- Feb 7, 2011
- 9,039
- 3,716
- 118
- Country
- 'Merica
- Gender
- 3 children in a trench coat
It does. The map gets smaller over time, which does force you into combat, however it doesn't promote and incentivize said combat. You're incentivized not to engage, and most of your deaths will be by snipers you never saw, you very rarely actually fight face to face.Ezekiel said:In Battle Royale and The Hunger Games, the players are forced to move to different areas every few hours and the battlefield becomes progressively smaller. Does this game have anything like that?Dirty Hipsters said:Not really.trunkage said:So a COD or Battlefield cloneDirty Hipsters said:Player Unknowns Battlegrounds isn't even the best SHOOTER of the year much less game.Gethsemani said:Player Unknowns Battlegrounds. Fite me.
It's a multiplayer shooter that promotes cowardice and passivity where the best way to win is the sit back and not engage. It's corner camping the game.
You win at PUBG by being the last one alive. This incentivizes you to completely avoid people for the entire game, let everyone else fight it out, and swoop in to get the last kill (or preferably find the last piece of cover within the last field of battle, sit behind it and really hope the enemy walks by you so you can shoot them in the back).
You win at COD or Battlefield by having the most kills, which means that you have to actively engage in combat.
Basically if you're corner camping in cod or battlefield and enemies aren't coming to fight you it's the worst thing ever because there's no way for you to win without kills. If you're sitting in a building in PUBG and enemies aren't coming to fight you it's the best thing ever because the fewer fights you're in the greater the chance of you winning.
That's why PUBG's game design is shitty.
I'd say the breakdown of the game goes something like this:
40% sitting in empty buildings waiting to find out where the safe zone is.
50% running/driving to the safe zone (and really hoping a sniper you can't see doesn't blow your head off in one shot)
8% looking at enemies through your scope (but not engaging because you don't want them to shoot back, and your optics are probably too shitty to properly engage at range anyway)
2% actually shooting at people
The easiest way to win the game is to correctly predict where the safe zone is going to be and then sitting in a corner of a house in the safe zone for 15 minutes until the enemies are forced to come to you as the death wall closes in around the safe zone.
Another thing I forgot to mention is that the shittier you make the game look the easier it is to play. Reducing all the graphical options to their minimum removes most of the foliage in the game making it much easier to spot and shoot people who are hiding. So the optimal way to play this game is to make it look as shitty as possible (and it's not exactly a looker to begin with).
Go a little over 8 minutes in for the truest test of skill you've ever seen.