![]() ![]() ![]() Modern fighting games tried to increase the likelihood of close matches by introducing comeback mechanics, but these often reduced the depth of the gameplay by allowing your opponent to force you into the defensive with little effort. But it's very hard to find a good match if a slight skill disparity results in a disproportionate frag/map-control difference. Ideally you want matches to be close enough to motivate both players to give it their all, which makes for more fun matches instead of one-sided stomps. This is less the case between two players where there's a massive skill disparity but both players still have solid fundamentals and know what options they have to turn the match around, but if you're starting out you won't have the opportunity to learn these fundamentals if the only people still playing arena shooters are Quakedads who have been doing so for over 10 years. The winner will usually get bored since they don't really need to try to win, and the loser will be too demoralized by the asskicking to really try their best-yet there's still 6 more minutes on the clock. ![]() Which is made more painful by the long length of a match (10 minutes). The more snowball-heavy the game is, the more matches will turn into one-sided stomps the bigger the difference in skill levels between players is. The winner would get rewarded for winning with more winning, and you would just have to accept your inevitable death depending on how unlucky your spawn was. You would get killed, then depending on the map your opponent would find and kill you within 8 seconds since you respawn with nothing but a MG, and RNGesus felt that out of the three farthest spawn points from your opponent, you should respawn at the one closest to your opponent which also has no nearby weapon pick-ups. One thing I never liked about dueling in Quake (Live) is how snowball-heavy it was. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |