Rts Or Fps?

Ripur · August 2004

Would you say NS classic is more RTS or FPS in feel? Which mode of play would you prefer NS be?

Thansal · August 2004

It al ldepends.

to the comander, it feels like an RTS

to the rines it is an FPS

For the Aliens it is a tactical combat game (aka, FPS with ral tactics needed).

me? I can't play RTS (suck to much) so I never comm, though I love tactical combat, thus I love playing both rine and alien <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' />

Bait_Boy · August 2004

I cant comm, but thats because everyone seems to like throwing the word
"NEWB!!!11!!1!1!" around
I prefer it FPS, but thats just me

NolSinkler · August 2004

I think it is more FPS on the marine side, unless your commander. If you're an alien, then for skulk it's FPS, for gorge its RTS, for lerk its FPS/RTS, for fade its FPS, and for Onos its FPS. Combat, however, is completely FPS.

So, right now, I think NS is more FPS based.

JacKnife · August 2004

id say both

coris · August 2004

Its a lot more FPS than RTS. IN a RTS you can often say which unit is better and who'll come out on top in a fight, skill is the biggest deciding factor.

waller · August 2004

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (coris @ Aug 20 2004, 06:12 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Its a lot more FPS than RTS. IN a RTS you can often say which unit is better and who'll come out on top in a fight, skill is the biggest deciding factor.  </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> 
You can still do this to a certain point though
For example in the game Red Alert 2, you may think "Oh no! they have terror drones, i'll get mirages" And you may lose a few mirages, but you know you will come out on top.
In NS it's more like "Oh noes, they have an oh noes, HMG HMG!"
Or fade/sg you get the picture <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' />

ssjyoda · August 2004

ns started as a strong rts with fps mixed in, but has greatly shifted toward the opposite as versions update.

jammno · August 2004

More of an FPS than an RTS. Cause it's a very linear RTS -_-;;

gazOzz · August 2004

Explain this ssjyoda... Which changes made NS:Classic less RTS... I must have missed these changes... Do the earlier versions have com for both sides?... Did they deintegrated com from marines in NS2.0 or NS3.0?...

or simply do you mean several structures are nerfed to increase game pace instead of endless turtling and WOLs???...

Sorry but NS still has same amount of RTS features as before... And It will be as long as NS:C is there...

RahXephon · August 2004

I think NS:C mainly an RTS, with only 1 important change: the units are real persons.

Think about it, you need to play the game as a strategy game to win. All the elements of RTS are there, resources, tech, units, time. You need to combine your elements to win the match.

FPS is also needed, but essentially to the very core, you can win the game without FPS elements. Sure u need soldiers and gorges to build, but without a commander or a gorge u can't really win a normal game.

ssjyoda · August 2004

i meant it was more about the team effort than individual effort.

ViPr · August 2004

i prefer playing the game like a FPS, i don't like being commander but i like the fact that the RTS element is there. it makes the FPS better that there is an RTS element. and i like the fact that winning is determined by both the commander and his soldiers. you need good thinking as well as good hand eye coordination and i think both should always be a part of the game.

Nos · August 2004

Definitely more FPS, but the RTS element is what makes NS such a great game. There are tons of pure FPS games, but very few tie in a RTS element.

im_lost · August 2004

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (gazOzz @ Aug 20 2004, 05:19 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Explain this ssjyoda... Which changes made NS:Classic less RTS... I must have missed these changes... Do the earlier versions have com for both sides?... Did they deintegrated com from marines in NS2.0 or NS3.0?...  </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> 
Rfk was added.

NolSinkler · August 2004

I'm lost beat me to it...

Ripur · August 2004

i have to gree that rfk was one of the biggest changes made to NS in terms of it's FPS/RTS feel.
I prefer a more strategic game myself and wouldn't mind seeing rfk go.

Since the dev teams have essentially made 2 games out of NS, do you think elements of RTS should be more prevelent in Classic, and keep CO as the hardcore FPS?

waller · August 2004

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Ripur @ Aug 20 2004, 09:50 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> i have to gree that rfk was one of the biggest changes made to NS in terms of it's FPS/RTS feel.
I prefer a more strategic game myself and wouldn't mind seeing rfk go.

Since the dev teams have essentially made 2 games out of NS, do you think elements of RTS should be more prevelent in Classic, and keep CO as the hardcore FPS?  </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> 
Combat should be removed, simple as.
RFK, i don't see how it changes the RTS/FPS feel to it at all? infact i think it adds quite a bit of stratagy to it.

Ripur · August 2004

the rfk asspect awards straight foward killing. Now this sounds like a very good thing, but remember the turtle strat of marines in v2.0
In v2.0 marines could rely on the resflow from sitting back and shooting until they had enough res to make a push on the hives. Some may argue this is a valid strat to use the marines inherint advantige to win, but i see it as a result of fualty comming to control the resource nodes in the earlier parts of the game. Why should marines be awarded for playing poorly, but shooting well?
Another example of rfk catering to the FPS side is a game i played on the alien forces. We had one player that was a very good fade. Very good when it came to killing marines, but had his head firmly up his **** in terms of team play or use of strategy. He constantly had res to go fade, but never bothered to attack res nodes, or come to the aid of our res nodes under attack. Just a constant wandering around and killing small groups of rines. He never felt the effects of low res flow becuase he could kill well, but our gorges couldn't build needed strucutres and couldn't defend them without his help.

waller · August 2004

But if you have 99 res, don't you get over flow which goes into the pool and gets handed out to the other players? in that case he should've been earning your team quite a nice little sum.
But i can understand how you feel, on pubs that's quite normal, but it's 10 times worse when the fade isn't half good but just **** for fade, kills 5 rines, dies, ****, kills, dies.
You get the picture <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' />

Ripur · August 2004

i don't think overflow was around in v2.0, but even if it was i doubt the player ever got over 99 res on one fade.
In all honesty i think rfk promotes reswhoring. I can't back this up becuase as long as the lifeforms have been unchained there has been rfk, but i played one game where rfk was turned off on a server and it was like a whole new NS. it had much better team work than what i see on pubs, much more focus on protecting and destroying res nodes, and it was hard to predict the tech tree of the other team.
The game lasted about 1 and 1/2 hours, but the 'early' and 'mid game' aspect lasted for over half the game. And you would see crazy stuff happen. Like after we got the second hive up (about 20 min into the game) a fade showed up. The rines couldn't afford a team of shotties, so they actually used mines, set a trap and killed the fade with one shotgun and an lmg. The fade wasn't a newb or anything, he just wasn't expecting to lose almost all his life by stepping on a mine.
So i would say the slower games would be more RTS and the faster games brought on by rfk are more FPS.

gazOzz · August 2004

RFK is not such a big motivation... at least not as big as Scoreboard...

But yea I guess you are right at some point, some changes kill the RTS feeling...

ViPr · August 2004

resource for kills is a good idea although sometimes i think losing resources for dying might be better. but it was stupid before where marines and skulks were worth nothing and you could just throw them away. that made it less of an RTS. i'll be very mad if they change it back to the way it was before where killing a skulk or light marine was pointless and could actually be helping the enemy team. there is still some flaws in the design which creates benefits to dying but at least it's better than before.

IBT · August 2004

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Thansal @ Aug 19 2004, 08:58 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> to the comander, it feels like an RTS

to the rines it is an FPS  </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> 
thats the point <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' />

i like the fact that ns blends the 2 gametypes together like renegade tried.

and i agree with ViPr

Status_Quo · August 2004

NS is a FPS and will most likely remain so unless the pace is reduced considerably and a tech-tree with a bit of flesh on the bones is implemented.

AlienCow · August 2004

Blatently an FPS with extra knobs. No jokes.

Rts Or Fps?

Comments