It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
avatar
Judicat0r: No, it's not.
It's you that were opinionating based on your likings and tastes.
I don't, I'm referring to facts and technology.
A bullet sponge is just an an HPs container which poses no threat to the player but its own HPs as opposed to enemies capable of more complex behavior than just coming at you and shoot like: take cover and make pot shots, cooperate with other AI entities, act collectively as one entity, adapt to changing conditions and so on.
And that's not debatable, it is just a fact, especially in DooM.
Sooner or later every AI becomes unrefined compared to newer iterations and, as a matter of fact, due to their lack of behavioral branches compared to newer ones, could easily and lazily only be improved by raising their HPs.
And that was my point to begin with: the enemies from that time, the 90s, the early 90s specifically, are just bullet sponges in most cases, because they lack the skills required to look like they are acting credibily, which happened later on, and something you may not like but that is a fact and objectively true.
The enemy AI did get more complex in the later games. I'm not disputing that. But does that necessarily mean better? Who is to say.

But the core of the issue here is obviously our definition of a bullet sponge. A bullet sponge to me is only an enemy, that takes a tediously large amount of time to dispatch with the arsenal the game provides to you, compared to the rest of the enemies. Their time to kill is disproportionately higher than most other enemies.

But that doesn't mean you can't use them effectively in a combat scenario.

And even if we go by your definition, the enemies in Unreal are definitely still not sponges. As you said in your initial post that started this entire discussion, they actively dodge, attack/retreat depending on their HP or sometimes even pre-fire a corner etc. Meaning they don't just walk in your general direction and attack. And all of them besides the mentioned Titan die in a very reasonable time, supposing you hit your shots.
Post edited January 31, 2022 by idbeholdME
avatar
idbeholdME: The enemy AI did get more complex in the later games. I'm not disputing that. But does that necessarily mean better? Who is to say.
Sometimes better AI is not as fun to play against.

It can be sometimes nice to fight a bunch of stupid enemies. Even fighting hundreds of enemies that just run at you, begging to be slaughtered, in a survival scenario can be fun.

An AI that's too good might not be fun. For example, if you play a game like Tic-Tac-Toe against a perfect AI opponent, there's no way to win (and it's easy to write such an AI). Furthermore, chess AI has gotten good enough that, I believe, grandmasters are no longer willing to play against them, as it's no longer fair.

(Incidentally, there's one game I tried, the Knights of the Chalice demo, that could have used a setting to make the AI less intelligent; the developers focused on making an intelligent enemy AI, but by allowing that to be tweaked, they could have added a difficulty setting that isn't just about changing enemy stats.)
Buy copies of E1M1 magazine ;)
avatar
Judicat0r: No, it's not.
It's you that were opinionating based on your likings and tastes.
I don't, I'm referring to facts and technology.
A bullet sponge is just an an HPs container which poses no threat to the player but its own HPs as opposed to enemies capable of more complex behavior than just coming at you and shoot like: take cover and make pot shots, cooperate with other AI entities, act collectively as one entity, adapt to changing conditions and so on.
And that's not debatable, it is just a fact, especially in DooM.
Sooner or later every AI becomes unrefined compared to newer iterations and, as a matter of fact, due to their lack of behavioral branches compared to newer ones, could easily and lazily only be improved by raising their HPs.
And that was my point to begin with: the enemies from that time, the 90s, the early 90s specifically, are just bullet sponges in most cases, because they lack the skills required to look like they are acting credibily, which happened later on, and something you may not like but that is a fact and objectively true.
avatar
idbeholdME: The enemy AI did get more complex in the later games. I'm not disputing that. But does that necessarily mean better? Who is to say.

But the core of the issue here is obviously our definition of a bullet sponge. A bullet sponge to me is only an enemy, that takes a tediously large amount of time to dispatch with the arsenal the game provides to you, compared to the rest of the enemies. Their time to kill is disproportionately higher than most other enemies.

But that doesn't mean you can't use them effectively in a combat scenario.

And even if we go by your definition, the enemies in Unreal are definitely still not sponges. As you said in your initial post that started this entire discussion, they actively dodge, attack/retreat depending on their HP or sometimes even pre-fire a corner etc. Meaning they don't just walk in your general direction and attack. And all of them besides the mentioned Titan die in a very reasonable time, supposing you hit your shots.
avatar
Judicat0r: No, it's not.
It's you that were opinionating based on your likings and tastes.
I don't, I'm referring to facts and technology.
A bullet sponge is just an an HPs container which poses no threat to the player but its own HPs as opposed to enemies capable of more complex behavior than just coming at you and shoot like: take cover and make pot shots, cooperate with other AI entities, act collectively as one entity, adapt to changing conditions and so on.
And that's not debatable, it is just a fact, especially in DooM.
Sooner or later every AI becomes unrefined compared to newer iterations and, as a matter of fact, due to their lack of behavioral branches compared to newer ones, could easily and lazily only be improved by raising their HPs.
And that was my point to begin with: the enemies from that time, the 90s, the early 90s specifically, are just bullet sponges in most cases, because they lack the skills required to look like they are acting credibily, which happened later on, and something you may not like but that is a fact and objectively true.
avatar
idbeholdME: The enemy AI did get more complex in the later games. I'm not disputing that. But does that necessarily mean better? Who is to say.

