Forgotten Hope Public Forum
Forgotten Hope 2 => Community Polls => Topic started by: Admiral Donutz on 11-04-2009, 18:04:12
-
Before you vote read this first please:
- You have multiple votes and you can change your vote if you made a mistake ! -
In the first category you can vote for your favourit setup for kills that you make:
- Show who you just killed.
- Don't show who you just killed.
- Only show who you killed if you killed a friendly (team kill).
- Add delay before your kill is confirmed.
In the second category you can vote for your setup regarding the messages that shows information on who or what just killed you:
- Show the person who killed you.
- Do not show who killed you.
- Show who just killed you for frienldy fire (team kill) only.
- Show which specific weapon (K98, Lee Enfield MK III, ....) you were killed with.
- Show general type of weapon (tank, airplane, handheld, ...) you were killed with.
- Don't show weapon that killed you at all.
- Show weapon that killed you if you were killed by friendly fire (team kill) only.
- Add delay before you are shown who or what killed you
Please read the poll carefully and select a combination of options that would be the most satisfying in your opinion. I made this "complex" poll so that any combination of "kill" and "killed by" messages should be possible. You may change your vote if you made a mistake.
For example, if you like the current system you vote:
- Option 1 (Show who you just killed)
- Option 5 (Show the person who killed you)
- Option 8 (Show the specific weapon that killed you).
If you (like me) rather do not show who you just shot (except TKs) and you wish to be shown who killed you but no with which weapon you were killed:
- Option 3 (Only show if you killed a friendly)
- Option 5 (Show the person who killed you)
- Option 10 (Don't show the weapon that killed you at all.
-
I like the current system - I approach FH2 as a game, not a simulation.
Anyway, if possible I would make a change which is not shown in the options:
a server-side option to have names of TKers only shown to admins (if admins are online) to avoid endless TK name-calling. When no admins are online, things as usual, players can do justice themselves :P
so players get "someone [teamkills] rattovolante", but the admins get "eeevil donutz tker [teamkills] rattovolante"
Of course I know this is entirely server-side so any server can implement it on their own (although they might have to renounce the [PURE] setting?)
-
Before I make up my mind and vote in this poll, I have one suggestion related to this: if we had no killmessages it'd be good to make the dead bodies stay a bit longer, so something like hunting the area that you fired at 2 minutes ago searching for dead body or supporting MG gunner with binoculars would have much more sense.
-
As I said in the other thread, I think it would be better if we had no kill messages (except maybe the type of weapon, and in case of teamkills, definitely). If people know who killed them, they will appropiately go and search for the Heckenschütze e.g., once they've killed them, they compare the person killed to the one that has killed them all the time.
Now if this wasn't the case, and they shot someone else, they might think they have catched the right one - and you, as the real sharpshooter, could go on if your timing is good.
This is just one of many examples one could give for something like that. Surplus it would eliminate stupid little feuds people start when having been killed by a special person etc., which draws them away from teamplay to IM GONNA KILL THAT SON OF A (female dog).
SO DO IT DO IT, DO IT!!!!!11einseinself
EDIT: Spits idea doesn't sound too bad. I think leaving them laying around for a minute later wouldn't mean significantly more lag (for bodies only, not with tanks etc.)?
-
I support the removal of most of the messages. I think that they not only make some of the long range shooting easier by giving you the cue to come out of cover afterwards, but the constant scrolling of the text is quite distracting.
When you kill, you should only know it if you teamkilled. Your score should only be updated once the person you killed respawns.
When killed, you should have no idea who killed you unless it was a team kill. Once you respawn, you should be told what generic item caused your demise.
The only thing that isn't on the list is that you should see deaths from your own team - but not the killers or equipment. Say that teamate "N00bk1lla" kets killed by a panzer 2; you would see in the upper corner "N00bk1lla was killed by the enemy".
Disregard the above, my opinion has changed!
See post 32 (http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/2433/aaadapterandtegx8.jpg) for my new opinion.
-
Donutz' personal opinion (combination 3, 5, 10) suits myself the best aswell.
-
Donutz' personal opinion (combination 3, 5, 10) suits myself the best aswell.
I'll have the same as this gentleman.
-
The only thing that isn't on the list is that you should see deaths from your own team - but not the killers or equipment. Say that teamate "N00bk1lla" kets killed by a panzer 2; you would see in the upper corner "N00bk1lla was killed by the enemy".
I'd consider this part of the feedback when you are killed. If you are killed and text is shown it is shown to you and simular text is shown to the team. Or I'd have to reset the poll and extend it even further making it way too messy (perhaps I should look for multiple polls in a row?).
I'd wish I could have made a few polls in a row so it is a bit more easy to understand the various combinations available.
Why did I vote the way I did? :
- Option 3 (Only show if you killed a friendly)
- Option 5 (Show the person who killed you)
- Option 10 (Don't show the weapon that killed you at all.
Because when you kill:
- I think that giving away who killed you spoils a lot of information, it removes the "Did I ot him or did I not?" factor completely. That ain't fun. It's much more fun to find out you wasted time waiting for an enemy that is long gone or long dead or that manages to kill you 'cause you thought you cleared the area...
- Not showing any kills you make is not good, people could end up making TK after TK without realizing, especially if they are new to the game.
- Thus it would be important to tell people when they make a TK but otherwise don't inform them of kills.
