Dude, when I'm hitting 40% + rail consistently, I *know* something is wrong. I sucked ass with it q2, and in q3. Suddenly I'm some sort of rail pro? Don't think so.
My friend who's actually *good* with the railgun hit 68% in a tdm match last night. wtf! That's right on edge of 3 out of 4 100 damage shots every 1.5 seconds. I'm lucky to hit 50%+ rocket accuracy in dm situations! And those rocket hits aren't doing anywhere near 100 damage. And forget the shotgun in terms of accuracy/damage ratio.
Honestly, I'm at the point where I hope Internet console gaming takes off. I'd love to play against others in Mario Kart or NBA Jam. We won't have to worry about who has the best CPU, video card, mouse, or all these other problems. There'd be a wider selection of games to choose from.
I'm getting there myself. The last FOUR pc games I bought all had copy protection problems with my drive. Two wouldn't work while patched, period. One would not work in multiplayer for me and my friends, no matter what we tried (and this is not a tech-illterate group, largely IT professionals, I pity the average gamer)
Not hard to see why console gaming grows and grows, but PC gaming sticks to a few select genres that it does well, and little else.
Note that I'm platform agnostic, I own all consoles, play all pc games, please no console vs pc nonsense :P
i guess this also explains why i've been pulling mid-air rocket hits out of my ass left and right.
i frankly find this rather annoying because i'm seeing players who can barely move and turn being railgun whores. i can run circles aroudn these players but when three of them get the rail and kill you it's rather frustrating...especially when they say things like "ahaha owned." these little shits can't keep up with me otherwise. i'd like to see the bounding box downsized myself.
also the rocket splass damage is kind of a joke. maybe it's just me but i find the splash damage from the nailgun to be more effective than that from rockets.
Why not have the same thing that SoF 2 has? You know, a wireframe bounded over the low-poly model. It allowed you to shoot through the players crotch and all, and I guess it didn't feel very processor heavy.
dzjepp wrote:Why not have the same thing that SoF 2 has? You know, a wireframe bounded over the low-poly model. It allowed you to shoot through the players crotch and all, and I guess it didn't feel very processor heavy.
Couldn't that be exploited by having a sort of oddjob character from N64? Like a really small character, therefore small hitbox. Or am I missing something?
dzjepp wrote:Why not have the same thing that SoF 2 has? You know, a wireframe bounded over the low-poly model. It allowed you to shoot through the players crotch and all, and I guess it didn't feel very processor heavy.
Couldn't that be exploited by having a sort of oddjob character from N64? Like a really small character, therefore small hitbox. Or am I missing something?
you could only use your model if the server allowed it though
considering these models are skinny compared to some of the hulk-like ones of q3, doesn't it stand to reason that the hit boxes are really approximately the same, but the models are just skinnier? although I do routinely hit 50-70% rail and I used to average 30-40 in q3, so I dunno why that is. probably because I'm not playing only top clans right now, i think that is mostly it. these noobies are easy to hit.
dzjepp wrote:Why not have the same thing that SoF 2 has? You know, a wireframe bounded over the low-poly model. It allowed you to shoot through the players crotch and all, and I guess it didn't feel very processor heavy.
Couldn't that be exploited by having a sort of oddjob character from N64? Like a really small character, therefore small hitbox. Or am I missing something?
you could only use your model if the server allowed it though
That's interesting that the numbers aren't "that" different, but everyone (including myself, from the first time I picked up the gun) feels that railing is so much easier.
Could this be because the hitbox is more consistently faithful to the player model than it is in Quake III?
The problem with per poly is that it works based on your model and your model alone. So your models hitbox WILL be smaller, or bigger, than your mates.
The problem with standard hitboxes is that they suck ass, period. BEcause they go to big, to small, to odd, when you run and jump it does things, it lags at the wrong times etc etc.
There is no easy way to do this. The only REAL way of doing this good is to force everybody into using the same model with a different skin, and then use per poly. But of course people want choice.
In other words, its this way because you people wanted it this way in saying it would be better. Of course 9 out of 10 of you didn't think it had just as many flaws to gameplay as the other method.
Then I've been misinformed :/
Read it in an article, stating you could better face your enemy head-on to minimize hitbox area. Can't find an article to back it up, and you're probably right anyway
spookmineer wrote:Then I've been misinformed :/
Read it in an article, stating you could better face your enemy head-on to minimize hitbox area. Can't find an article to back it up, and you're probably right anyway
I don't think it's which way you face, but the orientation of your hitbox to the enemy. I don't mean it turns, but if it stays perpendicular to the x & y coordinates of the map, the player standing due southeast or southwest, etc might have a very slightly easier time hitting it.
Hm... If the bounding box is oriented in X and Y of the map, both players have the same advantage or disadvantage, because they both reveal the same amount of area to eachother.
