My thoughts on NS2

2»

Comments

  • playerplayer Join Date: 2010-09-12 Member: 73982Members
    <!--quoteo(post=1870714:date=Aug 23 2011, 05:19 PM:name=vizionz)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (vizionz @ Aug 23 2011, 05:19 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1870714"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I am just going to LOL this... 2 games modes, hahaha, wow.

    You "people" really need to stop using the lingo "It shouldn't be to hard to make". You don't know what is involved in game development (clearly), so don't make accusations...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    J'accuse! We just build it on top of the ns2-gamemode (as opposed to a fork), as much of the work has already been done, and we can continue benefiting from ns2's bug-fixes.

    For example, removing sprinting should be but a few lines of script. Increasing marine\skulk-speed is but a value-change. Removing MACs is but a line or 2 to strip it from the comm-interface. Flamethrowers would take but a few lines to delete entirely. Buying from the armory would take but a few lines to disable (as comms can\will be able to drop guns near the armory soon, it'll be exactly like ns1 again). And so on...
  • BJHBnade_spammerBJHBnade_spammer Join Date: 2005-02-25 Member: 42431Members
    lol cool player we can market that as ns classic to keep the haters happy.
  • F O XF O X Join Date: 2010-02-20 Member: 70652Members
    edited August 2011
    I just wanted to add, isn't NS1 good for pro players because of his graphic 'simplicity' ?

    I like better graphics too, but when it's about adding one million objects in corridor to make it "realistic"; the necessity or bhopping is very reduced if you get blocked in every corners.. It's the same about realistic environnement, I play with max gamma on NS1 and it's OK, but all the flickering lights in NS2 sometimes give me headache.. The excellent level design and simple geometry in NS1 also allow you to remember each corner you can corner shot or part you can bhop, but is it the same with a too complex level design ? (for example sometimes you have decorative props on wall that disturb your view and you can't corner shot a skulk escaping)

    Making a NS1 mod for NS2 seems to be a good idea but there are a lot of things to change.. Also don't pay attention to "vizionz" he was the same telling to the developer to not care about our complaining for NS1 gameplay on another thread.. He's clearly a noob wanting to play NS2 like he plays cod on console
  • playerplayer Join Date: 2010-09-12 Member: 73982Members
    <!--quoteo(post=1870780:date=Aug 23 2011, 10:45 PM:name=F O X)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (F O X @ Aug 23 2011, 10:45 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1870780"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I just wanted to add, isn't NS1 good for pro players because of his graphic 'simplicity' ?

    I like better graphics too, but when it's about adding one million objects in corridor to make it "realistic"; the necessity or bhopping is very reduced if you get blocked in every corners.. It's the same about realistic environnement, I play with max gamma on NS1 and it's OK, but all the flickering lights in NS2 sometimes give me headache.. The excellent level design and simple geometry in NS1 also allow you to remember each corner you can corner shot or part you can bhop, but is it the same with a too complex level design ? (for example sometimes you have decorative props on wall that disturb your view and you can't corner shot a skulk escaping)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    That's exactly right and one of the things that disturb me quite a bit in NS2 (ea. getting stuck behind crates, lose wires and whatnot). NS1 maps were more like arenas: without clear footing in reality, but nicely streamlined for gameplay. If anyone intends to recreate any of the ol' NS1 maps (with the permission of the respective authors of course), I think this dimension of arena-like gameplay has to be preserved.
  • Chris0132Chris0132 Join Date: 2009-07-25 Member: 68262Members
    edited August 2011
    <!--quoteo(post=1870758:date=Aug 23 2011, 07:20 PM:name=henzee)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (henzee @ Aug 23 2011, 07:20 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1870758"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Making "NS1 classic gamemode" is not just changing stuff. NS1 gameplay is so much different atm from NS2 that this version would need also e.g different maps.

    And its not like NS1 has ever had players as much as CS or other popular games like that, so you cannot expect as many players these days anymore as they do have. Still NS1 was most popular hl-mod after CS and for a reason. Only wrong way to go here is to even try to compete with popular FPS games because graphics just dont reach to the same. So making a game that offers something different from those. NS1 is FPS+RTS game and it should stay like that to keep the players and attract more with its originality.

