Thoughts on Cover Systems?

[LegateLaniusThe2nd]

Thoughts on Cover Systems?

https://youtu.be/sSGSj-evneo


After watching this guys video I agree Cover Systems are way too overused, stale and haven't innovated in years.

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

I despise sticky-cover design. Almost as much as a bullet-time feature and about as much as dodgeroll design (Vaguish, to which that video almost seems like an advertisement to, has all of those... bleughhh....). There are no words to describe the bore and sickness and bile and muck that's there.

 

[metalmaniac21]

Favored. Not the usual way with sticky cover system, Alpha Protocol did it embarassingly bad.
Adds up to RPG-y combat and makes sense in general, has it's place in FNFF. Yet, the executions needs alot of thought, trials and errors, since no one did covers good enough before. Maybe Bethesda in FO4 but that game suffers from balance issues and covers usually not so necessary.
....

Hah, who am I fooling, I just want covers due to low framerate and unable to jump and look around and shoot like in UT99 because of it.

 

[Suhiira]

I'd really rather CP2077 not be a cover-based shooter.
That said, if you put a solid object between you and whoever is shooting at you then you should have cover. But in far too many games I see cardboard and plastic containers acting as cover - NOT!

 

[Lisbeth_Salander]

Great thing he said about Vanquish forcing the player to get out of cover by having a great and fun gameplay system, but then again Vanquish has no challenge, and it's pretty much easy mode since you can walk among the bullets with no problem.

You know what's a great way to force players to get out of cover? Destructible cover objects. One bullet is enough to pass through multiple walls, bring that to CP2077.

 

[Suhiira]

The "best" way to do this would be to rate cover (more-or-less) the way metals are rated.
"Hardness" = How resistant an object is to penetration ... i.e. a tank ... it'll bounce bullets all day but hit it with a cannon shell and you'll punch thru.
"Toughness" = How resistant an object is to damage ... i.e. a Kevlar vest ... an object will absorb a certain amount of damage, degrading with each hit till it totally fails.

Each cover item (and piece of personal/vehicle armor) is rate with both values, and like say a diamond they aren't usually equal. A diamond is very "Hard" but not very "Tough" (its brittle). Whereas say a stack of newspapers has essentially zero "Hardness" but it very "Tough".

 

[NukeTheMoon]

Great thing he said about Vanquish forcing the player to get out of cover by having a great and fun gameplay system, but then again Vanquish has no challenge, and it's pretty much easy mode since you can walk among the bullets with no problem.

You know what's a great way to force players to get out of cover? Destructible cover objects. One bullet is enough to pass through multiple walls, bring that to CP2077.

It seems like Cover-based shooting has become some sort of necessary inclusion while the game gets better the more you don't rely on it.

The best example that comes to mind is Red Faction Guerilla.
It had a cover mechanic, that seemed to have gotten forgotten about pretty early on. It was still *there*, but it was so much better to weave in and out of concealment and move around as cover was destroyed or created from falling buildings. Staying in one place and playing whack-a-mole wasn't an option, just for a temporary retreat before pushing forward again.

I've never been a big fan of cover based shooting.
In PC FPS games of the 90's there was no concept of pressing a button to crouch behind cover, you just went over the object and hold the crouch button. It seemed like the whole cover-shooter thing was some sort of crutch for 30 fps game-play. Shooters in 30 fps are a joke, to speed the action up you have to simplify the controls so the player can keep up.

The best work around for cover based shooter is simply to not rely on it as much as possible and simply maneuver in and out of cover yourself.
It's even easier to do in third-person than first-person because you have more situational awareness.

Ultimately, I would be surprised if CP77 didn't include cover-based shooting, because I am fairly certain it will be a third person shooter, and the game is going to be built around 30 fps like TW3 was for consoles.

However my hope would just be that the game has enough maneuverable fluidity from map design and smooth controls, that cover shooting is mostly unnecessary.

 

[Calistarius]

I have never had any problems with Cover Systems/Shooters... mostly because that kind of playstyle comes very natural to me and my style of playing when it comes to first and third person shooters (to most kinds of games in general where this can be aplied to as well).

My style of playing FPS games has always been that of a stealthy sniper type of a thing (no matter if the weapons I have is an actual sniper rifle, or if it's an assault or semi-automatic rifle ( mid to long ranged types of rifles... which tends to be the most common type of weapon I use), or even pistols... all of them preferably with supressors on them if possible). Where I first spend time with just watching what the enemies do, their patrol paterns, where I might be able to take out a target compleatly unseen without having to dispose of the body my self, etc... and then I look for a good place to snipe as many of them as possible (and relocate to a new location when I have exausted the previous one), and as silently as possible so that the rest of the opponents don't notice that it has happened... and with as few bullets as possible as well, preferably one shot kill headshots for all of them... I almost never go full auto with automatic weapons, and if available I will have all weapons switched to single fire, or which ever mode fires off the least amount of bullets when you pull the trigger (essentually I use most weapons as if they where semi-automatic). If the weapon only has full auto I will only fire in short bursts of 2-4 shots if possible.

