|
SuccinctAndPunchy posted:no it's completely true Again, you are only looking at HP totals and ignoring literally everything else including the fact that shooting zombies limbs will cause those limbs to detach and that critical headshot death can be a very significant (if random) factor.
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 03:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 18:15 |
|
|
ImpAtom posted:Again, you are only looking at HP totals and ignoring literally everything else including the fact that shooting zombies limbs will cause those limbs to detach and that critical headshot death can be a very significant (if random) factor. whether or not limbs snap is random and can sometimes also suffer from the "why does this sometimes take eight million shots" problem because some zombies are arbitrarily more resistant to it than others in a fashion that's imperceptible unless you're like me and dug through all the fuckin numbers
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 03:03
|
|
|
SuccinctAndPunchy posted:whether or not limbs snap is random So, let me understand this 100% correct. You are saying if someone shoots a zombies arm, their leg will fall off? Because I've looked at the health data too and if that is what you're saying you're 100% bullshitting.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 03:03
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:So, let me understand this 100% correct. no I'm saying it might take 1 bullet or it might take like 12 because that whole system is entirely independent of the health pools and still isn't very choosy about specifically where you hit like you can hit the head and you'll reduce the "stagger" counter and then you can hit the leg and that counts for limb breakage as far as that whole math thing is concerned. poo poo's wack.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 03:04
|
|
|
I had pretty consistent results with legs. Three shots of the Matilda would destroy a leg, and this was the case essentially every time I tried. Claire's weapons seemed to be a bit more variable but that's either because they're slightly weaker or because I never got used to them with the juggling.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 03:05
|
|
|
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Fjw1UQsUn4FsKjff4Xc5FaGYmJiVvFQFi5nt5sOEfOg/edit?usp=drivesdk I don't know if there's better data out there somewhere, but according to this zombies and other enemies do take locational damage.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 03:06
|
|
|
Just shoot them in the head with a handgun for the crit chance. You save a heap of ammo and the zombie is perma dead. Honestly I can't understand how you could end up at the end of the game with barely any ammo. And RE0 was great.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 03:06
|
|
|
SuccinctAndPunchy posted:no I'm saying it might take 1 bullet or it might take like 12 because that whole system is entirely independent of the health pools and still isn't very choosy about specifically where you hit I'm completely lost as to what your argument is here at this point. You're saying locational damage doesn't matter (when it does) and then when that is pointed out it just retreat back to the HP totals. Unless you're looking at different numbers then I've seen, enemies do take different damage to their HP totals to different body parts in addition to the body parts themselves breaking. If you have something that says differently perhaps you could link it because at this point you seem to be saying something different from everyone else I've seen.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 03:06
|
|
|
Momomo posted:I had pretty consistent results with legs. Three shots of the Matilda would destroy a leg, and this was the case essentially every time I tried. Claire's weapons seemed to be a bit more variable but that's either because they're slightly weaker or because I never got used to them with the juggling. That's nice, but that system is (mostly within given parameters) random. Might take like 10 if you roll poo poo. everyone seems to have their own pet theory about the combat of this game and most of them aren't correct, and it's not like I blame people since the game goes to great pains to confuse its true nature since it's actually extremely straightforward but wants to seem more complicated than it is
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 03:08
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:I'm completely lost as to what your argument is here at this point. You're saying locational damage doesn't matter (when it does) and then when that is pointed out it just retreat back to the HP totals. Locational damage only matters when the game feels like it. It also deliberately obscures this fact pretty hard, which judging from this thread seems to be pretty effective.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 03:08
|
|
|
SuccinctAndPunchy posted:Locational damage only matters when the game feels like it. Okay. Please provide actual context for this and not "I'm saying this and I'm right." Like you seem utterly sure. Please provide the data mining info you found that shows "location damage is completely random and never matters"
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 03:10
|
|
|
if anyone cares, Capcom has relaunched their merch store. Right now they're only selling Monster Hunter merch + all their other games but hopefully we get some good RE stuff soon.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 03:12