    NS2 is simpler and I get it why, but making game simpler isint always good or atleast the only way to make the game newbiefriendly. Im not all against the new stuff, I do like somethings like flamethrower that NS2 has, but it just seems that the game is becoming somekind of trench warfare -game where you just fight for one spot for 30min and the one who loses that loses the game. And what comes to commanders, i feel like they dont have anyother value on the game than building RT's and/or dropping medpacks. I just dont see the point of alien commander and compative gaming being 5v5 on field + alien and marine commander.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

    Maps are easy to make, loads of people are already making them. Besides you could quite easily convert existing ones by moving rooms around a little bit, taking out tech points, and adding a few more corridors. Much like with the rest of the game, you already have the assets, you just have to rearrange them a bit.

    The game is still FPSRTS, it's probably more FPSRTS than NS1 is as both sides have RTS commanders and the RTS side is more in-depth than it was in NS1, there are also more weapon (or will be) and more varied mechanics. NS2 expands upon NS1 in just about every conceivable way. If you liked commanding in NS1 I really don't see why you can dislike it in NS2, given that the comm does more or less everything it did in NS1 (minus spamming piles of guns at spawn) and more, with the increased reliance on phase gates, turrets, the new MACs and ARCs, and the alien infestation mechanic.

    There are a lot of complaints you can level against NS2 but complaining that it's dumbed down is one I find rather hard to justify, it's more complicated, it's also more intuitive in a lot of ways, which is the way complexity should work, but it's still more complicated. The game has added more mechanics but all mechanics are somewhat easier to understand at first glance due to better interface, effects, graphics etc.

    The game is a trenchy mess because it's broken at the moment, the devs have taken a lot of stuff to bits in order to change it and haven't got round to putting it back together again. It's extremely annoying yes but I would be pretty surprised if anything in the game is exhibiting its intended behaviour at the moment.
  • lunsluns Join Date: 2010-12-05 Member: 75502Members
    regrading the two modes idea...

    the problem with that ns2 gameplay is filled with two modes already mixed into one. Charlie has mixed up combat and ns maps ideas into single game or at least that's what he's trying to do. I personally support having CO maps, and NS maps, this way the player can experience two different versions of the same game.
  • Chris0132Chris0132 Join Date: 2009-07-25 Member: 68262Members
    edited August 2011
    Er, he has?

    Because to me it looks like he carbon copied NS1 and then stuck a bunch of new features on it, oh and then somewhere along the way a lot of the NS1 features got tidied up a bunch.

    NS2 has everything NS1 did, and nothing that combat did.
  • lunsluns Join Date: 2010-12-05 Member: 75502Members
    <!--quoteo(post=1870799:date=Aug 23 2011, 10:57 PM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Aug 23 2011, 10:57 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1870799"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Er, he has?

    Because to me it looks like he carbon copied NS1 and then stuck a bunch of new features on it, oh and then somewhere along the way a lot of the NS1 features got tidied up a bunch.

    NS2 has everything NS1 did, and nothing that combat did.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

    not at all, and far from it.
  • playerplayer Join Date: 2010-09-12 Member: 73982Members
    <!--quoteo(post=1870799:date=Aug 24 2011, 12:57 AM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Aug 24 2011, 12:57 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1870799"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Er, he has?

    Because to me it looks like he carbon copied NS1 and then stuck a bunch of new features on it, oh and then somewhere along the way a lot of the NS1 features got tidied up a bunch.

    NS2 has everything NS1 did, and nothing that combat did.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

    Removing the asymmetry is tidying up? No. The asymmetry was a clear feature of NS1, and it has been gutted by NS2. The sly movement too was a feature (though not uncommon on the Gldsource-engine), and it's just gone now. It really is not a carbon-copy, more like a derivative-work. Also, I do find it dumbed down. Adding new features like the MAC\drifter doesn't automatically imply a more sophisticated gameplay-mechanic. If anything, originally the MAC's sole purpose was to rob the marines of part of their function. Same story with the armory that is causing a severe detachement between the marine and the commander. That's not making things more complex\in-depth, that's trying to casualize the game. Sometimes less is more, and here, more is less.
  • Chris0132Chris0132 Join Date: 2009-07-25 Member: 68262Members
    Last time I checked the marines and aliens were pretty different.

    Aliens excel at mobility and require bases to expand their tech, marines have all their tech available from one base but require bases to expand their mobility with phase gates. Strategy wise they do the same thing (as in NS1, fight for hive locations) but approach it for two entirely different reasons.

    Gameplay wise they're also pretty different, aliens are pretty crap on paper as they're all melee based, marines on the other hand are almost entirely range based and what the aliens to stay as far away as possible. Aliens however have the advantages of strategic speed as they are all at least as fast as marines and most of them can use vents to move faster still across large distances, they also carry more versatile weapons as they don't need ammo and are generally universally effective to some degree, although some classes are better suited for different things.

