Yeah. Keeping an ear to the wall and listening in on the general ideas of the teeming masses on the forums is probably a good idea. It helps get a quick sense of potential feedback. Plus, alienating them would be hazardous since these are most likely to be your biggest advocates in the future. One of the quickest ways to kill any mod or indie game in m experience is alienate the community.
However, letting yourself and your design to be ruled by the trolls, self-proclaimed experts, and random gamers who visit is not the best of plans. At times heeding their advice to make a tweak is great. Other times it may be better to simply move along and tell them that you have bigger plans in store, so trust you a little bit. The discerning dev will be able to know when to do what.
As far as the devs' credentials for being "hardcore gamers", while they may not be in the pro circuit I'm sure they have talked with high-level gamers, played games of their own, and there's plenty of media and knowledge out there for anyone who wants to search. So, don't think of them as random programmers and artists who want to make a game. They at some level have a sense of good gameplay, at least on a theoretical level. Also, they've already experienced developing and balancing NS1 and other projects, so they're not noobies to this either.
I really implore Unknown Worlds to ignore all/most feedback at this stage of development, I really liked the idea of the taser but personally would have only replaced the knife not the pistol with it. Slashing alien structures does seem very unrealistic but using an electrical arc to burn through flesh and bacteria makes far more sense to me, and with the right effects far more satisfying.
I want to be nicely susurprised when the alpha comes through and there are completely new gameplay features to get my head around and enjoy, if it was just a rehash of the original Natural Selection I would be sorely disappointed. I personally feel everyone at UW are on the right track and they need to show us their vision of where the Natural Selection franchise is going.
A point to note is the world of C&C, when EALA took over Westwood and produced C&C 3 they ruined the canon of the series. After many complaints they tried to explain the style changes within the game, which I personally thought was very lame, secondly with the expansion pack they tried to fix the complaints bringing back nostalgic features from previous games. Personally they had completely lost me and I had no belief in the world they were trying to create. The reason this happened was because they were trying to please everyones quibbles and it is impossible to do this the game ended up looking like a series of apologises to every member of the community, I don't want NS to look like this!
I think half the success of a great game is its ability to make you put emotional energy into it, whether it is through a great storyline or through the environment you are placed within. Natural Selection was fantastic at this, apart from the small fiction produced about the game there was no moving storyline, the game gathered its emotional energy through the concept of survival of the fittest and creating an environment you could become lost in and fight for either side. It is this that UW need to hold onto the most.
And to keep it on topic, No, listen to your customers. Otherwise you end up out of business. Period.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Read the article. Read up on Advanced Squad Leader. Remember that those who speak up are generally the small group of the most highly devoted. Listen to them too much and soon they're the only people you sell to.. and that puts you out of business just as fast.
<!--quoteo(post=1719744:date=Jul 28 2009, 04:57 AM:name=Bacillus)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bacillus @ Jul 28 2009, 04:57 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1719744"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Completely ignoring the forums sounds overkill. By all means the devs should have their own vision and stick to it, but reading the forums doesn't hurt unless you take them too seriously. With a healthy amount of common sense and some dev inside knowledge it shouldn't be too difficult to tell which thoughts actually are relevant and worth further consideration.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not to mention, we are in many ways self-policing. We argue on issues a lot for the betterment of the game because luckily, we represent a wide range of players. It's been 7 years since NS1 and a lot of us went on divergent paths which are represented here.
If there is something we don't complain about, you got a winner. If we we do complaint, you need to be more careful but please don't fundamentally change what you're doing.
cause thats how some games turn out - instead of of being like this: <img src="http://blogs.venturacountystar.com/motorhead/R8.jpg" border="0" class="linked-image" />
I honestly can't see how ignoring the voices of the people who've already bought your game, or those considering buying your game, can be considered a bad thing.
