"you play YOUR game while they play theirs, how they play theirs affects how you play yours, and vice versa, the two are intrinsically linked because they take place on the same board."
That explains everything. That is not what I imagine NS is about. It is not about putting an RTS on an FPS, it is about creating a new game that integrates the good aspects from both RTS and FPS. Also, there are those of us that loved commanding in NS1, but that is largely irrelevant.
I'm at a loss to whether or not I should even reply to some of what has been written in this thread. Are the forums just full of trolls, or are we really that intelligent?
<u><b>NS was great because it was an all human game that required two traditionally completely unrelated game types to be forced to interact and depend on one another. </b></u>If I wanted to play a straight FPS I could play one. Same goes for RTS. Just because I want a novel RTS or FPS does not mean I should try to hijack a game that was supposed to push into a new genre of gaming and turn it less into "new genre" and more into "we took two old genres, and made them play on the same board."
NS was good because it was a good shooter, I never played commander in NS1, most people didn't play commander most of the time, but I still enjoyed playing it.
The commander/player interaction has very little to do with the appeal of NS because it is such a small part of the game.
What does the commander do for most players most of the time? Give the occasional order. Woop de doo. Thanks commander I really needed to know to go over there and attack the hive, you sure are an important part of my gameplay experience.
Most of NS1 <i>is</i> just two games taking place on the same board, and it works much better in those areas than it does when you try any of the 'new genre' stuff. NS1 is a great shooter, maybe a little odd by modern standards but for the time it came out it's definitely well put together and offers interesting gameplay. It also offers RTS on a nice sort of scale, you don't often see RTS games based entirely inside a building, so that's pretty cool as well.
And then you get to the shoehorned attempts at 'integrating' the two roles, and the game becomes a steaming heap of crap that lets both sides down, marines can't do anything without a good commander, and commanders can't do anything without marines, it's an excellent way to annoy both sides and make the game fail under anything less than ideal circumstances.
If anything, aliens were the better 'new genre' because their RTS players were playing a proper RTS, but they were doing it from an FPS perspective, that worked quite nicely, although it came with its own problems, but it does show quite nicely that putting each player in charge of the entirety of their role is much better than the artificial separation of different parts of the roles.
Commander/marine interaction is like making am FPS game where one player controls the legs and one player controls the gun, why would you bother?
ArgathorJoin Date: 2011-07-18Member: 110942Members, Squad Five Blue
edited November 2011
<!--quoteo(post=1886275:date=Nov 23 2011, 01:31 PM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Nov 23 2011, 01:31 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1886275"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The commander/player interaction has very little to do with the appeal of NS because it is such a small part of the game.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> What game are you playing? The Commander makes or breaks game's for the marine team. The difference between a medicore and great commander is huge, both its effect on players and on the overall outcome. A few examples:
1) Dropping meds (well placed meds) in the middle of fights, meaning a marine can take 3-5 bites from a skulk, this makes a good marine practically invincible to single skulks. 2) Dropping ammo on top of marines shooting hives (rifle- meaning they don't need to reload), or can continue shooting grenades without moving. 3) Scanning rooms just before a group of marines move in, allowing them to see where all the skulks are hiding or that it is clear. 4) Dropping structures (mainly res nodes and PGs) before they are asked for/needed, to speed up the marine teams movement.
These might not seem like much on their own, but when they happen continously through a match the impact is very significant.
Now I am not saying the other players on the marine team are not important. Having a marine team that couldn't hit an onos standing right infront of them let alone skulks/fades is going to destory any chance of winning, but that isnt the only factor effecting the outcome of the game.
When playing as a marine, Commanders are an integral part of the game for me. I spend my time doing what I think they want me to do, every action I take is with them in mind (even when I get it wrong, I can't read minds you know!).
(edit: The above is some of what makes NS2 special for me!)
