DescentBB

As I'm sure many here will agree, Descent is better than most conventional FPS's

I was wondering why it is that way, and came up with one possibility:
Normal FPS's are based primarily on reflexes. Who can notice the enemy fastest, and still be accurate enough to hit him. This means that a person who hasn't developed those reflexes has very little chance against anyone, no matter what weapon they have.
But with Descent, it's out-thinking your opponent. You have to predict where your enemy is going to be, both in dog-fights and tunnel-ratting. As a result, once you know how to fly your ship, it's not about physical skills with a keyboard/mouse/joystick, but about how well you can guess where your enemy is going to be. (and also not be where your enemy thinks you will be).

Thoughts?

More or less, but you could make most ground based FPSes pretty close by limiting the player turn speed. Most FPSes are simply point and shoot because the player can turn at infinite speed, where as the ship turn speed in Descent is limited. So basically the limits and restrictions of movement in Descent actually add depth and skill requirements that make it a lot more challenging.

I wouldn't really call it always "better" than more standard twitch based shooters, it is just "different". Which one is better and which one is worse is generally up to personal preference, I like Descent better than other games because I'm a sucker for games with more depth and skill than point and click twitch shooters, but it doesn't mean I don't enjoy twitch shooters anyway.

Also reflexes are still hugely important in Descent, it doesn't do you any good if you can think 2 or 3 moves ahead of your opponent if you can't also physically keep up with them. There were plenty of "thinking ahead" types of Descent players that I was able to reliably crush with nothing more than an in-your-face bum rush assault. Thinking ahead is for situations where you can't just bring a bigger hammer and smash through their defenses.

What Krom said.

Note that the converse of his point applies, too:
* Descent3 also becomes a twitch shooter when mouselook (infinite turn rate) is allowed.
* Ground-pounders sometimes have weapons requiring lots of predictive ability, too. So that's not what sets Descent apart.

Actually towards the end of when I was playing regularly, I wasn't thinking two moves or three moves ahead in a fight, most of the time I wasn't thinking at all. What I was doing was simply hauling around a ridiculously gigantic hammer, with "muscle memory" written all over it, composed of years worth of blood, sweat and tears (and possibly powered by the souls of a few dead puppies/kittens/orphans/imoutos along the way ). And because of that, everything started looking like a nail to me.

Probably why my interest faded.

And I'm pretty sure I wasn't the only one to go through all those phases, in retrospect it was always the journey, not the destination that made it worth playing. Which is why I'm a sucker for deep games that require a lot of effort and skill to advance in, it makes for a longer journey. "Instant Gratification" is just another way to phrase "Instant Boredom".

Foil wrote:* Ground-pounders sometimes have weapons requiring lots of predictive ability, too. So that's not what sets Descent apart.

Which seemed to be the more fun ones to me. Best time I ever had in UT99 was with a rocket launcher with the game speed wound down to 50%.

True, I like multiplayer games best when you have to outthink your opponents -- that's what makes a game fun for me. Maybe that's why I still call myself Fox? Descent definitely has some of that. Interestingly, Shootmania Storm has a lot of that too, and in that case it's more about the weapons being very far from hitscan, rather than turn rate/controls.

But this is also why I hate shaker levels. Krom said it best, you might as well be comparing genital sizes.

I don't know. I still play D2 occasionally. There's just something that draws me back after awhile. I still have a few old games that I play once and awhile because they're.........well fun. I've started on D2XXL because it looks new with all the extra goodies, additions and graphics. Old is new again.

Since I don't play multiplayer, I can't comment on out-thinking other human opponents. Personally, I think Descent is about exploring somewhere new and quick reflexes. Hunt, look, shoot first and fast, survive, or die.

D2X-XL has some really cool stuff as far as single-player is concerned especially - makes it feel like a new game at times Doubly so with Pumo's recent work.

In multi-player, this is true. But the robots in single player are really slow and easy to hit/avoid their shots.

Then you need to stop playing on Trainee.

Honestly, I have to agree that Descent 1 single-player really is a thinking man's game. My first run through it on Insane was not just nostalgic, but also more of a logic puzzle with how to use the strengths and weaknesses of the various weapons. Since that game had such a good weapon balance, it really encouraged this kind of thinking, something that Descent 2 normally doesn't do quite as well on its own unless you add in specific mods or set conditions. I'm currently running through Vertigo on Ace with only ten of the weapons in use (Lasers, Vulcan, Spreadfire, Phoenix, Fusion, Concussion, Homing, Proximity, Smart Missile and Shakers) and it's become more of a question of how to use each of these weapons, especially since most of them are overpowered by the robots in the game.

Descent 2 single player is still my favorite, though, but that's partly because of the focus of certain games. For example, the Enemy Within, my favorite mission, seems to require much more strategy than the Counterstrike campaign, especially with the new cast of more varied, more versatile and more powerful robots. The Descent 1 weapons get (a little) more face time early on and more weapon switching is encouraged later in the game to deal with the stronger robots, so it's not like Counterstrike where I tend to use nothing but the Helix and Gauss.

In D1, even on hotshot it's like a puzzle at times (level 22 XD). And there are hints galore to the solutions if you're looking for the right things. Usually a smart missile lying out in the open is a cue to be smart .
I would imagine on Insane it would play like the turret levels in Portal.
I'm playing through on Ace and I'm already noticing some of this. But dogfights are still possible if you really want them.

It's a space ship against mechanical things so there ain't (almost any) blood there. And lasers & missiles.

Sirius wrote:D2X-XL has some really cool stuff as far as single-player is concerned especially - makes it feel like a new game at times Doubly so with Pumo's recent work.

Especially since I now have the horsepower to crank it up.

I played a small (4 player) game of Quake Live yesterday. It was pretty tense, a kill only every now and then because we were constantly trying to outsmart one another.

I feel games like Quake can often have just as much strategy as Descent, but with a different feel of course since you're a sack of meat... sometimes, and you aren't flying... sometimes. Not so much with today's modern warfare shooters.

Sdfgeoff - I completely agree with what you said (but I must quickly admit I really only have experience with D3 multiplayer) although I'd say the thinking man's game aspect really comes into play during 1v1s. It's like a game of chess: waiting, feinting, leading, luring, predicting all take place. It's full of strategy. My best memories of Descent were 1 on 1 games with players slightly more skilled than me. Krom's point about muscle memory I think applies more to games with more players.

single game in Descent is pleasant to me much more, than in any FPS