How I would create a game to troll 90% of FPS players

[Hawk of Battle]

This is Unreal Tournament. The only point that doesn't quite fit fully is #3.

 

[MammothBlade]

You should just make a game in which sensitivity is realistically low in every scenario, pissing off the ultra hardcore twitch-shooter players, plus you'll have the excuse that it's realistic!

(disclaimer: all of the following is written from the perspective of Halo's multiplayer)
People always rag on auto-aim, but I actually see it as a positive influence in the FPS genre: my aiming skils are pretty average, however because of the mediating influence of auto-aim, the players less accurate than me shoot almost as well, and the players more accurate than me shoot comparatively not as good as they should: it acts as a handicap that evens the game out, keeps thing challenging for those who would otherwise get bored of mowing down noobs and, most of all, puts more gameplay emphasis on tactics rather than just aiming ability:

With auto-aim, you can be more sure that any given player will have at least SOME ability to shoot you, so you know that if you start shooting at the same time, the likelihood is that you will either both die or you will only just escape and be killed with one shot by the next guy to spot you. This allows players to succeed not only by being able to put a cursor over a hitbox and press a button, but rewards INTELLIGENCE. In a game like Halo, at least, encounters become more about who can, on the fly, make the best use of the environment, who spotted who first and given themselves the best predetermined advantage in terms of grenades, weapons and equipment they have on their person.

Basically: in my opinion, auto-aim favours those who are less skilled but more tactical over those who are more skilled but just march into a situation guns blazing because they are confident nobody can out-headshot them.

Good points, I never really thought about that. I rather dislike twitch gaming.

 

[VladG]

You should just make a game in which sensitivity is realistically low in every scenario, pissing off the ultra hardcore twitch-shooter players, plus you'll have the excuse that it's realistic!

(disclaimer: all of the following is written from the perspective of Halo's multiplayer)
People always rag on auto-aim, but I actually see it as a positive influence in the FPS genre: my aiming skils are pretty average, however because of the mediating influence of auto-aim, the players less accurate than me shoot almost as well, and the players more accurate than me shoot comparatively not as good as they should: it acts as a handicap that evens the game out, keeps thing challenging for those who would otherwise get bored of mowing down noobs and, most of all, puts more gameplay emphasis on tactics rather than just aiming ability:

With auto-aim, you can be more sure that any given player will have at least SOME ability to shoot you, so you know that if you start shooting at the same time, the likelihood is that you will either both die or you will only just escape and be killed with one shot by the next guy to spot you. This allows players to succeed not only by being able to put a cursor over a hitbox and press a button, but rewards INTELLIGENCE. In a game like Halo, at least, encounters become more about who can, on the fly, make the best use of the environment, who spotted who first and given themselves the best predetermined advantage in terms of grenades, weapons and equipment they have on their person.

Basically: in my opinion, auto-aim favours those who are less skilled but more tactical over those who are more skilled but just march into a situation guns blazing because they are confident nobody can out-headshot them.

Good point, I never really thought about that. I rather dislike twitch gaming.

That's kinda the whole basis of my geriatric idea a few posts up

 

[MammothBlade]

You should just make a game in which sensitivity is realistically low in every scenario, pissing off the ultra hardcore twitch-shooter players, plus you'll have the excuse that it's realistic!

(disclaimer: all of the following is written from the perspective of Halo's multiplayer)
People always rag on auto-aim, but I actually see it as a positive influence in the FPS genre: my aiming skils are pretty average, however because of the mediating influence of auto-aim, the players less accurate than me shoot almost as well, and the players more accurate than me shoot comparatively not as good as they should: it acts as a handicap that evens the game out, keeps thing challenging for those who would otherwise get bored of mowing down noobs and, most of all, puts more gameplay emphasis on tactics rather than just aiming ability:

With auto-aim, you can be more sure that any given player will have at least SOME ability to shoot you, so you know that if you start shooting at the same time, the likelihood is that you will either both die or you will only just escape and be killed with one shot by the next guy to spot you. This allows players to succeed not only by being able to put a cursor over a hitbox and press a button, but rewards INTELLIGENCE. In a game like Halo, at least, encounters become more about who can, on the fly, make the best use of the environment, who spotted who first and given themselves the best predetermined advantage in terms of grenades, weapons and equipment they have on their person.

Basically: in my opinion, auto-aim favours those who are less skilled but more tactical over those who are more skilled but just march into a situation guns blazing because they are confident nobody can out-headshot them.

Good point, I never really thought about that. I rather dislike twitch gaming.

That's kinda the whole basis of my geriatric idea a few posts up

Yeah, that was good too. What're you going to call it... Call of Duty: Veterans' Reunion?

 

[hutchy27]

No ironsight?!?!? :O

 

[Little2Raph]

I guess if you really wanted to piss off the majority of your audience you could design a shooter with a lot of RPG elements in it, stretch it out over three games so the players become heavily invested in the characters, fool them into thinking choices and decisions they made over the course of the trilogy will have a significant impact on the outcome; and then right at the very end wrap it all up by forcing the player to choose between three more-or-less identical cutscenes.