ArgathorJoin Date: 2011-07-18Member: 110942Members, Squad Five Blue
<!--quoteo(post=1886275:date=Nov 23 2011, 01:31 PM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Nov 23 2011, 01:31 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1886275"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->What does the commander do for most players most of the time? Give the occasional order. Woop de doo. Thanks commander I really needed to know to go over there and attack the hive, you sure are an important part of my gameplay experience.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> That is <i>only true</i> in a game with a bad Commander. Just because the majority of Commanders (in a beta, having not played very much) are not very good, is not an arguement against the gameplay mechanics. There are some very good Comm's about, even now.
Once a more active and competitive scene is running in NS2, there will be a much larger pool of high quality Commanders. Which in turn will serve as a positive example for would-be public Commanders. Eventually increasing the general Commanding ability in the NS2 community. Which will also increase over time anyway, as people play more and get better at the game.
One of the issues, I think, is that Commanding in NS2 takes a completely different skill set than playing as a marine normally. This is compounded by there not being a good situation to learn the role. Commander's that are slow or making mistakes (while learning) tend to get a lot of abuse, which puts them off. Even if they might have eventually, with practice, been great Commanders.
So we either end up with great Comm's, or a wide array of bullheaded and ignorant Comm's who ignore everyone else (they don't care what anyone else thinks, so the abuse doesn't put them off). This seems to lead them to playing Comm like a single player, ignoring their team. Getting MACs and then turreting everywhere they build.
I think the issue of how we can encourge strong commander to team co-operation, thus reducing the use of AI where possible, is a much better (and more beneficial for NS2) problem to discuss.
I think Chris has a very peculiar experience of NS, it's like he's speaking about another game. I'm not sure it's really useful to discuss from such divergent grounds. I'm not saying it's bad to think differently, just that discussion is to very fruitful when basic axioms are not shared.
I didn't ever play in a clan, I always played public games, I also played earlier version when the game had a living community and not just the people who had been playing it for years and years. Most of my fellow players were semi-casual players just looking for a fun game, maybe not massively into games, mostly late teens I would expect.
Esentially I played the game that most people would play if you put a copy of NS2 in the hands of every gamer out there.
I realise NS has a very long history of organised play and some very long time fans, and that most of the people posting on the forums probably fall into one or both of those categories, but you must remember that this is not representitive of the majority of potential players, and I don't think that this vocal minority of players are something you can or should build a game around.
The commander CAN be a marvellously positive role in a game, a good commander could do wonders for immersion, game balance, team performance, teaching new players, anything really. A good commander would be like a good dungeon master for a DnD game, they use their control of the fundamental mechanics to make the game fun for everyone, a truly good commander would even do things like letting the alien team have a bit of leeway if they're struggling slightly, because that makes it more fun for the aliens, and potentially the marines too because they get more of a challenge. The commander role carries the responsibility of the power it wields, but there is a single, glaring, massive problem with that.
How often are you going to get a commander that good?
In organised play you would get one 90% of the time, or even more, because it's ORGANISED, you make sure there will be a commander for each side before you play, but in an average public game with people joining and leaving as they feel like it, you can't guarantee that. I play empires mod, it's one of the most fun games I've played if you get the right game together, a good mix of players who play for fun and don't abuse exploits to win, good commanders who know what they're doing but don't abuse the players, a good level that matches the skill of your players, it has the capacity to be a marvellously enjoyable game, but with all of that said, it's a terrible game. None of what I said happens most of the time in public games, playing empires publically is virtually impossible, because every game ends before it gets started, now if you were used to organised play you might say 'how can you call it a bad game, it's great, none of that happens' but it does, and it happens more often than the other option.
Now, NS1 was better than empires in that regard, it resolved poor starts faster, and it tended to give you at least some decent gameplay even if you didn't win, but it was by no means the game everyone is describing, not in my purely public playing experience, and I don't think it's a good idea to throw the game even further into that two-tier ditch by building it around the longtime players. Just because I can play it like that does not mean everyone else can, I would much rather play an active, well populated game with fun players than I would a stagnant, elitist, formalised and tired game with the same handful of people every day. Organised play has its perks, but fun public play is better.