So due to that, Cover Systems/Shooters seem to come natural to me... I can't think of a single cover shooter that I have played which I have disliked as of yet.

 

[Rawls]

I'd be fine with a cover system ... though I'm admittedly not sure the best way to implement it. Perhaps you take cover by the "sneak/stealth" button if you're near cover or if your already in stealth mode? I'm not a huge fan of always auto sticking to cover.

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

I thnk it should be enough "cover" if you walk behind an object or a corner and you can the lean to take a peek. No magnetism happens, the cover doesn't grab you



It's just you behind an object. That should be enough.

 

[0248991]

Hi,
as it was discussed, cyberpunk may have destructible environment.
It would be cool to use some objects around to help you "win" fight.

e.g. - toss explosive at wall and it will fall on enemies, create sound, dust ;
use objects around as temporary destructible covers;
maybe implant that will fastly spread and create small personal shield;
use car remote controller to drive it into enemies;
use random people as hostages;
blinding light shots;
poisonous/ blinding/ whatever gasses - smaller throwable, or bigger, needed to be placed before;
appendable cameras to track, spy, see behind corners,
etc...

Make it more like preparation and bit of strategy, medium speed thinking, unexpected situations and player reactions, and more complex fight ends than win/loose till the last man:
e.g. - care for allies, show mercy to enemies, surrender, run, ... - numbers of survivors count.

 

[Lisbeth_Salander]

You know what is another way to force players to not use cover all the time? To make enemies AI's smart. In real life, when the enemy knows you're behind a cover he concentrates fire on you. Yeah, he shoots a lot at your direction, but not only in the cover you're behind of but also where you MIGHT appear to shot him. This means that everytime the player takes aim while in cover, he would imediately be shot at, since enemies would know that he was indeed taking cover in that specific place.

This way, there'd be no way for players to shoot and hide repeatedly, thus players would be forced to eventually face the enemy.

Spoiler

 

[Meccanical]

Hate'em, mainly because level design suffers because every area has to be designed around having cover in mind. If the area has no cover, you know you aren't in danger. If you walk in an empty room with chest high walls in it, you already know enemies are about to barge in to shoot at you. Tension is completely sapped now. Not to mention most games involving cover systems involve the player staying in cover only emerging when they need to shoot at enemies who precariously expose themselves at regular intervals.

However, cover and concealment do need to be properly implemented in a game in which firearms are abundant. It's a fundamental part of combat. I just think we need to do more with the concept, be less restrictive. Don't fall for the same basic gameplay loop 90% of games are already using.

 

[RLKing1969]

On cover and concealment: I was in the service and, while I can agree understand why people playing a video game would HATE cover...In real life, folks, it could save your butt. As far as combat in the game is concerned (It wouldn't be Cyberpunk unless there was the occasional "Drive-by" or all out gunfight.), I believe that cover and concealment should be treated as it is in real life. I sort of like the idea that almost all cover is, by nature "Ablative" (Which is to say, just about EVERYTHING that gets pounded enough with enough firepower, will eventually deteriorate.). I know there are variances: A cinder block wall can take regular small caliber handgun rounds conceivably forever, but open up with the bigger guns and, well, you usually end up with chunks of concrete in relatively short order. And thus it should be. There should be "Ratings" as far as how much damage potential cover can suck up before it becomes worthless. As for the predictable, old shtick that the enemy pops up their heads at predictable intervals? Unless they are highly trained professionals, rule that out, for the most part as most folks won't even "hit the dirt" once the combat starts. It's a fact. A lot of people in real life have gotten themselves killed because the normal, human tendency is to "Look around" and not react immediately. The whole "Duck and cover" routine is a trained response.

 

[Meccanical]

I definitely hope crouching and prone positions are available in game.

 

[NukeTheMoon]

There are plenty of games with high levels of damage (counter strike) that use cover in a more realistic way, cutting-the-pie around corners, covering angles, waiting for enemy pop-out, signalling to pop out... all done in a fps game with no stick walls over 20 years ago.

I think that really, if the game really has the level of leathality in combat for both the player and the enemies (not bullet sponges) then the cover thing could possibly end up be redundant and ignored like what happened in Red Faction Guerilla.

 

[Suhiira]

Arma 3 seems to have a pretty good cover system too.

 

[RLKing1969]

Meccanical: One would hope so. If us real folks can do it, so should our characters.