 

[ACM_Shadow]

About the auto aim, on console we have to have a small amount of aim assist, its way too hard to use an analog without auto aim. To prove my point try to teamkill in Reach or Halo 3, super hard.

used to do it all the time when they are retards.. plasma nades are the best though.

Want fast, gameplay with 90% of the above.. try Tribes Ascend on PC, its free, and rewards people for being able to lead their shots.

 

[GoaThief]

Basically: in my opinion, auto-aim favours those who are less skilled but more tactical over those who are more skilled but just march into a situation guns blazing because they are confident nobody can out-headshot them.

Just play a game that doesn't reward headshots and/or emphasises strategy more such as Quake.

No ironsight?!?!? :O

Yes, iron sights are craptastic and have no place in multiplayer shooters aside from milsims such as Arma. To be fair the vast majority of FPS I've played lately haven't employed iron sights or rewarded players for using them. This is a very good thing.

As for the OP;

Nexuiz
Hard Reset
Painkiller
Tribes: Ascend
Left 4 Dead 2 (for the asymmetric Infected play mechanics)

 

[Barry Purse]

Make every gun fire balloons, with the appropriate physics.

 

[repeating integers]

Why is everyone claiming that halo fits these criteria when halo subscirbes to the whole "two weapon rule" bullshit. Also, regenerating health.

No game fits all those criteria, but Halo fits #1, #5, #6, partially #7, #8, and partially #10 in 3 of the instalments.

 

[Some_weirdGuy]

No game fits all those criteria, but Halo fits #1, #5, #6, partially #7, #8, and partially #10 in 3 of the instalments.

Team fortress 2 does.
As many people have already pointed out.

 

[repeating integers]

No game fits all those criteria, but Halo fits #1, #5, #6, partially #7, #8, and partially #10 in 3 of the instalments.

Team fortress 2 does.
As many people have already pointed out.

Yes it does, but (for some reason) he doesn't seem to count it.

 

[drosalion]

So Counter Strike, but with more weapon slots and less popular weapons?

 

[cthulhuspawn82]

Making the game realistic would be the best way to troll them.

1. One shot kills
2. No jumping except to get over low obstacles
3. No knife, or knife is almost useless
4. Much slower rate of movement, and no run except in very short bursts and not that often.

Or just put them in Rainbow 6, the older ones. I would always pwn kids in that game, rather than today where its the complete opposite. I went from doing a 5 way free for all where I would kill all 4 of the other players single highhandedly, to getting pwned by a 14 year old who can mash the space bar. Just goes to show you how much modern games favor "1334" skills.

 

[bafrali]

No game fits all those criteria, but Halo fits #1, #5, #6, partially #7, #8, and partially #10 in 3 of the instalments.

Team fortress 2 does.
As many people have already pointed out.

Yes it does, but (for some reason) he doesn't seem to count it.

OP realized he wasn't that original to begin with but decided to exclude TF2 from FPS genre rather than admitting he has been out-trolled by Valve (Which is no shame really).

 

[Sandjube]

I play some FPS games myself occasionally, but I have something of a hate on for the way the FPS genre has gone today.

#1. No iron sights. They take a fair bit of fun out of the game, in my view. I always did prefer hip fire. Scopes are an exception, of course.
#2. No auto-aim. It encourages laziness and makes it easy for people to get in annoying successive shots through their stupid iron sights.
#3. No automatic assault rifles. They remove a great deal of strategy from the game, because they are the jack of all kills and can hit anything on most maps. I think it would be better to have only submachine guns and light machine guns. Assault rifles should be semi-auto only. That way, it's more of a shooting game, you have to think about your shots.
#4. More than 2 "primary" weapons slots. This allows for versatility in combat.
#5. No killstreaks or perks.
#6. As many obscure, antique, or imaginary weapons as possible. No AK-47s or M4s, even semi auto versions. The same goes for Desert Eagles. Or perhaps they could be harshly nerfed so that anyone who uses them is in for an unpleasant surprise.
#7. No knife button, it's a secondary weapon which you have to select first. There is a wide selection of melee weapons.
#8. No quickscoping.

Wow, I must be incredibly bitter.

So some form of TF2?

Works for me, TF2 is a great game.

Absolutely not, did you not read the part where I specifically said it wouldn't be some variation of TF2?

Can't say I did, and can't say I care to find it.

 

[Aerosteam]

Let us compare TF2 to CoD in the points you have made:

Spoiler: Team Fortress 2

Team Fortress 2:

1: Matches
2: Matches
3: Matches
4: Matches
5: Matches
6: Matches
7: Matches
8: Matches
9: Matches
10: Matches

Spoiler: Call of Duty

Call of Duty:

1: Doesn't match
2: Doesn't match
3: Doesn't match
4: Doesn't match
5: Doesn't match
6: Doesn't match
7: Doesn't match
8: Doesn't match
9: Doesn't match
10: Doesn't match

Wow. Looks like the thread should have been called:

"How I would create a game exactly like Team Fortress 2 to troll 100% of Call of Duty players"

 

[Evilpigeon]

Surely the best way to troll FPS players would be to make COD: Concientious Objector edition?

Best idea in thread, multiplayer involves 64 players walking round 1916 London getting abuse hurled at you by female NPCs