ScardyBobScardyBobJoin Date: 2009-11-25Member: 69528Forum Admins, Forum Moderators, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow
<!--quoteo(post=1886353:date=Nov 23 2011, 11:32 AM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Nov 23 2011, 11:32 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1886353"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->In organised play you would get one 90% of the time, or even more, because it's ORGANISED, you make sure there will be a commander for each side before you play, but in an average public game with people joining and leaving as they feel like it, you can't guarantee that.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I'll chime in for the fact that I've found that competitive NS2 clan matches are much better and more fun than current public NS2 matches. In particular, you have two teams with decently skilled players who know what their doing and that leads to interesting strategies and genuinely fun games. For example, its not uncommon for the marine side in a clan match to basically resign once the aliens get a 2nd hive and 2+ fades, because there is little chance of coming back after that. Instead of trying to drag out the match in a long turtle/sentry/ARC spam that isn't fun for anyone, the marines resign, the teams switch sides, and start a new, fun match. Frankly, I've rarely seen the same happen in a public match.
As such, even though we're playing the same NS2, its almost like two different games when you compare competitive vs public NS2 with regards to fun and entertainment.
<!--quoteo(post=1886371:date=Nov 23 2011, 11:22 PM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Nov 23 2011, 11:22 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1886371"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It's play with the very small number of people who still play NS and have played it for years. You don't have casual players on it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Untrue. Most people are casual players who don't play in any form of clan or gather.
You really need to do your research and get some evidence before you say such things. Especially on the commander mode. It's embarrassing.
<!--quoteo(post=1886372:date=Nov 23 2011, 09:50 PM:name=konata)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (konata @ Nov 23 2011, 09:50 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1886372"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Untrue. Most people are casual players who don't play in any form of clan or gather.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Casual != not in a clan. I mean they are players who have played NS for a long time and therefore know how to play it very well, or at the very least have played it enough to be fairly good at the game, or play a lot of counterstrike and subsequently take their gaming quite seriously. I don't for one second believe that any significant number of casual gamers still play semi-obscure goldsrc mods.
Most of the people I played with when I used to play were almost like new, or weren't taking much of an active interest in the game, not sure which, either way they would run around and shoot at enemies and have a good time, probably weren't able to or very interested in commanding a game or following precise instructions however. Basically they seemed a lot like the folks who play modern FPS games, your battlefield players, maybe your CoD players although that might be stretching it a little, but certainly the sort of folks I used to play BF2/2142 with, and the sort of folks you might find on an empires server on a good day. Fun players, people I would want to play with, people who won't scream at anyone who asks a question.
In Chris' defense, wonga.ns can in no way be compared to normal public-servers (of either NS1 way back, or NS2 now). While you may be correct that there are no clanners\puggers to speak of, that is probably only so because there is no competitive-scene to speak of anymore in NS1. Wonga.ns has a very high concentration of skilled\experienced players, whom have been playing the game for a very long time indeed. It's a long way from how NS1 publics were back in the day (that is to say, painful). It's the last bastion for NS1-players, a bit of a unique situation which you probably won't see again anytime soon in NS2.
<!--quoteo(post=1886402:date=Nov 23 2011, 11:49 PM:name=player)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (player @ Nov 23 2011, 11:49 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1886402"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->In Chris' defense, wonga.ns can in no way be compared to normal public-servers (of either NS1 way back, or NS2 now). While you may be correct that there are no clanners\puggers to speak of, that is probably only so because there is no competitive-scene to speak of anymore in NS1. Wonga.ns has a very high concentration of skilled\experienced players, whom have been playing the game for a very long time indeed. It's a long way from how NS1 publics were back in the day (that is to say, painful). It's the last bastion for NS1-players, a bit of a unique situation which you probably won't see again anytime soon in NS2.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thank god somebody reads and thinks before replying.
<!--quoteo(post=1886404:date=Nov 24 2011, 12:01 AM:name=konata)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (konata @ Nov 24 2011, 12:01 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1886404"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Says the guy who thinks commanders shouldn't <i>HAVE TO</i> drop medpacks or ammopacks.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
ArgathorJoin Date: 2011-07-18Member: 110942Members, Squad Five Blue
<!--quoteo(post=1886405:date=Nov 24 2011, 01:08 AM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Nov 24 2011, 01:08 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1886405"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> It is not all about public players, or clan players. The community is made up of both. Duplex has 3 players who all make very good comm's (sadly not me, im a badie!): Johs, swalk and Wilson. Other clans have more and all it takes in a server of 14 people is one player to marine command (alien comm is not as important). The more active the community is as a whole, the better the situation for everyone.
