5 Reasons NS Scares People Away
noisywalrus
Join Date: 2010-12-15 Member: 75694Members
Join Date: 2010-12-15 Member: 75694Members
Disclaimer: I think it's fair to start providing feedback about what appear to be clear philosophical decisions. I can only make guesses about what is a placeholder. I don't know the gaming industry, but I know a little about playing games, a little about software engineering, and a little about how to read a balance sheet. My analysis below is based half on what I think is sound gameplay and half on what I think is sound business.
The situation: Fast-forward some months from now. The feature set might be looking pretty darn complete. Crashes are down, framerate is up, and everything is all double rainbows on the Big Rock Candy Mountain. It's good to report bugs, but idiotic to cry about them. It'll all get fixed. However, I think some design decisions being made right now could have some unintended consequences later.
The uncomfortable truth: Many gamers are intimidated by NS2. I assume this is bad. Maybe you don't want to make compromises and only want to make the game you always wanted to make for you and like-minded people. That would be both awesome and valid, but if that is the case then I can offer no useful suggestions.
If you *do* want to attract more people, here's why I think they are intimidated (many I've heard from people I know who refused to play NS1 more than a day) and how I think this can be addressed:
<b>Domain knowledge required to play a single game is staggering.</b>
<ul><li> Problem: Map navigation, chokepoints, buildings, tech trees, team status, in-game conventions, etc... and you still have to be a decent shot.</li><li> Sucks because: Few people want to feel like they have to study just to play a game.</li><li> Hardcore people love it because: Predetermined advantages are what competitive people thrive on.</li><li> Potential solutions: Extremely deep tutorials, raidframe-style popups ("you're standing in the fire") that are suppressed once you demonstrate that you get it (like L4D), more feedback about game/player/team state and what player can do to correct negative behaviors and repeat positive ones</li></ul>
<b>Maps are confusing and one hallway looks the same as the next.</b>
<ul><li> Problem: Right now, the maps look like these big generic collection of sci-fi corridors. Best way to figure out where you are is to type something in chat. Even then, it's highly likely that the name of your current location is some abstract concept ("Access Tunnel") that provides no helpful context. How far am I away from home? How far to the enemy base? Is the room next door relatively safer or not? Makes awesome screenshots, but it's tough to construct a mental picture in your head about without playing one for 2+ hours.</li><li> Sucks because: New players shouldn't have to pull up their minimap (which I assume will exist in final). They're excited but held back by a) getting yelled at for wandering off and b) not knowing where to go when someone says WEST! OMG IT'S GOING DOWN. NOW, DAMMIT.</li><li> Hardcore people love it because: Predetermined advantages are what competitive people thrive on.</li><li> Potential solution: Compasses, minimaps (as a fallback), signposts everywhere (TF2), waypoints that can trace through the centers of the intermediate rooms (GPS-style), ability for players to set their own waypoints on minimap, Crazy Taxi "smart" heading arrow. BIG lights around pathable doors and vents. (Fun fact: most marines don't know there's a 3rd exit out of marine start in tram because your doors don't look walkable.)</li></ul>
<b>Dying with no feedback is frustrating.</b>
<ul><li> Problem: Hey, I think I see someth.... splat.</li><li> Sucks because: It's really hard to figure out what you did wrong whe... splat.</li><li> Hardcore people love it because: I'm not sure anyone likes this besides people who are playing with the currently-hilarious lerk alt-fire down long hallways.</li><li> Potential solution: Deathcam, 5-second instant replay, reminders about the weapon that killed you ("protip: flames will blind you for 2.5 seconds and do x dmg per second with a y/sec dot. At full blast, your fade will last 4.7 seconds with current armor.")</li></ul>
<b>Buildings are confusing and do not reflect purpose or importance well.</b>
<ul><li> Problem: Do the spores coming out of that reef rock hurt me like the gas? Which way is this turret pointed? How do I get a different gun? What's this big grey box in the middle of base?</li><li> Sucks because: You would never think life or death -- especially as a marine -- comes down to the little metal disc on the ground that just got eaten by a skulk.</li><li> Hardcore people love it because: "Well, you should've learned the game/read the manual/studied the playguide/hung out in the forum/etc."</li><li> Potential solutions: Art is expensive. I understand if that's not changing. Maybe lose the subtlety and make open res nodes produce more smoke and glow, create video demos that can be played in-game of what each structure does (think SC2), L4D-style white outlines + tooltips over things you can interact with in the world. Built, unbuilt, and damaged states wouldn't hurt either. Alien buildings do a pretty good job of expressing function via silhouette, but marine buildings? In an ideal world, com chairs would have glass windows so you can see a guy sits inside it, armories would have gun racks mounted on the outside, etc.</li></ul>
<b>Commander is impossible to practice.</b>
<ul><li> Problem: People who want to really see what this RTS/FPS thing is about don't really have a way to do so.</li><li> Potential solutions: Better UI (I'm sure you're working on it) that emphasizes decision-making over physical dexterity. Think MMO healer or tank. They manage situations, not firearms. I have some ideas for this which I may post later. Create an environment that allows the com to do really great things, rather than just avoid doing stupid things or running errands on a schedule (re: the sadly stuck-in-1998 SC2 design).</li></ul>
Overall: <b>Simplify.</b> Insert your favorite quote here about perfection being simply the minimal viable good idea. It looks fantastic right now, guys. Now to just get more people to give it a chance to show them how much fun it can be....
