Valve: Modern Shooters "Pander" to Casual Gamers

[wooty]

I stopped playing this "hardcore" game Counter Strike years ago once the maps became infested with awp whores and campers.

I then moved to Day of Defeat, but stopped playing that once the maps became infested with campers.

I then moved to Battlefield 2, but stopped playing that once the maps became infested with grenade spam and bunny hopping.

I then moved to Call of Duty, but stopped playing that once the maps became infested with sniper whores and campers.

I'm currently getting too pissed of with the Battlefield 3 beta because the maps are becoming infested with sniper whores and campers..............

Noticing patterns here.

 

[-Samurai-]

If a game adds iron sights, what we lose is gameplay speed. As you said, you can choose to shoot from the hip, but that means you lose accuracy in every game I've seen that gives you the choice.

I don't want that from Counter-strike; we already have plenty of games that give you the choice between shooting accurately and moving quickly. Why can't Counter-strike be the one exception that lets you do both?

Gameplay speed? After the first 10 seconds of a CS or CSS match, it's all turtle mode from there.

Everyone rushes around in the beginning, but then they start to walk to avoid making noise, and to increase their accuracy. What does it matter if you're walking slowly while using iron sights? You're walking slowly anyway. And they'd both increase accuracy.

It's just a different view that accomplishes the exact same thing.

Maybe I just play with a different group of people, but I haven't seen a camper in CS in years.

Camping? No. I didn't mention anything about camping. Walking? Yes.

 

[Celtic_Kerr]

"A lot of shooters, instead of giving people encouragement to improve, will just pander to them never being better. ...we think iron sights just make people move slower because they'll be afraid to put their gun down."

Wow, Valve. Your example dramatically contradicts your supposed point.

I think it's just an extreme scale, as follows:

No Iron sights ----------------------------------------------------------- Needed Irons Sights

Yes, shooting from the hip IS less accurate, so call of duty did this:

No Iron sights ------------------------------------------------------||----- Needed Irons Sights

You need to be aiming in order to make a kill more than a few feet away, or get off a shit load of rounds before the guy turns to see you. Now in CoD, there is A LOT of running about, and people always flash to their iron sights to make the kill, by no means are people afraid to lower their iron sights, but they make sure they won't take a lobotomy if they do. Ever see footage of soldiers during a mission? A LOT of Iron sights action, because it's more accurate. Game shouldn't REALLY need tat, as it isn't life or death.

Now Valve thinks: Too afraid to drop your irons sights? Stop being pandered to! And did this:

No Needed Iron sights ----||------------------------------------------------------- Needed Irons Sights

Not that you don't need iron sights, but the option is removed and there is a vastly increased difficulty, so it would be a treat if they were in there.

Companies need to learn that what THE CONSUMER ACTUALLY FUCKING NEEDS is not one extreme or the other, but this:

No Iron sights ------------------------------||----------------------------- Needed Irons Sights

A game where someone can go through the game with or without Iron Sights, use it as they lease, not build a reliability on it, and enjoy a good challenge.

We shouldn't be looking for games that make a reliability on a certain action (aiming down the sights), but making a game that simply take the feature away is just as bad. Let us play as we want, but make it a fun challenge to play how we want

 

[thirion1850]

Largest group on the smallest online (discounting Wii). Not impressive.

Oh you~. Maybe next you will be saying that DotA, CS, Unreal, Starcraft and ect had no impact on Esports what's so ever. Clearly you missed out on the 1.6 era, so I'm afraid I can't help you there. Good luck!

 

[cainx10a]

I stopped playing this "hardcore" game Counter Strike years ago once the maps became infested with awp whores and campers.

I then moved to Day of Defeat, but stopped playing that once the maps became infested with campers.

I then moved to Battlefield 2, but stopped playing that once the maps became infested with grenade spam and bunny hopping.

I then moved to Call of Duty, but stopped playing that once the maps became infested with sniper whores and campers.

I'm currently getting too pissed of with the Battlefield 3 beta because the maps are becoming infested with sniper whores and campers..............

Noticing patterns here.

Sounds like you should be playing a game like Unreal Tournament where you always have to be on the move, even if you have a lightning gun or a sniper rifle. Camping and Sniping are both legitimate tactics. Bunny hoping and Dolphin diving are just flaws in a game mechanics, although i like what black ops did to fix Dolphin Diving. The only way to remove bunny hoping is to remove jump altogether and rely on contextual jump to allow the user to cross some terrain, or to hop from building to building at some points on the level.

Either way, CS (1.6) is a bit unforgiving since you can't respawn. Add to that weapons that are not exactly as accurate as the one you find in CoD, and maps design that are not exactly trying to be replicas of real world locales, and you get a pretty good game rather than what every other shooter is doing. Competitive CS (scrim, not pubbing) was always a blast.

 

[Celtic_Kerr]

"A lot of shooters, instead of giving people encouragement to improve, will just pander to them never being better. ...we think iron sights just make people move slower because they'll be afraid to put their gun down."

Wow, Valve. Your example dramatically contradicts your supposed point.