The arguement that NS2 shouldn't have commanders, or they shouldn't be important is crazy. That is what made NS and makes NS2. Without that it is simply a mediocre FPS.
What makes NS2 special is that there is an important relationship between the players on the team and their commander. This forces people to play a genre they know differently, it makes it special. The challenge for us to help make sure that special relationship is postive as often as possible.
We all get frustrated with bad team mates, but that doesn't go away without a comm. Infact I see marine losses being caused by bad marines as often as bad commanders. This type of game requires people to learn to play differently than most FPS's, especially the currently popular BF/CoD. That takes time for people to get used to and adapt to. The way people play NS2 now is not reflective of how they will play it in the future.
The problem I have is that organised play works because it's organised, if you want to form a clan and play an organised, strategic game you can do that on ANY game. You can play quake 3 strategically if you want to, and would get better results than if you didn't, there are FOOTBALL strategy games out there.
So an organised match would have commander/player interaction regardless of whether the commander could do everything with macs, because ostensibly the players would want to work with the commander and the commander could use them if so inclined. If that sort of play is what you want, the game facilitates it.
However, the idea that the game should make all other styles of play impossible doesn't make sense, because the only rationale behind it is the elitist clan players saying 'we want to force all the horrible proles to adopt our way of playing' or worse 'we like and are good at playing like this, so make everyone else crap at the game so we can feel good when we beat them'.
If you want the game to have that large community, favouring organised play to the exclusion of all else just doesn't make sense. Adding in useful features for organised play is fine, if the devs put in a built-in league match system or things like the old sv_pure option in source, or tournament balanced maps, those sorts of things, I have no issue there, it doesn't negatively affect other players.
But when people say 'if you don't like the commander/player interaction you must LEAVE THE GAME AND NEVER PLAY AGAIN YOU SCUM' it just annoys the hell out of me. Commanders and players are on the same server, you will get organisation if players want it. I made a map specifically based around that idea, and it worked pretty well, players don't even need a specific commander role, if you have a group of good players who are used to playing with structure and hierarchy, you tend to get a defacto leader who tells other people what to do, and they organise into squads and work together, you can have that kind of fun on almost any game.
I'm not suggesting remove the commander, the commander fills a fairly neccesary role in NS, you need one to place the buildings, but I don't think that making his role unneccesarily difficult and clunky in the name of 'player-commander interaction' is a good thing. Forced teamwork is worthless, if someone is only doing what you say because they have to, they obviously aren't going to enjoy it and the teamwork is no longer fun. Fun teamwork comes from people who want to do it, and people who want to do it will do it without being forced to.
ArgathorJoin Date: 2011-07-18Member: 110942Members, Squad Five Blue
edited November 2011
I think this issue is framed everyone's personal experiences of teamplay, which makes it very subjective.
Whether you like it or not co-operation with your commander (and the other marines) is <b>essential</b> in NS2, if you want any measure of success. There are already too many boneheaded rambo's running around aimlessly, the game doesnt need any more. This type of game isn't for everyone, its a niche FPS.
The more systems in place that encourage players to interact with their commander the better. This helps players learn what makes NS2 different faster and allows them to adjust their play style. The more you detract from that the less likely players are to make the adjustment, it is much more natural and easier to simply run around rambo'ing as a marine. The problem is that is totally useless. Where as it can be perfectly satisfactory in BF/CoD/etc.
I personally do not have an issue with some system that automatically build structures and repair, but it should be much less effective than players doing it. Part of the fun in the NS playstyle is the satisfaction at the end, knowing that your teamwork and co-operation made the outcome. I don't ideally want to build structures, but it only takes a handful of seconds and it helps the team, so I do it. A selfish, instant gratification, attitude does not work with this game.