- Sure, people could check the scoreboard to see if they got a higher score but this would require some time, take your eye of the battlefield (good for the enemy if you did not kill him) and thus would generally reduce the times people use this "game exploit of information" to find out if they made a kill. Especially in a tense situation you don't go and check your score.
- It would be nice if your score would be update when the people you killed respawn, probably not possible though and might cause problems at the end of the round.
Because when you are killed:
- It's nice to know who killed you, just for the element of fun ("haha, damn it jumjum killed be again, bugger!").
- It makes it easier to report a name when somebody kills you in an unfair manner ("What the? That's an exploit the guy just used!! Damn you Flippy you cheat! *reports to admin*).
- Showing which exact weapon killed you gives away too much info, you will know that a sniper got you and thus look for him. But how the hell would you know a sniper got you unles you saw the guy with your own eyes?! This causes people hunting for snipers and other hidden enemies which is "unfair".
- SHowing the general type of weapon could be an option, though even this may sometimes give you too much info unless you actually saw it with your own eyes what killed you. Atleast you won't know a sniper rifle got you but just a "handweapon" which could be anything basically.
- Not showing the weapon that killed you at all prevents you knowing too much completely. Unless you saw it with your own eyes you won't know what got you. SO if you are killed from behind you won't be able to yell over team chat "Watchout, a tank just shot me from behind!" , it could have been a grenade, mortar or arty impact or even infantry... thus keeping up the element of suprise and keeping you guessing. You might think a tank got you, take "approperiate" measures on respawn only to find out you were wrong (or you will never find out at all... hah!).
Conclusion:
With this setup people know when they make a TK, are TK-ed and have to guess which weapon got them unless they saw it with there own eys. They will know who got them for fun (it's a game afterall) and fairness (reporting cheaters). An acceptable alternative would be to show the general type of weapon that killed you.
-
I think the current death messages system is fine, but I think showing what weapon or vehicle killed you is a bit too much. I like knowing who killed me in FH2, because often times I actually KNOW that person. Sometimes its fun to wage a private war with another person on the other team across the period of a game... but that's just me.
If this were meant to be an infantry simulator, I would say nix all death messages PERIOD, but it's FH... come on.
-
Show nothing except Teamkills.
(obvious huh :P )
-
This one is a slapper. Tough nut to crack I may add even. I'll try to make it short: In the way FH2 stands now, kill messages should stay as they are now.
No kill message just doesn't suit FH's gameplay as we now know (I know it doesn't tell you much, sorry). If I'd have to make comparison it would be like to make bunnyhopping enabled in PR just to make it more 'casual' than simulator. In the end the rest of the game doesn't stand up to the way one of it's aspects is presented. IMHO having one part be very realistic/simulator-like while other parts are too much arcadey in contrast, just spoils the game as a whole.
For another comparison: it's like listening to a classical concert and suddenly the piano player starts to improvise in blues/jazz style. Sure, he plays great but it doesn't change the fact it ruined the whole concert.
Also, I concur with hockeywarrior here. Removing kill-msgs just makes the game too much anonymous. I like to play with people I know on the server and those messages give me a bit information about that person. Is he infantry type, does he play well, is he a templayer or a deuche. Personal war gives me pleasure as well. It's simply fun in the way I see it to be killed (f.e.) Sdt-D and then I can return the favour after a while. In our small community making people even more anonymous just weakens it. I'm really glad that devs didn't have the guts to change that aspect of FH.
There are also few gameplay problems with the dissapearence of kill-msgs but I'll not mention them... now. :)
I'm a fan of making things more realistic and a bit of PRish in FH but then again it wouldn't be FH as we know it, right?
-
1, 5, 8. I like how it is now. And if you completely remove it theres no way to impress others with knifing someone or bicycling someone. No way to screenshot it. The horror.
-
Fine as is. Is FH2 going all PR?
-
Fine as is, besides whats the point to killing infantry with the bayonet, the knife, Bare fists, the recon plane, the UVC, static objects, the ATR, the smoke grenade, etc etc. If you don't get confirmation of the kill, the guy you killed doesn't get confirmation of the kill, and the server doesn't get confirmation.
-
What the fuck is it that people have with PR all the time?
This is a suggestion that stands for its own, not a "I saw this in PR and I thought"-suggestion.
And the server always gets confirmation. Me at least, I play for myself, not to show others on the server "Look, I killed one with the bayonett!" ;)
-
What the fuck is it that people have with PR all the time?
This is a suggestion that stands for its own, not a "I saw this in PR and I thought"-suggestion.
And the server always gets confirmation. Me at least, I play for myself, not to show others on the server "Look, I killed one with the bayonett!" ;)
It's not that we have something to PR or we portray a stance PR=bad. The fact is that PR is the most realistic/simulator-like game mage on the same engine and we use it as a point to reffer to. At least it's the way I see it.
And it's too bad you're 'playing for yourself' as playing for your teammates and people you know and like is sooooo much more rewarding. 8)
-
By server, I meant the people playing in the server. I mean what good is a tractor killing spree if everyone else doesn't see it and lol.
"playing for your teammates and people you know and like is sooooo much more rewarding."
:-)
-
And it's too bad you're 'playing for yourself' as playing for your teammates and people you know and like is sooooo much more rewarding. 8)
That's not what I meant. Firstable, a bayonett kill doesn't help your teammates more than a rifle kill. And I do enjoy playing with people I know, may it be in real life or just from the community. However, with those, I join a squad or teamspeak, and can go all WOOHOO DID YOU SEE THAT I CUT HIS EAR OF WITH MY FLARE GUN as much as I want. :P I don't need all the guys on the server to know (and seriously, practically none cares, anyway).
