The Manual
Gadzuko
Join Date: 2002-12-26 Member: 11556Members, Constellation
Join Date: 2002-12-26 Member: 11556Members, Constellation
<div class="IPBDescription">Eh? Wossat?</div> I'm a documentation freak. I read everything I can get my hands on about a game, from the manual to the little pop-up tooltips, and I generally try to do so before I even load up a game. And when I say everything, I mean everything... I literally read <i>every single page</i> of the NS manual before I started playing. So now I'm curious as to just how many of you did the same thing (well, not the same thing, because that would be scary, but something close to it).
This is just sort of a random question that just popped into my head while reading a couple of threads... My first ever game of NS I knew the point of the commander and tried to follow orders the best I could, and I had a blast. I don't understand how someone could just hurl his (or her) self bodily into the game without some kind of reading beforehand. I figure most of you read the manual at some point, but am I in a minority for having read it before I played at all?
This is just sort of a random question that just popped into my head while reading a couple of threads... My first ever game of NS I knew the point of the commander and tried to follow orders the best I could, and I had a blast. I don't understand how someone could just hurl his (or her) self bodily into the game without some kind of reading beforehand. I figure most of you read the manual at some point, but am I in a minority for having read it before I played at all?
Comments
Statistics show that workers usually learn most about how to work well at their jobs from experience, not from education. Therefore, why cant it work out the same for computer games?
And yes, I read the whole manual, mainly cause I had to for Fam!
yeah but the current education system is flawed, but thats a whole nother debate
manuals are written for the specific purpose of teaching people the fundamentals of a game
and in regards to the fluff some people have complained about, i must quote monse, a day or two after the manual was released,
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><MonsE|IronChefPwn> the point of the manual is not what a lot of you think; it is not supposed to be a comprehensive guide to everything in NS. It is more a background and framework of the basics of the game, presented to be an interestsing read. Basically, it gets you to the starting line. PLaying the game is the way to learn teh very low-level detail.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
and yeah i combed through the entire manual
I read it all, everything, from the species definition right down to "what is nanotech"...
I dont remember some parts of it, so I keep referring to it. The manual is a masterpiece...
I also would have to agree with KO, the education is flawed. I read the NS manual during ECE130, intro to logic design. I also d/l'ed the game during the class <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
[edit] typo fix required [/edit]
However I did read it later for the background of the NS universe that it contained.
theyre so....descriptive!
But not even with all that reading, one can fully understand how they game is played, until you try it. But with the understanding I gained, I catched on to the gameplay after one or two rounds.
Then it takes another month or two learning every aspect of the maps. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
To sum it up:
Reading the manual should be mandatory, at least for complex games like this. Granted, you dont need to read the manual to play CS or many other HL mods, but NS has so much more deapth than most.
Also; the manual for NS is so extremely well-written. Perhaps a bit hard to navigate at first, but surely worht the effort, just for fun.
/SourFruit (aka -FaH-RexM)
"I`m writing all thoose readme.txt`s"
I read about 15 pages into the 'tales from the frontline' thread too. Man that was incredible.
"How do I get weapons? Where's the buy-menu? WTH si this BS?"
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Statistics show that workers usually learn most about how to work well at their jobs from experience, not from education. Therefore, why cant it work out the same for computer games?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Statistics also show that operating a circular saw without any prior experience is likely to cause loss of fingers.
Manuals are really nifty. You should always read them, unless they are written so poorly that they don't bother to describe the in-game mechanics at all.
Ooh. Clever. Almost as clever and groundbreaking as saying "There is a frontpage?" at the SA forums.
<!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->
SA sure is something awful! HAHAHA!!!11
Background storylines and justifications of why various game features would make sense 'in real life' are irrelevant trash. A good manual that explained only what a competant player needed to know, in the space of a couple of pages would be worth reading. A manual designed to create an 'atmosphere' is so bloated with things that bare no relevance to the game that you will learn faster by just getting on a server and playing. My first ever play of NS was done on an empty local server, dropping buildings and seeing what they did. My second game was on our private clan server with a bunch of friends who know the game. By the time i hit a pub, i had a reasonable understanding of the game and only lacked in knowledge of the map layouts. I didn't read the manual. Looking back at it now, the manual is worthless to a new player, the FAQ however is pretty good.