Don't feed the trolls. I don't know what crack Chris is smoking.... why is it almost every thread I see chris type his paragraphs in, I come out of it asking myself "Is this guy actually serious?"
Comments
That explains everything. That is not what I imagine NS is about. It is not about putting an RTS on an FPS, it is about creating a new game that integrates the good aspects from both RTS and FPS. Also, there are those of us that loved commanding in NS1, but that is largely irrelevant.
I'm at a loss to whether or not I should even reply to some of what has been written in this thread. Are the forums just full of trolls, or are we really that intelligent?
<u><b>NS was great because it was an all human game that required two traditionally completely unrelated game types to be forced to interact and depend on one another. </b></u>If I wanted to play a straight FPS I could play one. Same goes for RTS. Just because I want a novel RTS or FPS does not mean I should try to hijack a game that was supposed to push into a new genre of gaming and turn it less into "new genre" and more into "we took two old genres, and made them play on the same board."
But why do I bother feeding the trolls? pfft.
The commander/player interaction has very little to do with the appeal of NS because it is such a small part of the game.
What does the commander do for most players most of the time? Give the occasional order. Woop de doo. Thanks commander I really needed to know to go over there and attack the hive, you sure are an important part of my gameplay experience.
Most of NS1 <i>is</i> just two games taking place on the same board, and it works much better in those areas than it does when you try any of the 'new genre' stuff. NS1 is a great shooter, maybe a little odd by modern standards but for the time it came out it's definitely well put together and offers interesting gameplay. It also offers RTS on a nice sort of scale, you don't often see RTS games based entirely inside a building, so that's pretty cool as well.
And then you get to the shoehorned attempts at 'integrating' the two roles, and the game becomes a steaming heap of crap that lets both sides down, marines can't do anything without a good commander, and commanders can't do anything without marines, it's an excellent way to annoy both sides and make the game fail under anything less than ideal circumstances.
If anything, aliens were the better 'new genre' because their RTS players were playing a proper RTS, but they were doing it from an FPS perspective, that worked quite nicely, although it came with its own problems, but it does show quite nicely that putting each player in charge of the entirety of their role is much better than the artificial separation of different parts of the roles.
Commander/marine interaction is like making am FPS game where one player controls the legs and one player controls the gun, why would you bother?
What game are you playing? The Commander makes or breaks game's for the marine team. The difference between a medicore and great commander is huge, both its effect on players and on the overall outcome. A few examples:
1) Dropping meds (well placed meds) in the middle of fights, meaning a marine can take 3-5 bites from a skulk, this makes a good marine practically invincible to single skulks.
2) Dropping ammo on top of marines shooting hives (rifle- meaning they don't need to reload), or can continue shooting grenades without moving.
3) Scanning rooms just before a group of marines move in, allowing them to see where all the skulks are hiding or that it is clear.
4) Dropping structures (mainly res nodes and PGs) before they are asked for/needed, to speed up the marine teams movement.
These might not seem like much on their own, but when they happen continously through a match the impact is very significant.
Now I am not saying the other players on the marine team are not important. Having a marine team that couldn't hit an onos standing right infront of them let alone skulks/fades is going to destory any chance of winning, but that isnt the only factor effecting the outcome of the game.
When playing as a marine, Commanders are an integral part of the game for me. I spend my time doing what I think they want me to do, every action I take is with them in mind (even when I get it wrong, I can't read minds you know!).
(edit: The above is some of what makes NS2 special for me!)
That is <i>only true</i> in a game with a bad Commander. Just because the majority of Commanders (in a beta, having not played very much) are not very good, is not an arguement against the gameplay mechanics. There are some very good Comm's about, even now.
Once a more active and competitive scene is running in NS2, there will be a much larger pool of high quality Commanders. Which in turn will serve as a positive example for would-be public Commanders. Eventually increasing the general Commanding ability in the NS2 community. Which will also increase over time anyway, as people play more and get better at the game.