The situation: Fast-forward some months from now. The feature set might be looking pretty darn complete. Crashes are down, framerate is up, and everything is all double rainbows on the Big Rock Candy Mountain. It's good to report bugs, but idiotic to cry about them. It'll all get fixed. However, I think some design decisions being made right now could have some unintended consequences later.
The uncomfortable truth: Many gamers are intimidated by NS2. I assume this is bad. Maybe you don't want to make compromises and only want to make the game you always wanted to make for you and like-minded people. That would be both awesome and valid, but if that is the case then I can offer no useful suggestions.
If you *do* want to attract more people, here's why I think they are intimidated (many I've heard from people I know who refused to play NS1 more than a day) and how I think this can be addressed:
<b>Domain knowledge required to play a single game is staggering.</b>
<ul><li> Problem: Map navigation, chokepoints, buildings, tech trees, team status, in-game conventions, etc... and you still have to be a decent shot.</li><li> Sucks because: Few people want to feel like they have to study just to play a game.</li><li> Hardcore people love it because: Predetermined advantages are what competitive people thrive on.</li><li> Potential solutions: Extremely deep tutorials, raidframe-style popups ("you're standing in the fire") that are suppressed once you demonstrate that you get it (like L4D), more feedback about game/player/team state and what player can do to correct negative behaviors and repeat positive ones</li></ul>
<b>Maps are confusing and one hallway looks the same as the next.</b>
<ul><li> Problem: Right now, the maps look like these big generic collection of sci-fi corridors. Best way to figure out where you are is to type something in chat. Even then, it's highly likely that the name of your current location is some abstract concept ("Access Tunnel") that provides no helpful context. How far am I away from home? How far to the enemy base? Is the room next door relatively safer or not? Makes awesome screenshots, but it's tough to construct a mental picture in your head about without playing one for 2+ hours.</li><li> Sucks because: New players shouldn't have to pull up their minimap (which I assume will exist in final). They're excited but held back by a) getting yelled at for wandering off and b) not knowing where to go when someone says WEST! OMG IT'S GOING DOWN. NOW, DAMMIT.</li><li> Hardcore people love it because: Predetermined advantages are what competitive people thrive on.</li><li> Potential solution: Compasses, minimaps (as a fallback), signposts everywhere (TF2), waypoints that can trace through the centers of the intermediate rooms (GPS-style), ability for players to set their own waypoints on minimap, Crazy Taxi "smart" heading arrow. BIG lights around pathable doors and vents. (Fun fact: most marines don't know there's a 3rd exit out of marine start in tram because your doors don't look walkable.)</li></ul>
<b>Dying with no feedback is frustrating.</b>
<ul><li> Problem: Hey, I think I see someth.... splat.</li><li> Sucks because: It's really hard to figure out what you did wrong whe... splat.</li><li> Hardcore people love it because: I'm not sure anyone likes this besides people who are playing with the currently-hilarious lerk alt-fire down long hallways.</li><li> Potential solution: Deathcam, 5-second instant replay, reminders about the weapon that killed you ("protip: flames will blind you for 2.5 seconds and do x dmg per second with a y/sec dot. At full blast, your fade will last 4.7 seconds with current armor.")</li></ul>
<b>Buildings are confusing and do not reflect purpose or importance well.</b>
<ul><li> Problem: Do the spores coming out of that reef rock hurt me like the gas? Which way is this turret pointed? How do I get a different gun? What's this big grey box in the middle of base?</li><li> Sucks because: You would never think life or death -- especially as a marine -- comes down to the little metal disc on the ground that just got eaten by a skulk.</li><li> Hardcore people love it because: "Well, you should've learned the game/read the manual/studied the playguide/hung out in the forum/etc."</li><li> Potential solutions: Art is expensive. I understand if that's not changing. Maybe lose the subtlety and make open res nodes produce more smoke and glow, create video demos that can be played in-game of what each structure does (think SC2), L4D-style white outlines + tooltips over things you can interact with in the world. Built, unbuilt, and damaged states wouldn't hurt either. Alien buildings do a pretty good job of expressing function via silhouette, but marine buildings? In an ideal world, com chairs would have glass windows so you can see a guy sits inside it, armories would have gun racks mounted on the outside, etc.</li></ul>
