Same goal as the 'old' TF2?
LuaPineapple
Join Date: 2008-10-25 Member: 65296Members, Reinforced - Silver
Join Date: 2008-10-25 Member: 65296Members, Reinforced - Silver
Comments
Ermm.. what do you mean? They already succeeded with it in NS1. Nothing to "fix".
Now that is just rude !!!! You probably seen some NS2 video and read some articles and then come here saying this game will sux !
No go and try to play ns1 and try to say it's booring !!
It's difficult to say anything specific as long as there aren't any exact details of the TF2 commander plans. The UWE team is adjusting the commander so that he can't ruin the whole game all alone, but the actual solutions are still anybody's guess.
When it's released, it isn't going to be like NS1 where everyone knows the "pro" commanders. There will be a lot of bad people; because they dont know the game or they are just bad. Bad comms will occur and I'm sure the devs have thought a solution beyond "marines can purchase their own guns".
No go and try to play ns1 and try to say it's booring !!<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Now, there's no need to jump on him, it seems to me like he's asking a reasonable question.
I think they did a pretty good job with the commander in NS1, and they seem to be tinkering with it for NS2, so I'd say it was likely that they're trying to improve upon it.
I remember hearing that during the commentary as well, but it seems like they are going down the right path with the new commander in NS2.
Ohhh, wait! I get it now... you think VALVe is making NS2 (and made NS1), right? Thats sort of what your post implies.
Well, yes and no. When you had a good Commander, it worked brilliantly. When you didn't have a good Commander, the game was basically a wash-out, and the Marine team had very little enjoyment (in fact, you could make the case that the Alien team had a pretty poor gameplay experience as well). NS1 still faces this problem, and it's one that should not be ignored. When the gameplay enjoyment of an entire side revolves around the skills and experience of just one member of that team, you're setting yourself up for a potential problem.
To use a TF2 analogy, take the Medic. The backbone of any offense or defense; a side with a skilled Medic has a huge advantage over a side that either has no Medic or an unskilled one. However, this advantage does not translate into an automatic victory. Sides without skilled Medics can and do regularly win against teams with excellent Medics. This is an example of a key member of a team that is done correctly: failure to have this member does not mean defeat, and having him does not mean victory.
Copying the commander system completely from NS1 to NS2 would be, I believe, an unwise move in today's FPS market, and I'm pleased to see that Flayra and the guys aren't doing that. I would like to see more information about how the marines will be somewhat more autonomous, and what steps are being taken to produce a commanding experience that is "Easy to learn, difficult to master" so that new or average Comms stand a better chance of leading their team to victory. Most importantly, NS2 should not be a game where a poor or less skilled conmmander means automatic GG.
EDIT
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Ohhh, wait! I get it now... you think VALVe is making NS2 (and made NS1), right? Thats sort of what your post implies.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think what he was trying to say was that Valve, an experienced FPS developer, have tried this particular concept (commanding), in their own games, namely TF2, and found it too difficult to impliment and still keep the game enjoyable in all circumstances.
I think the short answer is that Valve wanted to make a game with as broad an appeal as possible (as others have said). UWE want to make an inventive, fun game that appeals to enough people to be profitable, while still offering something different to other online multiplayer games.
In all likelihood UWE won't solve all of the problems associated with having commanders - at some point you might still hate your commander and have a lousy round because of him, but as NS1 shows, the good outweighs the bad!
All that we know for sure right now is that marines and aliens will have commanders. How the commander class will be played is unknown.
Why did valve abandon the commander class in TF2? that's a question for valve to answer. If i had to guess i would say that most likely the commander class does not fit the TF2 gameplay style. I cannot imagine how a commander class would work in TF2.
I'll say one last thing, if the commander class deviates a significant amount from what it was in NS1 then it will no longer be a commanding class and its purpose would be altered. I prefer the commander remains the same as in NS1 if not, altered but only a little.
Just like not everyone is good as a fade or a lerk or a marine with grenade launcher, not everyone is good with being a commander as well. Does this mean that there is something wrong with the commander because not everyone is good with it? No it doesn't, if you are not good at commanding simply do not be a commander. End of story. Good is a matter of perspective. For sure at the release of the game no one will be a "good" commander since the game just came out and in this case good would mean what the average commander at the time is capable of.
I was just asking if anyone knew if UWE had found some sort of miracle-formula that solved the problem that VALVe had when they were making TF2. (Please see TF2's commentaries for more info.)
The best answer I've seen here is that they haven't, and that they're trying to minimize the potential backlash of having a moron as your commander while still giving an advantage if you DO have a good commander. (See the excellent TF2 Medic analogy posted above by Ryo-Ohki.)
"The guy's questions is valid: Valve couldn't make it work, what makes you think you can?"
Well I didn't mean it that way, more like:
"VALVe tried it but they couldn't get it to work, have you found a way to do it an still insure everyone has fun?"
You have to be careful these days on the forums. It seems they're quickly filling with fanboys.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The best answer I've seen here is that they haven't<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, the best answer is that they might, but we don't know about it. Few details about the commander mode have been released. Questions about it are, of course, valid and acceptable.
The thing with TF2 is that it doesn't form a straight analogy NS2, since there is basically no strategic elements to TF2's gameplay. You spawn in waves, run forwards with your team, and do the best you can to kill and avoid being killed. Overlaying a strategic commander on top of that gameplay doesn't really add much in terms of enjoyment value. In NS1, the commander directed the pace and orientation of the marine strategy. A medic does none of that. The challenge for NS2 will be to keep that sort of centralized strategic role while losing as much of the frustrating parts as possible.