-
Well, I don't mind getting rid of it as a regular player.
I'm just worried about how it's going to be when it comes to taking care of the server as a admin.
-
I like it the way it is now. But I also wouldn´t mind if you´d remove them. ^^
Bascially: I don´t know and I don´t care ^^
-
Well... must be easier, if you only see the teamkills? I mean, TK's wouldn't be burried under all the regular killmessage spam.
-
It is a game after all, and in games it's all about scores. Some games can get away with it (some mods can even get away withy it), but when I play a game, I want to know who shot me, and who I shot.
Ever been killed at the same time you killed your enemy? I want to know if I did, so I know my death wasn't in vein.
Cheers
-
I agree with all of the Original Poster's points in this thread.
Show general type of weapon (tank, airplane, handheld, ...) you were killed with.
Awesome idea. This is really the only info you need - are you under fire from infantry, an AT gun, a tank, or artillery?
Fine as is, besides whats the point to killing infantry with the bayonet, the knife, Bare fists, the recon plane, the UVC, static objects, the ATR, the smoke grenade, etc etc. If you don't get confirmation of the kill, the guy you killed doesn't get confirmation of the kill, and the server doesn't get confirmation.
The point is that you get points for killing them, they die and have to wait to respawn, and you thereby help your team.
It's nonsensical in my eyes to not want a new feature because it'd mean that you wouldn't get glory when you make a strange kill. That's not what FH2 is all about at all.
-
Why did I vote the way I did? :
- Option 3 (Only show if you killed a friendly)
- Option 5 (Show the person who killed you)
- Option 10 (Don't show the weapon that killed you at all.
Because when you kill:
- I think that giving away who killed you spoils a lot of information, it removes the "Did I ot him or did I not?" factor completely. That ain't fun. It's much more fun to find out you wasted time waiting for an enemy that is long gone or long dead or that manages to kill you 'cause you thought you cleared the area...
Yooopie wasting time is fun (Sorry for sarcasm here but I couldn't help it). The concept of fun is a personal thing the way I see it. And even if not knowing if you killed someone is not 'fun' (thrilling might be the word) it is definately rewarding (definately in time) in a way.
- Not showing any kills you make is not good, people could end up making TK after TK without realizing, especially if they are new to the game.
- Thus it would be important to tell people when they make a TK but otherwise don't inform them of kills.
Hell yeah you're right.
- Sure, people could check the scoreboard to see if they got a higher score but this would require some time, take your eye of the battlefield (good for the enemy if you did not kill him) and thus would generally reduce the times people use this "game exploit of information" to find out if they made a kill. Especially in a tense situation you don't go and check your score.
Making a logical chain if kill-msgs are an exploit then scoreboard are exploit too and even going further killing someone becouse he was cheking how well is he doing is an exploit as well. It's a matter in drawing the line what things are exploits and which are features that help us in being aware of our surroundings just like senses do IRL.
- It would be nice if your score would be update when the people you killed respawn, probably not possible though and might cause problems at the end of the round.
If no-kill-msg would be immplemented. Yeah.
Because when you are killed:
- It's nice to know who killed you, just for the element of fun ("haha, damn it jumjum killed be again, bugger!").
And also you know that you were killed by a person, not some anonymous guy.
- It makes it easier to report a name when somebody kills you in an unfair manner ("What the? That's an exploit the guy just used!! Damn you Flippy you cheat! *reports to admin*).
And that is good, isn't it?
- Showing which exact weapon killed you gives away too much info, you will know that a sniper got you and thus look for him. But how the hell would you know a sniper got you unles you saw the guy with your own eyes?! This causes people hunting for snipers and other hidden enemies which is "unfair".
This might be the point I agree with except for the 'unfair' part. Both sides have the same abillity to know what weapon made their demise and that is fair. It just makes harder for a sniper to do his job but it shouldn't be too easy in the first place.
- SHowing the general type of weapon could be an option, though even this may sometimes give you too much info unless you actually saw it with your own eyes what killed you. Atleast you won't know a sniper rifle got you but just a "handweapon" which could be anything basically.
I see a way for an exploit here: someone spawncamps with a tank and you don't even know what killed you (in general) and you can't act accordingly (get AT kit) unill it's too late.
- Not showing the weapon that killed you at all prevents you knowing too much completely. Unless you saw it with your own eyes you won't know what got you. SO if you are killed from behind you won't be able to yell over team chat "Watchout, a tank just shot me from behind!" , it could have been a grenade, mortar or arty impact or even infantry... thus keeping up the element of suprise and keeping you guessing. You might think a tank got you, take "approperiate" measures on respawn only to find out you were wrong (or you will never find out at all... hah!).
The same case as in previous quote. Only thing I'd like to add that I don't see amusing to keep players 'in the dark'.
Conclusion:
With this setup people know when they make a TK, are TK-ed and have to guess which weapon got them unless they saw it with there own eys. They will know who got them for fun (it's a game afterall) and fairness (reporting cheaters). An acceptable alternative would be to show the general type of weapon that killed you.
I would accept with all those points as they're logical and made for the sake of gameplay if it wouldn't be the fact that FH is not the type of a game I see it go well with.
-
Not knowing if you've killed a guy adds a lot of depth to game play as it forces you to either watch over the area/spot where you last saw him, or go check, whereas with kill messages on, it's just "target killed, moving on to next".
-
Well if nobody sees your great achievement of killing people with tractor, bicycle or knife what is the point in doing it then? Then I'll just kill, kill, kill. It adds some extra fun partcicularleiflyyyy (still can't spell that) when your playing in a team. Just my humble opinion ofcourse.
-
What the fuck is it that people have with PR all the time?
This is a suggestion that stands for its own, not a "I saw this in PR and I thought"-suggestion.
And the server always gets confirmation. Me at least, I play for myself, not to show others on the server "Look, I killed one with the bayonett!" ;)
All I said was ''Is FH2 going all PR?''.
The facts are, as it stands, Project Reality has an alternate kill message display than FH2. It was a simple reference, I could of used any other mod if the circumstance were the same. In FH2, you get the notice (and gratification if it appeals to you), in PR...you don't. It was a simple comparison. You either get a kill message or you don't, both systems have their advantages and dissadvantages.
In my opinion, PR isn't a satisfying game, but that's my opinion...it just isn't what I look for in a game. I like the gratification you get from a kill message. I like the hilarious bayonet kills. I like knowing who killed me and with what. I'm not opposed to a switch, or a proposition of said change. In fact, it really doesn't bother me at all. I'm happy with either.
You made the PR reference. Both mods are going to be compared because they are modifications - and therefore variations - of a limited engine. Simple as. No need to go apeshit.
-
Guys, some of you have PR-phobia. Who said that if PR did something (and it's good, or just points more-less in good way) we can't do something similar? Focus on the problem, leave the phobia.
-
No Kill message sounds good.(Except for TKs)
Would make players feel vulnerable, and unsure.
In a way, it encourages squads, and smooths game play in maps such as Tunis (First flag).[<Example]
As (specially) defenders can't confirm their kills and vise versa, but they can't leave their position to check.
Either way I could care less for the guy who Killed me or I killed.
-
Donutz' personal opinion (combination 3, 5, 10) suits myself the best aswell.
I'll have that, stirred, with ice.
:)
But I gotta agree...I wanna be able to pretend I'm act like I'm dead, or be able to wait something out then sneak away, instead of having someone hunting after me nonstop=/
-
I want to see whom I killed, I wouldn't mind a delay, but I still want to see which SOB shot me or when I got my sweet revenge.
Knowing who I just killed just adds soooo much to the fun, in PR, even though the feature might be more immersive it just doesn't add the fun and I get bored quite soon, as every kill is anonymous and you can't relate to your achievement... killing faceless enemies in a GAME! Then I could play SP why even bother to go online.
As FH2 is also about fun and not only work in a game I am against removing the killmessages.
Hugh I have spoken.
-
WALL OFTEXT!!!!
make it simple Donutz: kill message that shows for all (entire server) or just the person you killed, or the person who killed you (internal).
I prefer internal, I dont care whatever dude on the other side of the map killed etc etc... BUT: I wanna know who I killed and/or who killed me - ofcourse BOTH for TK and enemy, no difference.
So the vote could be:
-ABSOLUTELY NO MESSAGE
-AS IT IS NOW
-ONLY INTERNAL MESSAGES (Like it is in Battlefield:Heroes)
-
My revised opinion (I had a long think):
The HUD should say who killed who. The weapon used to do it should not be shown at all. However, the clincher here is that the HUD should run about 1-2 minutes behind the game. So you kill someone. 1-2 minutes later your score is updated and the kill message appears up in the corner for all to see. The message that appears halfway down the screen that says "you killed x" appears at this time as well. The exception to all this are teamkills, which are updated immediatly.
The above I feel allows the whole community aspect of "oh, I was killed by donutz, I'll have to return him the favour", but also allows the whole "omg, did I kill him, is it safe to go on?" feeling.
-
Why did I vote the way I did? :
- Option 3 (Only show if you killed a friendly)
- Option 5 (Show the person who killed you)
- Option 10 (Don't show the weapon that killed you at all.
Because when you kill:
- I think that giving away who killed you spoils a lot of information, it removes the "Did I ot him or did I not?" factor completely. That ain't fun. It's much more fun to find out you wasted time waiting for an enemy that is long gone or long dead or that manages to kill you 'cause you thought you cleared the area...
WALL OFTEXT!!!!
make it simple Donutz: kill message that shows for all (entire server) or just the person you killed, or the person who killed you (internal).
I prefer internal, I dont care whatever dude on the other side of the map killed etc etc... BUT: I wanna know who I killed and/or who killed me - ofcourse BOTH for TK and enemy, no difference.
So the vote could be:
-ABSOLUTELY NO MESSAGE
-AS IT IS NOW
-ONLY INTERNAL MESSAGES (Like it is in Battlefield:Heroes)
There are way too many options to allow for a simple poll with two or three options.
Anyway, yes yet an other attribute to play with would be with changing wether only the player or the entire team can see a "killed" or "killedby" (= death) message.
Yooopie wasting time is fun (Sorry for sarcasm here but I couldn't help it). The concept of fun is a personal thing the way I see it. And even if not knowing if you killed someone is not 'fun' (thrilling might be the word) it is definately rewarding (definately in time) in a way.
