StarDestroyer.Net BBS

At best Reach will be exact halo 1 clone with 3 AI squadmates and prettier graphics. It already has wort wort wort speaking elites put back in. Nearly ten years after the first Halo was reached Bungiee would be back where they started. And people would praise them for innovation.

Woah woah woah are we actually trashing Reach here for finally doing things other games have been doing for years? Like loadouts and cone fire? You got to give Halo some points for finally catching up to 2003.

Duckie wrote:So, the thing they're touting is jetpacks now?

Uh, didn't... Starsiege Tribes or something have jetpacks too? How is this in any way new?

As well as vehicles, different suits, and a host of weaponry. Not counting the insane number of mods.

So basically they're psyched about having finally catching up with Tribes.

(PS. The original Starsiege blew)

CaptHawkeye wrote:Woah woah woah are we actually trashing Reach here for finally doing things other games have been doing for years? Like loadouts and cone fire? You got to give Halo some points for finally catching up to 2003.

Halo weapons have had cone fire for a long time, it's just that the reticules didn't show it.

DPDarkPrimus wrote:

CaptHawkeye wrote:Woah woah woah are we actually trashing Reach here for finally doing things other games have been doing for years? Like loadouts and cone fire? You got to give Halo some points for finally catching up to 2003.

Halo weapons have had cone fire for a long time, it's just that the reticules didn't show it.

Halo 1 did not suffer from mediocrity like conefire and hitscan weapons.

So conefire is 'mediocrity' and Halo didn't have any? I think you need to play Halo again.

You even had to rag on 'hitscan' weapons for no reason. SOMEONE has been reading gaming forums from 1998!

Sarevok wrote:

DPDarkPrimus wrote:

CaptHawkeye wrote:Woah woah woah are we actually trashing Reach here for finally doing things other games have been doing for years? Like loadouts and cone fire? You got to give Halo some points for finally catching up to 2003.

Halo weapons have had cone fire for a long time, it's just that the reticules didn't show it.

Halo 1 did not suffer from mediocrity like conefire and hitscan weapons.

No, it just suffered from a multiplayer that was started to be worked on about 6 weeks before deadline, meaning that they couldn't properly balance the weapons or maps.

Sarevok wrote:Halo 1 did not suffer from mediocrity like conefire and hitscan weapons.

The only possible inteerpretation of this comment is that Halo HAD conefire and hitscan weapons but did not suffer because of it.

It is certain that it had conefire. Fire the assault rifle and watch as each bullet flies out in a direction totally independant of the last, uniformly distributed over a widening cone.

There was no ballistics and bullets hit instantly, the very definition of 'hitscan' weapons.

It is certain that it had conefire. Fire the assault rifle and watch as each bullet flies out in a direction totally independant of the last, uniformly distributed over a widening cone.

The AR is a spray weapon like the shotgun. And it only becomes uncontrollable after a long burst, In short corridor fights the bullet dispersal is not an issue.

And with plasma weapons there is no "conefire" whatever. They always hit where they aim no matter how far away the target is.

There was no ballistics and bullets hit instantly, the very definition of 'hitscan' weapons.

Incorrect. Due to a quark in halo engine all projectiles have speed. Even bullets from sniper rifle.

As for ballistics go fire the fuel rod gun and tell me if it does not follow a ballistic trajectory.

So by 'no conefire' you mean 'some conefire'? By 'ballistics' you mean 'nades and fuel rods have ballistics'? The sniper pistol sure didn't.

Frankly, 'hitscan' (stupid word btw) being bad is pretty much horseshit. I've rarely seen a gun that is 'hitscan' that doesn't need to be (railguns, lasers, special effects, etc) in any FPS game. They're just negative-connotation buzzwords; conefire is pretty much essential to game balance excluding the existince of 'barrel awareness' which almost no game does properly.

Then again, I'm told Borderlands has 'hitscan' weapons even though you can see the bullets travel, so clearly I'm not thinking like an internet moron.

So by 'no conefire' you mean 'some conefire'?

So what ? The bullets spewed out by the AR are not hitting pixels determined by a random number generator. The weapon is firing actual projectiles with some spread. The AR is perfect for suppressing large numbers of unshielded foes at close and medium range. Even the plasma rifle is inadequate to AR when taking on large hordes of Flood creatures. It is an effective weapon without SoD breaking elements like insta-hit bullets and that's what matters.

By 'ballistics' you mean 'nades and fuel rods have ballistics'?

