Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
First Person Shooters (Games) Graphics Games

An Early Look At Next-Gen Shooter Bodycount 238

If you ask fans of first-person shooters what feature they'd like to see in a new game, their answers — now and for the past 15 years — probably involve destructible environments. Game developers have tried to satisfy this demand with scripted events, breakable objects, and more crates than you can shake a rocket launcher at. However, Bodycount, an upcoming game from Codemasters Guildford, is aiming to deliver what gamers have wanted for so long: the ability to blast apart whatever you please. Quoting the Guardian's games blog from their hands-on with the game: "... it's not just about effect, it's about access. In Bodycount, you can blow chunks out of thinner interior walls, allowing you to burst through and catch enemies by surprise. You can also brilliantly modify cover objects – if you're hiding behind a crate and want to take out enemies without popping up from behind it, shoot a hole in it. Bingo, you've got a comparatively safe firing vantage. The difference between this and say, Red Faction or Bad Company, is that the destruction isn't limited to pre-set building sections. It's everywhere. This should, of course, grind the processor to a halt, but the team has come up with a simple compromise to facilitate its vision. 'The trick is that we're not running full physics on everything,' explains lead coder, Jon Creighton. ... This is tied in with one of the best cover systems I've ever seen. While in a crouching position (gained by holding the left trigger down), you can use the left analogue stick to subtly look and aim around your cover object, ducking and peeking to gain that perfect view of the war zone. It's natural, it's comfortable and it's adaptive, and it will surely consign the whole 'locking on' mechanic to the graveyard of cover system history."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

An Early Look At Next-Gen Shooter Bodycount

Comments Filter:
  • by Thanshin ( 1188877 ) on Tuesday April 20, 2010 @04:14AM (#31907368)

    I agree, but I'd also like to point out that the technology is ready to give players the separation of vision and aim.

    I want to be able to watch in a direction, run in another and shoot in another one. As running is going to be linked to a hand (as foot controls are cumbersome) and shooting to the other, vision should be linked to head movement.

    What I'm suggesting is: Don't "evolve" to mouse control if you can truly evolve.

  • by Barny ( 103770 ) <> on Tuesday April 20, 2010 @04:37AM (#31907450) Journal

    Wait, uh, how do you line up a target your not looking at?

  • Re:Space Invaders (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Barny ( 103770 ) <> on Tuesday April 20, 2010 @04:40AM (#31907460) Journal

    Not to mention that if a shot from your gun makes a nice hole in an object for you to see through, how many holes in the object can the enemies make? And how many of those holes will proceed with their holiness into you?

  • by thegarbz ( 1787294 ) on Tuesday April 20, 2010 @04:47AM (#31907502)
    Are we actually talking fully destructible this time? Or the "fully destructible" environments of say Crysis? I don't care if I can chop down a tree with a machine gun. If bits of rock don't start getting chipped away as I'm hitting them with a bazooka then it's not a fully destructible environment, and if absolutely everything isn't destructible, then you're stuck with the same mundane limits as all former games regardless of what fancyness has been done with the game engine.
  • Re:Space Invaders (Score:3, Insightful)

    by mdf-flynn ( 1684038 ) on Tuesday April 20, 2010 @05:04AM (#31907568)
    Fry: I still have a trick or two up my sleeve. Watch as I fire upwards through our own shield!
    Bender: [panicked] He's a mad man! A mad man!
  • Paradox? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by B1oodAnge1 ( 1485419 ) on Tuesday April 20, 2010 @05:09AM (#31907594) of first-person shooters... ...can use the left analogue stick...

    Your implication is quite ludicrous, sir.

  • Next Gen, huh (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 20, 2010 @05:29AM (#31907684)

    Next gen for a console, that was developed 5-6.... uh, quite a while ago. Same ol' tricks huh, what to look forward too, a F.O.V of 75 for added difficulty that cant be changed, an AI that stands while your hiding behind a box before returning to original position. 2 graphic settings, translated A B C D control that still appear in pop ups with a description down below and bad/lazy work covered up by bloom with an that Orange tinge these games seam to have. Yet marketed as next generation and ported incomplete to a PC where it gets even worse. So when is the next gen FPS coming where you can shoot yourself in the foot.

  • by L4t3r4lu5 ( 1216702 ) on Tuesday April 20, 2010 @05:41AM (#31907746)
    Console games: Sports, driving games, fighting, button-mashers.
    PC games: RPGs, first person shooters.

    If it ain't on PC, you can take one lost sale away from the "OMG TEH PIEWATS!" statistics, and add it onto "Don't know which platform a game should be developed for" chart.