Maybe "wasting time" is a poor choice of words. But I'd think it would be quite funny to find out you were overlooking an area you think an enemy was in only to find out later that the chap already has been killed or moved to an other position.
This is also of importance to gameplay as you will be less likely to go after an other target if you are unsure if your current target is dead ro not, has or has not relocated himself. You might try and investigate (dangerous!), you might keep digged in (while it's save, thus allowing the enemy to outflank you from an other position) and there is a whole bunch of other scenarious to think of that would create a more realistic, more deverse and more fun gameplay.
- Sure, people could check the scoreboard to see if they got a higher score but this would require some time, take your eye of the battlefield (good for the enemy if you did not kill him) and thus would generally reduce the times people use this "game exploit of information" to find out if they made a kill. Especially in a tense situation you don't go and check your score.
Making a logical chain if kill-msgs are an exploit then scoreboard are exploit too and even going further killing someone becouse he was cheking how well is he doing is an exploit as well. It's a matter in drawing the line what things are exploits and which are features that help us in being aware of our surroundings just like senses do IRL.
I'm not sure what you are getting at here. I didn't spoke about removing the scoreboard. Personally I could live without, letthem poor scorewhores go and play Quake or Doom. But for the sake of compromise I can live with keeping it around. Regardless, I dont'quite get how not getting feedback (kill messages) for kills and thus not knowing if you killed the guy behind the rock with your grenade conflicts with "your awareness of surroundings" as in real life? Hell it is just that, if you see or think you see you got a kill you probably did. It's fun and realistically simulates how your mid works in real life. :)
- It would be nice if your score would be update when the people you killed respawn, probably not possible though and might cause problems at the end of the round.
If no-kill-msg would be immplemented. Yeah.
A delay would be a sort of compromise if the kill messages would not be removed. It would still give those who care about this text their text but a bit later so it stops the "instant unrealistic feedback" me and others complain about.
- Showing which exact weapon killed you gives away too much info, you will know that a sniper got you and thus look for him. But how the hell would you know a sniper got you unles you saw the guy with your own eyes?! This causes people hunting for snipers and other hidden enemies which is "unfair".
This might be the point I agree with except for the 'unfair' part. Both sides have the same abillity to know what weapon made their demise and that is fair. It just makes harder for a sniper to do his job but it shouldn't be too easy in the first place.
True, both teams have this "unfair" (or should I say "doesn't make sense" and "allows you to counter react to something you shouldn't be able to know unless you actually saw it with your own eyes or a team mate told you about" ) atvantage thus balancing it out. But that doesn't mean it's right. If we give both sides the ability to see the enemy on the HUD (if within 10 meters or something from you) it would be balanced but it woulnd't be right... it would give you information you aren't supposed to know, it would be unrealistc as hell.
- SHowing the general type of weapon could be an option, though even this may sometimes give you too much info unless you actually saw it with your own eyes what killed you. Atleast you won't know a sniper rifle got you but just a "handweapon" which could be anything basically.
I see a way for an exploit here: someone spawncamps with a tank and you don't even know what killed you (in general) and you can't act accordingly (get AT kit) unill it's too late.
You cna only camp a base. Firing at a capturable flag is alright, if the spawns are well located it should be very hard to cover a spawn point anyway and if it does it should only affect one out of a larger number of spawn points thus still allowig you to counter react while a tank is "supressing" the flag (so that team mates can move in more easily and capture the flag).
When talking about an uncapturable flag (base flag), same as above there should be alternative spawns.
And I doubt nobody would know what killed them, and if nobody saw the tank pounding the team they deserve to fail at taking approperiate counter messages. The tank probably did a very good job at remaining stealthy (that or the other team really really sucks badly, in which case I'd still say the tanker deserved his kills due to a clueless bun ch of idiots with IQ 40).
And what would be better then you spawning as antitank class, going to the front where the new threat has been detected (or where it is believed to be atleast) only to find out it's actually a guy with a mortar and you with your bazooka/PIAT/schreck and knife (or whatever the kits will look like) have to face close combat infantry? Pwned!
- Not showing the weapon that killed you at all prevents you knowing too much completely. Unless you saw it with your own eyes you won't know what got you. SO if you are killed from behind you won't be able to yell over team chat "Watchout, a tank just shot me from behind!" , it could have been a grenade, mortar or arty impact or even infantry... thus keeping up the element of suprise and keeping you guessing. You might think a tank got you, take "approperiate" measures on respawn only to find out you were wrong (or you will never find out at all... hah!).
The same case as in previous quote. Only thing I'd like to add that I don't see amusing to keep players 'in the dark'.
They got eyes don't they? And team chat? A minimap? voice chat? It's not impossible to take counter measures, it shouldn't be much harder at all. It only stops people from "magicaly" taking counter measures that they shouldn't really be aware of to begin with. Which means an advantage if the attacking team plays it's cards right (deception, stealth and other such things to win the battle become more rewarding).
Conclusion:
With this setup people know when they make a TK, are TK-ed and have to guess which weapon got them unless they saw it with there own eys. They will know who got them for fun (it's a game afterall) and fairness (reporting cheaters). An acceptable alternative would be to show the general type of weapon that killed you.
I would accept with all those points as they're logical and made for the sake of gameplay if it wouldn't be the fact that FH is not the type of a game I see it go well with.
