"You are wasting a good idea."
Whiskey-Tango-Foxtrot
Join Date: 2006-10-31 Member: 58116Members
Join Date: 2006-10-31 Member: 58116Members
<div class="IPBDescription">WARNING: Tough Love</div>I used to post under "Whiskey Tango Foxtrot" and I have been around since BETA 6.
This is going to sound harsh but keep in mind this is tough love and in no way is this meant to hurt anyone...
I recently caught up on the podcasts and in the 7th podcast Charlie and Max talk a little about the commander concept and possible tweaks for NS2. When I finished the transcript I was left with a bad taste in my mouth, specifically, I felt that I have lost all confidence in the DEVs.
About 3-4 years ago, right around the time that the Pub Community for NS Classic was stagnating and there was a raging debate in the community among Pub Regulars and Clanners about the direction of NS. I was involved in a thread (I may have started it) about the evolutioin of the NS resource model that branched into ideas about the future of the FPS/RTS concept as well as gameplay models for NS. It was theoretical as much as practical but we discussed the problems of the NS model and possible improvements.
There were many great contributions to that thread both from regular Pubbers and Clanners, it didn't seem to get much attention from the DEVs (they didn't post in it but I hope they read it). It was shortly after that thread my interest in NS started to wane... I was a NS Classic Pubber and it was a bad time for us, hence my attempt to promote NS Classic and encourage discussions on how to make it better.
That thread was 3 years ago, flash forward to PODCAST 7 and from what I have read Charlie and Max is still theorizing about the commander concept? I always thought the FPS/RTS model has potential, and I had high hopes that concept would be incredible fun for a Sci-fi game in the same vein as NS. However, and I used to express this opinion quite a bit, the model will require rigorous testing to make it fun and practical. It needs to be tested by both Clanners and Pubbers with a mix of both newbs and vets.
I'm going to put it bluntly Charlie, "You are wasting a good idea."
If you want NS2 to be more popular than NS you need to avoid the same mistakes that were made in NS but from what I have read so far, it doesn't look like you guys have harvest anything significant from NS!?!?! How could you still be "humming and hawwing" about something as fundamental as the Commanders basic abilities?
I know games are for Fun, but from your perspective Charlie, it's a business and TIME IS MONEY. I understand you haven't been paid to do much of the work and you have been actively looking for investors but it doesn't seem like the NS model has advanced an inch for years!
By advanced I mean, serious testing of the FPS/RTS model for NS. There was some basic problems in NS that was huge when it came to encourage teamplay in Pubs and for the competitiveness of Clan play. Those problems need to be addressed and unless there is some serious effort into testing alternatives NS2 will just be NS with a visual update. Even though NS was popular relative to the other mods that existed, the problems that held it back from being the top MOD will still be a problem in NS2.
There needs to be some serious discussion and more importantly serious testing if NS2 wants to become more than a niche game. All I see in here is fluff, and what's worse, I hardly hear anything significant about NS2. I don't mean screenshots or a NS2TR... I just mean gameplay elements (ie. RTS/FPS model, resource model) that advance the NS model and possible solutions to the problems we had in NS.
Maybe I'm being harsh but I'm going to give everyone a chance to respond before I post more of my thoughts.
PS: I have long forgotten my password and email attached to my old account but if one of the mods can assist me in recovering it I would love to log in and try to retrieve some of the threads I am talking about. IM me if that is possible.
This is going to sound harsh but keep in mind this is tough love and in no way is this meant to hurt anyone...
I recently caught up on the podcasts and in the 7th podcast Charlie and Max talk a little about the commander concept and possible tweaks for NS2. When I finished the transcript I was left with a bad taste in my mouth, specifically, I felt that I have lost all confidence in the DEVs.
About 3-4 years ago, right around the time that the Pub Community for NS Classic was stagnating and there was a raging debate in the community among Pub Regulars and Clanners about the direction of NS. I was involved in a thread (I may have started it) about the evolutioin of the NS resource model that branched into ideas about the future of the FPS/RTS concept as well as gameplay models for NS. It was theoretical as much as practical but we discussed the problems of the NS model and possible improvements.
There were many great contributions to that thread both from regular Pubbers and Clanners, it didn't seem to get much attention from the DEVs (they didn't post in it but I hope they read it). It was shortly after that thread my interest in NS started to wane... I was a NS Classic Pubber and it was a bad time for us, hence my attempt to promote NS Classic and encourage discussions on how to make it better.
That thread was 3 years ago, flash forward to PODCAST 7 and from what I have read Charlie and Max is still theorizing about the commander concept? I always thought the FPS/RTS model has potential, and I had high hopes that concept would be incredible fun for a Sci-fi game in the same vein as NS. However, and I used to express this opinion quite a bit, the model will require rigorous testing to make it fun and practical. It needs to be tested by both Clanners and Pubbers with a mix of both newbs and vets.
I'm going to put it bluntly Charlie, "You are wasting a good idea."
