Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Random holdover poll #4: From Bullet sponge to one shot

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    It depends on the enemy, if it's just a normal human then it shouldn't be a bullet sponge.
    If there is a good valid reason why an enemy is a bullet sponge then I can understand to a point. I see bullet sponges as a lazy way to add difficulty to a game,

    Comment


    • #17
      Depends on the game, really. I personally think bullet sponges are lazy programming my self, but what do i know? I just play games.

      Comment


      • #18
        Make an enemy hard with their AI and Kit not just giving them a shit ton of health. Anthem's boss design is bullet sponges with bullshit AOE attacks and I could barely stand to play that piece of shit
        I'm crawling deeper and deeper into backlog hell. Also I stream on dlive: https://dlive.tv/jokerthefoolio

        Comment


        • #19
          "They should be defeatable with a realistic amount of hits depending on their armor" is my choice, but I would add "and depending what species the enemy is".
          Hail Kizuna Ai

          Comment


          • #20
            I feel like enemies that take less shots to kill are more satisfying to destroy. It makes you feel good when you get those headshots and they instantly drop as opposed to bullet sponge enemies who just end up being a chore to fight because they take so damn long to kill.

            Comment


            • #21
              The problem with realistic damage is that it makes a large selection of weapons functionally pointless. There's no need to trade firing speed for more firepower when realism dictates that 9mm is just as fatal as .338

              Comment


            • #22
              River City Girls is an example of this philosophy. Every single enemy in the game is a damage sponge, some more than others. You pretty much NEED to learn a good combo to kill anyone in a reasonable amount of time. Of course, you start the game with no moves and shitty stats. It's such an obnoxious design choice

              Comment


              • #23
                Originally posted by Garrett View Post
                The problem with realistic damage is that it makes a large selection of weapons functionally pointless. There's no need to trade firing speed for more firepower when realism dictates that 9mm is just as fatal as .338
                So if all those weapons are pointless why do they even exist in the real world? Against a single plain clothes target it shouldn't matter which weapon you use. Different weapons are chosen based on the environment and the range, not necessarily firepower. if you played any good tactical shooter, or even any ghost recon game that should be clear.
                Click here for all my game reviews. | Click here for my PC hardware history from 1991
                Games purchased on EGS: 0 | Free games redeemed on EGS: 0

                Comment


                • #24
                  Can't pass up on instagib

                  Comment


                  • #25
                    Originally posted by MadMummy76 View Post
                    or even any ghost recon game that should be clear.
                    Ironic since the last GR game I played has an SR-3 Vikhr and because the game's weapon stat balance is fucked, that rifle has some of the worst armor penetration and noise reduction values in the game, despite the fact that the rifle and its cartridge were specifically designed for high armor penetration with silent subsonic rounds. The game has guns whose bullets break the sound barrier twice but have 3x better sound reduction stats than a gun that doesn't break it at all.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X