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!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.
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.
Adding more stamina would do wonders. Even the Realism crowd would agree with that statement.
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.
140 ping works just fine now that we have proper latency compensation.
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).
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.
YOU STILL HERE? CRY WOLF MUCH?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).The_Cook said: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.