Why would plasma bolts have bullet drops ? Or needler rounds for that matter given they are micro seeking missiles ? Bullet drop for the AR would have been a nice addition but I suppose given the weapons high rate of fire it would have been too taxing for the hardware of original xbox.

The sniper pistol sure didn't.

The sniper pistol should have been replaced with a battle rifle skin by the time the game hit PC. It is one weapon that is inexcusable.

Frankly, 'hitscan' (stupid word btw) being bad is pretty much horseshit. I've rarely seen a gun that is 'hitscan' that doesn't need to be (railguns, lasers, special effects, etc) in any FPS game. They're just negative-connotation buzzwords; conefire is pretty much essential to game balance excluding the existince of 'barrel awareness' which almost no game does properly.

Hit-scan is bad for two reasons. First because other than directed energy weapons nothing travells fast enough to be considered instantenous. It breaks SoD. Secondly projectiles can be dodged. A game is more entertaining when you have evade an attack by dodging.

Then again, I'm told Borderlands has 'hitscan' weapons even though you can see the bullets travel, so clearly I'm not thinking like an internet moron.

Onscreen graphics rarely represents game mechanics in FPSes. See any game where you can see the players gun. You really think the camera is alligned with the gun held by the model ? Its all smoke and mirrors.

Sarevok wrote:

So by 'no conefire' you mean 'some conefire'?

So what ? The bullets spewed out by the AR are not hitting pixels determined by a random number generator. The weapon is firing actual projectiles with some spread. The AR is perfect for suppressing large numbers of unshielded foes at close and medium range. Even the plasma rifle is inadequate to AR when taking on large hordes of Flood creatures. It is an effective weapon without SoD breaking elements like insta-hit bullets and that's what matters.

The fact that the bullets go off in some direction independent of the last one within some solid angle is the fucking definition of 'conefire'. The fact that the solid angle expands as you fire does not change that fact.

By 'ballistics' you mean 'nades and fuel rods have ballistics'?

Why would plasma bolts have bullet drops ? Or needler rounds for that matter given they are micro seeking missiles ? Bullet drop for the AR would have been a nice addition but I suppose given the weapons high rate of fire it would have been too taxing for the hardware of original xbox.

The plasma bolts would have as much (or more) bullet drop as a normal bullet going at the same speed. This is physics. The plasma has mass and so will behave the same in a gravitational field as any other massive object. It could have inferior ballistics to an actual bullet due to the fact that it has lower mass and looks visibly fatter so could have worse drag depending on how much of that is actually interacting with the air.

I would vastly prefer "hitscan" weapons with proper behaviour of the weapon (ie no conefire) to conefire + good projectile ballistics. I would say that of the two evils of 'bullet travels at infinite speed' and 'bullet takes a 45 degree turn once it leaves the barrel' the speed is actually the lesser. Why? At ranges in most games it would hit the target before the next frame is rendered anyway; at 800m/s a target has to be 50m away for you to actually see the bullet before it hits, and the bullet will have dropped 2cm still going to hit someones eyeball if your aim was on to begin with. This is far less straining of disbelief and annoying than being able to feed someone your gun and still have the bullet miss.

The fact that the bullets go off in some direction independent of the last one within some solid angle is the fucking definition of 'conefire'. The fact that the solid angle expands as you fire does not change that fact.

You imply as if all Halo weapons were like this when I illustrated this is a function of a certain weapon designed precisely to spray lead.

The plasma bolts would have as much (or more) bullet drop as a normal bullet going at the same speed. This is physics.

What makes you think Covenant plasma weapons are any more "plasma" than a SW laser cannon is a laser ? The games storyline has not even established what gas is used in the plasma weapons much less its properties. Furthermore a plasma weapon runs out of charge not some tibanna gas like SW blasters or fuel like Peacekeeper pulse weapons in Farscape. All we know is Covenant plasma guns are typical scifi bolt throwers. They have no need to be affected by gravity any more than than a blaster bolt in SW.

In any case Halo has good simulation of ballistic trajectories in other respects. See bodies, vehicles, turrets thrown by explosions. Or the parabolic arcs taken by fuel rod cannons. They are spectacular to watch in large scale battles like level 05 and 07 when Hunters engaging distant marine or flood forces across canyons or frozen ice lakes.

would vastly prefer "hitscan" weapons with proper behaviour of the weapon (ie no conefire) to conefire + good projectile ballistics. I would say that of the two evils of 'bullet travels at infinite speed' and 'bullet takes a 45 degree turn once it leaves the barrel' the speed is actually the lesser. Why? At ranges in most games it would hit the target before the next frame is rendered anyway; at 800m/s a target has to be 50m away for you to actually see the bullet before it hits, and the bullet will have dropped 2cm still going to hit someones eyeball if your aim was on to begin with. This is far less straining of disbelief and annoying than being able to feed someone your gun and still have the bullet miss.