I believe FH is meant to be realistic to the extend that it would hurt gameplay. In my opinion my setup would increase gameplay and improve realism and thus fit the FH spirit perfectly. It would strenghten FH.
Ofcourse this is just my view, I know there are many other views out there, hence why I mate this thread. :p
-
(http://img2.imageshack.us/img2/7251/messx.jpg)
-
I'm with Mr. Donutz...
Devs may remove them (messages) temporary, at least. And then, will see is that fun or not.
-
Really, it is a game. I want to see who I killed, but also who ran me over with a bicycle, so I can type a message like: nice roadpizza you made of me....(insert name).
It is a mod played by a community. This community is far from faceless, and so that should be reflected in the game.
Knowing who killed you gives you the ability to launch a mass attack at that person, for fun's sake.
Personally, reality in games can go hang if it interferes with the thrill of shooting players, not just player models.
Forgotten Hope 2: Really personal.
-
voted
3) show teamkills only
4) add delay to confirm your kills
11) do not show the weapon you are killed with
The kill notifications give you too much information during a firefight. When for instance I am in a room and survive a grenade blast, the first thing going through my mind is that the other person knows I am still alive. The game is more fun with the uncertainty. I often will fire at muzzleflashes, and I would frankly rather not know for certain if I had scored a hit or not on someone deep in the shadows of a building or in vegitation.
I voted against showing the weapon because particularly with the short spawn times of FH, if you know what you were killed with, you have a much better idea who killed you and from where, and you can go directly after them. In my opinion one of the current drawbacks to FH is that you can find the perfect ambush spot, or use painstaking care sneaking up on a position, but as soon as you first draw blood you are on a timer, and as soon as that person respawns they are in all likelyhood going to be right back on top of your ass if you don't move. This is problematic if there are bullets flying overhead, particularly as lethal as guns are in FH.
The drawback to that system is that it is fun to watch the scroll to see random things like Joe Smith [smoke grenade] randomnoob, and it is fun to know you just shot one of the devs. Of course, I will also admit that I have had rounds in which I got pissed at one particular person who either repeatedly killed me or killed me and then insulted me and it degenerated into a personal vendetta for me. This is not a good thing either.
-
A half-serious compromise I can think of for those fans of wacky kills...
A default, non-TK kill message is comprised of a string that roughly looks like this: "{person making kill} [{killmessage string of vehicle/weapon}] {person killed}". So for example, if the weapon is an MP-40 and Lobo kills Donutz, it reads "Lobo [MP-40] Donutz".
How about about changing the string so it reads "{killmessage string of vehicle/weapon}" only, then blank out the killmessage strings of the regular weapons and vehicles, while adding amusing ones for bicycles, smoke grenades and the like?
If the killmessage is all that's shown, and the killmessages say something like "Look to both sides before crossing the bicycle path!" or "Remember, kids: Smoking kills...", people will know when such funny kills have been made. You could, if you had to, also throw in player names, though I envision this'd make it harder to make diverse quotes.
This is only a half-serious suggestion, and I'm not sure if I want it in as it might encourage silly 'mocking about' too much, but I thought I'd throw it out there nonetheless.
-
I would like to see the 'Commander [name] is on duty' spam go away, though.
-
I say, only show TK's
The rest is unimportant
Say if Psykfallet sprays and prays your Kübel full of Hans and Fritzels with the Thompson on hslan
What does it mather if you can see WHO did it? Just type in the chat, "nice thompson spray"
It's war, it shouldn't be that personal.
And the best thing, if we remove it. Everything looks better, looking out over Gazala from the Hurricane and a wall of red/blue text up in the corner just ruins things
-
Like it as it is.
-
no its not war.. its a game, like Danger X says... If you remove the text who killed who, you also remove the human being behind the killed player, and then its like playing VS bots....
But: I see no reason why on earth I care if someone in the other team TKs, or even in my team.. or other players killing eachother... it is meaningless information for me + it destroys immersion and clogs up the screen... The Minimap I also dislike, it doesnt show the important information like the CapsLock map does.
If possible; best would be to only see kills, TKs and Deaths that happens in your squad.. for example if Im SL, I wanna know when they die in mu squad, and when they kill someone.. (not all are using VoIP, and for sure they arent all screaming "I just killed Mr-fragz with a ATR" < this I wanna know if Mr-fragz have been tormenting us with a tank... etc etc..
But I sure dont care what happens on the other side of the map in Squad 4
Discuss more please
-
I want to know if it's Rambolt that has driven over my sneakily placed mine, and that O0mn1o has been caught out by my also sneakily placed Smine ;D
We were being hunted by a tank near Gabes wall last night and a player called 'medical.emergency' slammed it with Beau. bombs. As I could see in the scrolling text who it was I was able to type a "N1 Beau!". So it is nice to know what's going on around the server sometimes, but I could probably get used to playing without it.
But to take the personal 'you killed / you were killed by' messages out would take a lot of fun and banter away from the game.
-
I like the messages the way they are.
-
Same as Cymro. I like to know who killed me and who I killed.
About weapons, I don't care as much to know if I was killed by a No4 or a K98 so that's the less important part of the kill message for me and could be removed, apart for the "strange" kills (with smoke nade, bicycle, etc..)
-
its a game
Yes, and like any other game it try's to immerse you, into what it is portraying.
FH2 does it well, but knowing you killed all five defender at flag X takes part of that away.
Being uncertain, and vulnerable, that would encourage more teamwork.