<b>Commander is impossible to practice.</b>
<ul><li> Problem: People who want to really see what this RTS/FPS thing is about don't really have a way to do so.</li><li> Potential solutions: Better UI (I'm sure you're working on it) that emphasizes decision-making over physical dexterity. Think MMO healer or tank. They manage situations, not firearms. I have some ideas for this which I may post later. Create an environment that allows the com to do really great things, rather than just avoid doing stupid things or running errands on a schedule (re: the sadly stuck-in-1998 SC2 design).</li></ul>
Overall: <b>Simplify.</b> Insert your favorite quote here about perfection being simply the minimal viable good idea. It looks fantastic right now, guys. Now to just get more people to give it a chance to show them how much fun it can be....
Comments
They solved it, probably, with the campain and the challenges you can play.
just kidding
I bet there will be a great tutorial when the game is feature complete.
Remember that tram is the only full map available. The others are for testing only.
For all other issues see "standart-answer #1" for current NS2 questions: It's a BETA and not yet complete :P
Ns1 and ns2 are and will be harsher on the player by a factor of 5 than sc2. Complexity is fine if its fun to learn. Right now players basically learn through abuse. Heck how many experienced good coms used to get booted out the chair in ns1? Several of my mates flat out refused to play again after their first game of ns1.
Like the points on more intuitive looking buildings above. Even a spinning holographic weapon on top of the armory. Not sure how you can make res or power intuitive though- short of hanging big cables everywhere in levels. Really need to implement some of these ideas- tutorials etc- and let some new players loose on it.
Something fun- Avatar boot camp.
Having said that... most of us love NS because it is deep, rich and complex, don't we? We need to be careful what we wish for, anything that helps new players get into the game is definitely a good thing but it shouldn't be at the expense of gameplay. Most of the problems observed by the OP are real, and most of his suggestions are sensible.
<ul><li> Problem: Right now, the maps look like these big generic collection of sci-fi corridors. Best way to figure out where you are is to type something in chat. Even then, it's highly likely that the name of your current location is some abstract concept ("Access Tunnel") that provides no helpful context. How far am I away from home? How far to the enemy base? Is the room next door relatively safer or not? Makes awesome screenshots, but it's tough to construct a mental picture in your head about without playing one for 2+ hours.</li></ul><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Don't really have any complaints about anything in all this, but I always wondered about complaints like these in videogames. Do I just have a magical memory that can learn the exits in a room the first time I enter it? As long as it's even slightly visually distinct.
Agreed.
Besides, you have a commander telling you where to go :P
The maps really are not that confusing...and if you think of realism (if you feel like making that connection) why should a facility that was desined for efficiency have distinctive corridors? It's not like people are supposed to feel at home there :P
<a href="http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/extra-credits/2454-Easy-Games" target="_blank">http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/vie...2454-Easy-Games</a>
and a tutorial is already planned for ns2
However, the part I disagree on is:
<b>Simplify</b>
Using the right words is important to how you approach something, as really it should be:
<b>Make it Understandable</b>
Simplify (also to a lot of people on here) makes it sound like you are taking away from the game, rather than making the learning curve easier.
For me the devs seem to have a simple view of the behavioural aspects of people. Really people don't care how it all works at the end of the day. The key is to making the game 'feel' simple, whilst being inherently complex.
Biggest issues for me are:
# Learning curve of commander, identification of buildings on screen, tech tree.
# Map location, communication, status, direction, support, weak way points, realationship of players and commander.
# I still get lost in Tram, and there is no easy way to identify vents, etc.
The problem is these need really smart dynamic answers, not simple 'tool tips' that pop up - but an actual system for increasing learning, on a fun and cinematic level that is part of the game.