One of the issues, I think, is that Commanding in NS2 takes a completely different skill set than playing as a marine normally. This is compounded by there not being a good situation to learn the role. Commander's that are slow or making mistakes (while learning) tend to get a lot of abuse, which puts them off. Even if they might have eventually, with practice, been great Commanders.
So we either end up with great Comm's, or a wide array of bullheaded and ignorant Comm's who ignore everyone else (they don't care what anyone else thinks, so the abuse doesn't put them off). This seems to lead them to playing Comm like a single player, ignoring their team. Getting MACs and then turreting everywhere they build.
I think the issue of how we can encourge strong commander to team co-operation, thus reducing the use of AI where possible, is a much better (and more beneficial for NS2) problem to discuss.
Esentially I played the game that most people would play if you put a copy of NS2 in the hands of every gamer out there.
I realise NS has a very long history of organised play and some very long time fans, and that most of the people posting on the forums probably fall into one or both of those categories, but you must remember that this is not representitive of the majority of potential players, and I don't think that this vocal minority of players are something you can or should build a game around.
The commander CAN be a marvellously positive role in a game, a good commander could do wonders for immersion, game balance, team performance, teaching new players, anything really. A good commander would be like a good dungeon master for a DnD game, they use their control of the fundamental mechanics to make the game fun for everyone, a truly good commander would even do things like letting the alien team have a bit of leeway if they're struggling slightly, because that makes it more fun for the aliens, and potentially the marines too because they get more of a challenge. The commander role carries the responsibility of the power it wields, but there is a single, glaring, massive problem with that.
How often are you going to get a commander that good?
In organised play you would get one 90% of the time, or even more, because it's ORGANISED, you make sure there will be a commander for each side before you play, but in an average public game with people joining and leaving as they feel like it, you can't guarantee that. I play empires mod, it's one of the most fun games I've played if you get the right game together, a good mix of players who play for fun and don't abuse exploits to win, good commanders who know what they're doing but don't abuse the players, a good level that matches the skill of your players, it has the capacity to be a marvellously enjoyable game, but with all of that said, it's a terrible game. None of what I said happens most of the time in public games, playing empires publically is virtually impossible, because every game ends before it gets started, now if you were used to organised play you might say 'how can you call it a bad game, it's great, none of that happens' but it does, and it happens more often than the other option.
Now, NS1 was better than empires in that regard, it resolved poor starts faster, and it tended to give you at least some decent gameplay even if you didn't win, but it was by no means the game everyone is describing, not in my purely public playing experience, and I don't think it's a good idea to throw the game even further into that two-tier ditch by building it around the longtime players. Just because I can play it like that does not mean everyone else can, I would much rather play an active, well populated game with fun players than I would a stagnant, elitist, formalised and tired game with the same handful of people every day. Organised play has its perks, but fun public play is better.
I'll chime in for the fact that I've found that competitive NS2 clan matches are much better and more fun than current public NS2 matches. In particular, you have two teams with decently skilled players who know what their doing and that leads to interesting strategies and genuinely fun games. For example, its not uncommon for the marine side in a clan match to basically resign once the aliens get a 2nd hive and 2+ fades, because there is little chance of coming back after that. Instead of trying to drag out the match in a long turtle/sentry/ARC spam that isn't fun for anyone, the marines resign, the teams switch sides, and start a new, fun match. Frankly, I've rarely seen the same happen in a public match.
As such, even though we're playing the same NS2, its almost like two different games when you compare competitive vs public NS2 with regards to fun and entertainment.
Untrue. Most people are casual players who don't play in any form of clan or gather.
You really need to do your research and get some evidence before you say such things. Especially on the commander mode. It's embarrassing.
Casual != not in a clan. I mean they are players who have played NS for a long time and therefore know how to play it very well, or at the very least have played it enough to be fairly good at the game, or play a lot of counterstrike and subsequently take their gaming quite seriously. I don't for one second believe that any significant number of casual gamers still play semi-obscure goldsrc mods.