If you remove the text who killed who, you also remove the human being behind the killed player, and then its like playing VS bots.
Playing online... you know is another human, who will actually text you back after a kill and play more challenging than a bot.
You are still able to pop up the score screen, see who is in the opposite team, and find some one you know and ask him to switch or what ever regular chat goes on during play.
Bots and real players can't be compare by just the need to have a name, to remind people there are real humans they playing against.
But: I see no reason why on earth I care if someone in the other team TKs, or even in my team.. or other players killing eachother... it is meaningless information for me + it destroys immersion and clogs up the screen...
The regular Kill msg's clog it faster than TK's.
If possible; best would be to only see kills, TKs and Deaths that happens in your squad.. for example if Im SL, I wanna know when they die in mu squad, and when they kill someone.. (not all are using VoIP, and for sure they arent all screaming "I just killed Mr-fragz with a ATR" < this I wanna know if Mr-fragz have been tormenting us with a tank... etc etc..
That is an interesting idea.
-
Where is the i want it as it is vote button? this vote sucks. Seriously i thought about removing it.... ::)
-
Where is the i want it as it is vote button? this vote sucks. Seriously i thought about removing it.... ::)
Don't know why you would. The good guys are winning it would seem (although a leave it the hell alone option would have made more sense). Don't make a martyr out of this pathetic thread!
-
Where is the i want it as it is vote button? this vote sucks. Seriously i thought about removing it.... ::)
It is right there, see my first post:
For example, if you like the current system you vote:
- Option 1 (Show who you just killed)
- Option 5 (Show the person who killed you)
- Option 8 (Show the specific weapon that killed you).
That combination reflects the current setup. ;)
Don't know why you would. The good guys are winning it would seem (although a leave it the hell alone option would have made more sense).
"Good guys" ? We are talking about the various views people have, there is no "good opinion". Your opinion isn't any more good or worse then my or let's say Flippy's, Jum Jums, von Mudra's or Apple's opinion!
Don't make a martyr out of this pathetic thread!
And why is it pathetic? Since wheni is it pathetic to exchange opinions, discuss what people think think of a certain feature and why they like or don't like a certain feature or suggestion?
I'm highly offended by your post, it feels like somebody spitting in my face while I only openend a honourable, fair debate. You should be ashamed, deeply ashamed!
-
...or Apple's opinion!
I am honored that you think of me :).
Anyway lets all get along! Like Donutz said we are all entitled to an opinion (Hense the poll). Me, well, I can see how both ways can be good. Both ways meaning: The current way/No Kill Messages.
The current way is obviously more 'newbie' friendly. Its obviously easier to pop someone, look at the top of the screen to identity your kill, and move on to the next target. This makes for very fast paced gameplay, at any range that you engage your enemy. Like, currently, FH2 is a pretty fast paced, or at least a moderately paced mod (maps, players and etc play into this as well).
Now, on the other hand, no kill messages are good.
Because, no kill messages (as said before) will cause the player to double check after his supposed kill. He'll probably, if hes not sure of his kill, have to secure the area that he spotted the enemy activity in. This would slow down gameplay, but also create more depth to it. I mean, there would come a time when you know if you killed someone, and when you aren't sure. So naturally people are going to stop and think, and make sure that they actually killed their target.
So really both ways have their likes and dislikes. However I voted to leave it (or the equivalent of). Mainly because I like faster paced gameplay over slower. Event though both are fun.
:)
-
I'm highly offended by your post, it feels like somebody spitting in my face while I only openend a honourable, fair debate. You should be ashamed, deeply ashamed!
Well said. Sorry about that. I am just very pro kill message (for FH2) and I got a little carried away.
-
My opinion hasn't changed from the original thread at the old forums; no kill messages for either side and only one if it's a teamkill. All these in-game vendettas have to stop imo, and knowing if you've killed a person whom you know to be a SL, say Kurt Steiner, it takes away a lot from the confusion of where your enemy is. But if, once again, the headless chickens who don't want to defend a flag and hunt down individuals, want it the way it is, fine. Also, someone was arguing that it'd be faceless and this game is as much about the community as about the game then look at that other mod with correct ballistics and an aspiring-to-military-accuracy tendency. However, looking at toddel's comment, it doesn't look as though there's too much future in this thread though I did rep you Donutz for the effort.
-
1, 5, 8 of course. This is still a computer game that is meant to be fun. I would no longer play this mod if it was turned into another PR.
-
It's perfect the way it is at the moment.
I couldn't agree with you more Paalu...
-
1, 5, 8 of course. This is still a computer game that is meant to be fun. I would no longer play this mod if it was turned into another PR.
I voted the same.
However, I wouldn't stop playing just because it is changed. It's fine either way imo.
-
While I've also voted to keep it the way as it is, I like Natty's idea to show only "internal" kill messages. I vote for a new poll where you can choose between "everything", "internal", and "nothing".
-
Sir Apple is on fire, and also, lesser HUD/Text on the screen while in-game just makes the game look better
The best example for this is Day of Defeat: Source. With all the HUD and crap it really destroys the beauty of it. Remove the HUD in console and it's amazing
-
I'm highly offended by your post, it feels like somebody spitting in my face while I only openend a honourable, fair debate. You should be ashamed, deeply ashamed!
Well said. Sorry about that. I am just very pro kill message (for FH2) and I got a little carried away.
Cheers.