Granted, the developer's are not slaves to the will of the community and I wouldn't want them to be. But if there's strong support or strong opposition to an idea then developers should certainly consider it. Granted, this type of strong reaction should not be common and so far it hasn't been. Out of all the new ideas that have been shown, the removal of the pistol is really the only idea that's had such strong opposition.
<!--quoteo(post=1719867:date=Jul 28 2009, 06:52 PM:name=schkorpio)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (schkorpio @ Jul 28 2009, 06:52 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1719867"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->feedback from your customers is important, but it doesnt mean that the customer is an experienced expert in creating your product
remember this?: *snip*
cause thats how some games turn out - instead of of being like this: *snip*<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why are you comparing a episode of the Simpsons, which is parody cartoon to a real-life product that required many engineers to create which none of us (all the engineers in the automotive industry please forgive me) have a clue how much input from public opinion surveys was actually considered into its aesthetic design?
This article/interview talks about Blizzard's design philosophy with StarCraft 2. Blizzard talks about what part of the community gives the most valuable feedback and why they develop and, more specifically, balance a competitive multiplayer game like StarCraft 2 with that feedback in mind.
<!--quoteo(post=1719974:date=Jul 29 2009, 05:35 PM:name=VenApple)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (VenApple @ Jul 29 2009, 05:35 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1719974"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This article/interview talks about Blizzard's design philosophy with StarCraft 2. Blizzard talks about what part of the community gives the most valuable feedback and why they develop and, more specifically, balance a competitive multiplayer game like StarCraft 2 with that feedback in mind.
I thought they weren't even going to put LAN in Starcraft 2. That's pretty much against the competitive side of the game. Unless they changed their mind and didn't get any news about it D:
If you don't give feedback and ideas and reply, at the request of the devs, when they post some very very rough concept art proposal (a taser so they don't need to pay someone to make a pistol and someone else to make a knife!)... then don't ###### when NS2 is released, and completely unrecognizable.
<a href="http://input.microsoft.com" target="_blank">http://input.microsoft.com</a> ... Windows 7... listening to the customers on some level... it really does work, but you must average what you read in the forums. You can't just read that 13 people like something (a taser... really? lol) which means the entire community will... Half of the fanboys on this forum will like anything you shovel down their throats (which means they aren't a good source for input... their is a bias)... you must see past that and talk to people in random servers. Anyone you talk to in a NS1-server is a veteran... see what they have to say. Not just the people on your steam friends-list... devs.
This is something you should have been doing since day one. It's downright scary that all of a sudden now your realizing their's a chance you are not delivering what the community wants/expected/paid-for. <ul><li> Having a teamspeak session to hear the thoughts about NS2 from some very experienced NS players. #fb about 3 hours ago </li><li> Long PR meeting with the whole team. It was a bit exhausting but we made some good decisions. #fb about 21 hours ago</li></ul> <img src="http://importantshock.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/tactical-face-palm.jpg" border="0" class="linked-image" />
I think its valuable and productive to give feedback on far reaching changes that are fundamental to gameplay like bunnyhopping or no bunnyhopping for aliens leading to completely different playing experiences.
Having said that, on the whole alot of reaction to information is just theorycrafting and we need to see or play some actual content before we are able to make informed opinions. (Hint, wheres the alpha for a game still slated to be on shop shelves in 4 months? :))
The group referred to as "Hardcore gamers" is actually a diverse sample of people from all sorts of age groups, gaming tastes, intelligence levels and agendas. I agree with the article in that if devs take too much heed of forums you will be stuck in a cycle of trying to please everyone, which in this case even more than others is simply not possible.
However there are reasonable people who's feedback can be valuable, and thankfully from the looks of this twit: "Having a teamspeak session to hear the thoughts about NS2 from some very experienced NS players."
The guys at UWE are seeking specific feedback from just these kinds of people. I'm sure with this kind of approach the end result will be everything we've been hoping for.
This article has lots of truths and makes a whole lot of sense. As much as I can ###### and moan about how I want a game to be, it's probably best if the developers don't change their ideas too much to accomodate those demands.
