Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
0 
Report this post
The fact that you can put it like that kinda shows that it is pointless busywork, no?
Even killing enemies is busy work, technically. Playing the game at all is busy work. It's the point: To keep us busy with trials and tribulations. Literally the point of games. To overcome obstacles. This is just a different obstacle. Just because it is VERY different doesn't mean it isn't a viable obstacle.
That being said, I do have a thing for consistency in games. For example I don't like how much homing the sniper shots have, because nothing else has that much homing. You cannot actually dodge it with just movement speed alone, which feels unfair since *every other attack in the game* I *can* dodge with movement speed alone. So, probably how you all feel about this red cap bot. However, I don't think the answer is "take it out of the game", because then I would have less obstacles to overcome, and, where do we draw the line at removing obstacles just to make it easier? At what point do we have no obstacles left anyway?
Judging and balancing this is what game designers are for. And making sure it sticks to the vision of the game's director.
How much freedom the lead designer and his team gets is determined afterward and it all revolves about communication and compromises between the designer team and the director.
They have an idea. They define what they want and the limitations and parameters they want to work within. They test things (a lot) and see how it goes. They learn what work and what doesn't and they adapt from there.
Eventually, it devolves into the finished product you got right now.
Part of the appeal of roguelites is the RNG. This is what keeps the game entertaining, and sometimes just throwing you a curveball can be a way to keep things fresh.
Some people like it, others might not. But that's all subjective. Ultimately, this hurt bot has a purpose and it's not even that bad considering you have a counterplay: all it requires is your attention.
My bad, seems like I need to elaborate to make my point clearer. I believe your analogy doesn't entirely hold up. Not all obstacles are created equal.
In TF2, Spy-checking is an inherently dynamic and interactive task. An enemy Spy is a living, thinking adversary who uses strategy to outplay opponents. Spy-checking, therefore, involves decision-making, differs based on player class and is generally dependent on the current game state. It's a real-time, situational interaction embedded into the game's larger, intricate web of systems and player interactions.
In contrast, the repair bot lacks those qualities. It's a static, barely-reactive -- most of the time non-reactive -- target that does not actively engage with the player or the broader game systems. It doesn't have attack patterns, it doesn't move or counteract the player in any meaningful way. The "challenge" it poses is not tied to player skill or adaptibility, but rather Rote memorization and habit formation. It boils down to an arbitrary test of whether you remembered to tick off the box during an otherwise disengaged moment in a safe zone.
The difference here is in the quality of the obstacles. The combat encounters with the AI, even if technically reducible to busywork, derive their enjoyment from the depth and unpredictability of their systems: randomized elements, strategic interplay, resource management, the necessity of player decision-making and the ability to execute those decisions. Engaging with these systems feels rewarding because the outcome is a synthesis of the game systems and my efforts as a player.
The repair bot on the other hand is a shallow interaction. Remembering to shoot it everytime ("as per protocol") isn't a test of skill and doesn't involve any active decisions. It's a reflexive action that, if missed, results in a punishment that doesn't feel justified by the effort involved.
You can dodge it with base movement, it just takes slightly different movement. Moving diagonally is enough usually to make the shot miss.
I'm aware this doesn't change what you're saying and I'm not trying to convince you to, just wanted to put out information on how to dodge it since a lot of people have trouble with it.
Does a pit in the ground react? No, but it's an obstacle. How many obstacles could I remove from all games by pointing out how they are different from one another? Of by complaining about some obstacles are more dynamic than others?
An obstacle is an obstacle. They come in millions of varieties. It makes little difference how they are different, besides of course, that them being different is what actually makes games interesting? If all obstacles had the same qualities, the same "this is the way it works" then everything becomes boring as hell? Imagine if every single enemy had the Weak Spot on the SAME exact spot. Boring! So the weak spot is in different spots for different enemies, so we have a variety of obstacles to overcome, even if some weak points are MUCH harder to hit than other weak points.
Not falling into a pit is protocol. Dodging an enemy rocket is protocol. Shooting the heal bot is protocol. Don't die to damage is protocol. They have a unique an interesting challenge, and funny little obstacle, in a funny little place. It's still an equal obstacle to all others as an obstacle.
Yep that's my point! :)
If I'm moving 90 degrees horizontal to it from as far as I can be while it is targeting, moving maximum base speed, it does not dodge.. That is the best dodge you can make at that angle and distance. I cannot move faster, and any other angle only closes the distance faster. You need the grappling hook to dodge it perhaps, but I think it's garbage to need an unlock just to dodge basic enemy attack.
If you're moving while it's targetting or the bullet is far from you, you may be changing the angle to one more favorable for the enemy.
I cannot dodge them with the BASE character was my point. That's ♥♥♥♥♥♥, since EVERY other attack in the game I CAN dodge with the BASE character, no extra tools required.
The actual way I deal with snipers is: break their line of sight before they shoot. No dodging, but instead, break the laser line before they shoot, preventing a dodge. So, there is a strategy to overcome them, it's just annoying in the same way that the red cap bot is annoying. Different from every other established obstacle.
Edit: also slide is ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ garbage for me. HALF the time I press the button I get NO slide or crouch at all, it's a huge pain in my ass. And it's not the button itself, because it works 100% of the time in all other context. Worse! Soooo many times I'm standing still and just want to crouch?! *slides backwards all of a sudden* UGH
Edit: Like for real I have NEVER been able to dodge ANY sniper shot EVER, no matter what my angle is with base speed. No matter the distance to or from the sniper, no matter their elevation compared to mine, IF that ♥♥♥♥♥♥ shoots, it IS going to hit me. That's why I have learned to just *prevent* them shooting as the solution to them. It's ridiculous. The only time "dodge" starts to work is when you have bonus speed. And when you DO have bonus speed, 90 degrees is the first place you start surviving.