I.e possibilities:
# Get in the commander chair/hive - there is a log in cinematic sequence that quickly runs through a visual of the tech tree, your job, etc.
I'm not talking 'Hello commander welcome to the command chair'.. simple suggestive stuff. Logging in, downloading nanite database (tech tree), situation 'clear out alien threat' (displays aliens in order of threat) etc. Quick, cool, informative visuals.
# Command advisor - advises next building to be built, clicking on more advanced buildings on the menu and it displays the build route to that particular weapon/upgrade/etc. Sgt Barlow was quite up on the idea, so it might make it's way in.
# Move the game towards the commander 'commanding' players across the map more, so that they have purpose, direction, support and increased relationship with comm.
Way points are not sturdy enough, the text is too small, and there are no 'on location' decals on the floor. If a squad or build bot or anything is clicked on by the commander, the whole team should see what they are doing.
The more understanding of what what each players intentions are the better.
That link above is awesome.
Someone was saying we should all rush the alien hive. That didnt work because:
- some players dont know what a hive is or where they are
- many do not know the names of the different parts of the maps
- the commander couldnt work out how to create/manage squads and give orders, or even know that he could do that
- we couldnt see where our team mates were
- with the weapons we had it was impossible to get near the hives
- players can easily ignore any team play efforts and act like its a team deathmatch game (or not even realise we're supposed to work as a team to be able to win)
I say go back to finger-painting or staring at the wall. Clearly NS2 or any game of depth just isn't for you.
Seriously though, you're hating on the fact there is depth to the game? The fact it's not <i>instantly</i> obvious how to play it like a pro? That it's not just a point & shoot game ala CoD?
Although I'll agree on the monotony of the maps in terms of corridor design, every single FPS/RTS/RPG requires you to learn, one way or another, the layout of the maps and gradual mastery of the game mechanics if you want to play it competently.
As for the replay function; StarCraft 2, CSS etc don't hold your hand and replay back to you <i>why</i> you lost, that's left up to you to determine. They're not super easy games, yet they're wildly popular. I doubt that the complexity of NS2, which isn't rocket science, is going to scare people away.
Also if you played NS1 you would have noticed that the minimap system isn't hard to follow, every area is clearly labelled, and its easy to see from the map alone how to get there.
<a href="http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/extra-credits/2454-Easy-Games" target="_blank">http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/vie...2454-Easy-Games</a>
and a tutorial is already planned for ns2<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Terribad video
But he is right good tutorial is necessery, certainly worth putting a lot effort into, but jesus dont think depth is what this guy (in video) thinks.
Unfortunately this would mean less sales.
For example, getting feedback on what you did wrong when you died, such as a deathcam, can be awesome for learning. But when you play against a team that uses ambushes and try to suprise the marines, it can be completely devastating. Sure if I kill someone they will know I am in that area, but then I might move to a new hideout in a nearby room, which they would see if they had a deathcam, making them able to go and pick me out next life, when I was completely sure noone had seen me move there (happened quite often because of my last kill spectating me during those seconds it take for a rine to respawn).
The biggest problem scaring players away if you ask me, is that the other players are unfriendly toward noobs. For example, the first time I played classic in ns1, people kept shouting at me that I was going to the wrong place, and that I should move to a place named something else, and generally insulting me for not obeying the comms orders. It got even worse when I tried being comm myself, they called me worthless, and indeed I was, but they didnt offer any help, only telling me to exit the cc, insulting me and acting pretty much like victory was all they cared about, not helping out the new.
Needless to say, I figured classic was boring because of all the unfriendly players, and only played combat in ns1 (way more independant gameplay, making ppl not care about how much I sucked at first).
I know not everyone is all this unfriendly, and that it is just a miniority, but it is still to many. I actually joined a classic server later on, which were filled with bots and around 2 other humans, which all were very friendly and helped me figure out what button did what, and how to comm in general. Still stayed away from classic though.
Now that we are all noobs (ns2 is merely a beta), and have to figure out the new stuff, people is way more tolerant, not to mention helping eachothers (that or its only the friendly players who preordered and play alpha and beta, while the others ragequit and post rage threads (which reminds me, I havent seen any for quite a while now)).