On another note I think that the UW should read this. I am a bit worried that they are being a bit too soft when it comes to this forums whiners. Of course - Always take feedback and consider it. But if it's honestly not what you want/need in your vision of the game - ignore it.
EpidemicDark Force GorgeJoin Date: 2003-06-29Member: 17781Members
"It sounds harsh and definitely won't be a popular opinion, but the most dangerous thing a developer can do is listen to his hardcore community."
Agreed, which is why bunnyhopping should be purged from this world and why Flayra shouldn't do teamspeak sessions with the same group of people who played NS when they really wanted to play CS with aliens.
<!--quoteo(post=1720520:date=Aug 3 2009, 08:57 PM:name=Epidemic)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Epidemic @ Aug 3 2009, 08:57 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1720520"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->the same group of people who played NS when they really wanted to play CS with aliens.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is 100% wrong in every way.
Anyway, I'm reasonably convinced that Flayra & friends will make a great game and that they can judge for themselves when to listen to and when to ignore feedback.
I disagree with this article. I don't believe it's wrong, I believe it is inaccurate. You need to listen to the SMART people in your community. Definitely not ignore your whole hardcore community. The credibility of this article is hurt by assuming hardcore gamers are 14 years old and all male. That's pretty ignorant, same with the idea of ignoring all your hardcore fanbase.
You don't go with a majority or a minority, you go with what feels right and makes the game more fun.
It had some choice words about developing based on initial reactions from your hardcore community, whether or not their definition of hardcore gaming doesn't apply perfectly here. Just as an example, the new RT model was just as hotly received, obviously people have been playing this game for many years and have strong opinions on where they want this sequel to be heading.
Great Topic. I vote for keeping it pure and get the alpha out. Fix bugs take feedback. Release Beta. Fix bugs take feedback. Release Game. Fix bugs take feedback. Patch v1.01. Fix bugs take feedback. Patch v1.02 etc...
<!--quoteo(post=1719717:date=Jul 28 2009, 01:37 AM:name=trinity.ns)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (trinity.ns @ Jul 28 2009, 01:37 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1719717"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->"Developers must learn to stick to their guns and see their visions through.", i like that quote
"Wow you guys have very strong opinions about the taser weapon. We are strongly considering replacing it with the vanilla knife/pistol. #fb", and i don't like this one<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
lol'ed and agreed
<!--quoteo(post=1720525:date=Aug 3 2009, 05:11 PM:name=MuYeah)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MuYeah @ Aug 3 2009, 05:11 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1720525"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Anyway, I'm reasonably convinced that Flayra & friends will make a great game and that they can judge for themselves when to listen to and when to ignore feedback.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The second twitter post quoted above is what worries me and probably the main reason this topic was started. OP worrying about devs not sticking to their original vision.
<!--quoteo(post=1719744:date=Jul 28 2009, 03:57 AM:name=Bacillus)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bacillus @ Jul 28 2009, 03:57 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1719744"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Completely ignoring the forums sounds overkill. By all means the devs should have their own vision and stick to it, but reading the forums doesn't hurt unless you take them too seriously. With a healthy amount of common sense and some dev inside knowledge it shouldn't be too difficult to tell which thoughts actually are relevant and worth further consideration.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
agreed, adding that at this point we as normal fans and forum goes have very little to go on to form our opinions. UWE stay the course! You alone fully understand your full vision. At this point the forums and community should be used more to ADD rather than REMOVE ideas. And even then only in extreme cases of designer's block.
<!--quoteo(post=1719745:date=Jul 28 2009, 04:04 AM:name=todd1Ok)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (todd1Ok @ Jul 28 2009, 04:04 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1719745"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->And to keep it on topic, No, listen to your customers. Otherwise you end up out of business. Period.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
...but only AFTER your customers has tried your product.
yeah, I didn't pay for NS1 with improved graphics.. Then you shoulda just made a Source version of NS...