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:Okay. Please provide actual context for this and not "I'm saying this and I'm right." Zombies have a number that determines whether or not you'll pop a limb off but where that number actually starts is randomly determined (but it tends to start less forgiving if your dynamic difficulty is peaking) and depending on the zombie's base HP you might just kill it before any sort of "locational" damage really matters since where you shoot doesn't change the raw HP damage any. but it's not like you have any way of knowing which zombies are gonna do this or when it's gonna happen so you might as well just always shoot the leg but you're gonna get totally different results somewhat arbitrarily Unless you're doing a speedrun then the hot play is always just to hope they randomly stagger in 1 or 2 hits and fuckin leg it lol I don't know how to prove that to you necessarily. There's a tool out there that lets you see things like dynamic difficulty and zombie HP values and stuff on the fly while playing and screwing around with that lets you see these things in action. I don't think it shows stagger counter though. That'd probably make it a bit too easy, I guess. Like sure, targeting the leg is a more consistent strategy than aiming at the head in the sense that you will always eventually pop the leg as opposed to going for a crit headshot which the game may very well just never give you so I guess you could say it "matters" but nobody would figure that out for absolute certain unless they were told the numbers behind it and it's only consistent in the sense of it being less random than crit headshots, but it's still wildly inconsistent. In essence, locational damage only matters in three ways, one of which is mathematically worse than the others and this is not really a "choice" that will ever occur to the player since the game misleads the player so heavily as to how the combat works. Either you know a zombie has low health, so you can just burst it down with bodyshots, you don't know and you're feeling lucky so you go with hoping for a critical headshot (this is a gamble that you will very often lose) or you don't know and you want to make it an easy target so you attempt to pop the leg off, which may or may not go well for you depending on what counter you rolled. This is only a "choice" if you have literally perfect information and the average player absolutely doesn't and hell even most advanced players don't, which means most people aren't really making choices about the combat so much as attempting combat and having a semi-random number partially informed by how well the game thinks the player is doing (i.e dynamic difficulty) attempt to push them back towards a baseline of resources. It's....opaque, to say the least. RE4 kinda operated the same way but not to such a batshit extent. SuccinctAndPunchy fucked around with this message at 03:35 on Feb 10, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 03:17
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:Okay. Please provide actual context for this and not "I'm saying this and I'm right." Or similar for when you're replaying an area and a zombie decides "Today, my kneecap will sustain 10+ handgun rounds before I even fall over (and 6 before I even flinch)" rather than your past experience of revoking their shin privileges with 4 wild unfocused crosshair shots. Section Z fucked around with this message at 03:35 on Feb 10, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 03:32
|
|
|
Phobos Anomaly posted:And RE0 was great. There's some bad opinions on these forums but god drat. In other news, I'm working on my Leon A Hardcore run to get S+, everything was going swimmingly until an Ivy grabs me right at the end and I don't have a defense item so I'm hosed. Now I'm back right before the Birkin 2 fight and of course, rather than going through it in one shot I keep dying because the fight is RNG bullshit, but he seemingly can combo you in two hits, something I've never seen before. I hate this dumb fight, his massive whirlwind attacks on a 2x2 foot platform is just stupid.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 03:32
|
|
|
But what about on hardcore that doesn't have difficulty scaling.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 03:34
|
|
|
s.i.r.e. posted:There's some bad opinions on these forums but god drat. He can absolutely do a guaranteed two hit combo if you get knocked down that will kill you instantly if you don't spam the inventory button and heal as soon as possible. It's the worst fight in the game
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 03:35
|
|
|
In Training posted:But what about on hardcore that doesn't have difficulty scaling. Staggers are still random, limb explosion also random. Your outgoing damage is consistent, at least! This is actually the same sort of reason the majority of Resident Evil 4 speedrunners prefer Professional mode. The dynamic difficulty is capped at its highest value, which prevents it from loving with things in a really abstract manner.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 03:36
|
|
|
In Training posted:But what about on hardcore that doesn't have difficulty scaling. It actually does, but it starts at the top and can only go down. A little.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 03:37
|
|
|
I went from hating Claire's SAA to loving it since you can fan 3 shots into a zombie's legs and guarantee a stagger.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 03:41
|
|
|
Section Z posted:wild unfocused crosshair shots. incidentally crosshair focus only affects damage, it has no particular bearing on whether or not you critical or stagger something
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 03:42
|
|
|
Even the toughest zombies' legs seem to consistently come off in 3-4 shots for me. I think the amount it takes to actually kill them varies, but limbs come off consistently.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 03:44
|
|
|