    Marine strength lies in the fact that when they group together, their firepower multiplies, whereas if aliens group together, they get in each other's way. If marines work in groups they become significantly harder to kill, their power multiplies exponentially rather than linearly, so groups are key to marine success. Aliens on the other hand favour more scattered attacks, their individual mobility making them excellent at running interference and messing up marine res nodes and suchlike, as well as being particularly effective when marines have to traverse longer distances as this gives them more time to intercept. Aliens are self sufficient and excel in exploiting that, marines group together very well and excel when they do so.

    This is all true of NS1 and is still true of NS2.

    Marines aren't attached to the commander, you're all players on a server, nobody cares about each other, they never have and never will, unless you're in a clan or other organised game, this is going to be the case in any game. When I played NS1 as I didn't play organised games, the commander was just something that made sure res towers appeared when I asked for them and kept the piles of guns in the spawn topped up. You could replace it with a sufficiently advanced computer and it would be just as good, if not preferable because computers are more reliable than people. There is nothing relationship building about typing 'rt here' in chat and then holding E on it, as opposed to being told 'go here and protect the RT while the robot builds it'. Same goes for running up the the armory and clicking the gun you want as opposed to running over to the heap of jetpacks and then the heap of HMGs to get the gun you want. The one thing those changes DO allow is a more consistent experience, if I want a gun, I can get it, I don't have to hope the comm remembers to drop it and that he picks a gun I like (or that there will only be two guns in the entire game because HMG and GL are the only things worth using), and as commander I don't have to hope the marine builds the RT in base, I can just tell the robot to do it.

    Further, I still find my players do most of the building in the game, I don't tell them to a lot of the time, they just kinda do it, presumably because they want the stuff the buildings make. Some of them even listen when I tell them to do stuff, honestly NS2 probably has the best teamwork I've seen in a game, like 30% or so of the server population can follow simple instructions, it's amazing.
  • NurEinMenschNurEinMensch Join Date: 2003-02-26 Member: 14056Members, Constellation
    Once communities of regulars develop around servers people start to mind the commander (especially if he's known to be good) and try to execute his plan well. That's what I experienced in NS1 and I'm sure will be the same in NS2.
  • henzeehenzee Join Date: 2009-05-26 Member: 67483Members
    <!--quoteo(post=1870791:date=Aug 24 2011, 12:36 AM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Aug 24 2011, 12:36 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1870791"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The game is still FPSRTS, it's probably more FPSRTS than NS1 is as both sides have RTS commanders and the RTS side is more in-depth than it was in NS1, there are also more weapon (or will be) and more varied mechanics. NS2 expands upon NS1 in just about every conceivable way. If you liked commanding in NS1 I really don't see why you can dislike it in NS2, given that the comm does more or less everything it did in NS1 (minus spamming piles of guns at spawn) and more, with the increased reliance on phase gates, turrets, the new MACs and ARCs, and the alien infestation mechanic.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    Not true, because they have taken away commanders ability to influence to res usage, especially on guns, and organize team pushes by saving for 5 jetpacks, 5 shotguns for example. This affects negatively to gamestyle by making game more like flat pushing rather than organized pushing and this will be clearly seen in public gaming.

    <!--quoteo(post=1870791:date=Aug 24 2011, 12:36 AM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Aug 24 2011, 12:36 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1870791"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->There are a lot of complaints you can level against NS2 but complaining that it's dumbed down is one I find rather hard to justify, it's more complicated, it's also more intuitive in a lot of ways, which is the way complexity should work, but it's still more complicated. The game has added more mechanics but all mechanics are somewhat easier to understand at first glance due to better interface, effects, graphics etc.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    I dont sign that NS2 has better intrface or its more intuitive. NS1 you get the guns from commander and it states that you need to go somewhere were combat is even and you need to do something about it, also if you dont get the guns, your team either have no res or there is no point pushing the spot so you dont need the gun and commander saves those res for another thing.

    <!--quoteo(post=1870791:date=Aug 24 2011, 12:36 AM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Aug 24 2011, 12:36 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1870791"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The game is a trenchy mess because it's broken at the moment, the devs have taken a lot of stuff to bits in order to change it and haven't got round to putting it back together again. It's extremely annoying yes but I would be pretty surprised if anything in the game is exhibiting its intended behaviour at the moment.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    This is the reason why they should start making basics for NS2 from NS1.