Oh and someone said something about how they should listen to the veterans to hear what they have to say...
What the heck gives them the right to choose what the REST of the players want to be in NS2??
Charlie!! Shut down the forum untill NS2 is released!!!! :P <!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc--><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I assume you mean besides the fact that the veterans are hugely responsible for supporting and molding NS into the game it is today, giving Charlie the opportunity to start UWE and begin development on NS2.
<!--quoteo(post=1719617:date=Jul 28 2009, 07:08 AM:name=enfurno)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (enfurno @ Jul 28 2009, 07:08 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1719617"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Now tweaking mechanics can have some major downfalls. Personally I've never met these "need a dual function backup weapon" people in game so did they just play once, decide that the pistol wasn't like the one in halo, and start ranting about it? Sure it could be better but the alternative sounds really crappy.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Pretty sure it's the <b>exact opposite</b>. The devs' vision involved a 'dual function backup weapon', and then the community decided to rant against it. Long story short, you completely missed the point.
locallyunsceneFeeder of TrollsJoin Date: 2002-12-25Member: 11528Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1720729:date=Aug 5 2009, 07:41 AM:name=homicide)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (homicide @ Aug 5 2009, 07:41 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1720729"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I assume you mean besides the fact that the veterans are hugely responsible for supporting and molding NS into the game it is today, giving Charlie the opportunity to start UWE and begin development on NS2.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I love how you're arguing the exact opposite in the other thread, that the way the game is has nothing to do with veterans or the way it's designed, but everything to do with hl air control. I think what you're saying here is <i>more</i> correct than your other statement. I think the devs had a much larger role in designing NS than you're giving them credit for :-p
<!--quoteo(post=1720737:date=Aug 5 2009, 01:44 PM:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Harimau @ Aug 5 2009, 01:44 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1720737"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Pretty sure it's the <b>exact opposite</b>. The devs' vision involved a 'dual function backup weapon', and then the community decided to rant against it. Long story short, you completely missed the point.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Is the old 1.0x manual still around? I'd like to add that (iirc) the manual stated that the pistol had a special recoil vectoring whatever system, which made it recoil-less and charged bullets back in faster. Basically means that it was meant to be used for the high accuracy/RoF. Never really felt it fit, but I appreciated it when I started playing. Though now that I've completely stopped playing games competitively, I'm really not that into the uberpistol, though I can understand why people still cling to it.
<!--quoteo(post=1720746:date=Aug 5 2009, 05:27 AM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (locallyunscene @ Aug 5 2009, 05:27 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1720746"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I love how you're arguing the exact opposite in the other thread, that the way the game is has nothing to do with veterans or the way it's designed, but everything to do with hl air control. I think what you're saying here is <i>more</i> correct than your other statement. I think the devs had a much larger role in designing NS than you're giving them credit for :-p<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Wrong, let me merge and summarize the two threads I believe you are talking about:
The devs tried to implement unique movement mechanics... and failed. This was made obvious thanks to player testing and opinion. So they tried again. This went on for ages (NS was "beta" for like 4 years LOL). Eventually the developers finally implemented simple movement mechanics that relied less on their own ingenuity and more on what the PLAYERS wanted - movement that facilitated half-life air control.
I am not saying the the developers did a ###### job. They formed an awesome foundation for a game with complexity the likes of which the half-life engine had never seen; one of the greatest games ever made. However, when it came to the finer aspects of NS, the aspects that were refined by <b>playing</b> the game, the <b>players</b> knew better.
This is why I am suggesting the developers should mold the high level game mechanics as they desire: redefine the role of the commander, change resource structure, implement dynamic infestation, change siege mechanics, hell they could even add in another race, etc... However, they should rely heavily on the community's opinion when it comes to the aspects that define the feel of the game: alien movement, marine movement, aim, recoil (or lack there of), cone of fire, fundamental weapons, game-pace, etc... With this in mind, the development team should attempt to maintain continuity in low level mechanics from NS1 to NS2. Movement, aim, fundamental weapons, game-pace should all remain relatively similar.