Also, the point CyberMantis makes above is also valid. I don't think Valve has ever really made any risky choices in their games. If they did, you'd have seen TF2 come out in the first part of this decade. They make very intelligently reasoned choices to maximize the potential for their success. And it works for them. But an indie like UWE can make games you'll never see elsewhere.
Also, the point CyberMantis makes above is also valid. I don't think Valve has ever really made any risky choices in their games. If they did, you'd have seen TF2 come out in the first part of this decade. They make very intelligently reasoned choices to maximize the potential for their success. And it works for them. But an indie like UWE can make games you'll never see elsewhere.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, originally TF2 was going to have a commander a la NS1 style who would lay down buildings and such. VALVe thrashed it after they were unable to insure everyone was having fun even if their commander was a moron. You can verify this by listening to the TF2 commentaries. And originally TF2 was supposed to look like something out of WWII, which is clearly not what shipped at the end.
As for VALVe: Portal? (Though I generally agree with you.)
Okay, okay, so they hired a bunch of students for that. But they did hire them no?
I dont really think the commanders job can be made easier, althought the implementation of the GUI and controls can be made easier. In the end it is till up to the players and the commander to work together to win a map. They will probably just let the server admins and regulars sort this problem out as before.
How do you add value to the commander's role? How can you ensure a bad comm won't ruin the game? How can you ensure an exceptionally good comm can 'outplay' the other team/comm? How can you make the role more than that of a babysitter? How can you have actual strategical decisions being made, as opposed to just following the predetermined best build order?
These are all really good questions that are <i>really</i> hard to answer. These questions weren't really answered in NS1, either. For example, let's take the "how can a commander make actual strategic decisions" and expand it. In the standard RTS game a player will scout to see what units the enemy is making and then they'll produce the counter for those units, however, a RTS/FPS hybrid can't really have that. If hard counters exist in the game then the FPS players will feel helpless as they'll fighting at a steep disadvantage, yet it's these counters that put the 'strategy' in a 'real time strategy' game. So who's fun is more important? The one (or two) commanders, or the six or seven marines?
Yeah I am aware of the ditched commander mode. That's also why it took years to make, because they scrapped their original design. Commander mode would have never worked out for team fortress because it is a strategy layer slapped onto gameplay that is anything but strategic. Also TF2 was originally supposed to be a modern warfare, unholy union of CS and TFC kind of thing, like seen <a href="http://www.gameinformer.com/NR/rdonlyres/89207D73-43D7-49B8-A503-107610874A2C/11978/tfoldschool.jpg" target="_blank">here</a>. (Basically another point for Valve isn't innovative.)
I'm not ragging on Valve; they make good games that I really enjoy. I still think we can be thankful they didn't make the original TF2, since that might have killed off NS2 before it was born, and not many people have the talent and experience balancing complex, asymmetric game systems like good ol' Charlie does.
yes and i hope they do a better hitbox then valve...i die so many times behind walls...man the new engine must be good!
They've said that the commander and team will be less dependend on each other. I interpret that as minimizing the obligatory supply part of commanding. There will most likely be alternative health and ammo sources on the field and hard counter gameplay elements like SC will be removed or dramatically changed.
Fair question. I think it's important to take a second look at some of the responses though.
<!--quoteo(post=1715638:date=Jul 4 2009, 03:45 AM:name=rsd)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (rsd @ Jul 4 2009, 03:45 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1715638"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The guy's questions is valid: Valve couldn't make it work, what makes you think you can?
I think the short answer is that Valve wanted to make a game with as broad an appeal as possible (as others have said). UWE want to make an inventive, fun game that appeals to enough people to be profitable, while still offering something different to other online multiplayer games.
In all likelihood UWE won't solve all of the problems associated with having commanders - at some point you might still hate your commander and have a lousy round because of him, but as NS1 shows, the good outweighs the bad!<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree, NS2 is trying to be a different game from TF2(even the orig version). In some ways UWE will have a harder time in trying to appeal to both casual and competitive gamers.
Some thing else of note is that while Valve makes great games, they had not made any game with a commander when TF2 came out. You could say L4D has now filled that role with the Director, but I'd say that implementation is inferior to even NS1. UWE may not be Valve or Blizzard, but they do have experience making a good game with a commander.
To directly answer your question, one of the earliest podcasts dealt with exactly this issue right after TF2 Dev Commentary came out. The answer (in their opinion) was to give the non-comms more control over strategic aspects of the game like allowing them to buy their own weapons. More recently Charlie mentioned expanding this further in a thread about improving the learning curve:
<!--quoteo(post=1690982:date=Oct 21 2008, 01:15 PM:name=Flayra)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Flayra @ Oct 21 2008, 01:15 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1690982"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->- The Commander and non-Comms are more decoupled so they can each be more effective on their own. Of course the best teams will have everyone working together, but Commanders will be able to be effective with braindead non-Comms (through the use of AI builder bots/nymphs and spell-like abilities) and the ability for marines to buy their own weapons/equipment from armories.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
We don't have many specifics to know how far this will go of course, but this is how they're addressing your question.
Also, as <b>crispy</b> said, there will be room for multiple commanders and, presumably, the ability for someone else to step up if a comm is failing.
But this is a RTS game too.. while we all hated bad comms, and even newbie comms, what was even worse was the fact that as comm we not have anyone listen to us. So all in all, marines had the highest probability to have things go wrong in the game. Either slow start (no one wanting to comm), bad comm, upgrading teh wrong things or trying to tech up too fast, wasting res on weapons etc. so yea pretty much depending how well the marines did pretty much put on how fun the game was.
You have to admit that struggling for res nodes and slowly inching your way clearing rooms and stuff is a fun thing. Being able to counter a Heavy train or coutnering Skulk rushes, or fades or a group of aliens all stuck in a room. has a good feeling to it.