Sign in to follow this  

simulating infantry combat in multiplayer FPS

This topic is 4852 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

I wish someone would make a multiplayer FPS that more realistically simulated infantry combat. I want to be able to participate in the realistic infantry combat that I see in movies like Saving Private Ryan and Band of Brothers and read about in military history books. I think games like Bf1942 and Call of Duty are good but inorder to make those types of games way more realistic and fun in my opinion, two little things need to be done. 1) Simulating death In real life if you get shot and die then thats it. It's all over for eternity. In games like Bf1942 and Call of Duty if you die you respawn within a few seconds. This difference has a huge effect on gameplay. If you know that if you die you'll be able to respawn you're going to be far less concerned with running over open ground and just generally less careful. Anyway the finality of death could easily be simulated by not allowing people to respawn and the server could remember their IP address so that they can't reconnect when they die. 2) Realistic health system Most FPS games have a health bar. A more realistic health system would involve any hits to the t-zone being an instant kill and hits outside the t-zone causing a reduction in mobility. If the injuries aren't bandaged in a certain amount of time by a medic then the player dies. Operation Flashpoint had a health system similiar to this. These two things would be so easy to implement in an FPS. And I think these two things would make gameplay way more realistic. Teamwork would come into play because you'd have to work with teammates inorder to stay alive. Covering fire would come into play because you'd just have to spray an area with bullets to keep the enemies heads down. MGs would have more of a role to play unlike in bf1942 where the MGs never get used. And I think if these two things were implemented there'd be way more fire fights over long distances. It would be really cool to have two teams firing at each other from behind cover.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Realism doesn't necessarily equal more fun.

I think permanent deaths are a horrible idea. Say a player dies after 30 seconds, what are they supposed to do now? Spend 5 minutes finding and joining another game? That's not fun, man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
America's Army uses the Unreal 2 engine, is free to download, and is promoted by the most powerful organization on the face of the planet (bar id software). Not having heard of it is inexcusable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All I ask is an end to the days of people bouncing all over the place, jumping up and down and ducking backwards and forwards as I saw so many times in Unreal Tournament.

I'm sure some company must have addressed this particular "tactic" in a new game... I imagine that a system to prevent the abuse of the god-given ability to move forwards, backwards, left and right must be one of the easier things we could achieve. And in turn, this could be made up for by more use of cover and players having to deal with recoil.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by bookah
Anyway the finality of death could easily be simulated by not allowing people to respawn and the server could remember their IP address so that they can't reconnect when they die.

The majority of gamers hate waiting for a new round to start in CS. They will just about tollerate that but they wouldn't tollerate "one death and your out of the game". Not only wouldthe good players get fed up and play something else but it would be impossible for newbies to even learn the game.

Spawn, bang, death, spend five minutes finding and logging into a new game.
Spawn, bang, death, spend five minutes finding and logging into a new game.
Spawn, bang, death, spend five minutes finding and logging into a new game.
Spawn, bang, death, spend five minutes finding and logging into a new game.
Give up and go play something else.

If you really think it is a such a good idea then play that way. Every time you get shot log out and play on a different server

Quote:
Original post by Zild
All I ask is an end to the days of people bouncing all over the place, jumping up and down and ducking backwards and forwards as I saw so many times in Unreal Tournament.

I'm sure some company must have addressed this particular "tactic" in a new game...
This was fixed in Call of Duty. f you jump around your speed of movement decreases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Obscure
The majority of gamers hate waiting for a new round to start in CS. They will just about tollerate that but they wouldn't tollerate "one death and your out of the game". Not only wouldthe good players get fed up and play something else but it would be impossible for newbies to even learn the game.


lol CS

That would be another advantage of my game - it wouldn't attract CS players

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In most battles (say WW2, for example) there are way more than 30 people fighting. As we can't make 200 people to join into the same game (talking about games like BF or DoD, for example), we can at least use respawning so the battlefield doesn't get empty after the first minute, so respawning HAS a point in the game fun factor. Just imagine one of those BF1942 maps with just 3 players looking for the others, that's not fun for them, neither for the 27 others waiting.

It's true, however, than when people can respawn easily they tend to be less careful, but that can be balanced if we add a penalty for those who die fast or too many times. Also, that penalty could get harder everytime you die. Say, in BF1942, if a player is killed too many times when flying a plane, you penalize him so he can't fly any plane again in X time. After the first death, he would be very careful not to get killed again if he wants to keep flying.