So I plead, please stay tolerant with new people, there is nothing that can encourage someone to play a game (especially one as complex as ns2) more than friendly players helping you out, but there is also nothing that can scare people away quite like elitist ######s who refined their methods on countless of noobs.
sounds like youd be right at home in black ops.
go go theres a bomb that needs diffusing.. somewhere.
"Sorry, I'm new help me out" usually helps, coming to a new game with an almighty attitude doesnt really help.
Listening to commander can be a good start chances are he has more experience if not everyones happy anyway and if you cant take few insults from immature kids, internet is not the place for you.
I personally havent seen any new player discrimination for quite sometime occasional ammo/health pack rages but DIV1 top commanders get that too no point taking it too personal (unless your div1 comm <3).
<!--quoteo(post=1816382:date=Dec 16 2010, 06:50 AM:name=noisywalrus)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (noisywalrus @ Dec 16 2010, 06:50 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1816382"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><b>Domain knowledge required to play a single game is staggering.</b>
<ul><li> Problem: Map navigation, chokepoints, buildings, tech trees, team status, in-game conventions, etc... and you still have to be a decent shot.</li><li> Sucks because: Few people want to feel like they have to study just to play a game.</li><li> Hardcore people love it because: Predetermined advantages are what competitive people thrive on.</li><li> Potential solutions: Extremely deep tutorials, raidframe-style popups ("you're standing in the fire") that are suppressed once you demonstrate that you get it (like L4D), more feedback about game/player/team state and what player can do to correct negative behaviors and repeat positive ones</li></ul><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This will never be fixed and there is no problem. All strategy games are like this. NS2 is a strategy game. Learning is what strategy games are. It'd be nice if we could all instantly know how to perfectly play chess. But that will never happen.
Some games reward mental effort. For a game to reward mental effort, it must reward mental laziness less/nothing or punish mental laziness. This is unavoidable.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><b>Maps are confusing and one hallway looks the same as the next.</b>
<ul><li> Problem: Right now, the maps look like these big generic collection of sci-fi corridors. Best way to figure out where you are is to type something in chat. Even then, it's highly likely that the name of your current location is some abstract concept ("Access Tunnel") that provides no helpful context. How far am I away from home? How far to the enemy base? Is the room next door relatively safer or not? Makes awesome screenshots, but it's tough to construct a mental picture in your head about without playing one for 2+ hours.</li><li> Sucks because: New players shouldn't have to pull up their minimap (which I assume will exist in final). They're excited but held back by a) getting yelled at for wandering off and b) not knowing where to go when someone says WEST! OMG IT'S GOING DOWN. NOW, DAMMIT.</li><li> Hardcore people love it because: Predetermined advantages are what competitive people thrive on.</li><li> Potential solution: Compasses, minimaps (as a fallback), signposts everywhere (TF2), waypoints that can trace through the centers of the intermediate rooms (GPS-style), ability for players to set their own waypoints on minimap, Crazy Taxi "smart" heading arrow. BIG lights around pathable doors and vents. (Fun fact: most marines don't know there's a 3rd exit out of marine start in tram because your doors don't look walkable.)</li></ul><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is a big concern. Learning maps in NS is very difficult. I like the self waypoint idea. <b>A map and a minimap need to be in NS2. This is a top priority and must be finished before NS2 is released.</b>
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><b>Dying with no feedback is frustrating.</b>
<ul><li> Problem: Hey, I think I see someth.... splat.</li><li> Sucks because: It's really hard to figure out what you did wrong whe... splat.</li><li> Hardcore people love it because: I'm not sure anyone likes this besides people who are playing with the currently-hilarious lerk alt-fire down long hallways.</li><li> Potential solution: Deathcam, 5-second instant replay, reminders about the weapon that killed you ("protip: flames will blind you for 2.5 seconds and do x dmg per second with a y/sec dot. At full blast, your fade will last 4.7 seconds with current armor.")</li></ul><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No feedback would be retarded. NS2 does have some feedback, but not enough. You know who killed you and with what. A third person instant replay would be nice. <b>Displaying statistics of the weapon which killed you while you respawn would be great.</b> A replay from the killer's perspective as they kill you would also be good.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><b>Buildings are confusing and do not reflect purpose or importance well.</b>
<ul><li> Problem: Do the spores coming out of that reef rock hurt me like the gas? Which way is this turret pointed? How do I get a different gun? What's this big grey box in the middle of base?</li><li> Sucks because: You would never think life or death -- especially as a marine -- comes down to the little metal disc on the ground that just got eaten by a skulk.</li><li> Hardcore people love it because: "Well, you should've learned the game/read the manual/studied the playguide/hung out in the forum/etc."</li><li> Potential solutions: Art is expensive. I understand if that's not changing. Maybe lose the subtlety and make open res nodes produce more smoke and glow, create video demos that can be played in-game of what each structure does (think SC2), L4D-style white outlines + tooltips over things you can interact with in the world. Built, unbuilt, and damaged states wouldn't hurt either. Alien buildings do a pretty good job of expressing function via silhouette, but marine buildings? In an ideal world, com chairs would have glass windows so you can see a guy sits inside it, armories would have gun racks mounted on the outside, etc.</li></ul><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This problem will never be fixed. In-game buildings represent fictional concepts (like "Robotics Facility", "Weapon dispenser", or "Healing structure") which have absolutely no basis in real life. There is no possible way for their images to have any logical relation to their function because there is no logical precept from real life to follow.