    I've played FPS games on a PC and a console. If I have to wait 2+ seconds to spin 180 degrees, or the same amount of time lining up the crosshair / ironsight to get a headshot, you've failed in creating a good FPS.
  • Next next gen. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by w0mprat ( 1317953 ) on Tuesday April 20, 2010 @06:13AM (#31907866)
    For me a next gen shooter would be any FPS without... crates.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 20, 2010 @06:48AM (#31907982)

    I can flick the thumb stick and the crosshair lands pretty close to the target. No different than using a mouse. A little step left or right with the left stick and there's the headshot. No different than an adjustment using "A" or "D". The controller feels as natural as a keyboard and mouse.

    Mostly, the reason for this is that the game is developed with the expectation that users are playing on a joypad. All number of compromises extend from that. Along with frame rate and display limitation issues, this serves to limit the scope of the game.

    There is a reason that 99% of console fps can only be played online against other console users. If you mixed PC and console clients the experience would not be enjoyable for either party. Hands up who played Quake 3 online against Dreamcast players.

    I've been playing multiplayer fps since ~1996 and after a long hiatus from games, moved to a console for convenience reasons (time, practicality). Within a few months I found myself with my first new PC in 7 years and back to hopping PC servers. Console fps are a different breed to their PC cousins and while I understand that many enjoy them, I don't like what the console is doing to my favourite genre.

  • by Shadow of Eternity ( 795165 ) on Tuesday April 20, 2010 @07:18AM (#31908100)

    Your eyes have apparently gotten worse as well if you haven't noticed that most modern console shooters are that easy because they're basically doing half the aiming for you.

  • by PopeRatzo ( 965947 ) * on Tuesday April 20, 2010 @07:58AM (#31908270) Journal

    you still won't be able to control your character.

    Nonsense. The reason we can't control our characters in PC gaming is because game manufacturers have figured out that they can cut a corner and port their crappy console games for PC.

    Companies that don't develop specifically for the PC platform are leaving a lot of money on the table, DRM or not. The ones that figure that out are going to make a lot of dough.

    The Half-Life games were not crappy console ports, and they made Valve enough money to start Steam. And Gordon Freeman was not some 2nd-person wooden puppet that I had to use combination techniques to fight with or run with. When I said "jump" he said "how high?". When I said "duck" he ducked. With a crowbar in one hand and his dick in the other he crossed friggin' dimensions to put shit right...

    Sorry, I got carried away there. Anyway as I was saying, somebody's going to figure out that people on PC's want to play games and we've got the hardware to do it. We'll pay for games, too, but you can't fuck us around with console ports and if you treat us like criminals with the always-on DRM, we're going to act like criminals.

  • by Jarik C-Bol ( 894741 ) on Tuesday April 20, 2010 @08:49AM (#31908662)
    nah, you just bind q and e to that function, or some of the dozens of extra buttons on your mouse. thats the thing about PC games, you can make the controls fit your play-style. If something is awkward to do on a console game, chances are, you just have to live with it.
  • by Rennt ( 582550 ) on Tuesday April 20, 2010 @08:49AM (#31908664)
    so did Nethack :P
  • by delinear ( 991444 ) on Tuesday April 20, 2010 @09:27AM (#31909028)
    That's why this kind of aim, while great in theory, usually falls down in practice - the second you run into something you want to destroy and they won't let you, the whole experience feels forced. It's still neat that you can shoot some stuff, but it just feels even more jarring when you find the bits you can't shoot. Fully destructible environments would probably work best in a pure multiplayer game, where you don't need to zone off specific areas and force the player through some predefined tunnel run.
  • by boneclinkz ( 1284458 ) on Tuesday April 20, 2010 @10:14AM (#31909658)
    Absolutely. The problem isn't really with the feature, it's with game design. If you truly embrace this sort of technology, you need to be willing to have a game where the player is free to screw him/herself over. Save often.
  • Left Analog Stick? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by djdevon3 ( 947872 ) on Tuesday April 20, 2010 @10:18AM (#31909716)
    I'm sorry I seem to be missing a left analog stick ON MY PC. I have a much better input device called a MOUSE. Consoles can suck it.
  • Re:Space Invaders (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Reziac ( 43301 ) * on Tuesday April 20, 2010 @11:42AM (#31911106) Homepage Journal

    That's a good point, and shouldn't enemy fire have the same capacity to eventually blast through your cover?? the advantage then becomes who knows where the other guy is, which could go to you or them. Sounds like fun to me :)

  • Re:Space Invaders (Score:4, Insightful)

    by slimjim8094 ( 941042 ) <> on Tuesday April 20, 2010 @03:49PM (#31914622)

    Why does it stop? Probably because some guy set a couple of oil drums on fire, which lit the grassland and started a forest fire.

1 Mole = 007 Secret Agents