Comments
However, letting yourself and your design to be ruled by the trolls, self-proclaimed experts, and random gamers who visit is not the best of plans. At times heeding their advice to make a tweak is great. Other times it may be better to simply move along and tell them that you have bigger plans in store, so trust you a little bit. The discerning dev will be able to know when to do what.
As far as the devs' credentials for being "hardcore gamers", while they may not be in the pro circuit I'm sure they have talked with high-level gamers, played games of their own, and there's plenty of media and knowledge out there for anyone who wants to search. So, don't think of them as random programmers and artists who want to make a game. They at some level have a sense of good gameplay, at least on a theoretical level. Also, they've already experienced developing and balancing NS1 and other projects, so they're not noobies to this either.
I want to be nicely susurprised when the alpha comes through and there are completely new gameplay features to get my head around and enjoy, if it was just a rehash of the original Natural Selection I would be sorely disappointed. I personally feel everyone at UW are on the right track and they need to show us their vision of where the Natural Selection franchise is going.
A point to note is the world of C&C, when EALA took over Westwood and produced C&C 3 they ruined the canon of the series. After many complaints they tried to explain the style changes within the game, which I personally thought was very lame, secondly with the expansion pack they tried to fix the complaints bringing back nostalgic features from previous games. Personally they had completely lost me and I had no belief in the world they were trying to create. The reason this happened was because they were trying to please everyones quibbles and it is impossible to do this the game ended up looking like a series of apologises to every member of the community, I don't want NS to look like this!
I think half the success of a great game is its ability to make you put emotional energy into it, whether it is through a great storyline or through the environment you are placed within. Natural Selection was fantastic at this, apart from the small fiction produced about the game there was no moving storyline, the game gathered its emotional energy through the concept of survival of the fittest and creating an environment you could become lost in and fight for either side. It is this that UW need to hold onto the most.
YA SEE, THE KIDS LISTEN TO THE RAP MUSIC
And to keep it on topic, No, listen to your customers. Otherwise you end up out of business. Period.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Read the article.
Read up on Advanced Squad Leader.
Remember that those who speak up are generally the small group of the most highly devoted. Listen to them too much and soon they're the only people you sell to.. and that puts you out of business just as fast.
Not to mention, we are in many ways self-policing. We argue on issues a lot for the betterment of the game because luckily, we represent a wide range of players. It's been 7 years since NS1 and a lot of us went on divergent paths which are represented here.
If there is something we don't complain about, you got a winner. If we we do complaint, you need to be more careful but please don't fundamentally change what you're doing.
EDIT: Dang censorship.
remember this?: <img src="http://images.loqu.com/contents/821/153/image/C/U2148P2DT20080626081320(1).jpg" border="0" class="linked-image" />
cause thats how some games turn out - instead of of being like this:
<img src="http://blogs.venturacountystar.com/motorhead/R8.jpg" border="0" class="linked-image" />
Granted, the developer's are not slaves to the will of the community and I wouldn't want them to be. But if there's strong support or strong opposition to an idea then developers should certainly consider it. Granted, this type of strong reaction should not be common and so far it hasn't been. Out of all the new ideas that have been shown, the removal of the pistol is really the only idea that's had such strong opposition.
remember this?: *snip*
cause thats how some games turn out - instead of of being like this:
*snip*<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why are you comparing a episode of the Simpsons, which is parody cartoon to a real-life product that required many engineers to create which none of us (all the engineers in the automotive industry please forgive me) have a clue how much input from public opinion surveys was actually considered into its aesthetic design?
