The Gamer's Quarter

[aderack]

Does anyone have any experience with these? Can you tell me any good ones, and reasons why they're good?

Are there any that don't have "Tom Clancy" in the title? Or, better, that aren't first/third-person shooters?

Has anyone played that Resident Evil online game?
_________________

[Shapermc]

Worms?

There's not much outside of the first person perspective. Shadowrun is intended to be team/squad based game, and it works really well if you play it like that. There will of course be Team Fortress 2 starting tomorrow.

I assume that you're looking for something that isn't an MMO, because most are based around squad based gameplay.
_________________
“The average man has a secret desire to be a swaggering, drunken, fighting, raping swashbuckler.”
-Robert E. Howard in a letter to a friend circa Decmber 1932

"There is no place in this enterprise for a rogue physicist!"

[aderack]

Worms isn't co-op, is it?

Team Fortress 2. Okay, yeah. I feel dumb. Of course, I have no actual money. But. Yeah. Good point there.

Surely someone must have played Resident Evil Outbreak? It sounds so interesting!
_________________

[The Great Unwashed]

F.E.A.R. Multiplayer is some of the best squad-based FPS action I have ever played. I know you weren't after FPS' particularly, but it is a beautifully crafted piece of work and I encourage you to check it out with some mates at a LAN if you get the chance - and after all, it's free.
_________________

[Shapermc]

[aderack]

How does that work, exactly? I'm not too familiar with FEAR. How is the squad business organized?
_________________

[aderack]

[Ethoscapade]

worms can be co-op; when setting up a multiplayer game, you assign each player's team a different color, and if you assign two people the same colors (exactly like smash bros., now that i think of it) then they are on the same team.

it doesn't really lend itself to any kind of co-op play, though.

[Redeye]

Fallout Tactics Multiplayer.

In RT mode this is kind of idiotic, but fun to watch.

Turn Based, it's chess with guns.


Assault, Capture The Flag, and Skirmish maps.


Demo

There are still people out there playing this.

Lotsa Poles and Hispanics
_________________
I felt sheer anarchic joy when I ran over my first pedestrian.

[parkbench]

Oh my god ENEMY TERRITORY!!

That's more of a "team" than a "squad," but by god if it's not the best team-based FPS I've ever played.

And it's free. It's fucking. FREE!

I can ramble more about it if you'd like. It has two huge flaws that you need to be willing to sift past, however (though I could help steer you right): a mediocre server browser, and a terrible server culture that ends up with most servers loading your computer with tons of unnecessary pk3s which aren't even just custom maps, but custom menu setups and very annoying mods that change the core gameplay without you realizing it.

But I loves it.

Ill get some screens if ya'd like.

[aderack]

Define the distinction between team and squad. Squad being that everyone is more vital?
_________________

[Shapermc]

Squad:

1 : a small organized group of military personnel; especially : a tactical unit that can be easily directed in the field
2 : a small group engaged in a common effort or occupation

Team:

4: a number of persons associated together in work or activity: as a: a group on one side (as in football or a debate)

So, while I know the distinction is going to be vauge, I imagine that squad based is where everyone is very similar where team is going to be a game where there are different roles within a squad and each person plays up to that role.

For example: in Quake Arena everyone is the same and when you're playing team based games you're actually playing as a squad. Team based would be something like Team Fortress 2 where everyone has a different role to play (like football where you have different positions to play).

PERHAPS I ACTUALLY HAVE THIS BACKWARDS?

I don't know. There is a distinction though, even if slight.
_________________
“The average man has a secret desire to be a swaggering, drunken, fighting, raping swashbuckler.”
-Robert E. Howard in a letter to a friend circa Decmber 1932

"There is no place in this enterprise for a rogue physicist!"