And even if he's killed and can't use the plane, that doesn't mean he can't have fun. He can take a car, or just go on feet. You're not limiting his fun.

You just can't kick killed players out of the server, that idea is not realistic. If you look at any game you will see that most of the players get shot down in the first 5 minutes. If you did that, your server would always be empty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Obscure
This was fixed in Call of Duty. f you jump around your speed of movement decreases.


Thanks for that. Out of curiosity, has anybody seen any other (different) fixes for this type of thing?

Regarding the issue of kicking people once dead, I hear that Splinter Cell: Pandora Tomorrow does actually kick people forever once they are dead. But then, in SC:PT you only start with four players total.

I do like the idea of punishing people (even such things as a worse starting weapon or less ammo) in order to stop them being careless. And the idea of respawning to take the role of another participant in a large melee does make sense.

How about this for an idea? Each side starts with a set number of combatants, and when they've all been deployed you cannot spawn anymore. Every player starts with a special weapon of their choice (sniper rifle, rocket launcher etc.), but when they die they must respawn with basic infantry weapons (rifle). The game may or may not allow them to pick up other weapons. So by being careless, you lose not only your choice of weapon, but the team loses a specialist and one "life". Players could also spawn/respawn in suitable locations, for example snipers with good views, rocket launchers behind cover.

Once each of a team's combatants ("lives") have been deployed, anybody who dies must then wait until the end of the game to play again. It still involves a little waiting, but nowhere near as much as per game as not being able to respawn at all. Again, the "lives" setting could be adjusted or even turned to unlimited if the players wanted.

Players can still be reckless, and when doing so could continue to enjoy tha game. But they would also learn to be a little less reckless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous Poster
A couple of things to make games more realistic to change the gameplay:

1) Make hitting a lot harder than it currently is
You'd be amazed how many rounds get fired before anyone actually gets hit. In the famous bank heist that happened in LA in 1997, about 1,000 rounds were fired and about a dozen hits were scored. In other words, roughly 1 in 100 shots actually hit someone. In your average FPS game, it takes maybe 10 shots to hit someone if that. In an FPS game, you only have to control the position of the cursor onto the target. In the real world, you have often more than one axes to control (when you hold a rifle, you are controlling the butt end of the rifle as well as the muzzle with your hands, this has the effect of creating more imprecision in the control of aim). While some FPS games simulate that where the cursor is only an approximation of where the round is going to land, they need to go one step farther and introduce random movements of the targeting cursor itself. A skill level of the shooter could reduce the erratic movements, and a more accurate weapon/firing mode would make the precision of rounds more accurate.


2) Players have no fear
In the real world, one is often reluctant to stick one's head out from cover if there's a lot of fire or explosions going on. You can have a Stress meter that relates the character's Willpower to the probablity that a lethal event might occur. If the Stress level is too high, the character is forced to drop down for cover or dive for the nearest cover.

For example, if someone is blanketing an area with suppression fire, in today's game, big deal...the only consequence is that the character might get hit and therefore may or may not avoid it. The action the character takes is totally in the hands of the player however. But with this system, psychological reactions force the character to do something the player may not want to happen, even though it may be more realistic. So in the above example, the player may want his character to charge forward, but instead, the character will be forced to take cover. A way to override this mechanism is one I talked about in some posts on roleplaying...you can have a pool of points (I call it Discipline and Focus) which you can use to lower the Stress rating and continue your action. However, these points are limited and refresh slowly, so you have to be wise in knowing when to use them.

3) Diminishing Effectiveness
While damage is the best example of this, there are other factors too. Fatigue, both mental and physical are important. Another is your psychological or emotional state. There is an old dictum that it's far easier to break a man's will than his body. Depending on a character's actions, his physical fatigue will increase, affecting how fast he can run as well as his shooting ability (try shooting accurately while your sucking in air). Constantly being stressed out from battle will have long term consequences as well. If you are terrified of what's happening, usually your effectiveness also drops (which would happen if out of group of 30 players on your side, only 2 of you are left).

These are just a few ideas off the top of my head. I can agree with the idea of making death permanent for the character, but only if some of these suggestions are follwed. With the current model of how FPS game work, it simply wouldn't work very well. Current FPS games makes large scale warfare way to easy to get hit and therefore die. It also makes the characters perfect rambos willing to charge the machinegun nest with nary a thought as long as he knows he can suck up a hit or two.