<a href="http://pc.ign.com/articles/100/1002570p1.html" target="_blank">http://pc.ign.com/articles/100/1002570p1.html</a>
<a href="http://pc.ign.com/articles/100/1002570p1.html" target="_blank">http://pc.ign.com/articles/100/1002570p1.html</a><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I thought they weren't even going to put LAN in Starcraft 2. That's pretty much against the competitive side of the game. Unless they changed their mind and didn't get any news about it D:
<a href="http://input.microsoft.com" target="_blank">http://input.microsoft.com</a> ... Windows 7... listening to the customers on some level... it really does work, but you must average what you read in the forums. You can't just read that 13 people like something (a taser... really? lol) which means the entire community will... Half of the fanboys on this forum will like anything you shovel down their throats (which means they aren't a good source for input... their is a bias)... you must see past that and talk to people in random servers. Anyone you talk to in a NS1-server is a veteran... see what they have to say. Not just the people on your steam friends-list... devs.
This is something you should have been doing since day one. It's downright scary that all of a sudden now your realizing their's a chance you are not delivering what the community wants/expected/paid-for.
<ul><li> Having a teamspeak session to hear the thoughts about NS2 from some very experienced NS players. #fb about 3 hours ago
</li><li> Long PR meeting with the whole team. It was a bit exhausting but we made some good decisions. #fb about 21 hours ago</li></ul>
<img src="http://importantshock.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/tactical-face-palm.jpg" border="0" class="linked-image" />
Because some people like to see their post count go up. And flaunt signatures.
You should follow your advice.
Having said that, on the whole alot of reaction to information is just theorycrafting and we need to see or play some actual content before we are able to make informed opinions. (Hint, wheres the alpha for a game still slated to be on shop shelves in 4 months? :))
However there are reasonable people who's feedback can be valuable, and thankfully from the looks of this twit: "Having a teamspeak session to hear the thoughts about NS2 from some very experienced NS players."
The guys at UWE are seeking specific feedback from just these kinds of people. I'm sure with this kind of approach the end result will be everything we've been hoping for.
On another note I think that the UW should read this. I am a bit worried that they are being a bit too soft when it comes to this forums whiners. Of course - Always take feedback and consider it. But if it's honestly not what you want/need in your vision of the game - ignore it.
right back at you
<!--coloro:lawngreen--><span style="color:lawngreen"><!--/coloro-->
yeah, I didn't pay for NS1 with improved graphics.. Then you shoulda just made a Source version of NS...
Oh and someone said something about how they should listen to the veterans to hear what they have to say...
What the heck gives them the right to choose what the REST of the players want to be in NS2??
Charlie!! Shut down the forum untill NS2 is released!!!! :P
<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->
Agreed, which is why bunnyhopping should be purged from this world and why Flayra shouldn't do teamspeak sessions with the same group of people who played NS when they really wanted to play CS with aliens.
This is 100% wrong in every way.
Anyway, I'm reasonably convinced that Flayra & friends will make a great game and that they can judge for themselves when to listen to and when to ignore feedback.
Seriously now, don't ###### up our game, I payed $40 for NATURAL SELECTION 2.
You don't go with a majority or a minority, you go with what feels right and makes the game more fun.
<!--quoteo(post=1719717:date=Jul 28 2009, 01:37 AM:name=trinity.ns)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (trinity.ns @ Jul 28 2009, 01:37 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1719717"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->"Developers must learn to stick to their guns and see their visions through.", i like that quote
"Wow you guys have very strong opinions about the taser weapon. We are strongly considering replacing it with the vanilla knife/pistol. #fb", and i don't like this one<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
lol'ed and agreed
<!--quoteo(post=1720525:date=Aug 3 2009, 05:11 PM:name=MuYeah)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MuYeah @ Aug 3 2009, 05:11 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1720525"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Anyway, I'm reasonably convinced that Flayra & friends will make a great game and that they can judge for themselves when to listen to and when to ignore feedback.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The second twitter post quoted above is what worries me and probably the main reason this topic was started. OP worrying about devs not sticking to their original vision.
