[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru / zine ]

/games/ - Games

Password (For file deletion.)

Join our Matrix Chat <=> IRC: #leftypol on Rizon


Complainers of it say it’s
“Unfun to play against”
But then we’ll it’s not impossible to avoid just don’t run in the same place over and over again and you won’t get shot. Also most people that get killed by campers often run and gun without thinking at all in advance about where players are hiding or where they’ll emerge, the devs design these shooters with loads of corners and easy spots to take cover and camp in use them to your advantage than run blindly into someone’s line of fire.


Because they also camp in objective gamemodes,where they should move their fucking asses instaead of being "woooow I'm top of the scoreboard with an insane K/D look at me,I'm fucking useless"


Camping is a gameplay issue, devs should introduce mechanics that discourage it.


This. Camping is just an instance of a too dominating strategy. Strategy should be highly situational, otherwise people will lose interest. Stable transitive relations between alternatives are boring, you need intransitive relations between weapons and between places etc.


'Given the opportunity, players will optimize the fun out of a game.'


No-one complains about "camping" in any skill-based FPS game. In CS, It's just holding an angle, to which attackers can do things like prefire (if it's a really common one), have a teammate flash for you, etc. etc.

In Quake (duel), you can't camp because you'll lose control of the items that spawn, so you need to be moving a lot (especially when in control). Out of control, you can "camp" by chipping damage with railgun in order to contest an armor later for example, but it's just basic strategy


File: 1659541110907.png (642.59 KB, 1158x813, 1632260782142.png)

>be me
>+2000 hours in CS 1.6
>faced some of the best vets in pub and pug
All I can say to OP on whether there is a legitimate argument against camping in shooters: no, there are none, it is always viable
There is good camping and bad camping. And no I am not talking about any morals or fun in regards to "good" or "bad". I'm talking about tactics. Good tactics and bad tactics. Camping in an easy noticeable spot and picking off noobs who don't know the map may be a viable strategy at first, but you'll just be flushed out eventually. Diversifying your approaches and finding risky to get to but unexpected camping spots (blind spots next to the enemy spawn for instance where players will just run by and not check a corner), using rush and hold tactics, not shooting the first enemy to cross your line of sight so that when you pick off the second one the enemy team won't think is coming from behind them but to the side throwing off their cohesion and creating confusion. That's good camping!


>Unfun to play against
You know what is "unfun" trying to play a vidya game the "right" "honorable" way ie straight up fire-fight when your opponents are all seasoned veterans of the game who can two-hit kill you within a single frame from across mid (one hit tap with an ak or just insta kill with an awp) not to mention ping and reg differences. Add to this that these "vets" tend to never take a single round "easy". It is always play to win no matter how stacked a team is in their favor, even in a pub skrim. That seems more toxic a community to me than some lone camper.
So my advice; if it works and makes your opponents seethe, then its just good tactics baby!


The problem is that it slow downs matches, making them unfun, plus it's a cheap tactic since you don't know that there's a camper until after you die. Camping is (arguable) the reason why a game like call of duty ghosts did so poorly. (There's many other reason to be fair, but camping did really hurt the game).

Not wrong, but games have a limitation in their approach. so a code is sometimes the best option. (This is why all fps multiplayer games should use server browsers so there can be anti-camping and pro-camping servers, with everything in between).

Not true on cod or really most arena games which don't do the item drop system.


i mean the fact that they are killing enemy players means less enemy players against your team.


Killcams in TF2 are meant to prevent camping.


Bad maps also lead to camping and the best antidote is fucking communicating with your team.


That’s not the issue

Maps in arena shooters are built to be camped on as camping revolves around taking cover and staying in positions that are walled off to prevent you from getting shot at in several directions, it’s even better when there’s verticality involved. The issue is designing a game where camping isn’t just encouraged but a vital mechanic like in csgo where understanding the layout of the map and using it to your advantage feels satisfying rather than annoying to put up with like in mw19



I love playing as sniper in heroes and general, the whole point of it is just finding a good hiding spot and shooting enemies from a distance when they have no clue were you, it's fun af.


>where understanding the layout of the map and using it to your advantage feels satisfying
That's called map control and it was a staple in actual arena shooters like Unreal Tournament and Quake Arena. In both games camping is discouraged, and they're also some of the best FPS experiences you can have.

Your brain has rot, sort it out.


cus its gay


File: 1660347286664.png (1.35 MB, 932x687, ClipboardImage.png)

If everyone did it, the game would be unplayable.


What are grenades and mortars for?


File: 1660348365900.png (317.64 KB, 339x400, ClipboardImage.png)

Nothing, that's why CS became the dominant shooter design. Because it designated one team as the campers, and the other the team that must go in against the campers. I dunno how CS really balances it, because you'd think CT would always have the advantage on cs_maps and Ts would always have the advantage de_maps. I guess the advantage is that the attackers can get an objective win. Also that their are multiple locations, so the attackers can all rush and overwhelm the forces at one objective and then gain the upper hand.

But yeah this was a huge problem every time me and my friends would airsoft at a friends house. The match always took forever because camping is objectively the best strategy.
>Hide behind cover somewhere it's hard to see you and wait for someone to come into your line of site and then pop them.
The person that's running around can be seen much easier than he can see the people hiding behind cover. So the match would always be an hour long of everyone hiding and being afraid until someone got bored/bold enough to try assaulting and then campers still win.

I think the only solution is making the game objective base like CS or capture the flag.


Also Battlefield design with the maps being so large. Long term camping will lead you to get less kills because everyone is respawning and getting kills on the other end of the map while you're busy waiting in some corner nobody is every going to walk down.


And then everyone in the bf community forgot what air based vehicle camping was


Or actually also the Push mode they added in later Battlefield games or they have in Insurgency. The team that is forced to assault gets more respawns than the defenders to offset the advantage the defenders/campers get. It's just like they say that rule for warfare that your invasion force needs to be 4 times( I forget the exact multiple) the size of the defenders you're going against.


I realize OP isn't focusing on spawn camping, but that's the kind of camping I'm going to focus on because I don't rally consider waiting patiently to defend a position to be "camping". The problem with camping in competitive games comes down to the old Conservation of Fun principle: one team's enjoyment from domination comes at the expense of the other team's enjoyment. I do think there is merit in positioning your team in locations to effectively make it impossible for your opponents to do anything, but that is the point in which the current game should end and the campers declared the tactical victors. It's a bit like in chess: you never actually capture your opponent's king, you simply put them into an impossible circumstance with no hope of winning, and the game mercifully ends there. Sadly, the vast majority of shooters out there don't allow for this sort of quick end to an obviously concluded game, and instead they allow the losers to be pummeled for an extended period of boredom until the match ends. That's when camping sucks, and anyone who defends those sorts of impossible situations is just a bully lacking in empathy for the others they're playing the game with. It's shitty game design that allows for such situations to arise easily, and good servers can attempt to ameliorate it with their own self-imposed rules.

Unique IPs: 16

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru / zine ]