I think if you make the death final, then players will naturally be more cautious. This in turn should make them more tense when they enter combat and also force them to be more tactical in their decision-making. If you include things like the Stress meter which may force the character to do something the player doesn't intend (but have the means to override if possible), then it introduces another layer of unpredictability to keep the player on his toes. Combat should always be about minimizing one's chance of dying while maximizing one's chance to eliminate the enemy. Almost always, the former has priority over the latter. Heroics usually happen when the latter dominates the former, but is done so only with motivation to save other lives (rather than for glory). Only if you make the consequences steep will heroics have true meaning. In other words, if you the player wre actually fearful for your character's life, yet made the decision to put the character in harm's way to do something, then heroics has a more profound impact. But if you just think, oh so what, I'll just get to respawn or reload the level, no biggie", then heroism is utterly meaningless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I like how the game Allegiance dealt with the question of player death.

Each player has a Kill Bonus(KB), which starts off at 0 and increases as the player kills other players. A player's KB affects the damage done to enemies, thereby making them a more effective fighter. When a player gets killed, their KB returns to 0 and they have to get it back up.

While Allegiance is a space-flight-sim, this same process can be applied to a FPS. As a player is successful in the game, they can be rewarded with slight stat upgrades. They can maybe be made a little faster, or be more accurate with weapons. The stat upgrade shouldnt be too significant, but just enough to make the player not want to lose it.

I think this would make most players think twice before running out into the open or doing something that most military people would deem as stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Zild
All I ask is an end to the days of people bouncing all over the place, jumping up and down and ducking backwards and forwards as I saw so many times in Unreal Tournament


A world without trickjumping would suck :)

-lp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My only comment for people proposing death-banning.

Lets say you start the game with 10,000 players. Doing only one battle per day in which half of the players are killed will result in the following:

end of 1st day: 5000 players
end of 1st week: 78 players
end of 2nd week: 1 player

After 2 weeks, the game which you just spent months or years developing now only has one remaining player. That player will now more than likely kill himself for wasting 2 weeks playing a game with no future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think that relies on the game lasting for 2 weeks... I don't know about you, but I've never played a multiplayer FPS for two weeks on one single game :p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Zild
I think that relies on the game lasting for 2 weeks... I don't know about you, but I've never played a multiplayer FPS for two weeks on one single game :p


I believe he is talking about ALL games. If a given player joins a game and dies, he is then banned from that server, and must find another. After a given amount of time all players will be banned from all servers. The time may be more than two weeks, but in any case, you can see a problem here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Realism is overrated. A computer game will never be totally realistic, and striving for that goal is futile. I have tons of fun playing Day of Defeat (WWII Half-Life mod), and it is hardly realistic. It has enough "realism" to be fun, but it is not bogged down in a "I am going to punish you for playing my game because that is realistic" mentality.

The players [in DoD] that avoid death but are still able to capture flags and kill enemy troops are looked upon as highly skilled. Players that die constantly because they aren't careful with their life are regarded as newbies or poorly skilled. That difference, IMO, is what really makes the difference.

- Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I didn't mean that when you died you'd be banned from the server for ever. I meant that you'd be dead for the extent of a game which I imagined would last an average of about 30 minutes. And you wouldn't be kicked. You'd still be able to hang around to see which team won and the like. The server would store your IP so that you couldn't respawn by re-connecting to the server.

But having had a look at World War II Online http://www.wwiionline.com, I'm just waiting for someone to make a WWII fps mmorpg that has good graphics and a good interface. World War II Online has shown the potential that a game like that has but the graphics and interface are shocking. It needs to be made by a big company. And it would probably need lots of resource. Each server would probably have to be made up of several actual computers and would need a big fat internet connection. They could have 1 server on the east coast of US, 1 server on the west coast of the US, 1 in europe and 1 in oceania for us Australians and New Zealanders.

I think the ideal number of people per server would be about 1000. And I think the most important part of the game would be that you spawn in platoon sized groups so that you're in a team from the very start. You could go off by yourself but I think most ppl would stay with their platoon. You get a score that stays with your character when you logoff and the command positions are taken by the ppl with the highest score. And when you die you respawn at a base that is a fair distance from the front line so that your penalty for dieing is that you have to travel back to the frontline.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This topic is 4852 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this