[aderack]

I was thinking maybe a squad is where everyone is focused on one discrete mission, and has to work together as a single functioning unit. If someone fails, to some extent everyone does. Does that sound right at all?
_________________

[Harveyjames]

I'd say it sounds a bit like a squad could be defined as a group of subservient people all following the orders of a seperate commanding entity, while 'teams' are more democratic affairs where every member is important and equally 'in charge'.

google image search to the rescue:

SQUAD



TEAM



As I see it, teams are the sum of the various abilities of the individuals comprising it, but there is no room for individuality in a squad.

EDIT: Oh wait that's exactly what Shaper said.

[silentmatt]

So, the hypothetical Go! Squad would be much less entertaining then?
_________________
PSN: Twitch_City ||| Wii: 8083 5371 5767 6700
"Jadis, si je me souviens bien, ma vie était un festin où s'ouvraient tous les coeurs, où tous les vins coulaient."

[Harveyjames]

They'd sort of just all rap at the same time, then all play the harmonica at the same time, then all play guitar at the same time. It'd be neat if nothing else!

[SuperWes]

I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest Halo in a Capture the Flag gametype?

I suppose that's more Team and less Squad though in that you get to respawn quickly if you die. Personally, I prefer being able to respawn.

-Wes
_________________

[Harveyjames]

I used to freaking love the team vs. team mode in Action Quake 2. The unique, quiet pace of the game was like nothing else I'd played and the whole thing was put together with a wicked sense of humour (motherfucking KARATE KICKS??). Reservoir Dogs vs. Swat in the Museum level was bliss.

Everyone kind of graduated to Counterstrike after that, which was a shame because I never had as much fun with CS as I did with AQ.

[aderack]

So how exactly does Counterstrike work, anyway? At least in theory, if you remove the kind of people who seem to play it all the time? I've managed to avoid this whole area of life.
_________________

[seryogin]

it's impossible to speak about Counter Strike in theory. You can't separate it from the people that actually play it.

Thinking over it now, I'd say that if everyone actually played Counter Strike the way it was meant to be played, then everyone would divide into small groups attempt to accomplish their objectives (setting bombs if you're playing terrorists, preventing bomb-setting if playing couter-terrorists) while communicating to ensure the most effective coordination of efforts.

This doesn't happen for the most part.

I'd say the best squad-based multi-player game, from my view anyway, has been Day of Defeat, which is a Counter Strike mod. It takes place in WWII Western Front and it has a good weapon balance that allows for a lot of teamwork. A lot people still play it like Counter Strike, though this doesn't work as well there. The players that the game usually draws are those that are somewhat concerned about historical accuracy. The maps reflect this and discourage the type of sneaky gloating that Counter Strike promotes.
_________________

[Ethoscapade]

i played counterstrike for an hour once.

i ascertained that what makes it good is the fact that you do not respawn. it's "round" based; your whole team starts in one area, you go meet the other team, and you all die slowly until one team wins.

this is entirely unique in my experience.

[aderack]

[Swimmy]

[Harveyjames]

[seryogin]

[Redeye]

Has anyone here played Tribes?

Apparently it can be good if Counterstrikification can be avoided.
_________________
I felt sheer anarchic joy when I ran over my first pedestrian.

[Redeye]

[Harveyjames]

[aderack]

[Cycle]

Tribes 2 was awesome, yes.
_________________

[Shapermc]

[silentmatt]

Warhawk is less "team" or "squad" though.... Yes, it is blue team vs. red team, but there are so many people and things going on that, on most servers, you don't really play as a tight-knit squad, really.

It is more just everyone rushing forward and killing anything not their color.

That being said, CTF rounds and even some zone control, if you are playing with friends/people with mics, do show much better teamwork than straight up deathmatch rounds.

I'd liken Warhawk to the online component of, say, Starwars Battlefront.

Don't get me wrong - it is still damn fun, but without the intricacies of the other titles you mention.
_________________
PSN: Twitch_City ||| Wii: 8083 5371 5767 6700
"Jadis, si je me souviens bien, ma vie était un festin où s'ouvraient tous les coeurs, où tous les vins coulaient."