Most of the people I played with when I used to play were almost like new, or weren't taking much of an active interest in the game, not sure which, either way they would run around and shoot at enemies and have a good time, probably weren't able to or very interested in commanding a game or following precise instructions however. Basically they seemed a lot like the folks who play modern FPS games, your battlefield players, maybe your CoD players although that might be stretching it a little, but certainly the sort of folks I used to play BF2/2142 with, and the sort of folks you might find on an empires server on a good day. Fun players, people I would want to play with, people who won't scream at anyone who asks a question.
Thank god somebody reads and thinks before replying.
Says the guy who thinks commanders shouldn't drop medpacks or ammopacks.
I thought I was on ignore?
It is not all about public players, or clan players. The community is made up of both. Duplex has 3 players who all make very good comm's (sadly not me, im a badie!): Johs, swalk and Wilson. Other clans have more and all it takes in a server of 14 people is one player to marine command (alien comm is not as important). The more active the community is as a whole, the better the situation for everyone.
The arguement that NS2 shouldn't have commanders, or they shouldn't be important is crazy. That is what made NS and makes NS2. Without that it is simply a mediocre FPS.
What makes NS2 special is that there is an important relationship between the players on the team and their commander. This forces people to play a genre they know differently, it makes it special. The challenge for us to help make sure that special relationship is postive as often as possible.
We all get frustrated with bad team mates, but that doesn't go away without a comm. Infact I see marine losses being caused by bad marines as often as bad commanders. This type of game requires people to learn to play differently than most FPS's, especially the currently popular BF/CoD. That takes time for people to get used to and adapt to. The way people play NS2 now is not reflective of how they will play it in the future.
So an organised match would have commander/player interaction regardless of whether the commander could do everything with macs, because ostensibly the players would want to work with the commander and the commander could use them if so inclined. If that sort of play is what you want, the game facilitates it.
However, the idea that the game should make all other styles of play impossible doesn't make sense, because the only rationale behind it is the elitist clan players saying 'we want to force all the horrible proles to adopt our way of playing' or worse 'we like and are good at playing like this, so make everyone else crap at the game so we can feel good when we beat them'.
If you want the game to have that large community, favouring organised play to the exclusion of all else just doesn't make sense. Adding in useful features for organised play is fine, if the devs put in a built-in league match system or things like the old sv_pure option in source, or tournament balanced maps, those sorts of things, I have no issue there, it doesn't negatively affect other players.
But when people say 'if you don't like the commander/player interaction you must LEAVE THE GAME AND NEVER PLAY AGAIN YOU SCUM' it just annoys the hell out of me. Commanders and players are on the same server, you will get organisation if players want it. I made a map specifically based around that idea, and it worked pretty well, players don't even need a specific commander role, if you have a group of good players who are used to playing with structure and hierarchy, you tend to get a defacto leader who tells other people what to do, and they organise into squads and work together, you can have that kind of fun on almost any game.
I'm not suggesting remove the commander, the commander fills a fairly neccesary role in NS, you need one to place the buildings, but I don't think that making his role unneccesarily difficult and clunky in the name of 'player-commander interaction' is a good thing. Forced teamwork is worthless, if someone is only doing what you say because they have to, they obviously aren't going to enjoy it and the teamwork is no longer fun. Fun teamwork comes from people who want to do it, and people who want to do it will do it without being forced to.
Whether you like it or not co-operation with your commander (and the other marines) is <b>essential</b> in NS2, if you want any measure of success. There are already too many boneheaded rambo's running around aimlessly, the game doesnt need any more. This type of game isn't for everyone, its a niche FPS.
The more systems in place that encourage players to interact with their commander the better. This helps players learn what makes NS2 different faster and allows them to adjust their play style. The more you detract from that the less likely players are to make the adjustment, it is much more natural and easier to simply run around rambo'ing as a marine. The problem is that is totally useless. Where as it can be perfectly satisfactory in BF/CoD/etc.
I personally do not have an issue with some system that automatically build structures and repair, but it should be much less effective than players doing it. Part of the fun in the NS playstyle is the satisfaction at the end, knowing that your teamwork and co-operation made the outcome. I don't ideally want to build structures, but it only takes a handful of seconds and it helps the team, so I do it. A selfish, instant gratification, attitude does not work with this game.