3 ms·

I really wish people perceived the bar to be higher than "well, it doesn't totally break the game, and it adds to the skill cap, so ship it!" for keeping any bu

I really wish people perceived the bar to be higher than "well, it doesn't totally break the game, and it adds to the skill cap, so ship it!" for keeping any bug/feature in. Literally anything that can impair you adds to the skill cap because it's another thing you have to learn to use/avoid. We must also answer questions like "Is it credibility-destroyingly stupid to have players flying around at high speed in a semi-realistic military shooter" and "is this even fun" and "what effect does this have on the intended balance & map design". I don't know the answers for CS but in general I often see criticism of the status quo in games met with with knee-jerk "this increases the skill cap, learn to play" responses.

reubenmorais 12y ago
Realistic military shooters are niche. The average player wants fun, not believable. I personally attribute most of Counter-Strike's success to its completely unrealistic movement/weapon handling, creating a game that is arcade-y: you can replicate movements with almost 100% accuracy which means with enough practice you can master the game in incredible ways. This means the replay value is almost infinite: see for example, how the 1.6 competitive scene has used the same 15 original bomb defuse maps for more than a decade without it getting stale.
- clarry 12y ago
  I would assume however that mainstream gamers (who would be "average" by definition, in terms of skill level) have no appreciation for non-obvious game mechanics that give highly skilled players an "unfair" advantage. In fact anything that increases the skill cap works against the "merely average" players on public servers. So there is an incentive for the companies behind big online shooters to strip their games of such features. It follows that modern shooters do not come with bunny hopping, and the players who've been primarily exposed to this new generation of games would find such tricks game-breaking and unfair. So I guess bunny hopping and such will remain a thing for old timers who stick to the old classics. And boy do they have a ton of fun :) Although it would be nice to see some new players. Old players get old and tired... To vehementi: bunny hopping and all the other stuff you can master to become better at a game really is a ton of fun. I don't think breaking balance is as big of an issue as some here make it out to be, though it obviously depends on the map and mode. But in general, if your foe can bunny hop, so can you. Sometimes they start in a position where it's way more advantageous to them. But in my experience it's just not very common. And thankfully, with the good games, we are not tied to the stock maps put out by the company behind the game.. instead there's a community of gamers and mappers, and the community will adapt. Many stock maps suck anyway, whether you have bunny hopping or not. For example, many of the stock Q3A maps are regarded as crap, and aren't really played at all in competitive matches. Bunny hopping however is a core mechanic in these games and iD was well aware of it.

reubenmorais 12y ago

Realistic military shooters are niche. The average player wants fun, not believable. I personally attribute most of Counter-Strike's success to its completely unrealistic movement/weapon handling, creating a game that is arcade-y: you can replicate movements with almost 100% accuracy which means with enough practice you can master the game in incredible ways. This means the replay value is almost infinite: see for example, how the 1.6 competitive scene has used the same 15 original bomb defuse maps for more than a decade without it getting stale.

clarry 12y ago
I would assume however that mainstream gamers (who would be "average" by definition, in terms of skill level) have no appreciation for non-obvious game mechanics that give highly skilled players an "unfair" advantage. In fact anything that increases the skill cap works against the "merely average" players on public servers. So there is an incentive for the companies behind big online shooters to strip their games of such features. It follows that modern shooters do not come with bunny hopping, and the players who've been primarily exposed to this new generation of games would find such tricks game-breaking and unfair. So I guess bunny hopping and such will remain a thing for old timers who stick to the old classics. And boy do they have a ton of fun :) Although it would be nice to see some new players. Old players get old and tired... To vehementi: bunny hopping and all the other stuff you can master to become better at a game really is a ton of fun. I don't think breaking balance is as big of an issue as some here make it out to be, though it obviously depends on the map and mode. But in general, if your foe can bunny hop, so can you. Sometimes they start in a position where it's way more advantageous to them. But in my experience it's just not very common. And thankfully, with the good games, we are not tied to the stock maps put out by the company behind the game.. instead there's a community of gamers and mappers, and the community will adapt. Many stock maps suck anyway, whether you have bunny hopping or not. For example, many of the stock Q3A maps are regarded as crap, and aren't really played at all in competitive matches. Bunny hopping however is a core mechanic in these games and iD was well aware of it.