<!--quoteo(post=1719744:date=Jul 28 2009, 03:57 AM:name=Bacillus)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bacillus @ Jul 28 2009, 03:57 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1719744"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Completely ignoring the forums sounds overkill. By all means the devs should have their own vision and stick to it, but reading the forums doesn't hurt unless you take them too seriously. With a healthy amount of common sense and some dev inside knowledge it shouldn't be too difficult to tell which thoughts actually are relevant and worth further consideration.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
agreed, adding that at this point we as normal fans and forum goes have very little to go on to form our opinions. UWE stay the course! You alone fully understand your full vision. At this point the forums and community should be used more to ADD rather than REMOVE ideas. And even then only in extreme cases of designer's block.
<!--quoteo(post=1719745:date=Jul 28 2009, 04:04 AM:name=todd1Ok)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (todd1Ok @ Jul 28 2009, 04:04 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1719745"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->And to keep it on topic, No, listen to your customers. Otherwise you end up out of business. Period.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
...but only AFTER your customers has tried your product.
yeah, I didn't pay for NS1 with improved graphics.. Then you shoulda just made a Source version of NS...
Oh and someone said something about how they should listen to the veterans to hear what they have to say...
What the heck gives them the right to choose what the REST of the players want to be in NS2??
Charlie!! Shut down the forum untill NS2 is released!!!! :P
<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc--><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
^^ what he said..
yeah, I didn't pay for NS1 with improved graphics.. Then you shoulda just made a Source version of NS...
Oh and someone said something about how they should listen to the veterans to hear what they have to say...
What the heck gives them the right to choose what the REST of the players want to be in NS2??
Charlie!! Shut down the forum untill NS2 is released!!!! :P
<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc--><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I assume you mean besides the fact that the veterans are hugely responsible for supporting and molding NS into the game it is today, giving Charlie the opportunity to start UWE and begin development on NS2.
Pretty sure it's the <b>exact opposite</b>. The devs' vision involved a 'dual function backup weapon', and then the community decided to rant against it. Long story short, you completely missed the point.
I love how you're arguing the exact opposite in the other thread, that the way the game is has nothing to do with veterans or the way it's designed, but everything to do with hl air control. I think what you're saying here is <i>more</i> correct than your other statement. I think the devs had a much larger role in designing NS than you're giving them credit for :-p
Is the old 1.0x manual still around? I'd like to add that (iirc) the manual stated that the pistol had a special recoil vectoring whatever system, which made it recoil-less and charged bullets back in faster. Basically means that it was meant to be used for the high accuracy/RoF.
Never really felt it fit, but I appreciated it when I started playing. Though now that I've completely stopped playing games competitively, I'm really not that into the uberpistol, though I can understand why people still cling to it.
Wrong, let me merge and summarize the two threads I believe you are talking about:
The devs tried to implement unique movement mechanics... and failed. This was made obvious thanks to player testing and opinion. So they tried again. This went on for ages (NS was "beta" for like 4 years LOL). Eventually the developers finally implemented simple movement mechanics that relied less on their own ingenuity and more on what the PLAYERS wanted - movement that facilitated half-life air control.
I am not saying the the developers did a ###### job. They formed an awesome foundation for a game with complexity the likes of which the half-life engine had never seen; one of the greatest games ever made. However, when it came to the finer aspects of NS, the aspects that were refined by <b>playing</b> the game, the <b>players</b> knew better.
This is why I am suggesting the developers should mold the high level game mechanics as they desire: redefine the role of the commander, change resource structure, implement dynamic infestation, change siege mechanics, hell they could even add in another race, etc... However, they should rely heavily on the community's opinion when it comes to the aspects that define the feel of the game: alien movement, marine movement, aim, recoil (or lack there of), cone of fire, fundamental weapons, game-pace, etc... With this in mind, the development team should attempt to maintain continuity in low level mechanics from NS1 to NS2. Movement, aim, fundamental weapons, game-pace should all remain relatively similar.