I guess this was the intention, an FAQ to cover basic questions and the marine manual section just for a bit of fun, for those people who like reading novels that have little relevance to the actual game. What is really lacking, is some proper statistical information. Working out the details of the game from devteam information is a guessing game, if not impossible. Testing it is often very difficult, and forum posts are contradicting. How many threads would be unnecessary if we just had a guide explaining weapon damage stats, armour absorption rates, properties of weapons such as lerk spikes being hitscan, and details such as what it takes to set off a mine. Flayra has to have this stuff down somewhere anyway, yet we rarely get any intervention from testers or developers when a thread starts up asking about a feature. No confirmation when an argument starts over wether grenades actually are doing 200dmg, or wether the lerk spikes actually dip.
Its great and cool. Then there is naturally those great help-boxes in NS which will help players who didn't read the manual.
I guess this was the intention, an FAQ to cover basic questions and the marine manual section just for a bit of fun, for those people who like reading novels that have little relevance to the actual game. What is really lacking, is some proper statistical information. Working out the details of the game from devteam information is a guessing game, if not impossible. Testing it is often very difficult, and forum posts are contradicting. How many threads would be unnecessary if we just had a guide explaining weapon damage stats, armour absorption rates, properties of weapons such as lerk spikes being hitscan, and details such as what it takes to set off a mine. Flayra has to have this stuff down somewhere anyway, yet we rarely get any intervention from testers or developers when a thread starts up asking about a feature. No confirmation when an argument starts over wether grenades actually are doing 200dmg, or wether the lerk spikes actually dip. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
TeoH, no offense, but get off your high horse a second will ya ?
Your defination of a 'good' manual is obviously going to be different from other peoples. I still find myself picking up my Homeworld or Starcraft manuals just because they are a good read. If the NS manual doesn't fit your criteria of a 'good' manual fine, but calling it trash or bloated with irrelevant information is out of order and an insult to those who made them.
The manual does precisely what it was intended to do. There is another thread in the New Player forum re: the manual where this was posted...
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><MonsE|IronChefPwn> the point of the manual is not what a lot of you think; it is not supposed to be a comprehensive guide to everything in NS. It is more a background and framework of the basics of the game, presented to be an interestsing read. Basically, it gets you to the starting line. PLaying the game is the way to learn teh very low-level detail.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You learnt on-line as was intended. Eventually there'll be a manual to explain NS and gave some background and a feel for the game, the slideshow to gave a quick 'in-game' prep and the tutorial to actually teach you to play properly. Although I guess the slideshow might disappear all together.
Additionally the manual does gave weapon damage stats and armour absorption rates (some of the damage stats are of course out of date).
The lerk spikes AFAIK has actually been classified as a bug, not an intended feature. The grenade damage mixup is due to the double damage to structures being sited as the GL's normal damage. It should be doing 100 vs. aliens and 200 vs. buildings. I've heard stories its still doing 90/180 though.
Both the lerk spike and GL damage issues have been been cleared up, by coil and Flayra respectively.
Edit: Fam, good! My only criticism is whilst the layout looks nice, I found myself going round in circles, not sure what I had and hadn't read. Too many links I think.
(As for the slightly confusing layout, I do agree, and as soon as I get some time I will revamp the navigation)
Your defination of a 'good' manual is obviously going to be different from other peoples.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
heh, yes <b>my</b> definition of a good manual is a document that would best help <b>me</b>,I thought that was quite clear. Of course some people will like to read the NS manual, and i don't deny that it is well written. In terms of being 'an interesting read' i think it succeeds, however from my point of view, i don't think it succeeds in being a good manual. The FAQ, as i stated, is imo more of a manual than the actual manual is. I would label the manual as more of a story line. Once you're past the storyline, it does have some actual game information true. Some of it is wrong, some of it is out of date, and it is limited in what it covers, so getting back to my previous point...