But the core of the issue here is obviously our definition of a bullet sponge. A bullet sponge to me is only an enemy, that takes a tediously large amount of time to dispatch with the arsenal the game provides to you, compared to the rest of the enemies. Their time to kill is disproportionately higher than most other enemies.

But that doesn't mean you can't use them effectively in a combat scenario.

And even if we go by your definition, the enemies in Unreal are definitely still not sponges. As you said in your initial post that started this entire discussion, they actively dodge, attack/retreat depending on their HP or sometimes even pre-fire a corner etc. Meaning they don't just walk in your general direction and attack. And all of them besides the mentioned Titan die in a very reasonable time, supposing you hit your shots.
My definition... Oh man. Let's leave aside the fact that it's you that keep opinionating (to me..., tediously, reasonable, hate this..., I vastly prefer..., I'll take...).
It's not my definition... a bullet sponge is a common and accepted concept that defines an enemy which has a very high an amount of HPs in relation to it's skills/abilities and to the player's damage output to the point that it can become a threat, there's not much up to debate here and that's been like that for 20 years, if you don't trust me, I mean, you can ask somebody.
About Unreal I think I've been clear but I can go over it again: Unreal enemies have higher than average skills due to a more refined AI (let's call it AI) compared form other gamens from that time. What I blame on the devs is that, because they had to or because of lazyness, they didn't keep on that path but went the easy way for the highest difficulty setting: pump up the HPs, again they didn't have much choice but that strides compared to the good work made up until then.
DooM is from 12/93 Magic Carpet is from 06/94, six months apart from eah other, and the first one pales compared to the second technically: 3D terrain which can morph in real time, textures that can morph in real time according to the landscape, enemies that can dodge fireballs, computer-controlled mages that can use spells, steal your mana, build their castle, more advanced pathnoding, basic physics implementation AND a bunch of bullet sponge enemies but not just those.
avatar
Judicat0r: It's not my definition... a bullet sponge is a common and accepted concept that defines an enemy which has a very high an amount of HPs in relation to it's skills/abilities and to the player's damage output to the point that it can become a threat, there's not much up to debate here and that's been like that for 20 years, if you don't trust me, I mean, you can ask somebody.
You could have a bullet sponge with low HP, if its defense is high enough.

(Thinking of Metal Slimes in Dragon Quest games. Yes, they're not FPS games, but nothing prevents an FPS from having an enemy like that, though without damage numbers, players would not likely notice this.)
avatar
Judicat0r: It's not my definition... a bullet sponge is a common and accepted concept that defines an enemy which has a very high an amount of HPs in relation to it's skills/abilities and to the player's damage output to the point that it can become a threat, there's not much up to debate here and that's been like that for 20 years, if you don't trust me, I mean, you can ask somebody.
avatar
dtgreene: You could have a bullet sponge with low HP, if its defense is high enough.

(Thinking of Metal Slimes in Dragon Quest games. Yes, they're not FPS games, but nothing prevents an FPS from having an enemy like that, though without damage numbers, players would not likely notice this.)
Define "defense", please.
avatar
dtgreene: You could have a bullet sponge with low HP, if its defense is high enough.

(Thinking of Metal Slimes in Dragon Quest games. Yes, they're not FPS games, but nothing prevents an FPS from having an enemy like that, though without damage numbers, players would not likely notice this.)
avatar
Judicat0r: Define "defense", please.
Defense is a stat that reduces the damage received by the character. A high defense character takes less damage from the same attack as a low defense one.

In the case of DQ's Metal Slimes, the enemy's defense is so high that a non-critical hit only has a 50% chance of doing any damage, and even then, it's only 1 point. With that said, their HP is low enough (3-4 for a plain metal slime) that it's feasible to kill one without a crit, as long as it doesn't run away.

(Where defense starts to get interesting is when different attack types aren't affected to the same degree. For example, an enemy might have different defense against different types of attacks, meaning the player has to switch weapons to effectively deal with different types of enemies. I wouldn't expect a flamethrower to be the best choice against a creature made of fire, but it would work well on something made of wood (like a plant creature) or ice.)
low rated
Welcome to AAA gaming post-2020. Games aren't meant to be played any more, they are meant to be watched (as is evident from their design).