    <!--quoteo(post=1870799:date=Aug 24 2011, 12:57 AM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Aug 24 2011, 12:57 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1870799"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->NS2 has everything NS1 did, and nothing that combat did.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    Actually NS2 is just like NS1 combat at the moment. Especially because of how guns are bought. They have taken player to more individual rather than team player.

    <!--quoteo(post=1870819:date=Aug 24 2011, 03:33 AM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Aug 24 2011, 03:33 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1870819"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Last time I checked the marines and aliens were pretty different.

    Aliens excel at mobility and require bases to expand their tech, marines have all their tech available from one base but require bases to expand their mobility with phase gates. Strategy wise they do the same thing (as in NS1, fight for hive locations) but approach it for two entirely different reasons.

    Gameplay wise they're also pretty different, aliens are pretty crap on paper as they're all melee based, marines on the other hand are almost entirely range based and what the aliens to stay as far away as possible. Aliens however have the advantages of strategic speed as they are all at least as fast as marines and most of them can use vents to move faster still across large distances, they also carry more versatile weapons as they don't need ammo and are generally universally effective to some degree, although some classes are better suited for different things.

    Marine strength lies in the fact that when they group together, their firepower multiplies, whereas if aliens group together, they get in each other's way. If marines work in groups they become significantly harder to kill, their power multiplies exponentially rather than linearly, so groups are key to marine success. Aliens on the other hand favour more scattered attacks, their individual mobility making them excellent at running interference and messing up marine res nodes and suchlike, as well as being particularly effective when marines have to traverse longer distances as this gives them more time to intercept. Aliens are self sufficient and excel in exploiting that, marines group together very well and excel when they do so.

    This is all true of NS1 and is still true of NS2.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

    In NS2 both of teams need to systematically push from point A to point B. There are no typical hidden PG's near by hive, or atleast it is almost impossible to do that. RT capping has become more like that too and having alien commander makes field combat "even" (5vs5). And no, aliens dont have good movement at the moment, they are rather like these tanks that take hits and move slowly towards enemy and that makes them hard to kill, not their (skill-based)movement.

    Your claims on aliens also are false. They need to and they do play on team to win the games (atleast on NS1) and this is the way it should be on NS2. Well organized raid from 3-4 skulks should kill 3-4 marines even they had 1 shotgun, even on wider area because of fast movement. BUT individual skulk wont manage to kill single marine, atleast in 66% of situations. Of course here the difference comes from skill-based movement, aim, marine placement and game intellect.

    <!--quoteo(post=1870819:date=Aug 24 2011, 03:33 AM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Aug 24 2011, 03:33 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1870819"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Marines aren't attached to the commander, you're all players on a server, nobody cares about each other, they never have and never will, unless you're in a clan or other organised game, this is going to be the case in any game.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    Again I ask, why NS2 should be like any other game? NS1 players were attached to commander and that is how it should be. It has proven to work and it will work. This actually makes NS1 more interesting even on public. If one wants something else, there are aliens without commander or filthy combat.

    <!--quoteo(post=1870819:date=Aug 24 2011, 03:33 AM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Aug 24 2011, 03:33 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1870819"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Same goes for running up the the armory and clicking the gun you want as opposed to running over to the heap of jetpacks and then the heap of HMGs to get the gun you want.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

    As I said earlier, when marines have common resources, there isint always res for jetpack and hmg for every player and decision is for commander to make who might want to save for 5 jetpacks, 3hmgs and 2 shotguns to make more organized attack rather than players go one by one and die so there are no more than 1-2 jetpacks with lmgs on field because solo jetpacks are easy to kill.

    And what comes to my experience on NS2, its just bunch of marines running between A and B one by one and dying because nobody welds or does anything organized.
  • CorpseyCorpsey Join Date: 2011-07-02 Member: 107538Members
    <!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I dont sign that NS2 has better intrface or its more intuitive. NS1 you get the guns from commander and it states that you need to go somewhere were combat is even and you need to do something about it, also if you dont get the guns, your team either have no res or there is no point pushing the spot so you dont need the gun and commander saves those res for another thing.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

