay, I admit, there were cases when this happened, Faklands and such), but rather call in the air support. Where your enemies won't you outnumber by more than, maybe, 3:1. Of course, I'm talking about a game where you areon the side of the industrialized western countries.

Problem with most FPS at all... You don't want to play a soldier in a game where you don't get any sight of an enemy 99% of the mission time, and come home with five or six kills if you're lucky. A game where a bullet in your thigh will end the mission for you because even if you survive, there won't be much fighting for you any more. A game where you don't make a run for a machine gun nest and whipe them out (okay, I admit, there were cases when this happened, Faklands and such), but rather call in the air support. Where your enemies won't you outnumber by more than, maybe, 3:1. Of course, I'm talking about a game where you areon the side of the industrialized western countries.

I thought about this for a long time, but I have to admit... I wouldn't mind a game that came that close to real combat... Assuming that modern day combat is similar to futuristic combat 200 years from now, which is doubtful... Now that actually racking a kill is difficult, challenging and requires a bit of luck, IM won't feel like a shooting gallery on par to those carnival ones that every freakin FPS game today have.