Again, we come back to strategy games requiring mental energy to play correctly, which isn't surprising and shouldn't be upsetting. Furthermore, NS2 is a sci-fi game. NS2's building artwork will never be completely intuitive.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><b>Commander is impossible to practice.</b>
<ul><li> Problem: People who want to really see what this RTS/FPS thing is about don't really have a way to do so.</li><li> Potential solutions: Better UI (I'm sure you're working on it) that emphasizes decision-making over physical dexterity. Think MMO healer or tank. They manage situations, not firearms. I have some ideas for this which I may post later. Create an environment that allows the com to do really great things, rather than just avoid doing stupid things or running errands on a schedule (re: the sadly stuck-in-1998 SC2 design).</li></ul><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
People who want to see what this RTS/FPS thing is about can enter the command station or hive. This opportunity is not obvious.
SC2 makes production difficult for a reason. It's a huge skill requirement. SC2 is also an esport. SC2 is also the <i>biggest</i> esport ever. It needs retarded, hostile skill requirements so people can overcome those skill requirements better than anyone else be professional gamers. Is NS2 an esport? No, not hardly. Does it need to be playable by new comers? Absolutely yes or it will tank, full stop, no one can successfully argue against me on this point.
That said, I don't think NS2 under emphasizes "decision making" (like upgrading, I suppose) or over emphasizes physical dexterity. Soldier efficiency is not dependent on commander skill. Telling soldiers to go to X location instead of Y location, or build Z building instead of W building is decision making--- Choosing one option over others.
Commanders must make those choices, otherwise the game plays itself and isn't a game (strategy or otherwise). So selecting the build menu, then selecting "Robotics Factory", then clicking on the screen to place the building are all necessary. Again, NS2 is a strategy game. If commanders can't actually make choices, it's not. And as I've said before, strategy games are viable and good games. No reason to hate on them for being strategy games and choices which require brain power and fiddling with hardware interfaces are necessary.
The only "chore" I can think of in NS2 is building resource towers. But again, that is a necessary chore, because the location must be an option. Thus, the commander must exhaust some energy in building resource towers or NS2 loses an invaluable part (choosing when to expand one's economy!!!).
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Overall: <b>Simplify.</b> Insert your favorite quote here about perfection being simply the minimal viable good idea. It looks fantastic right now, guys. Now to just get more people to give it a chance to show them how much fun it can be....<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Everything should be made obvious, not simple ("This is how to command, now try to manage your economy, upgrade, build, order, and produce while an enemy commander is doing all those things too"). And very few things should be made truly easy (like moving, reloading) because then there is no difficulty to master, no skill requirement, and no reason to play aside from cutscenes and graphics.
And if I wanted to watch a movie, I'd watch one with a experienced director, writer, and actors. I don't want movies made by computer programmers for pretty obvious reasons.
I am not sure if it was mentioned before, but hating the new armory I wonder why the menu isn't on the armory itself like a modern game should provide. I expected to see something like the DOOM3 access pads but I got an annoying window that "takes me out of the game"
the old buildings always had the nice looking but disfunctional displays. with modern game technology...well I just don't get it or is it more like an time/effort issue for the team?
the model is already made...waste of time for me.
They solved it, probably, with the campain and the challenges you can play.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
SC2 is popular because it's SC1 in a shinier box.
SC1 is popular because... I have no idea why. But it is popular, so SC2 is popular, SC2 would be popular if the did absolutely nothing to it from SC1, because it automatically inheits the huge SC1 fanbase.