I dunno. Insta-hit weapons just feel fake. A lot of the lively things than happens in Halo 1s campaign is down to the projectiles. Like a grunt accidentally stepping into a stream of plasma bolts or a marine peppering another marine by mistakes. If everyone had infalliable insta-hit weapons the game would lose its charm.

Regarding bullet velocity may I remind you of how difficult it is to shoot down distant Banshees even with bullets when they are evading ? If you could just point and click to damage an aircraft it would make all the fancy aerial manevering tactics worthless.

The only hit-scan weapons in Halo 3 were the Sniper Rifle, Covenant Sniper Rifle and Spartan Laser.

Halo 2 had more hit-scan weapons, most notably the Battle Rifle.

Sarevok wrote:So what ?

You said there was none, and there is. Ooops.

Sarevok wrote:The bullets spewed out by the AR are not hitting pixels determined by a random number generator. The weapon is firing actual projectiles with some spread.

I don't think you know what 'conefire' means.

Sarevok wrote:The AR is perfect for suppressing large numbers of unshielded foes at close and medium range.

How does it suppress anything when it takes a full mag at close range to down a shield?

Sarevok wrote:Even the plasma rifle is inadequate to AR when taking on large hordes of Flood creatures.

You mean because plasma weapons get reduced damage against flood? Lol.

Sarevok wrote:It is an effective weapon without SoD breaking elements like insta-hit bullets and that's what matters.

It has conefire too. Oops. And no ballistics! Oops.

Sarevok wrote:Why would plasma bolts have bullet drops ? Or needler rounds for that matter given they are micro seeking missiles ? Bullet drop for the AR would have been a nice addition but I suppose given the weapons high rate of fire it would have been too taxing for the hardware of original xbox.

I guess you forgot about all those guns that fire magic straight-line bullets. There's no 'ballistics' there. Oops. In fact, the nades and fuel rods are the only weapons with anything even remotely describable as ballistics; mods from UT had more. The idea the Xbox couldn't handle ballistics is totally asinine.

The sniper pistol should have been replaced with a battle rifle skin by the time the game hit PC. It is one weapon that is inexcusable.

So you agree that it had no ballistics and you're full of shit?

Hit-scan is bad for two reasons. First because other than directed energy weapons nothing travells fast enough to be considered instantenous. It breaks SoD. Secondly projectiles can be dodged. A game is more entertaining when you have evade an attack by dodging.

It's almost as if I didn't just mention several ways its appropriate and not just automatically bad. But then you're some kind of fucking moron who thinks a game is better when you can dodge fucking bullets, so who knows what goes in in your tiny brain.

Sarevok wrote:Onscreen graphics rarely represents game mechanics in FPSes. See any game where you can see the players gun. You really think the camera is alligned with the gun held by the model ? Its all smoke and mirrors.

So you say that Halo has ballistics, no conefire and no hitscan, even though all these things are wrong, and then deign to tell me that games are 'smoke and mirrors'? You're not just stupid and misinformed, you're massively arrogant.

PROTIP: in Blands, the impact effects and damage isn't applied until after a finite delay. Thus no hitscan. UH OH.

I'd actually like to know if anything Sarevok has said about Halo so far has been correct; he seems to be totally wrong so far.

EDIT - If he's seriously saying that Halo is better because it has magic railgun not-conefired bullets that aren't hitscan because they hit in between frames such that there is no scope to do anything, that's pretty funny.

Stark wrote: How does it suppress anything when it takes a full mag at close range to down a shield?

You could kill Flood poppers/carriers with it.

Anything tougher than them and it was useless.

Sarevok wrote:Bullet drop for the AR would have been a nice addition but I suppose given the weapons high rate of fire it would have been too taxing for the hardware of original xbox.

Simulating bullet drop requires no additional calculation, for the kind of distances seen in Halo. They didn't do it because it would be a pointless irrelevant non-feature in a soft sci-fi run-and-gun shooter

Hit-scan is bad for two reasons. First because other than directed energy weapons nothing travells fast enough to be considered instantenous. It breaks SoD.

With very few exceptions, game physics use a discrete synchronous variable-timestep models running at the screen refresh rate. That means bullets from contemporary guns should move 10 - 15 metres per frame. Shooting at anything closer than that will have literally no difference whether simple raycasting (hitscan) or bullet objects is used. In practice there are at least three frames of latency in the physics/display chain, so practically you aren't going to notice the difference for anything closer than 40 metres or so. Now, how much of the Halo series is spent shooting at things closer than 40 metres? 90% of it? Thus hitscan is a sensible choice for conventional guns.

Then again, I'm told Borderlands has 'hitscan' weapons even though you can see the bullets travel, so clearly I'm not thinking like an internet moron.

I don't know if Borderlands does that, but it would be a reasonable design choice for game consoles, which have rather limited CPU power for collision detection but plenty of GPU power for particle animation. Calculating the impact point once at firing time then animating the bullet streak over a few frames would be a reasonable way to deal with lots of bullets, chances are the players would never notice.

Starglider wrote:

Then again, I'm told Borderlands has 'hitscan' weapons even though you can see the bullets travel, so clearly I'm not thinking like an internet moron.

I don't know if Borderlands does that, but it would be a reasonable design choice for game consoles, which have rather limited CPU power for collision detection but plenty of GPU power for particle animation. Calculating the impact point once at firing time then animating the bullet streak over a few frames would be a reasonable way to deal with lots of bullets, chances are the players would never notice.

Blands has (actually quite hilariously slow moving) bullet object modelling. One character can even change the speed the bullets travel at.

I think a few can, actually (skills for siren and class mod for hunter) and different weapons fire different velocities anyway (especially special ammo like snake rounds etc). Oops, the internet consensus is wrong again.

While bullets don't drop over long distances in Halo 3, there definitely is bullet spread, and if anyone is curious about it I can dig up and post the big long treatsie Bungie wrote up talking about the difference between the BR from Halo 2 and Halo 3, because of how much people were bitching about it on the forums.

Sarevok wrote:

The fact that the bullets go off in some direction independent of the last one within some solid angle is the fucking definition of 'conefire'. The fact that the solid angle expands as you fire does not change that fact.

You imply as if all Halo weapons were like this when I illustrated this is a function of a certain weapon designed precisely to spray lead.

Hey idiot. Reading the thread will show you that you stated that there wasn't any 'conefire', also known as bullet spread.

The opposite of that statement is that at least one weapon in Halo has spread. Which there is.

Stark: A point on bullets looking hitscan and being hitscan:
Some games have hitscan weapons, but the graphic for the bullet isn't tied to where the damage is. The graphic for the bullet mostly exists to indicate that there is stuff coming from a particular direction.

For instance, in TF2 you see the bullets flying around, even though the weapons are hitscan. What's more, the damage comes from the centre of your head, while the graphic projects from your gun.

Weird stuff, eh?

defanatic wrote:

Sarevok wrote:

The fact that the bullets go off in some direction independent of the last one within some solid angle is the fucking definition of 'conefire'. The fact that the solid angle expands as you fire does not change that fact.

You imply as if all Halo weapons were like this when I illustrated this is a function of a certain weapon designed precisely to spray lead.

Hey idiot. Reading the thread will show you that you stated that there wasn't any 'conefire', also known as bullet spread.

The opposite of that statement is that at least one weapon in Halo has spread. Which there is.

Stark: A point on bullets looking hitscan and being hitscan:
Some games have hitscan weapons, but the graphic for the bullet isn't tied to where the damage is. The graphic for the bullet mostly exists to indicate that there is stuff coming from a particular direction.

For instance, in TF2 you see the bullets flying around, even though the weapons are hitscan. What's more, the damage comes from the centre of your head, while the graphic projects from your gun.

Weird stuff, eh?

Not really that wierd, they're obviously using the source of the ray as the camera's location. IIRC hitscan weapons essentially operate like picking, just the origin of the ray is an actual 3D point in worldspace, thus it doesn't need to run through a transform to get from 2D screen space to 3D world space). Why on the otherhand, is an interesting question. If they're keeping track of the gun barrell for purposes of having an origin for displaying the particle effects representing the firing, it seems a little odd not to use that as the origin for your hitscan ray. Now thats wierd, though there is probably a rational reason that I'm simply not thinking of off the top of my head. It may have something to do with the character models' animations and firing from behind cover properly, I've never actually played TF2 myself, only seen my brother play it.

Edit: clarified something.

According to the aforementioned detailed article about the Halo 3 Battle Rifle, the only hitscan weapon in Halo 3 is the Spartan Laser. Even the Sniper Rifle, at extreme distances, takes a few ticks to actually hit, though the initial range does function essentially like hitscan.