SuccinctAndPunchy posted:Zombies have a number that determines whether or not you'll pop a limb off but where that number actually starts is randomly determined (but it tends to start less forgiving if your dynamic difficulty is peaking) and depending on the zombie's base HP you might just kill it before any sort of "locational" damage really matters since where you shoot doesn't change the raw HP damage any. What you're saying here is very different than 'locational damage doesn't matter.' It's possible for a zombie's HP pool to outlast their limbs, yes, especially with lower-HP zombies. That doesn't make the choice of where to shoot less meaningful. There are a lot of random factors in the game but those random factors still can be influenced in certain directions. That might be annoying from the perspective of a speedrunner but in terms of general game design it isn't the same as having no agency. SuccinctAndPunchy posted:Like sure, targeting the leg is a more consistent strategy than aiming at the head in the sense that you will always eventually pop the leg as opposed to going for a crit headshot which the game may very well just never give you so I guess you could say it "matters" but nobody would figure that out for absolute certain unless they were told the numbers behind it and it's only consistent in the sense of it being less random than crit headshots, but it's still wildly inconsistent. A major factor in RE2's design is asking the players when they want to spend ammunition. The randomness in zombie HP is actually a factor in that because it asks them to make a choice and throws in the potential risk of it being more costly than they can anticipate (with crits offering the 'it can be cheaper than the expected" bit too.) If you knew reliably that zombies dropped in (x) hits then that element would be lost and it is almost entirely what the combat system is designed around, with pretty much every enemy that isn't a boss (and even some of those) being about the risk vs reward factor. The agency in a player's choice is to figure out when and where they want to spend resources and how many resources are too much. The dynamic difficulty attempts to keep that element in play even for more skilled players. Intentional inconsistency is important because almost every enemy in the game is designed with a no-resource-but-high-risk solution. (Which is, yes, usually running.) With zombies this is played up the fact that locational damage does matter and if anything it is communicated *more* clearly to the average player through visual feedback. I think you're probably looking at this so much from a speedrunning perspective that it kind of eclipses how the game is designed, especially for people not looking at hard numbers for every action. A lot of people do find RE2 scary and it's totally cool if you don't, but the game is designed to try to emphasize that sense of uncertainty and the risk of expending resources. (Especially on a first playthrough.) I actually felt the game had too many resources on my first playthrough and thought that would be the general opinion but I've been watching LPs since then and it makes it clear to me why a lot of the stuff is designed the way it is. Most people don't play the game optimally and instead focus on the quick-and-natural decisions and the game is designed heavily around those not only from a "they can finish it" perspective but from communicating things in a way people pick up on. ImpAtom fucked around with this message at 03:47 on Feb 10, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 03:45
|
|
|
If localized damage wasn’t a thing HUNK would be impossible as delimbing is the most efficient route I’ve discovered. Aim for a kneecap and that leg is gone, this doesn’t apply to handguns but who cares.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 03:50
|
|
|
I hope if they ever make Remake 3 that they script in a poo poo load of possible Nemesis encounters but only give each a very small percentage chance of occurring so every game is a mystery for when and where he shows up. It would help keep the tension up for multiple playthroughs and also screw with speed runners which is always a bonus.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 03:50
|
|
|
Night10194 posted:Even the toughest zombies' legs seem to consistently come off in 3-4 shots for me. I think the amount it takes to actually kill them varies, but limbs come off consistently. They don't. Like, i wish that was true but it's not There are certain dumb out of bounds glitches that require you to get bit by a crawling zombie in a very particular way (never mind that part, this is just how I know this) and successfully blowing off a limb even with the dynamic difficulty completely unchanged varies wildly on the same zombies from attempt to attempt. The current record blows the leg off the first zombie needed for this in a single blow. A random run, two shots to the left leg did jack poo poo, but the first shot to the right leg triggered it, because the first two shots decreased the counter to the point where the next limb shot was gonna break the limb even if he hit the arm or something, since it's not actually limb specific. For context, I don't speedrun this game and I don't have any particular interest in doing so, i found all of this plenty annoying on a normal ordinary playthrough. Just, the speedrunning lens is how you find out the nitty gritty of this sort of thing, since they live or die on this stuff. SuccinctAndPunchy fucked around with this message at 03:52 on Feb 10, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 03:50