    I actually really like being able to purchase my own weapon. In NS1 it was really annoying when the commander was prejudice of your state of mind - why put someone in charge of something he's not looking at through his eyes? The commander simply sees a different picture than the marines do sometimes and I think if the commander got out of the chair and looked at the situation after through his marines eyes he would say to himself "wow I really should have dropped that guy that GL he needed". In NS2 the commander doesn't even have to worry - not to mention people that were classified as "noob" in NS1 will actually get a chance to use the more superior weaponry the way NS2 is set up and I think that will translate to better usage of the weapons. You can't deny that practice makes perfect..... you said it yourself you liked learning new moves and tricks within a game. Anyways NS1 was a great game no doubt, it's too bad though that servers were so cenophobic and only accepted the ideas of regulars in the server, even though the regulars would be so entirely wrong even though they thought they knew so much about the game. :P I agree with PersianImm0rtal that if you want an identical game with better graphics you are truly insane...... think about it - an update to ns_veil with the same settings as NS1 will have the exact same outcomes as NS1.. so why is that exciting?
  • henzeehenzee Join Date: 2009-05-26 Member: 67483Members
    Firstly, I havent said that NS2 should be exactly the same as NS1. As I said earlier, I do like things that they have ADD to the game, like flamethrower. However, I dont like big changes that they have made, like buying the guns by player himself. Improving commander skills is much easier than improving 6 individual players to save for res till they need guns at the exact moment togather.

    Secondly, best thing about NS1 is and was that things can be done so many ways. Forexample 3 SG's (30res) is much better than 2 GL's (30res) for many situations even when pushing hive or rather just siege the OC farm down if its on hive.

    Having a commander who actually commands is much better for learnability of the game, when there is actually someone who says what should be done. And bad commanders can be voted out, but even then they can learn from their mistakes, if they are not just trolling. So i think "commander doesn't even have to worry" is kind of weird way to approach this, when commander is the one who should worry about these things. What comes to "noob" players getting their hand to superior weaponry is that I rather give SG to the guy who can actually use it on early push and make that 10res count rather than get 3 SG's to 3 "noobs" and see what happens. That way the game 1) becomes balanced and 2) more organized
  • CorpseyCorpsey Join Date: 2011-07-02 Member: 107538Members
    edited August 2011
    I actually find no problem with players in NS1 or NS2 being communicative <b>on marines</b>. It's the aliens I usually have a problem with because they never seem to want to coordinate an attack.. it's always 1 guy in, then out to heal, next guy in, then out to heal, rinse and repeat.. no strategy in taking down important structures etc.. It would be interesting if once the marine base was being sighted, or if something was parasited, the commander could "inflame" the parasite or something making it not just a parasited structure, but a real target of opportunity that the aliens should be collaboratively taking down.

    I did have a large argument about NS1 and NS2 commanding but I simply see it that you just have to have people that aren't being retarded.. in NS1 or 2 an entire base can be hindered by 1 person that seems to always think hiding next to a corner is a better idea than building the structures that will truly secure a location.... so yeah occasionally teams will be disorganized but unless the commander can draw on the minimap (which would be so.. so.. so abused by ignorant people) it's going to be disorganized in Pubs.. I personally would love to join a team but not a lot of people seem to play in US East.

    I don't know what to tell you really I mean I agree with you somewhat because I'm an idealist myself and I would prefer if everything followed some sort of plan.. at the same time sometimes you need something that you wouldn't expect you needed - i.e. your example in NS1 to buy 3 shotguns for 30 res instead of 2 GLs - a lot of commanders used to say this and to you a-hole commanders I say: WHY OH WHY DID YOU RESEARCH GRENADE LAUNCHERS THEN? because really 2 shotguns and 1 gl is more efficient than just sg vs gl. Diversify, man.
  • TaneTane Join Date: 2004-10-25 Member: 32441Members, Constellation
    edited August 2011
    NS2 is more unfamiliar to it predecessor than most gaming sequels; it's hard to even name a sequel which would have chanced game more than NS2 will. Just think Battlefields, the core elements has remained same from first Battlefield to Bad Company 2, they have just added extra features but they have never touched core elements of Battlefield saga. Same goes to Quake/Unreal and I haven't even named dramatic changes between CS 1.6 and source...

    No, I don't want NS with new graphics. I want NS1 with few new features like dynamic infestation, new wall hopping, new onos and so on. But for example changing every alien class role, reducing games pace and removing movement skills is just way too drastic. I can't understand why UWE want to remake something that did work really well. There is so much good in NS1 why isn't UWE using their former work? I'm not probably only one who thinks that fade's 3.2. movement is the best movement system there is at any video game. It goes beyond me why would anyone want to change that. It's quite funny how indie team doesn't recycle ideas from their former work while mainstream teams are doing that all the time.
  • henzeehenzee Join Date: 2009-05-26 Member: 67483Members
    <!--quoteo(post=1870913:date=Aug 24 2011, 05:14 PM:name=Tane)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tane @ Aug 24 2011, 05:14 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1870913"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->NS2 is more unfamiliar to it predecessor than most gaming sequels; it's hard to even name a sequel which would have chanced game more than NS2 will. Just think Battlefields, the core elements has remained same from first Battlefield to Bad Company 2, they have just added extra features but they have never touched core elements of Battlefield saga. Same goes to Quake/Unreal and I haven't even named dramatic changes between CS 1.6 and source...