And for that, you can ultimately blame modern gamers/casuals, who continue to throw their money after buying the same tripe year after year (often pre-ordering them, before they have even had a chance to assess the quality).
Post edited February 02, 2022 by Time4Tea
avatar
Judicat0r: Define "defense", please.
avatar
dtgreene: Defense is a stat that reduces the damage received by the character. A high defense character takes less damage from the same attack as a low defense one.

In the case of DQ's Metal Slimes, the enemy's defense is so high that a non-critical hit only has a 50% chance of doing any damage, and even then, it's only 1 point. With that said, their HP is low enough (3-4 for a plain metal slime) that it's feasible to kill one without a crit, as long as it doesn't run away.

(Where defense starts to get interesting is when different attack types aren't affected to the same degree. For example, an enemy might have different defense against different types of attacks, meaning the player has to switch weapons to effectively deal with different types of enemies. I wouldn't expect a flamethrower to be the best choice against a creature made of fire, but it would work well on something made of wood (like a plant creature) or ice.)
As long as it impacts how health is affected by the damage output of the player in relation to the damage output of the enemy and its skills, yes, I would guess so.
My observation about bullet spopnginess of enemies in early games was about FPS, as is the topic, RPGs are not exactly in topic and not my thing especially if they don't have a first person POV and/or can't be modded to it, are fantasy-set and few other things I can't stand about some of them.
avatar
Time4Tea: Welcome to AAA gaming post-2020. Games aren't meant to be played any more, they are meant to be watched (as is evident from their design).

And for that, you can ultimately blame modern gamers/casuals, who continue to throw their money after buying the same tripe year after year (often pre-ordering them, before they have even had a chance to assess the quality).
first game ive seen this is starcraft 2 , that game is not fun to play , it is way too micro intensive

I hate how these fake gamers ruin the market with their emotional buying games after seeing their fav streamer lulz on it , start it play about 1 hr then write a positive review of 4-5 words max , and never play it again
avatar
Orkhepaj: I hate how these fake gamers ruin the market with their emotional buying games after seeing their fav streamer lulz on it , start it play about 1 hr then write a positive review of 4-5 words max , and never play it again
I get the impression that there's really no such thing as a "fake gamer".
low rated
avatar
Orkhepaj: I hate how these fake gamers ruin the market with their emotional buying games after seeing their fav streamer lulz on it , start it play about 1 hr then write a positive review of 4-5 words max , and never play it again
avatar
dtgreene: I get the impression that there's really no such thing as a "fake gamer".
there are so many fake gamers , like those mobile "gamers"
or those game journos , hating on true gamers nonstop and lying in every one of their paid to shill reviews
some even whine when the tutorial is too hard for them :O
Post edited February 03, 2022 by Orkhepaj
avatar
dtgreene: I get the impression that there's really no such thing as a "fake gamer".
avatar
Orkhepaj: there are so many fake gamers , like those mobile "gamers"
or those game journos , hating on true gamers nonstop and lying in every one of their paid to shill reviews
some even whine when the tutorial is too hard for them :O
Mobile games are real games, and the people who play them are real gamers, even if they might not fit the stereotype.

Also, game journalists are gamers, even if they may not be as good as some of the more hardcore gamers (and there's the possibility of game journalists who are also hardcore). (Of course, that begs the question of what "hardcore" means, and I don't think it's fair to try to answer that.)
avatar
Orkhepaj: there are so many fake gamers , like those mobile "gamers"
or those game journos , hating on true gamers nonstop and lying in every one of their paid to shill reviews
some even whine when the tutorial is too hard for them :O
avatar
dtgreene: Mobile games are real games, and the people who play them are real gamers, even if they might not fit the stereotype.

Also, game journalists are gamers, even if they may not be as good as some of the more hardcore gamers (and there's the possibility of game journalists who are also hardcore). (Of course, that begs the question of what "hardcore" means, and I don't think it's fair to try to answer that.)
nah
why would they be real gamers? when they only click those micro infested scam garbage ?
avatar
dtgreene: Mobile games are real games, and the people who play them are real gamers, even if they might not fit the stereotype.

Also, game journalists are gamers, even if they may not be as good as some of the more hardcore gamers (and there's the possibility of game journalists who are also hardcore). (Of course, that begs the question of what "hardcore" means, and I don't think it's fair to try to answer that.)
avatar
Orkhepaj: nah
why would they be real gamers? when they only click those micro infested scam garbage ?
Why would they be real gamers, when they only go "pew pew" those gun-infested scam garbage?

Why would they be real gamers, when all they do is "get good" to clear that bonfire-infested scam garbage?

I could adapt this to any other genre. (OK, maybe the "bonfire-infested scam garbage" is a bit contrived, but you get the point.)