I think it's just an extreme scale, as follows:

No Iron sights ----------------------------------------------------------- Needed Irons Sights

Yes, shooting from the hip IS less accurate, so call of duty did this:

No Iron sights ------------------------------------------------------||----- Needed Irons Sights

You need to be aiming in order to make a kill more than a few feet away, or get off a shit load of rounds before the guy turns to see you. Now in CoD, there is A LOT of running about, and people always flash to their iron sights to make the kill, by no means are people afraid to lower their iron sights, but they make sure they won't take a lobotomy if they do. Ever see footage of soldiers during a mission? A LOT of Iron sights action, because it's more accurate. Game shouldn't REALLY need tat, as it isn't life or death.

Now Valve thinks: Too afraid to drop your irons sights? Stop being pandered to! And did this:

No Needed Iron sights ----||------------------------------------------------------- Needed Irons Sights

Not that you don't need iron sights, but the option is removed and there is a vastly increased difficulty, so it would be a treat if they were in there.

Companies need to learn that what THE CONSUMER ACTUALLY FUCKING NEEDS is not one extreme or the other, but this:

No Iron sights ------------------------------||----------------------------- Needed Irons Sights

A game where someone can go through the game with or without Iron Sights, use it as they lease, not build a reliability on it, and enjoy a good challenge.

We shouldn't be looking for games that make a reliability on a certain action (aiming down the sights), but making a game that simply take the feature away is just as bad. Let us play as we want, but make it a fun challenge to play how we want

If you take the use of iron sites into account at the design phase of a game you don't need them! You can design a game that plays well without them.

I think it's more about the feel of it really. Personally, I actually really like looking down the weapon when aiming. That's what I'm talking about. Personal choice really.

 

[Aprilgold]

Makes me glad I still play Doom, Unreal Tournament, and Serious Sam. Those can actually challenge you.

Strange how all of the DOOM series remains tough after all of this time, ain't it?

OT: Casual shooters can be fun, but they're right about not encouraging improvement.

And now I must rant how every fps AFTER doom has gone down hill, with only a few belly dancing few who stand above all else, such as counter strike.

I read that and hear "Valve knows their game won't sell or stand out - decides to make bullshit comment about modern shooters so nostalgic idiots will defend it aqgainst all criticism and buy it en masse"

Tell me I'm wrong.

Yes, you are 100% wrong, lets look at how much CS:S sold, for funzies.
Well, from searching, the original game sold about 1 million, so even if a quarter became fans and bought the sequel, thats 25,000, then imagine if they each told 2 friends. 75,000 sold copies, then we just keep adding, then add in youtube videos, reddit, facebook posts, ETC. Then you likely have over the amount the original sold, which means 1,900,193 or so then it keeps going until the game officially loses dev support or the sequel comes out. I remember hearing its one of the top bought Steam games, and top sold Valve game. So yes, you ARE wrong good sir. Valves games sell extraordinarily well for how long some have been out, TF2 is still making money, also, so even older games of theirs are still selling, modded, and all of the above.
Valve's games sell enough copies annually for them to make constant sequels, Portal 2 is a prime example, and Dota, Half Life 2 I guess hasn't sold enough episdodics for the third edition to be released. Left 4 Dead 2 is again, a prime example. Now then, we now know yoru statement is wrong. CoD is boring as hell, panders to kids for their main player base, and as such makes everything easy, incredibly easy. Battlefield is almost getting there too. Ironsights are pointless in real life, unless your behind the battle, mainly your going to be guess shooting everything, thus means raising the gun to your shoulder and then shooting at a guess, while hip is useless.

I think it's more about the feel of it really. Personally, I actually really like looking down the weapon when aiming. That's what I'm talking about. Personal choice really.

And then I pull out of my top hat the old sentence. Real life is mainly BBBBOOORRIINNNGG! You should be taking guess shots or just hip shooting. There IS no need for ironsights when your going to die in a hit or so, why not make it to where you give them weapons for the job, and those who mainly just kill let them kill, don't slow them down if their good. Some games that focus on realism need iron sights, like Red Orchestra, not Counter Strike.

 

[Steppin Razor]

Want to hazard a guess why?

Because they couldn't pull off CoD better than CoD? Valve are incredibly good at what they do, but the things that you would consider better are not what the masses want. The majority of people that play CoD love the killstreaks, one-hit knifing and iron sights.

On Topic:
When will this constant dick waving between companies end? Is no one immune to the seductive pull of heaping shit on their competition?

 

[bennyboy05]

Maybe I'm just weird but I've never had a problem with having an iron sight aiming mechanic in fps'. Here's a reason to keep iron sights in a game, it's how you aim a gun properly in real life.

 

[MickyD47]

Bet there are plenty of PC gamers getting hard over this.

"Consoles are Casual and destroying gaming come play our game the last bastion of real gaming."

 

[kebab4you]

Aw no useless Iron sight? What ever will I do?!

I didn't have much interest in CS:GO to start with but this sure do sounds interesting.

 

[xdropkicknickx]

If Counter Strike keeps their classic "wait your turn, young one" idea going, that is, when you die you wait until the big boys are done playing before you spawn, I see it being the refuge many core gamers need to dodge the plethora of unskilled players (noobs, if you will) and finally have some pro-level fun out of an FPS. With the hundreds of FPS' out there that allow you to spawn 5-15 seconds after you die, no noob will wait up to 10 minutes to spawn in (that may be too much, I can't remember how long counter strike matches last as it's been a long time since I played one), they'll all quit and play a different big name game with a shorter respawn time. Let's hope Valve means what they say.