I don't get it.
sicbud
Join Date: 2009-07-08 Member: 68083Members
Join Date: 2009-07-08 Member: 68083Members
Comments
Said dedicated fans dearly love the game that was first created, and are deathly afraid of having it ruined. When you like something so much, its easy to get a little touchy and sensitive about changes.
Indeed.
However, if nothing changes, why bother with a sequel at all? Why not just load up NS and play that now.
Flayra is going to give us an awesome game.
However, if nothing changes, why bother with a sequel at all? Why not just load up NS and play that now.
Flayra is going to give us an awesome game.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Hey, I'm all for new content and innovation, but thats totally different than "dumbing down the game." From what I heard from glancing around here, the Pistol/Taser idea was shot, along with a mech idea or something else random like that. I would have been down with either of those, so I'm not sure why new content gets so much hate. But essentially removing or over-simplifying content to me is sort of...
Guess we'll find out.
But then whenever they release new info, all you guys do is ###### and act like you have no faith at all int he development team. What gives?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And what exactly do you propose we use these forums for? People get so appalled when someone disagrees with something on these boards, but if we all just chatted happily about how great everything is, the discussion would be useless.
Instead of crying about losing skill and how it is an appeal to noobs/dumbing down of the game there could be discussion on things like the leap autobite such as how it would actually effect the game. For example there would likely be an increase in effectiveness on a skulk rush since anyone who makes contact will have a bite. Or 'since they are switching the ability to be an attack instead of movement for primary use will there be a general increase in skulk speed or alternate form of movement bonus?'
So you just wanted to create another autobite thread. Sigh.
But then whenever they release new info, all you guys do is ###### and act like you have no faith at all int he development team. What gives?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Simple case of <a href="http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/UnpleasableFanbase" target="_blank">unpleasable fanbase</a>.
If you change something it's <a href="http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RuinedFOREVER" target="_blank">ruined forever</a> while remaining the same means people won't buy it because they <a href="http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Left4Dead" target="_blank">'won't pay 30$ for the same game'</a>
The general course of action is to <a href="http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FanDumb" target="_blank">ignore the fanbase</a> and work on making a good game because you're the game designers and you get <i>paid</i> to design games and therefore you know far more about it than the uneducated masses on the forums.
Nope, just giving an example based on a recent example of what the OP was talking about and how it could be discussed instead of just having players react negatively.
Discussion of he negative aspects is still discussion. You're perfectly welcome to bring the previous comments to the autobite discussion if you think they're valid. Just don't expect everyone to agree with your assessment. So far I've seen criticism, constructive criticism, support, and everything in-between for this particular feature. That's how a forum is supposed to work.
There are members of the forum who are unpleasable, there are members who are unabashed fanbois. Expecting everyone to agree that such and such a change is good all the time is simply not going to happen by the nature of communities. Every idea has a few detractors, and some ideas have more than others. Don't assume other people's motives unless it's relevant to the discussion and look at their arguments instead of making blanket generalizations about the forum. You and they will get more out of it.
But then whenever they release new info, all you guys do is ###### and act like you have no faith at all int he development team. What gives?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
These discussion forums were meant to DISCUSS features, news releases, ideas and so on. And thats what we are doing.
All of us have a partial view of how NS2 will be, and therefore make assumptions based on NS1 to express and base our opinions. Obviously that means changes wont be easily acceptable since we dont get the full picture perfectly, but we are doing our part discussing everything and anything we get our hands on.
Eventualy some news we get hurt the personal view we have about NS2 and therefore generate frustration towards the development team, just like you said. Just bare with us, because if some people are discuraged with UWE progress, its their own psiqués fault.
I am willing to sacrifice some of NS1's identity for a easier to pick up game for new players. There are people who oppose my agenda going are going to say that NS1 was easy enough to learn. That new players who didn't learn only have themselves to blame. That depth should trump accessibility. I will argue with them.
halo 2 sucked fat donkey di#k
halo three tried hard to fix what it destroyed, but it was too horribly mangled. still fun to be had, for sure, but nothing like halo 1.
If you change something it's <a href="http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RuinedFOREVER" target="_blank">ruined forever</a> while remaining the same means people won't buy it because they <a href="http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Left4Dead" target="_blank">'won't pay 30$ for the same game'</a>
The general course of action is to <a href="http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FanDumb" target="_blank">ignore the fanbase</a> and work on making a good game because you're the game designers and you get <i>paid</i> to design games and therefore you know far more about it than the uneducated masses on the forums.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The assessment of the situation there is scarily alike to the state of affairs on this forum/with NS2 :\
Critisism tends to provoke discussion better than the all-positive attitude. In addition blindness to own mistakes is a part of human nature, so sometimes the critisism can actually provide some 'Oh, never thought of that' moments. In any other case, anyone reading that can just think that the devs have got the big picture where everything works in perfect harmony.
The word you want is bear, not bare. I don't care, this is just an internet videogame forum, but I thought you'd want to know for future reference.