However, looking at toddel's comment, it doesn't look as though there's too much future in this thread though I did rep you Donutz for the effort.
Not unless there is a stand off at dawn between Lobo and Toddel. Haha. ;)
But in my opinion there is A) Way too much text on the HUD B) It's too easy to "confirm" a kill even though you shouldn't be aware thus greatly handicapping the element of suprise for stealthy enemies. I'd like to think about various possibilities to improve this.
A delay on kill messages might be a nice consession so that those who need to see the name of who they just shot can still see so while those that point out this is a bit cheesy and spoils gameplay also (as you instant know you killed someone evne though visually you could not be sure, the dude might stil be hiding out there) would have atlesast something that aids them. The delay (5 - 10 seconds, just pulling a number) would give an enemy that got away plenty of time to get away since a confirmation of a kill would take some time. Extra time to either sneak out or to put a bullet between the eyes of the other person and say "Hah, you thought you killed me didn't you?".
Though my favourit setup hasn't changed.
-
Looking at all the thoughts put down in this thread, I think that if any change was done at all, if it would be one where most people were at least ameniable, then it would have to be thus:
Tanke the current system and just add a delay of about 20-30 seconds onto it. And maybe make teamkills in bold text.
-
Looking at all the thoughts put down in this thread, I think that if any change was done at all, if it would be one where most people were at least ameniable, then it would have to be thus:
Tanke the current system and just add a delay of about 20-30 seconds onto it. And maybe make teamkills in bold text.
I agree the number of people posting just goes to show how many people would be pissed off if it was changed. No matter how you'd change it, you'd be pleasing a few while irritating everyone else.
-
I don't think that a kill message delay is a good idea. It will confuse new players (and there will be many new players with the Normandy release) and is generally counter-intuitive. Just imagine how strange it would be, if you respawn and still see some kill messages pop up from your previous round. Although I prefer to keep the current system (but decluttered by showing only your personal kills and deaths) I'd rather have the messages comletely removed then having a somehow unwieldy system with delayed messages.
-
I think so too - either no messages or kill messages without delay. No compromises!
-
I like:
- killmessages, but only my own or my squadmates'
- messages which are meant for immersion: I only noticed yesterday that at some point on Sidi Rezegh, the server tells you that the "Germans have taken control over British reinforcements". I think messages like that are cool and should stay.
I don't like:
- spam in the topleft corner: commander is on duty can go, as can all other killmessages from teammates way too far off (thus leaving only my own and my squadmates').
- same spam in the lower left corner. I'm not stupid, I can read my kill and then move on, I don't need to read it twice.
- killmessage delay. Like others before me have stated, I think this will make things worse while it tries improving things.
In short: I'd keep it as it is, or change it into internal killmessages only, like natty proposed.
-
The commander on duty spam can't be fixed, it's a BF2 thing that can not be fixed/tuned.
-
I only said what I didn't like ;)
Seriously: it's a pity that such useles spam (because it is shown EVERY friggin' time the commander goes out of his seat and then enters it again >:( >:( >:() can't be removed.
-
IMO the current system is good.
-
I agree the number of people posting just goes to show how many people would be pissed off if it was changed.
On the contrary, it actually doesn't mean anything, as people can quite easily hate an idea in theory and love it once it's implemented. When Empire Earth came out, I was astonished to find that all airplanes had limited fuel - they'd take off from airbases, fly as usual until out of fuel, and then automatically return to the airbase they'd been assigned. Once they'd landed, they'd instantly be fully refuelled and would then slowly repair their damage until fully repaired, in which case they'd be ready for take-off or just fly to their assigned rally point. I loved this feature, which was an eye-opener to me because I know that if this feature had been suggested to me before I saw it in action, I'd utterly hate it and fight it with all my might, as would very likely lots of other people. And just think back to the 1942 days - how would you feel if someone told you they wanted a system in which any player could, at will, declare himself a mobile spawn point? The first reply would be "OMG that idea sux youd have people enter the enemy base and have people spawn on them and theyd dominate the map!". Lots of ideas sound utterly horrible on paper and end up working great once implemented.
My take: if a feature is implemented and played for a good while, enough for users to understand it, and people still hate it, listen. But theoretical discussions? Sure, votes are still good for their purposes, but arguments count more, in my opinion.
The commander on duty spam can't be fixed, it's a BF2 thing that can not be fixed/tuned.
Can't you even remove the string from the strings.csv file?
-
On the contrary, it actually doesn't mean anything, as people can quite easily hate an idea in theory and love it once it's implemented.
Besides FH2 I'm playing also the HL2-mod Insurgency, where the settings of the kill-messages are changeable by server-admins (AFAIK). So there are servers which show kill-messages and servers which don't. So I actually know how it is without them and I don't like it. I guess some people here played PR, which afaik hasn't any messages either. People allready experienced both sides.
-
Over the many years I've played realism mods for games... I've seen this brought up many many times. I think Red Orchestra covered it best. In RO you have two options, the default is as FH2 now. All death messages. But the server could be set to disable kill messages. In this mode all kill messages except for tk's were disabled, while people's personal death messages would still left intact allowing people to see who killed them. Players could then join a server running the option they want. Best of both worlds really...
The only issue is which would you default to? RO defaults to displaying kill messages... and thus almost all servers run with them enabled. And in my experience the majority of players would prefer to retain kill messages, though I personally like to have kill messages removed most often.