    No, I don't want NS with new graphics. I want NS1 with few new features like dynamic infestation, new wall hopping, new onos and so on. But for example changing every alien class role, reducing games pace and removing movement skills is just way too drastic. I can't understand why UWE want to remake something that did work really well. There is so much good in NS1 why isn't UWE using their former work? I'm not probably only one who thinks that fade's 3.2. movement is the best movement system there is at any video game. It goes beyond me why would anyone want to change that. It's quite funny how indie team doesn't recycle ideas from their former work while mainstream teams are doing that all the time.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    Exactly
  • FloodinatorFloodinator [HBZ] Member Join Date: 2005-02-22 Member: 42087Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    This is the reason why Mainstream games like CoD is always the same to play. It gets boring really fast (if you din't go for achievement), you walk always the same routes shooting trough walls at the sane places...
    NS2 has way less features (no acog, no silencer, no fmj and and) but almost every game plays different.

    The playstyle of CoD never will change. Only graphics get improved and the SP thats why they hold on the same features. Blackops changed a bit and that is why many players switched back to MW2. It is because of the big playerbase (PC,Xbox and PS) and even a little change of the core gameplay would destroy millions if players association with CoD. Never change a working cashcow!

    Indies are much more free because they want to do something absoluetly different than ever seen so they can atract more players that want something different than (COD1-5 or Battlefield 1-9?) mainstream that didn't changed for years!

    NS2 is the first real game from UWE because ir uses it own Engine and is a Job from 0 to hero. NS1 was "just" the greatest MOD on a Engine with limited possibilities for UWE. Now they have a engine that does what they want it to do sO they can add all the stuff they always wanted to add but was impossible on HL1/HL2 engine or maybe just to much work.
  • henzeehenzee Join Date: 2009-05-26 Member: 67483Members
    I dont know were are you getting with that post Floodinator, but I dont have anything against UWE adding new stuff, but I'am against changing existing.
  • vizioNzvizioNz InversionNS2.com Join Date: 2003-12-21 Member: 24595Members, Constellation, NS2 Playtester
    edited August 2011
    <!--quoteo(post=1870780:date=Aug 23 2011, 04:45 PM:name=F O X)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (F O X @ Aug 23 2011, 04:45 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1870780"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Making a NS1 mod for NS2 seems to be a good idea but there are a lot of things to change.. Also don't pay attention to "vizionz" he was the same telling to the developer to not care about our complaining for NS1 gameplay on another thread.. He's clearly a noob wanting to play NS2 like he plays cod on console<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    Don't know how I missed this, but the last time I checked you were a nobody in this community and I actually have a meaningful voice around here. I played NS1 competitively and I remember the massive gap between the top teams and the lower teams. This was mainly due to 2 factors: Skill and Bunnyhopping. If you had Skill you obviously were valuable. However, if you knew how to exploit bhopping and had little skill, you can still be one of the top players. I can't stand COD first of all, and your generalized reference to my message for the developers is incorrect. I stated that they should take 90% of the complaints here with a grain of salt (which they already do). Go back to your troll hole :)
  • vizioNzvizioNz InversionNS2.com Join Date: 2003-12-21 Member: 24595Members, Constellation, NS2 Playtester
    <!--quoteo(post=1870765:date=Aug 23 2011, 02:50 PM:name=player)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (player @ Aug 23 2011, 02:50 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1870765"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->J'accuse! We just build it on top of the ns2-gamemode (as opposed to a fork), as much of the work has already been done, and we can continue benefiting from ns2's bug-fixes.

    For example, removing sprinting should be but a few lines of script. Increasing marine\skulk-speed is but a value-change. Removing MACs is but a line or 2 to strip it from the comm-interface. Flamethrowers would take but a few lines to delete entirely. Buying from the armory would take but a few lines to disable (as comms can\will be able to drop guns near the armory soon, it'll be exactly like ns1 again). And so on...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    How about re-creating all the NS1 classic maps? Is that but a few lines of code as well? :)
Sign In or Register to comment.