I really think we need a good stats list. It doesn't matter what the intended values are, we're here right now playing matches on 1.04, and what we want to know are the actual stats, not the intended stats. There are still people posting to point out that the lerk damage is apparently 50. I'd be happy to compile a list of current stats and missconceptions, but i'd want some input, because there is still some fogginess surrounding which reports are actually true. Take the hitbox issue for example, and then there are so many people confused over the fps issue, like tailsin.
I'll have a go at collecting the information that's commonly argued over, as well as little snippets of information that you won't find in the manual or patch changes, like blocking phase gates. Then hopefully, when its up we can get some feedback, i'll edit what's incorrect and add other peoples information, and we'll have a good, up to date resource.
I agree that someone ought to write a player manual... but if I had to choose between the two, I'd pick the TSA manual every time. It *does* have all the information - every weapon, upgrade, evolution, building, chamber, etc. is in there. And as a bonus, it comes with a deliciously good backstory. I just love the anecdotes that accompany the kharaa evolutions.
Manuals = wasted time
Statistics show that workers usually learn most about how to work well at their jobs from experience, not from education. Therefore, why cant it work out the same for computer games?
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Great excuse to be extremely selfish, super.
But you´re right I guess - instead of wasting YOUR time reading the manual, you waste your TEAMMATES time by building the wrong stuff at the wrong time, asking stupid questions and generally ruining everyone´s game. But hey, at least you didn´t waste any of your precious time, right?
Thanks for being a complete and utter llama.
/end rant
I'd start with Kitsune's stats and work from there. I think with all these patches coming in quick succession, especially all the 1.04 incarnations, things have had a tendency to get easily mixed up and confused. It took me and some other posters a while to convince coil about the lerk spike being hitscan for example, to which he proclaimed it a bug and reported it.
I'd be tempted to wait until after 1.1 though. It'll probably either make your information unneeded at worst or out of date at best.
If you can confirm what damage GLs are doing, that'd be a good start though <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo--> It's one of the few things i'm unsure about.
<!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
lol, well put :)
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
I'd start with Kitsune's stats and work from there. I think with all these patches coming in quick succession, especially all the 1.04 incarnations, things have had a tendency to get easily mixed up and confused. It took me and some other posters a while to convince coil about the lerk spike being hitscan for example, to which he proclaimed it a bug and reported it.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yea, i think Kitsune's stuff is generally accepted to be accurate, he also tested the GL but i can do another test on it to confirm. As for the lerk, i would strongly advise against 'fixing' the spikes.... Developers making gameplay changes in this sort of circumstance is something that has always irked me, from their point of view they are simply fixing a slip up, but from a player POV what you are actually doing is making a major gameplay change. This is a prime example, if you 'fix' the spikes you are altering the gameplay in a way which most players would agree is undesirable. The lerk, as it is in 1.04, is probably the least used alien evolution, next to ONOS for obvious reasons, they are considered too weak for their cost at 1-hive and alien teams would prefer not to have to use them before umbra unless absolutely necessary.
Currently, spikes are a hitscan weapon that benefit from hitscan prediction, this makes it feasable to shoot down jetpackers - you aim directly with your crosshairs. Switching to a non-predicted dipping projectile makes lerking against jetpacks much, much harder, particularly for anyone on a higher ping. Changing the spike behaviour without altering the lerk in other ways will be a massive hit to the potency of the lerk, and kills off the aliens main JP counter at 1-hive. I would probably argue that even with additional changes to the lerk, the spikes would be better kept as a hitscan weapon, but thats a whole new essay worth of bitching.
To sum up, for the love of god, don't change things because they're "bugged" change things because they need changing. Just because something is unintended does not mean it is undesirable. The only definate problem with lerk spikes is that the visuals are misleading, and there is no official explanation of their behaviour, this does not mean the behaviour is necessarily wrong.