If you want NS2 to be more popular than NS you need to avoid the same mistakes that were made in NS but from what I have read so far, it doesn't look like you guys have harvest anything significant from NS!?!?! How could you still be "humming and hawwing" about something as fundamental as the Commanders basic abilities?
I know games are for Fun, but from your perspective Charlie, it's a business and TIME IS MONEY. I understand you haven't been paid to do much of the work and you have been actively looking for investors but it doesn't seem like the NS model has advanced an inch for years!
By advanced I mean, serious testing of the FPS/RTS model for NS. There was some basic problems in NS that was huge when it came to encourage teamplay in Pubs and for the competitiveness of Clan play. Those problems need to be addressed and unless there is some serious effort into testing alternatives NS2 will just be NS with a visual update. Even though NS was popular relative to the other mods that existed, the problems that held it back from being the top MOD will still be a problem in NS2.
There needs to be some serious discussion and more importantly serious testing if NS2 wants to become more than a niche game. All I see in here is fluff, and what's worse, I hardly hear anything significant about NS2. I don't mean screenshots or a NS2TR... I just mean gameplay elements (ie. RTS/FPS model, resource model) that advance the NS model and possible solutions to the problems we had in NS.
Maybe I'm being harsh but I'm going to give everyone a chance to respond before I post more of my thoughts.
PS: I have long forgotten my password and email attached to my old account but if one of the mods can assist me in recovering it I would love to log in and try to retrieve some of the threads I am talking about. IM me if that is possible.
Comments
i think ur comments are interesting but i dont really know what their about, forgive my nievity.
I didnt realise the DEVS were questioning whether or not to axe the rts.fps idea, i jsut thought they wanted to evolve it and change it abit.
My experience of playing the most recent versions of NS1 is that there are far more issues with game play on the alien team that the rts/fps balance on the marine team.
As far as the comms basic abilties goes i think there needs to be debates aobut what has and hasnt worked so well in ns1 which is discussed in another thread.
I do agree that there isnt much specific info on what decisions they have made for NS2 but i just figured thats the nature of game development.
And i expect the game will be throughly tested when its in a state for proper testing, they may be testing it atm for all i know. Though one thought is they could release another version of ns1 to test out ideas for ns 2
Of course, it could still get some tweaks, but the basic 10-rt, 1 in start, 1 res every 4 seconds, seems like it works very well. Tweaks could be like the suggested <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=103126" target="_blank"><u>2-res for an alien killing an rt</u></a>, or any number of other ideas found in the forums that show ways the system could be modified. Im sure many of them would prove unbalanced, but i've always found that the best way to make people play the way they 'should' play to get the best experience, is to give them incentives.
The problems with NS' popularity are not directly derived from the quality of the game. The game itself is absolutely phenomenal. Its problems with the playerbase are mostly due to being a mod (hence getting the attention of a mod; barely any, meaning that not many ppl hear about it); the learning curve (making it so hard for new people to get into it); the age of the engine (even the NS1 screenshot on the UWE page looks horrible, doesnt do the game justice); and the vast availability of new, awesome games.
If NS2 was a carbon copy of NS1 but with new, pretty graphics (which would mainly come from the props and map quality found in Source), being sold over Steam with the relevant Steam advertising, I think it would be pretty big. Toss in some video tutorials that not only really help with the learning curve, but can also act as mini-trailers (akin to the Meet the Soldier etc), and NS2 would be huge.
Add in a bunch of new features, and they could either make it even bigger, or damage the balance or be gimmicky, and hurt it.
You're right, way too much time is being spent on the planning here, or at least from our point of view. The work they've done on making new tools to help with the development sounds awesome, and i'm sure it will produce some great results; but at some point you have to stop making tools, and start using them. How much of the coding is being reworked? I'd think that a lot would be ported over. Hows the coding coming?
We have no updates on anything concrete. It could be that not a single texture out of 200 is ready yet, not a single prop out of 100. Im sure there are some done, but is it only 10% done? 30%? Aside from visuals, how close is the game to being 'designed' on paper?
Bleh
i think ur comments are interesting but i dont really know what their about, forgive my nievity.
I didnt realise the DEVS were questioning whether or not to axe the rts.fps idea, i jsut thought they wanted to evolve it and change it abit.
My experience of playing the most recent versions of NS1 is that there are far more issues with game play on the alien team that the rts/fps balance on the marine team.
As far as the comms basic abilties goes i think there needs to be debates aobut what has and hasnt worked so well in ns1 which is discussed in another thread.
I do agree that there isnt much specific info on what decisions they have made for NS2 but i just figured thats the nature of game development.
And i expect the game will be throughly tested when its in a state for proper testing, they may be testing it atm for all i know. Though one thought is they could release another version of ns1 to test out ideas for ns 2<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Don't apologize for being new buddy! <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile-fix.gif" /> Good to see NS is still attracting some new players.
Hopefully a mod can assist me in retrieving my old account because I can pull up some of those threads. Problems that were hotly debated was the resource model for Pub and Clan play. That was central to the thread I referred to. There was also quite a bit of discussion on how to improve the RTS/FPS model because of the integral problem of commander experience. Games can easily be ruined if the commander is not experienced enough. I'll be sure to post the links for those threads when I find them.
You actually nailed one of the ideas for what the DEVs could be doing. I understand we are far from a playable map for NS2 but it is still possible to experiment with NS1. All it requires is organization and a good mix of volunteers. One of the problems with NS was the less than scientific way the game was tested and balanced.
I don't know the level of play occuring on Pubs nowadays, is it mostly Combat or are people playing Classic? I think a direct port of NS to the Source engine will sell. Will it move in a way that is significant to Charlie's bank account I am not so sure. You have to remember, 5 years ago RTS/FPS was fresh and unique... that is no longer the case.
That is why my feeling is that Charlie is wasting a good idea.
I would have to disagree about NS is perfect but I would have to agree that the NS model is very balance sensitive. Even minor tweaks may have major consequences. That is why I am so anal (and others have expressed this opinion as well) about testing is exactly because of how balance sensitive things can be.
My critcism of the Dev team is that they have not made an progress from NS. By the 3rd year the reached a critical mass of players and NS was out long enough for all the unbalances to emerge. Yet when I read Charlie and Max talk about the gameplay of NS... it sounds as though they are still at the drawing board when they actually have at least 2-3 years of experience to work with.
I don't want to dig up too much old drama but this whole thing seems to be rooted in a lack of organization in development.
"How do you make the game fun when you have a terrible commander, or when the commander has a terrible team?"
Given the amount of money, time, and talent Valve has and they reasoned to drop the whole idea of the FPS/RTS mix, why do you feel it's a mistake for this team to be seriously rethinking this game mechanic?
But it does come at the price of the occasional bad game.
QFT
But it does come at the price of the <!--coloro:#FF0000--><span style="color:#FF0000"><!--/coloro-->occasional bad game<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Understatement Alert.
Commandermode fails for the majority of pub games, which is where the majority of players play. You needed to sample games back when there were actually more than 4 servers around and then make conclusions about how many bad games were caused by bad commanders.
Honestly, the only reason why it isn't any worse is because there are an equal amount of blockheads that are running in straight lines into marine fire as skulks.
The commandermode needs to be reworked at the very least for pub play. Competitive play at least has players who understand the basics of commanding theory.
You are in the wrong, they are taking the steps to create a flow from implementation, to testing, to balancing - of all their ideas. They openly admit they want "Quality Assurance" to be a integral part of their cycle to put out a bad ass multiplayer game. They do not have a set in stone design document on this, they are fluid to respond to challenges but firm on targets. Even if you have not listened to the latest podcast, I think you would have realized the fault in condemning the work of brain storming along with their actual work in progress.
This thread is an open invitation to flame when you do not respect your role in the process. If you think you can do better than the Devs, put your money and time where your mouth is like they have.
If you won't take my word for it, at least listen to the 4 Pillars of the 9th podcast.
<img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/mad-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":angry:" border="0" alt="mad-fix.gif" />
Commandermode fails for the majority of pub games, which is where the majority of players play. You needed to sample games back when there were actually more than 4 servers around and then make conclusions about how many bad games were caused by bad commanders.
Honestly, the only reason why it isn't any worse is because there are an equal amount of blockheads that are running in straight lines into marine fire as skulks.
The commandermode needs to be reworked at the very least for pub play. Competitive play at least has players who understand the basics of commanding theory.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I've never completely understood why its so difficult to learn commanding. After all, the basic mechanics are quite simple: Cap res, tech up and take out the 2nd hive. Player skills changing the outcome so much is probably one thing, but it doesn't explain it all the way. Is it just the fact that ns attracts so many people not familiar with the rts games?
NS is primarily an FPS game, with RTS components. FPS games are usually separate from RTS gamers. FPS gamers are usually not so good in RTS and vice versa. A small subset of RTS gamers will play NS. A smaller subset will keep on playing it. An even smaller subset are any good at RTS and might be able to command.
As for learning how to command, the basics are simple and many players do get it. However, the basics don't make a decent commander. It is necessary to know how to use medpacks, ammo, where to direct players, what areas of the map to focus on, how to respond to the dynamic state of map control, etc. If anything, commanders ruin games when they know the basics and just play by the basics. It's much more complex than that and there are huge consequences for what appears to be subtle differences in how the commander plays.
It also doesn't help that NS attracts mostly little children (ranges from age 5-18) who can't afford a good enough computer to play better games. Usually they aren't mature enough or even capable of learning semi-complex things and they are only getting worse with every generation. If you doubt it, just stop by a public school in your area sometime and ask to sit in during a few gr9-gr12 classes. If they actually let you do that (they probably won't), you'll see what I mean. (Well, maybe Finland might be better than North America with that).
It's all text based.
<!--c1--><div class='codetop'>CODE</div><div class='codemain'><!--ec1-->Player> Move East
Game> Player sees a Khara, Skulk Class
What will you do?_
Player> Shoot Skulk
Game> You miss. You die.
What will you do?_<!--c2--></div><!--ec2-->
I've already given away too much...
<!--quoteo(post=1659134:date=Nov 3 2007, 05:00 AM:name=CanadianWolverine)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(CanadianWolverine @ Nov 3 2007, 05:00 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1659134"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->What have I seen in this thread that adds naught else but criticism, and awfully early criticism at that. This comes across like back seat driving ... before the car has even been started, let alone built.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
We just passed the 5th Anniversary of NS. I think your analogy is a little incorrect because Charlie has expressed in the past that NS is the precursor to a retail game. Even though the title is NS2 it is really just an evolution of NS. The car has been built (NS), test driven , and there has been several revision of the design already. What is the purpose of creating a prototype and testing it? To uncover any design flaws so they can be addressed for the final product. Why I am so critical of the process so far is because of this snippet from Podcast 7 in reference to the RTS-side of the model (Commander Mode). Keep in mind earlier in the Podcast Charlie alluded to doubling the importance of the commander:
<b>7th Podcast</b>
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><b>Max:</b> So, some of the things he mentioned, where if you have a bad commander how do you keep that from ruining everyone else’s play experience, um… actually one of the things we mentioned…
<b>Charlie:</b> How do you want to do that? <i><u>There are lots of ways, I have lots of ideas, I don’t know what’s going to work, but.</i></u><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It was upon reading this that I started to lose confidence in the development process for NS. You must understand that <u><i>the role of the commander and the relationship between the commander level and the troop level is integral to the whole NS gameplay model</u></i>. 5 years into the development of NS and now into the development of NS2 (the retail product) and the Devs are still trying to answer this question?!?!
To make it worse, has there been any active effort to rigorously test, experiment, and advance our understanding of this major problem?
You want to use a car analogy, I think what I am questioning it is closer to this; "How can you produce a car to be sold to the public without figuring out how the make the tires spin in the right direction first?"
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You are in the wrong, they are taking the steps to create a flow from implementation, to testing, to balancing - of all their ideas. They openly admit they want "Quality Assurance" to be a integral part of their cycle to put out a bad ass multiplayer game. They do not have a set in stone design document on this, they are fluid to respond to challenges but firm on targets. Even if you have not listened to the latest podcast, I think you would have realized the fault in condemning the work of brain storming along with their actual work in progress.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Okay, you say I am in the wrong but you listened to the 7th Podcast right. Where I got the idea of the development process for NS came <i>directly</i> from the Charlie's mouth.
<b>7th Podcast</b>
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><b>Charlie:</b> Although I have to say, I really didn’t know if that approach would work at all, it was more like, just get it out there and try it.
<b>Max:</b> Right.
<b>Charlie:</b> And we had nothing to lose, and that’s the great thing about making a mod. You don’t have anything to lose. But now we do have stuff to lose, ostensibly, though I don’t know if that’s actually true, but
<b>Max:</b> But NS1 it did well, so I think at the baseline we know that that concept definitely can work, and that people enjoy it.
<b>Charlie:</b> Just on raw popularity, you can make a pretty compelling argument that it could work.
<b>Max:</b> Right.
<b>Charlie:</b> Or that it does work. <i><u>Even in the kind’ve naive implementations you saw in Natural Selection 1.</i></u> Which it wasn’t, you know, it’s not bad, it’s just, we learned a lot from that.
<b>Max:</b> So that’s kind’ve the base line, we know that the idea works, and that those kind’ve problems are, at least, addressable to some degree.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
At this point in time I would hope they have a process because they are producing a retail product to be sold... but by the way they are still discussing the fundamental gameplay elements of NS... it sounds like they are still in the brainstorming phase... after 5 years.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This thread is an open invitation to flame when you do not respect your role in the process. If you think you can do better than the Devs, put your money and time where your mouth is like they have.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I hope you are not accusing me of starting a flame war because I have tried to be as respectful as possible and back up my opinion. I don't want to make these observations but because of my loyalty to the community and the potential of the idea, I took to time to point out the ugly truths that no one seem to have addressed. I point it out so it can be fixed... I didn't take the time to submit feedback because I'm rooting for NS2 to fail.
Now, regarding "putting your money where my mouth is..." I think comment is out of line and completely irrelevent to our dicussion. I'm going to ignore this flamebait question and I hope you refrain from any more questions of the type.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If you won't take my word for it, at least listen to the 4 Pillars of the 9th podcast.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm planning to listen to it and I will definately post my thoughts. Looking forward to hearing something more indepth (I hope).
Thanks for dropping by and commenting Digz. Tactical Gamer was one of my favorite Pub servers back in the day. I recall getting my ass whooped and then whooping some ass with you a few times. <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile-fix.gif" />
I think StixNStonz nailed it, if they are going to the community for maps the DEVs will have to release information about the game so the mappers can properly balance the map.
P.S. (I respond too slowly...)
I'm sure with the release of the NS2 map kit, they'll include/make available official documentation. If not, we can always harass them until they do. <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile-fix.gif" />
<!--quoteo(post=1659078:date=Nov 2 2007, 02:09 PM:name=Whiskey-Tango-Foxtrot)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Whiskey-Tango-Foxtrot @ Nov 2 2007, 02:09 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1659078"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->That thread was 3 years ago, flash forward to PODCAST 7 and from what I have read Charlie and Max is still theorizing about the commander concept? I always thought the FPS/RTS model has potential, and I had high hopes that concept would be incredible fun for a Sci-fi game in the same vein as NS. However, and I used to express this opinion quite a bit, the model will require rigorous testing to make it fun and practical. It needs to be tested by both Clanners and Pubbers with a mix of both newbs and vets.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Testing by itself doesn't improve anything. Testing AND making changes based on experience is how things get better. In the podcast Charlie said that when he originally came up with the idea for a commander, he didn't have any idea how it would work in actual games or for the average player. After 5 years of NS, we think we have some ideas on how to make that better and that's going to be our starting point for NS2 testing. That's what we were talking about in the podcast.
This is going to sound harsh but keep in mind this is tough love and in no way is this meant to hurt anyone...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
okie dokie
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I recently caught up on the podcasts and in the 7th podcast Charlie and Max talk a little about the commander concept and possible tweaks for NS2. When I finished the transcript I was left with a bad taste in my mouth, specifically, I felt that I have lost all confidence in the DEVs.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Interesting, after hearing the commander podcast I was actually quite excited
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->About 3-4 years ago, right around the time that the Pub Community for NS Classic was stagnating and there was a raging debate in the community among Pub Regulars and Clanners about the direction of NS. I was involved in a thread (I may have started it) about the evolutioin of the NS resource model that branched into ideas about the future of the FPS/RTS concept as well as gameplay models for NS. It was theoretical as much as practical but we discussed the problems of the NS model and possible improvements.
There were many great contributions to that thread both from regular Pubbers and Clanners, it didn't seem to get much attention from the DEVs (they didn't post in it but I hope they read it). It was shortly after that thread my interest in NS started to wane... I was a NS Classic Pubber and it was a bad time for us, hence my attempt to promote NS Classic and encourage discussions on how to make it better.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Given the update system for NS, it would be difficult. Using LUA scripts allows the developers to do live updates.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->That thread was 3 years ago, flash forward to PODCAST 7 and from what I have read Charlie and Max is still theorizing about the commander concept? I always thought the FPS/RTS model has potential, and I had high hopes that concept would be incredible fun for a Sci-fi game in the same vein as NS. However, and I used to express this opinion quite a bit, the model will require rigorous testing to make it fun and practical. It needs to be tested by both Clanners and Pubbers with a mix of both newbs and vets.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Testing with players that are new to the game or are not skilled really won't yield any useful results. Those in the lower standard deviations are going to do so regardless of whatever dev changes are made to the game. The game should be tested by those who are competent in the game. The most competent in the game are usually competitive players. Of course there are pub players that can contribute, but to be honest, a lot of pub players would have little to contribute to the balance end of the game because they are gonna get murdered regardless of changes.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'm going to put it bluntly Charlie, "You are wasting a good idea."<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Huh?
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If you want NS2 to be more popular than NS you need to avoid the same mistakes that were made in NS but from what I have read so far, it doesn't look like you guys have harvest anything significant from NS!?!?! How could you still be "humming and hawwing" about something as fundamental as the Commanders basic abilities?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The changes in the command system are quite positive. Having less demand/responsibility on the commander significantly helps the marine team. If the marines in NS1 have a crap commander the odds of them winning are significantly lower. 1 player out of an 8 or 9 man team can ruin successful if they are not good at commanding. Giving a little more autonomy will actually attract more users to the game. The more things a player can do on their own the better.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I know games are for Fun, but from your perspective Charlie, it's a business and TIME IS MONEY. I understand you haven't been paid to do much of the work and you have been actively looking for investors but it doesn't seem like the NS model has advanced an inch for years!<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I dunno how to respond to this. The changes that are being made to the commander model will actually attract more players because they can still have a good time in the game if the commander is terrible.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->By advanced I mean, serious testing of the FPS/RTS model for NS. There was some basic problems in NS that was huge when it came to encourage teamplay in Pubs and for the competitiveness of Clan play. Those problems need to be addressed and unless there is some serious effort into testing alternatives NS2 will just be NS with a visual update. Even though NS was popular relative to the other mods that existed, the problems that held it back from being the top MOD will still be a problem in NS2.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I disagree about encouraging teamwork. Teamwork should be used when it is needed. Of course by working as a team will increase the odds of winning. But at the same token, players shouldn't be rewarded for things that they are supposed to do. There shouldn't be any bonuses for people who are humping each other's legs calling it "teamwork". Teamwork is simply a group of people working together to reach a certain goal. If you look at it from the macro view, you could understand that allowing players to do what they are good at is the best combination of what to do. If you look at it from a micro view, everyone has to be in a squad, and "roleplay" sorts of tactics and strategies, in an attempt to formulate teamwork, players actually formulate maladapative teamwork which doesn't help anyone. The best teamwork is to utilize all the assets on the team as effectively as possible.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->There needs to be some serious discussion and more importantly serious testing if NS2 wants to become more than a niche game. All I see in here is fluff, and what's worse, I hardly hear anything significant about NS2. I don't mean screenshots or a NS2TR... I just mean gameplay elements (ie. RTS/FPS model, resource model) that advance the NS model and possible solutions to the problems we had in NS.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
They don't even have a playable alpha yet. You are trying to sprint before you can even crawl. I would just sit back and relax before making any critical points about the resource system or any features that have not been announced yet. Your post is preemptive, and really does not have any merit at this time.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Maybe I'm being harsh but I'm going to give everyone a chance to respond before I post more of my thoughts.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Nah just irrational.
Now, regarding "putting your money where my mouth is..." I think comment is out of line and completely irrelevent to our dicussion. I'm going to ignore this flamebait question and I hope you refrain from any more questions of the type.
I'm planning to listen to it and I will definately post my thoughts. Looking forward to hearing something more indepth (I hope).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
In some ways, this is the post I wish you had done in the first post. Your reply was well thought out and I enjoyed reading it. I am glad you also want to see NS2 be a success.
"Money where mouth is" was not meant as flamebait, only a wake up to that from our position we are watching what someone else is doing. I wish to continue the analogy: I know when I drive, I don't appreciate back seat driving, but I do appreciate help navigating the streets - its safer when I keep my eyes on the road and someone else reads the map and lets me know before a turn is coming up. If you want to drive, I would suggest getting your own car.
Sure, we have a prototype vehicle, but it was built under different circumstances, with different tools, an lower budget, and different material components. Now they not only building a different model, it is intended for retail release and built in a manner of a factory line, rather than in their home's garage.
I think others posting before me probably say it better, so I hope you have read their posts.
I apologize if I was overly harsh, I just feel this need to defend what Unknown Worlds is trying to accomplish.
Random?
Anyhoo, interesting ideas in here...
I'll edit this post later when I have more time.
<img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/skulk.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="::skulk::" border="0" alt="skulk.gif" />
There are no guarantees, but at least you can get a feel for whom you might want to command a tough map.
Neither. I am talking about the Commander Role in general. Charlie obviously thinks it'll work, you think it'll work, and the whole reason I am here is because I think it'll work. But you know who doesn't think it will work that great... Robin Walker at Valve. I know they only spent months on it but a company with so many resources and minds must have researched and tested potential models and they couldn't come up with anything for some of the fundamental problems of the RTS/FPS gameplay model.
I'm going to address some of Firewater's reply along with your reply Max. And thank you Firewater for replying BTW, I remember you are one of the most vocal voices and wicked players in the NS clan scene. We've probably tango'd before on threads about Pub and Clan play LoL. I'm honored that you took the time, even if it's to disagree with me.
<!--quoteo(post=0:date=:name=Firewater)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Firewater)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Interesting, after hearing the commander podcast I was actually quite excited<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--quoteo(post=0:date=:name=Firewater)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Firewater)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The changes in the command system are quite positive. Having less demand/responsibility on the commander significantly helps the marine team. If the marines in NS1 have a crap commander the odds of them winning are significantly lower. 1 player out of an 8 or 9 man team can ruin successful if they are not good at commanding. Giving a little more autonomy will actually attract more users to the game. The more things a player can do on their own the better.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Firewater I didn't say I hated their proposed tweak to the commander mode, in fact, I think it is a damn fine idea and well worth a try.
But that is what it is right now... an good idea. How do we know if it will work? How will we figure it out without testing it? Which leads me back to your reply Max.
<!--quoteo(post=0:date=:name=Max)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Max)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Testing by itself doesn't improve anything. Testing AND making changes based on experience is how things get better. In the podcast Charlie said that when he originally came up with the idea for a commander, he didn't have any idea how it would work in actual games or for the average player. After 5 years of NS, we think we have some ideas on how to make that better and that's going to be our starting point for NS2 testing. That's what we were talking about in the podcast.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I don't disagree with you, I wholeheartedly agree. It's not the way your testing that bothers me Max, it's the <b><i>LACK</b></i> of testing.
I'm totally thankful Charlie thought of the idea, implemented it, and made NS. I have been around for a chunk of that time supporting the idea and the game... but I am not just some drooling fanboy, I'm an <b><i>honest</b></i>, drooling fanboy and the ugly truth is; after 5 years, we still do not know on what level the commander mode works the best.
Valve worked on the problem and Robin said one of the major issues was the bad commander/bad team under commander problem. Another one of the problems we have discovered through the development of NS is how to cultivate good commanders for Pub games.
If I haven't made myself clear I apologize, that is my fault. Let me clarify;
My worry is that the Devs have not considered and employed some method of testing the commander ideas that Charlie has harvested from 5 years of NS. Could those ideas be thrown on the HL engine and use NS as a testbed? If any of it can be tested, it should be tested with what we have.
Now I do understand maybe not all the solution you and Charlie have come up with may be testable on the HL engine and that they are potential solutions that require the capabilities of the HL2 engine.
<!--quoteo(post=0:date=:name=Firewater)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Firewater)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->They don't even have a playable alpha yet.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Remember Firewater, my problem isn't their ideas for the game, my problem is the time wasted while we have important ideas to see if they will work.
When we talk about, "How will the commander mode work best?" we are asking <b>Basic Concept and Overall Design</b> questions. That is the first stage of game development.
I want to look at the big bigger for a second guys.
Let's say "Sketching" and "Basic Element Construction" takes another 3-4 months, which means releasing a NS2TR in Feb/Apr of '08. Maps will need to be built before a playable Alpha can be released so let's say that takes another 3-4 months which takes us into May/Jun '08. Hopefully that will lead to the Beta which can be used for balance testing Maps and that takes 3-4 months which take us into Aug/Sep '08. Let's add 3-4 months for buffer (unforeseen problems) and we have an estimated release date for NS2 for about Jan '09.
Now this is a very generous time-line and from someone who does not work in the industry. I don't know the financial situation of Unknown Worlds but I wonder can they afford to bank 1 year of work on something that on a basic concept and overall design level is really uncertain.
NS was a moderate success, Charlie can't live off it but it has sustained him long enough to go on to developing NS2. Like he said, he learned from the problems of NS and he will implement those solutions in NS2 which will be a retail game. I'm not sure Charlie thinks if NS was a proof-of-concept for NS2... this part of the discussion can only be answered by him. However to me, if something as fundamental as a basic concept and overall design question cannot be answered, it's not a proof-of-concept... it is still an idea that may or may not work.
But as I have briefly outlined, it may take another 6-8 months before we have a playable Alpha. Is there nothing that can be done between now and then to test some of these solutions Charlie has come up with?
<!--quoteo(post=0:date=:name=Firewater)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Firewater)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You are trying to sprint before you can even crawl. I would just sit back and relax before making any critical points about the resource system or any features that have not been announced yet.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You accuse me of trying to sprint before I can crawl... which is exactly what I'm concerned about with the development of NS2.
<!--quoteo(post=0:date=:name=Firewater)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Firewater)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Your post is preemptive, and really does not have any merit at this time.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I hope this post has no merit at all... and that I am just overly critical. However we have both been around for a chunk of the development and evolution of NS. When we say Charlie has had 5 years worth of testing with NS we are being very generous. What about the time spent making NS:Combat. What about all the time spent on the BUS?
In the past I have not been quiet about my concern about the way NS is tested. Frankly I think it is less than scientific and prone to the influence of vets in the community that may or may not have an agenda (ie. promoting Clan play over Pub play).
As for being preemptive... this kind of post has to be preemptive.
EDiT: Typos and bad tags.
Firewater I didn't say I hated their proposed tweak to the commander mode, in fact, I think it is a damn fine idea and well worth a try.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm sorry to say that I do not remember you, but I will offer you the same respect you offered me. I will only attack your logic, not your person.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->But that is what it is right now... an good idea. How do we know if it will work? How will we figure it out without testing it? Which leads me back to your reply Max.
I don't disagree with you, I wholeheartedly agree. It's not the way your testing that bothers me Max, it's the <b><i>LACK</b></i> of testing.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You are punishing the dev team for a crime they have yet to commit in this game. That crime is faulty testing. There has been no testing going on, save internal testing. The best way to test the commander mode is to see how it will work with a controlled environment of players that know what they are doing. I will agree that their testing methods were not the most effective in the first game, however a lot of ideas that were suggested would just simply not coincide with the game engine. I have confidence that the developers learned from their errors that were bound to be made by any developers making a game of such a novel concept as NS. I would give them the benefit of the doubt, even after how critical I have been.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'm totally thankful Charlie thought of the idea, implemented it, and made NS. I have been around for a chunk of that time supporting the idea and the game... but I am not just some drooling fanboy, I'm an <b><i>honest</b></i>, drooling fanboy and the ugly truth is; after 5 years, we still do not know on what level the commander mode works the best.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Again, there were some ideas that could not be implemented into the HL1 engine. There are also somethings that could be changed for betterment. I think you are punishing the developers for a crime they have not commit in this game. If you want to get your ideas across, trust me this is not an effective means of doing so.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Valve worked on the problem and Robin said one of the major issues was the bad commander/bad team under commander problem. Another one of the problems we have discovered through the development of NS is how to cultivate good commanders for Pub games.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
One of the methods that they discussed, giving more autonomy to the marine team, is a way to solve a problem for bad commanders.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If I haven't made myself clear I apologize, that is my fault. Let me clarify;
My worry is that the Devs have not considered and employed some method of testing the commander ideas that Charlie has harvested from 5 years of NS. Could those ideas be thrown on the HL engine and use NS as a testbed? If any of it can be tested, it should be tested with what we have.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Testing commander ideas in HL1 without knowing the engine/movement/OTHER schematics of the game really is not a good idea. I understand your frustration, but going back and testing ideas on the HL1 engine without important aspects (new marine weapons, dynamic infestation, etc...) really is not going to help any. It would just waste more time to develop the game to retro-fit ideas on an outdated engine that the dev team has no more further use for.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Now I do understand maybe not all the solution you and Charlie have come up with may be testable on the HL engine and that they are potential solutions that require the capabilities of the HL2 engine.
Remember Firewater, my problem isn't their ideas for the game, my problem is the time wasted while we have important ideas to see if they will work.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
We won't know until we test it. Given the evolution of LUA into the source engine, the dev team will be able to implement different commander modes/designs in like a quarter of the time. So when testing begins they will be able to test whatever variables they want to with minimal amount of coding, given the framework they setup.
Now this is a very generous time-line and from someone who does not work in the industry. I don't know the financial situation of Unknown Worlds but I wonder can they afford to bank 1 year of work on something that on a basic concept and overall design level is really uncertain.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I wouldn't begin to estimate time lines, especially since you are not involved with the industry. Since you do not know the financial situation, its best to leave this part unspeculated.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->NS was a moderate success, Charlie can't live off it but it has sustained him long enough to go on to developing NS2. Like he said, he learned from the problems of NS and he will implement those solutions in NS2 which will be a retail game. I'm not sure Charlie thinks if NS was a proof-of-concept for NS2... this part of the discussion can only be answered by him. However to me, if something as fundamental as a basic concept and overall design question cannot be answered, it's not a proof-of-concept... it is still an idea that may or may not work.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
NS was a GREAT success in the beginning. A lot of people flocked to download it. It was the number 3rd party mod for like 3 years, and it still today beats out most source mods.
Also, if you admit the developers are learning from their mistakes, it kind of defeats the purpose right?
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->But as I have briefly outlined, it may take another 6-8 months before we have a playable Alpha. Is there nothing that can be done between now and then to test some of these solutions Charlie has come up with?
You accuse me of trying to sprint before I can crawl... which is exactly what I'm concerned about with the development of NS2.
I hope this post has no merit at all... and that I am just overly critical. However we have both been around for a chunk of the development and evolution of NS. When we say Charlie has had 5 years worth of testing with NS we are being very generous. What about the time spent making NS:Combat. What about all the time spent on the BUS?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well if combat was used the way it was supposed to be, there would have been more people playing classic. But its the player's choice on what he or she wants to play, thats not the dev team's fault. And given that there are going to be LUA scripts for everything, people will be able to customize exactly what they want.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->In the past I have not been quiet about my concern about the way NS is tested. Frankly I think it is less than scientific and prone to the influence of vets in the community that may or may not have an agenda (ie. promoting Clan play over Pub play).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The irony behind that is that the vets (myself included) always wanted to push for a more scientific means. In order to achieve balance, you have to test with the least amount of variables possible. Putting the top 2 teams against each other is the best way to eliminate variables from the game. Putting together random teams with random experiences, is not an effective way to test balance.
NS is different in that it's much more smallscale, it needs to aim at a small niche market and work towards its existing fans to be a success, because UWE doesn't have the funds or the core game concept to compete in the mainstream with the big players who can absorb losses made on 'safer' games that don't get any bites. UWE also has a decentralised dev team and probably the same goes for the dedicated playtester group if they're at that stage because financing an in-house PT group is (I guess) beyond their current means. This means they can't afford to be -too- experimental with their existing game model because they don't have the luxury of playtesting features with a full server twice a day like Valve do and they can't dedicate cabal groups to experimenting with ideas.
Commander is integral to NS. It works for the experienced players of NS today. There are plenty of refinements that can be made to the commander model to make it easier to learn, more intuitive, less split-second and more tactical. That is what NS2 should aim to do, hopefully.
I think that the dev's going back and reviewing the fundamental questions of NS is a good thing, not a sign of waste.
From my experience in pubs and clan play, things do need to be thought out and changed in regards to the commander.
1) Our main clan commander was very good but I believe he found it as boring as hell. Sometimes you want to just get out of the chair so you can just shoot things. Does anyone 'really' enjoy the role of commander and nothing else?
2) In pub games it can be difficult to get your commanders attention to get some buildings dropped. Inexperienced commanders or griefers that just do nothing in the chair.
This is pretty much solved with vote kicking the commander. But what if nobody on the team wants to be a commander or is capable of being a commander. A solo player training map with scripts to teach a player how to do commander activities would be the best way for new players.
3) If your going to remove things that the commander does such as having the marines on the ground selecting locations for turrets and other buildings, something else has to be added for commanders. The more you remove from the commanders, the more useless it feels to be a commander.
In the maps I created a while ago, I tried to add more essential things for the commander to do. I tried to make it so commanders would feel more directly involved with the battle. