Zainstaluj Steam
zaloguj się
|
język
简体中文 (chiński uproszczony)
繁體中文 (chiński tradycyjny)
日本語 (japoński)
한국어 (koreański)
ไทย (tajski)
български (bułgarski)
Čeština (czeski)
Dansk (duński)
Deutsch (niemiecki)
English (angielski)
Español – España (hiszpański)
Español – Latinoamérica (hiszpański latynoamerykański)
Ελληνικά (grecki)
Français (francuski)
Italiano (włoski)
Bahasa Indonesia (indonezyjski)
Magyar (węgierski)
Nederlands (niderlandzki)
Norsk (norweski)
Português (portugalski – Portugalia)
Português – Brasil (portugalski brazylijski)
Română (rumuński)
Русский (rosyjski)
Suomi (fiński)
Svenska (szwedzki)
Türkçe (turecki)
Tiếng Việt (wietnamski)
Українська (ukraiński)
Zgłoś problem z tłumaczeniem
Zasady dyskusji i wytyczne
Zgłoś ten post
People still live in Nebraska?
UT3 was a stillborn from the start. UT3 activity has been pretty dead for a long time, but it still has a couple hardcore fans.
There are a few players here and there, but the game was DOA and don't let anyone tell you different. This coming from an Unreal fan.
I wonder why Epic cares so much to keep its servers up if it's "dead". I smell at UT 04 elitist.
TL;DR just wish i could get my UT99 friends to jump over the fence lol
The biggest reason why people love modern shooters is because they offer a great variety of incentives that pure arena shooters just don't have. Look at the differences between CoD and Quake for example. CoD has - unlockable perks, weapons, killstreaks, skins, and all of them are tied to an rpg exp level system. Quake - No unlockables of any kind. Player skins in most if not all servers are forced to that ugly plain green.
Skill gap and ceilings in modern shooters are capped and lots of measures are put into place to make sure that it's very hard to a highly skilled player to run away with the match. In Quake and all other arena shooters this isn't the case. Someone whose good is going to destroy everyone else in the match and the scores are completely lopsided. Most matches I have played on Quake and UT and even Nexuiz have been lopsided matches. Either I destroy everyone or I'm one of those who get destroyed. There is no sense of balance, even if a matchmaking system is implemented. Someone just slightly better than you is going to kill you every single time and make you feel like there is no point in playing.
And honestly the absolutely main reason why modern shooters are loved compared to Quake's is that the vast majority of players can have fun without dedicating their entire life to getting good at the game. CoD and BF are more about unlocking stuff than about winning. It makes matters worse when the majority of the playing populations of arena shooters have been playing them non-stop for years. So just to be able to have a chance to win, you have to spend about a year or two treating the game like a job just to compete. It also makes matters EVEN worse when everyone still playing arena shooters are super competitive types that will only play arena shooters cuz they only will play games that allows them to pwn noobs.
isn't everyone dressed in fatigues kind of the same thing?
no matter what you do (even in video games) there's always going to be someone that's better at it than you. no leveling (rpg like) xp system eliminates the need for "matchmaking"
if you win you win...if you don't go practice more
when did "fun" stop being an incentive for playing video games?
^this just doesn't make any sense. mostly just isn't true but if i'm understanding you at all: you think that CoD and BF are played more because they're easier? i guess if that's the case maybe that explains why i look at those games and think they look boring....or maybe i just wish i could run around those games w/ a lazer cannon of some kind haha :D
And mostly it is true, just go on google and type "Why are arena shooters dead?". The results that come from Reddit pretty much explain everything. One guy replies "I think many who are asking for arena shooters to make a comeback, don't even really realize what they're asking for. If a new arena shooter came out, they would play it for a couple weeks at most and quit because they would be tired by getting killed by the 20 year old that doesn't have a job and can play games all day."
And for most people losing is not fun. Most casual gamers think that simply because they bought the game that they're entitled to have fun. In which case is mostly winning or getting something out of playing. If they aren't winning or getting something out of it, time to move on to another game that will. It's not like the old days where arena shooters were the only shooters online. In fact, that reason alone is why arena shooters were even popular in the first place. Because no other shooter genre was online at that time. Once easier shooters came out, people left Quake and UT in droves.
And people don't want to practice more. Hell, they don't want to practice at all. Practice = work, and work = not fun for casuals.
The problem with this is that the folks that do enjoy having a challenging game are too far in between to keep a game functionally wise alive. Look at QL forums for instance. Most of the topic deal with either the game is dying or it's matchmaking system not working. But of course the matchmaking system isn't going to work when the only ones left playing are the really skilled players.
And personally I know a lot of skilled gamers that will only play a game that has a good big population. These people mostly just want to pubstomp noobs though, so playing a game with a low population where only good people are playing would be the opposite of what they want.
In the end, it's a combination of many factors that lead to arena shooters being dead. Mainly, the games are too hard for newer lazier generations of gamers to bother trying.