[sediment]

I seem to recall team vs team deathmatch in Rise of the Triad?
_________________

[parkbench]

Pro games of CS--which are smaller--tend to lean more towards the 'squad' side of things, as it does rely on you being a tight team.

The problem with judging it the way we are is that we're talking about pub play, which is inherently irregular--people dropping in and out as the rounds go on. For this reason there's very little incentive to form a concrete team or strategy. I have found, however, over the years, that there [is a certain way to go about it. If you show yourself to be a skillful or knowledgeable player, you can sort of assert yourself as a de facto team leader and kind of push the team certain directions.

In CS this could amount to sending people different directions or having them follow you certain ways, but in ET this works out very nicely. As an avid player, when I used to play a lot I would know how most of the maps worked, and really, a lot of the time the reason a game would be lost or would just be unfulfilling would be because there was no organization; people lost sight of the objectives and just spent time getting caught in "deathmatch zones" and such. When a player--such as I (heh)--would come in and kind of whip everybody into an alert state and kind of coordinate some strategy, the game would start flowing a lot better, and we ceased to resemble a team: we became a squad. A squad with sub-squads, if you will (esp. in a game like ET). This also forced the other team to react similarly or lose. You'll find this in other complex team-based FPSes like Natural Selection, which can also easily become aimless without a sense of purpoe or leadership.

I've never gone pro myself, but I have friends who have. I'll talk to them a little bit, but I'd be interested to hear pro experiences. It's so vastly different. Playing on pub servers is like spelunking into some unknown cavern pretty much every time (until you start playing on a server with a pretty consistent community).

[Shapermc]

[aderack]

That whole issue of command, and its effects: that is really and truly fascinating. Can you go into more detail?
_________________

[Cycle]

I had lots of fun playing RtCW multiplayer, which was team-based. It also has one of the best team maps in any game, ever, which was also the one I pretty much exclusively played.

I was an awesome medic.

Shrub mod made it even better.

When my friends and I made a server, we changed it so you only have a single life. This made my job as a medic very important and made team-play incredibly important, it was great.
_________________

[Pink Teddy Bear]

Operation Flashpoint and Armed Assault?

[parkbench]

Well, aderack, the interesting thing is that since you are not a "real" commander, you have to coerce your team to do what you want more than order them, at least at first. When the team is dying every round in CS, for example, you might throw out an...emphatic suggestion, shall we say, that people should split up or rush a certain hallway. If the technique works, as i said the team then gains that much more of your trust.

In ET, which is more objective-based the strategies go beyond just methods of killing, they are methods of execution (of a task). And so because they are complex you need people to listen to you. It's just the urgency of the moment, I think. If you're playing on...Seawall let's say, and there's 8 minutes left (not a whole lot in terms of the overall map time), and your team is just walking into a deathtrap over and over again...you can use that sense of hopelessness/urgency to rouse the team. Especially with statements of encouragement. "Come on guys--8 minutes left, we can do this." "Somebody come with me to the back route, I need an engi and a field op to cover. We can break in through the back door." Stuff like that. People do get caught in that trance where they're just in the fray and are purposeless, so if you give them a purpose they might just listen. And like I said--showing that you're a 'worthy' player certainly helps. As a medic, I can usually gain peoples' favor by keeping them in tip-top shape, for example. It's inherently an 'altruistic' role (unless you're a rambo combat medic o_O).

I donno if that helped.

[Intentionally Wrong]

I'm surprised there's been no mention whatsoever of Gears of War. I guess it isn't necessarily any more team- or squad-based than any other multiplayer game in which there are teams; for some reason the very low game size called this to mind.