It's not a good example of game design, it doesn't have to be good, it just has to be SC.
SC1 is popular because... I have no idea why. But it is popular, so SC2 is popular, SC2 would be popular if the did absolutely nothing to it from SC1, because it automatically inheits the huge SC1 fanbase.
It's not a good example of game design, it doesn't have to be good, it just has to be SC.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Bull######, SC is popular even still because it is a good game with dept.
SC2 is a different game, new units, abilities and an actual gameplay the one thing you seem to dislike so much.
Listening to commander can be a good start chances are he has more experience if not everyones happy anyway and if you cant take few insults from immature kids, internet is not the place for you.
I personally havent seen any new player discrimination for quite sometime occasional ammo/health pack rages but DIV1 top commanders get that too no point taking it too personal (unless your div1 comm <3).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
As I said, I do know that its just a miniority that rage on new people, but it can feel quite hostile when you are a new player, and as you know the first impression matters alot. Saying that I was new did not really help, and the comm cant help when you are lost and dont know how to get where he wants you to be.
Also, I can take the insults (I even agreed with some of them, as I knew I was bad at the game), but I do not like gaming in an environment where people insult others (thus I only played combat). Why would someone want to play in a hostile environment when there is other games you can play ;)?
Obviously I might have had bad luck and joined a server which at that time had more unfriendly players than usuall, but the fact remains, there is nothing which 'scares' away noobs better than a hostile environment, so I really hope everyone stays as helpfull as they are now, a nice community will make new players want to learn the game ;).
<b>Posts: 1
Joined: Yesterday, 09:28 PM</b>
I'm really tired of this guy.
<ul><li> Problem: Right now, the maps look like these big generic collection of sci-fi corridors. Best way to figure out where you are is to type something in chat. Even then, it's highly likely that the name of your current location is some abstract concept ("Access Tunnel") that provides no helpful context. How far am I away from home? How far to the enemy base? Is the room next door relatively safer or not? Makes awesome screenshots, but it's tough to construct a mental picture in your head about without playing one for 2+ hours.</li><li> Sucks because: New players shouldn't have to pull up their minimap (which I assume will exist in final). They're excited but held back by a) getting yelled at for wandering off and b) not knowing where to go when someone says WEST! OMG IT'S GOING DOWN. NOW, DAMMIT.</li><li> Hardcore people love it because: Predetermined advantages are what competitive people thrive on.</li><li> Potential solution: Compasses, minimaps (as a fallback), signposts everywhere (TF2), waypoints that can trace through the centers of the intermediate rooms (GPS-style), ability for players to set their own waypoints on minimap, Crazy Taxi "smart" heading arrow. BIG lights around pathable doors and vents. (Fun fact: most marines don't know there's a 3rd exit out of marine start in tram because your doors don't look walkable.)</li></ul><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What game isn't like this? The lengths, turns, etc is different with most all hallways. Yes, a lot do look similar but what games hallways don't? I mean, TF2, a supposedly casual game has a bunch of gray walls. Sure there may be sign posts, but you still have to pull up your map and orient yourself... Just like with any game. In NS2, pull up your map a couple times and orient yourself.
All good tips, I just think this "issue" isn't a huge one as I have never really seen a game where this isn't a problem for new people. I wouldn't go as far as all of those tips though.
<ul><li> Problem: Right now, the maps look like these big generic collection of sci-fi corridors. Best way to figure out where you are is to type something in chat. Even then, it's highly likely that the name of your current location is some abstract concept ("Access Tunnel") that provides no helpful context. How far am I away from home? How far to the enemy base? Is the room next door relatively safer or not? Makes awesome screenshots, but it's tough to construct a mental picture in your head about without playing one for 2+ hours.</li><li> Sucks because: New players shouldn't have to pull up their minimap (which I assume will exist in final). They're excited but held back by a) getting yelled at for wandering off and b) not knowing where to go when someone says WEST! OMG IT'S GOING DOWN. NOW, DAMMIT.</li><li> Hardcore people love it because: Predetermined advantages are what competitive people thrive on.</li><li> Potential solution: Compasses, minimaps (as a fallback), signposts everywhere (TF2), waypoints that can trace through the centers of the intermediate rooms (GPS-style), ability for players to set their own waypoints on minimap, Crazy Taxi "smart" heading arrow. BIG lights around pathable doors and vents. (Fun fact: most marines don't know there's a 3rd exit out of marine start in tram because your doors don't look walkable.)</li></ul><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What game isn't like this? The lengths, turns, etc is different with most all hallways. Yes, a lot do look similar but what games hallways don't? I mean, TF2, a supposedly casual game has a bunch of gray walls. Sure there may be sign posts, but you still have to pull up your map and orient yourself... Just like with any game. In NS2, pull up your map a couple times and orient yourself.
