Why is classic mode so dead?

[Guggy]

I'd be totally down with a higher stamina cap for Classic

[hekuball]

personally i think twi's approach to the whole thing was wrong from the outset.
There was defintely something with the current "realism" setting that didnt please so-called "vets" (such as myself) but rather than address those issues within the realism mode, i felt that twi were trying to prove a point about how wrong certain people within the community were by re-creating an ro1 mode -ie classic as some kind of ironic punishment.

The problem is now that we have realism and classic. Classic is too ponderous but so called realism feels too much like an arena shooter. Something in-between, to me, would be ro2.

[r5cya]

Originally Posted by hekuball

personally i think twi's approach to the whole thing was wrong from the outset.
There was defintely something with the current "realism" setting that didnt please so-called "vets" (such as myself) but rather than address those issues within the realism mode, i felt that twi were trying to prove a point about how wrong certain people within the community were by re-creating an ro1 mode -ie classic as some kind of ironic punishment.

The problem is now that we have realism and classic. Classic is too ponderous but so called realism feels too much like an arena shooter. Something in-between, to me, would be ro2.

i kiinda doubt they went to all that trouble to prove a point. that's a buttload of man-hours! but your idea sure is funny!

[Leto Atreides]

Originally Posted by hekuball

personally i think twi's approach to the whole thing was wrong from the outset.
There was defintely something with the current "realism" setting that didnt please so-called "vets" (such as myself) but rather than address those issues within the realism mode, i felt that twi were trying to prove a point about how wrong certain people within the community were by re-creating an ro1 mode -ie classic as some kind of ironic punishment.

The problem is now that we have realism and classic. Classic is too ponderous but so called realism feels too much like an arena shooter. Something in-between, to me, would be ro2.

Kinda like George Lucas and his original Star Wars trilogy.

[Golf33]

Originally Posted by Nikita

Adding more stamina would do wonders. Even the Realism crowd would agree with that statement.

I think faster stamina recharge would be even better.

[Proud_God]

Originally Posted by hekuball

personally i think twi's approach to the whole thing was wrong from the outset.
There was defintely something with the current "realism" setting that didnt please so-called "vets" (such as myself) but rather than address those issues within the realism mode, i felt that twi were trying to prove a point about how wrong certain people within the community were by re-creating an ro1 mode -ie classic as some kind of ironic punishment.

The problem is now that we have realism and classic. Classic is too ponderous but so called realism feels too much like an arena shooter. Something in-between, to me, would be ro2.

In the big "what do you want to see improved" poll, "more realism" was the big winner. Also, I really don't remember seeing alot of posts asking to make Classic mode. So I was surprised when TWI said "Classic mode is what you asked, CLassic mode is what you get".

Can't complain though, what TWI did is commendable for a dev (especially these days).

[The_Cook]

Originally Posted by PhoenixDragon

140 ping works just fine now that we have proper latency compensation.

140 ping is unacceptable for any shooter no matter the net coding. sub 100ping is what is needed to be competitive. Any game running with 100+ ping begins to breakdown especially when you have players @ sub 80ping. clientside hit detection only tries to hide that problem.

[Sarkis.]

Originally Posted by Proud_God

In the big "what do you want to see improved" poll, "more realism" was the big winner. Also, I really don't remember seeing alot of posts asking to make Classic mode. So I was surprised when TWI said "Classic mode is what you asked, CLassic mode is what you get".

Can't complain though, what TWI did is commendable for a dev (especially these days).

It was commendable, but what people want is more realism. For that I called for a Authentic Realism mode. Improvements that could suit classic mode or realism mode, or be the mindset for a whole new mode, if so was Tripwire's wish

CLICK

[PhoenixDragon]

Originally Posted by The_Cook

140 ping is unacceptable for any shooter no matter the net coding.

I don't think "unacceptable" means what you think it means. 140 ping is playable now. It's certainly not preferable to 40ms, but it works fine. There are no "breakdowns," and most of the time you won't even notice a difference. Sure, if you're doing some semi-professional competition that relies on winning the game for your livelihood, the extra 100ms might be the edge that causes you to lose... but you're not. For normal play it's practically irrelevant. There is a broad gulf between "runs like on a LAN" and "unacceptable." "Not perfectly ideal" is not "unacceptable," and so long as you're playing a small-population niche game on the internet you'll have to deal with the fact that is will not be perfectly ideal, more likely than not.

In fact, considering the history of gaming I find the concept of 140ms being completely unacceptable to be particularly laughable. Did you play early online shooters? I remember when Rogue Spear was new back in '99, when a "good" ping was somewhere in the two-hundred range. Actually getting under 200ms was exceptionally fast. Nonetheless, it played fine, with average pings being double what you call unacceptable.

And on that matter, I find it rather absurd that you seem to be saying that nobody running a server near you is somehow a fault of TWI. They tweaked the netcode so the game is playable at 140ms (And even higher), yet it's their fault nobody runs a server near you?

Finally, I'd say that client-side hit detection doesn't hide the problems with latency, it rectifies many of them. Yes, it isn't quite as good as having a lower ping, but it brings you much closer to an even playing field and makes latency much less of an issue than it had been before.

[Howitzer114]

To add to the running speed debate.

Everyone is different. You have fast runners, average runners, and the slower guys. The thing with a game is, you can't accurately depict that. The closest thing to do would assign each player random speed/stamina intervals in the beginning of a game (not much, just a few percent difference) to add variety to the team's speed. That's how it would really be IMO.

[=GG= Mr Moe]

Originally Posted by PhoenixDragon

I don't think "unacceptable" means what you think it means. 140 ping is playable now. It's certainly not preferable to 40ms, but it works fine. There are no "breakdowns," and most of the time you won't even notice a difference. Sure, if you're doing some semi-professional competition that relies on winning the game for your livelihood, the extra 100ms might be the edge that causes you to lose... but you're not. For normal play it's practically irrelevant. There is a broad gulf between "runs like on a LAN" and "unacceptable." "Not perfectly ideal" is not "unacceptable," and so long as you're playing a small-population niche game on the internet you'll have to deal with the fact that is will not be perfectly ideal, more likely than not.

In fact, considering the history of gaming I find the concept of 140ms being completely unacceptable to be particularly laughable. Did you play early online shooters? I remember when Rogue Spear was new back in '99, when a "good" ping was somewhere in the two-hundred range. Actually getting under 200ms was exceptionally fast. Nonetheless, it played fine, with average pings being double what you call unacceptable.

And on that matter, I find it rather absurd that you seem to be saying that nobody running a server near you is somehow a fault of TWI. They tweaked the netcode so the game is playable at 140ms (And even higher), yet it's their fault nobody runs a server near you?

Finally, I'd say that client-side hit detection doesn't hide the problems with latency, it rectifies many of them. Yes, it isn't quite as good as having a lower ping, but it brings you much closer to an even playing field and makes latency much less of an issue than it had been before.

Lately he just wants to complain

I agree with you here. Personally I have not had problems with or without the lag compensation at pings higher than he is condeming.

[r5cya]

Originally Posted by The_Cook

140 ping is unacceptable for any shooter no matter the net coding. sub 100ping is what is needed to be competitive. Any game running with 100+ ping begins to breakdown especially when you have players @ sub 80ping. clientside hit detection only tries to hide that problem.

YOU STILL HERE? CRY WOLF MUCH?
"You have lost a customer, I am no longer purchasing your products, or promoting them to my friends. I'll come back when I hear news of half tracks and combined arms maps style of Ro1 start coming out. I check I'll play I'll see what I think. But TWI will never get pre-order money from me again, nor even regular price, nor any free advertisement and testimony to my friends from me. Best you can hope for with a new product will be "if it's on sale on steam for 50% off"
Till then good bye."
HARD TO TAKE ANYONE SERIOUSLY WHEN THE SAY THINGS AND NEVER FOLLOW THROUGH WITH THEM.

[Holy.Death]

Originally Posted by The_Cook

140 ping is unacceptable for any shooter no matter the net coding. sub 100ping is what is needed to be competitive. Any game running with 100+ ping begins to breakdown especially when you have players @ sub 80ping. clientside hit detection only tries to hide that problem.

I remember playing with you a few times back in the vanilla days, so I find your post rather... disturbing. Especially in the light of my personal experience - when hit detection was still server-side I had some problems hitting targets at range at 180 up, but at 120-150 and below was "manageable" to me (although I had to lead for my ping).

I was still competitive enough to be around top 5.

Now, with server-side hit detection I have no problem with hitting my targets as lead distance is depending on the actual distance, instead of my ping. There is some truth that you can't be competitive at the exactly same level (when your ping is still slower two to three times), but since we are playing for fun and teamwork is more important than individual skills (even the best shooter can't take out 3 out of 3 people aiming at him at once, I had such situation in the past) I don't mind much as the biggest problem has been solved.