In the developer commentary for Team Fortress 2, they talk about how for a long time, there was a "Commander" class who had more of an RTS role during games--directing the attacks of his team, designing battlefield structures, etc. Apparently it was too difficult to maintain a balance between the Commander being important to victory and everyone else having fun. Normally, if you have one weak player on your team, it slightly reduces your team's overall effectiveness but the rest of you can compensate with a little coordination. The Commander undermined that too much.

[dark steve]

Yeah, the chief problem to get around with online team-based games is the necessity for ad hoc leadership and coordination when you're with 7 other random players; when I used to play Myth 2 online, in a team game one player would be assigned to be the leader at random. The leader's job was to select which troops to bring onto a particular map using a point system, then assign them to the other players once it began. If this position fell into the hands of an inexperienced player, well, you can sort of imagine what would happen and how everyone else would react. It reached the point where, in most cases, there was a "typical" loadout of units for a particular map you'd be expected to know and players would just be bullied into selecting it, then divvying up the most valuable units to the highest ranked player, then to the next highest ranked player after him, and so on. This worked pretty well overall in terms of getting players to accept their roles and at least try to coordinate, though he only times I ever saw a lot of real leading and large-scale, intricate teamwork was when a particularly highly-ranked player would come into a game and browbeat everyone else into listening to him (this is not necessarily a bad system–to get the best rank (not counting special ranks for the top ten players overall), you have to be in the top 10%, in terms of win-losses, of all the registered online players, meaning you're among the most experienced with the game and pretty much know how to win at it. It also helped that the ranking system was rigged into a way that forced players to be prolific at all the different types of games (ctf, team vs, free for all, etc etc.) or stand the risk of having your status drop sharply during monthly resets).

The other way players address this problem themselves is forming clans. On the one hand, you know that everyone on your team is going to know what's up and there'll probably be a clear hierarchy to follow. On the other hand, you have to be in a clan, which is going to be run by hardcore players who may or may not have control issues (I remember watching a roommate "apply" to be in a FFXI group where he had to write up pages of stuff about his character and why he wanted to join, do "tryouts" where they certify you're not a total muppet, etc. etc; it's not hard to imagine how petty and weird this probably gets).
_________________

[aderack]

"ET" is Quake: Enemy Territories?
_________________

[dark steve]

I think people are mostly talking about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfenstein:_Enemy_Territory, although Quake Wars is from the same developer and looks like a scaled up version of the same game.
_________________

[parkbench]

I haven't played much of Quake Wars, though I've heard good things. I'm talking about classic ET :E

Also, games with built-in commander features are an interesting permutation. In this case, it is still a pub server with random players and unreliable skill base, but because there's a definitive position of leadership, as x said, it's easy for it to become a point of contention for the whole team. Again, a good leader will rally the team together. Though in NS I've seen people get pissed off really quickly. The game is complex enough and long enough that a bad commander can make what is essentially anywhere from a 20 minute to hour long experience very unenjoyable.

Clans are a way to counteract this, and another way to curry favor in pub games. I've never been part of a serious clan, only de facto and informal clans with my friends which just serve as "groups" really, and if three or four of us show skill in a particular server, then the team will learn to trust that clan's name (and the enemy team will learn to fear it ). So...yah.

[Shapermc]

[aderack]

So. Enemy Territory is free, is it.

Curious.

Are there any upgrades a person would need?
_________________

[Pink Teddy Bear]

So I'm thinking we should all play some Enemy Territory right?

[Shapermc]

PC not strong enough
_________________
“The average man has a secret desire to be a swaggering, drunken, fighting, raping swashbuckler.”
-Robert E. Howard in a letter to a friend circa Decmber 1932

"There is no place in this enterprise for a rogue physicist!"

[parkbench]

What, it's the quake 3 engine shaper.

My school is currently blocking ALL PORTZ. So I hope by the time we get around to this that changes No internet games for me (tf2 piles up dust in the corner...)

[aderack]

I have it here! I plan to install it, and to be curious. If anyone else is interested, that will maybe make it better than playing with weird people!
_________________