All good tips, I just think this "issue" isn't cause for concern as I have never really seen a game where this isn't a problem for new people. I wouldn't go as far as all of those tips though.
SC2 is a different game, new units, abilities and an actual gameplay the one thing you seem to dislike so much.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It feels like it's off the ark, it feels like playing a crappier version of warcraft 3, and warcraft 3 is off the ark.
It's not on the level of any modern RTS game, games like supreme commander, company of heroes, world in conflict, total war, those are games that do interesting and good things with their design, SC2 is entirely fuelled by franchise hype and copying verbatim from SC and WC.
Company of heroes, for example, has quite a simple premise. Bullets hurt infantry, cannons hurt everything, hiding behind stuff makes you tougher.
From that, you get ideas like lots of bullets can pin infantry, so vs machineguns you are stuffed. However if you get where the MG can't shoot, you can beat it. In a matched fight the victory goes to whoever has the best cover or positioning. Tanks are resistant to bullets but they are huge so they are easier to hit with cannons. Infantry die if you shoot them with cannons but usually bullets will kill them faster, some units blur the lines like AT guns, which have infantry on them and so die to bullets, but they fire tank weapons so they are strong against tanks, however they are also large enough to hit reliably with concentrated AT fire so they aren't invicible.
You only need to know the three basic rules, bullets beat infantry, cannons beat everything somewhat, obstacles buff your health. From that all the mechanics of the game are extrapolated, all the tactics are devised, and all the fun of the game emerges.
Much better than the starcraft method, which is 'you have 20 million goddamn units and they all shoot different coloured lasers and do different damages for no visible reason SO YOU WILL LEARN THEM ALL'.
SC1 is popular because... I have no idea why. But it is popular, so SC2 is popular, SC2 would be popular if the did absolutely nothing to it from SC1, because it automatically inheits the huge SC1 fanbase.
It's not a good example of game design, it doesn't have to be good, it just has to be SC.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You're an idiot if you don't understand popularity of SC1 or SC2.
You understand why strategy games are popular or perhaps even "good", right? Right? I mean, I never thought of you as an idiot and this is the official NS2 forum. Perhaps you have just never thought about this. Rewards for mental effort? Ordering armies in war games? Watching sci-fi effects? Is any of this ringing a bell?
Let me talk about SC1 specifically. SC1 was popular in 1998 because it had great graphics, FREE multiplayer, and balanced truly asymmetric races brought over numerous patches. To put it modestly, SC1 was new and good. From 2000 onward, SC1 was recognized as the best computer strategy game of all time. Having mother ###### birthed esports in south korea, it also had an esports scene to amuse and inspire novices as they dreamed big.
However, SC1 was made in 1998. It had a hostile interface, to say the least. Warcraft 3 came out, and people slowly stopped caring about SC1.
SC2 was made to be an esport. Balanced as the first priority. Impossible to fully master as a close second priority. Large strategic complexity. Great graphics naturally. True to the original, but innovative. Right now, SC2 has the largest esports scene on the entire planet. SC1 career gamers are swiching over as quickly as their contracts run out and are never looking back. SC1 hobbyist gamers are doing the same. SC2's graphics are comparable to Crysis (that game websites use as a benchmarking tool for graphics cards).
SC2 has fully and completed satisfied its design objectives of being better than SC1 in all ways and a platform for global esports expansion. SC2 is slated to be one of the most important games of the next decade or even ever, if it brings esports to the mainstream in western civilization. SC2 is perhaps the best example of game design we have.
You may not agree with what the game design of SC2 accomplished, but you cannot ever say it is a bad example of game design.
You sir, are wrong. *Adjusts monocle*.
Yes, I am mocking myself. But I do it for the lulz, because I am mayhaps too serious. Serious business indeed. I just care about video games' ascension into mainstream society, so hearing ignorance pains my fragile disposition. Some would say I have a soft spot for video games in my heart. I would say I have a sweet tooth, grown in proportion to that of a saber tooth tiger, ready to strike at the core of all those who oppose me. Beware.
Yes, that was a Diablo 2 Necro quote ^^.