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:What you're saying here is very different than 'locational damage doesn't matter.' It's possible for a zombie's HP pool to outlast their limbs, yes, especially with lower-HP zombies. That doesn't make the choice of where to shoot less meaningful. There are a lot of random factors in the game but those random factors still can be influenced in certain directions. That might be annoying from the perspective of a speedrunner but in terms of general game design it isn't the same as having no agency. It's similar since your choices don't actually matter to the extent that you are led to think they do. ImpAtom posted:The agency in a player's choice is to figure out when and where they want to spend resources and how many resources are too much. The dynamic difficulty attempts to keep that element in play even for more skilled players. Intentional inconsistency is important because almost every enemy in the game is designed with a no-resource-but-high-risk solution. (Which is, yes, usually running.) With zombies this is played up the fact that locational damage does matter and if anything it is communicated *more* clearly to the average player through visual feedback. It is difficult for the player to have agency when you can't even vaguely predict how combat will play out. Also, the visual feedback lies to you, that's why everyone seems to have their own pet theories about how the combat works and the majority of them are off-base since it's mostly just random numbers happening. I get why the systems exist, I just don't think they work well in achieving their intended purpose. Although, given how many people I've seen who never caught on, maybe it is effective? SuccinctAndPunchy fucked around with this message at 03:57 on Feb 10, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 03:55
|
|
|
You can predict pretty easily. If you shoot it in the leg it’s leg will eventually come off, this always works.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 03:57
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:You can predict pretty easily. eventually is quite the operative term in a game with limited resources especially when you get those super zombies who don't even stagger and grab you through a hail of gunfire lol
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 03:58
|
|
|
I mean who cares that doesn’t matter. The only important part is where you shoot matters how many shots really doesn’t.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 04:01
|
|
|
SuccinctAndPunchy posted:incidentally crosshair focus only affects damage, it has no particular bearing on whether or not you critical or stagger something In my experience it does. Massively.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 04:02
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:I mean who cares that doesn’t matter. The only important part is where you shoot matters how many shots really doesn’t. ???????? unless you're playing with infinite ammo it totally does
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 04:02
|
|
|
Phobos Anomaly posted:In my experience it does. Massively. Yeah but it doesn't. this is what I mean when I say everyone has their own pet theory, under the hood, it doesn't do a drat thing. It just increases damage.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 04:03
|
|
|
Who gives a gently caress lol.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 04:03
|
|
|
SuccinctAndPunchy posted:???????? Nah it really doesn’t. Knowing would make the game actively worse.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 04:03
|
|
|
SuccinctAndPunchy posted:It is difficult for the player to have agency when you can't even vaguely predict how combat will play out. This is straight-up untrue in both degrees. There are countless games which rely on random or semi-random numbers. Saying that every single one of them lacks agency is silly. The second part is that no, you can predict how combat will go. You can not predict the exact specific number of shots but "you can't even vaguely predict" is silly and I'm pretty sure you know that. The inconsistency in combat is to encourage the decision "should I fight" but if you choose to fight you have a fairly reliable knowledge of how things will go. You can't perhaps reliably predict a speedrun but hey, this isn't the first and presumably won't be the last where random factors influence a speedrun.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 04:04
|
|
|
It doesn't matter whether a zombie's head explodes in one, three, or a dozen handgun shots, because I'm either going to avoid it entirely, knock it over and run, or pull out something heavier to remove the problem. The handgun isn't meant to be an anti-zombie tool so much as something to disrupt its patterns.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 04:06
|
|
|
In Training posted:Who gives a gently caress lol. Me! I give a gently caress! ImpAtom posted:This is straight-up untrue in both degrees. There are countless games which rely on random or semi-random numbers. Saying that every single one of them lacks agency is silly. Of course, but it's the incredibly wide variance that makes it hard to predict. Numbers can be random but not when it swings between such huge ranges. Wanderer posted:It doesn't matter whether a zombie's head explodes in one, three, or a dozen handgun shots, because I'm either going to avoid it entirely, knock it over and run, or pull out something heavier to remove the problem. The handgun isn't meant to be an anti-zombie tool so much as something to disrupt its patterns. This is the only sensible way to treat it once you know how it works, but you first have to realise that and even then it doesn't do that consistently.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 04:08
|
|
|
SuccinctAndPunchy posted:Yeah but it doesn't. Yeah but it does.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 04:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 18:15 |
|
|
SuccinctAndPunchy posted:Me! I give a gently caress! That makes one of us
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 04:12
|
|