If you change something it's <a href="http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RuinedFOREVER" target="_blank">ruined forever</a> while remaining the same means people won't buy it because they <a href="http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Left4Dead" target="_blank">'won't pay 30$ for the same game'</a>
The general course of action is to <a href="http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FanDumb" target="_blank">ignore the fanbase</a> and work on making a good game because you're the game designers and you get <i>paid</i> to design games and therefore you know far more about it than the uneducated masses on the forums.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
+1
People just like to whine. I find discussion on gameplay elements (autobite, dual minigun wielding etc.) completely useless since no one played the game yet. No one knows how the game "feels" like. So these topics are simply wasted bytes to me.
The only kind of criticism I think does belong to this stage of development is comments on the artwork and the first renders. Although we don't see them in action, it's still something one can discuss without getting into too much speculation.
For the rest, it's just a waste of time. "omg dotn uze Source!!11! wtf dont us Steam!!1111 omfg keep bhopz! god autobite iz n00b!!" Come on now, it's getting old.
edit: me grammar socks
People just like to whine. I find discussion on gameplay elements (autobite, dual minigun wielding etc.) completely useless since no one played the game yet. No one knows how the game "feels" like. So these topics are simply wasted bytes to me.
The only kind of criticism I think does belong to this stage of development is comments on the artwork and the first renders. Although we don't see them in action, it's still something one can discuss without getting into too much speculation.
For the rest, it's just a waste of time. "omg dotn uze Source!!11! wtf dont us Steam!!1111 omfg keep bhopz! god autobite iz n00b!!" Come on now, it's getting old.
edit: me grammar socks<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
To bad that argument is self defeating. Thats like saying game developers have no ###### idea what they are doing because they havn't seen their initial concepts in-game. How about we make the marines have no-clip and shoot lazerbeams out their crapholes? Who knows, it might work? YOU CERTAINLY DON'T BECAUSE YOU HAVN'T SEEN IT YET.
I just think it's a bit premature to say that because of one feature that nobody has seen in action, people claim that they would drop the game on release.
Well, game developers did see their initial concepts in-game, we didn't. If they believe adding X or Y could be interesting, then why not? They can see the bigger picture, we can't yet. Once we're in alpha/beta, well then they can say "We thinking of adding X to the Onos" and we'll be able to give better feedback before they implement it.
Don't fool yourself; laser beam shooting crapholes can prove to be quite challenging. The skills and risks involved in turning your back to the enemy and guess where he'll be to disintegrate him would be no small feat, even with noclip enabled.
Besides, the game isn't even out yet.
I am willing to see changes in NS2, because it is a new game. NS1 will -probably- still be around by the time its sequel comes out. In other words, if you don't like it nobody's making you pay for it. There will always be people that join communities just to express their opposing opinions.
I made a post to Derek Smart once for something similar. I think he deleted my post.
Spot on mate !!
Personally, I'm glad he didn't and I'm quite looking forward to NS2, all changes included.
But ... I can't help but wonder if there would be much less outcries and moaning about changes that no one has even had a chance to try yet, to a game no one knows.
Just because it <b>sounds</b> like a change that you might not like, doesn't mean that is the case. Who knows ... maybe the exo suit they mentioned a while back would have been the most badassed thing in a game to date. Now, I guess we'll just never know.
That may have something to do with the fact that this is now a job, as in they need it to sell a lot and be commercial otherwise they end up living in a box in an alley.
You can either have NS1 with updated graphics, or you can have NS3, NS4, and NS5.
As NS2 is purportedly moddable, you may even be able to have both, but only if the game is designed to be commericlaly successful first and foremost.
I'm personally all for change in NS, otherwise it's just NS1 looking better.
I don't know why people are complaining anyhow, if they really want to change the game play when it is out, they can simply mod; I'm there will be some kind of "classic" mod :)
Don't forget this isn't EA games - UWE are actually trying to make a game that is first an foremost fun to play - and if it makes money than that is a bonus (and if it is fun of course it will)
Yes, which is precisely why judging that NS2 will be "watered down" at this stage is ridiculous. I understand you care about the game and you're passionate, but you can't tell which sort of features of the game/engine/accidental happenings will make the game "unique" or introduce unusual elements of skill. Almost every hypercompetitive game has evolved in such an unpredictable way.
I understand if you're impassioned, but at least be reasonable about what you can and can't predict.
The most controversial features to carry over from any prequeal are always the unintentional mechanics that molded the prequel. In any sequel, developers must recognize and intentionally incorporate what was initially created unintentionally. <b>Developers</b>, "earn the right" to modify game mechanics they initially conceptualized and implemented. In contrast, there are many great aspects of NS1 that the <b>players</b> are more qualified to comment on than the actual developers - features that are crucial to NS1 gameplay but were not intentionally implemented by the developers.
In the case of NS, player control is on the top of the list. There arn't <b>just a few</b> players more qualified than the developers to mold player controls there are <b>many</b> players more qualified. Thus, when the developers start announcing changes to player control mechanics like air control, bunny hopping, restricting movement, or changing attack mechanics there are <b>many</b> players that feel they have the right to strongly voice their opinions. Telling those players, "stfu you don't know better than the developers" is well...just laughable.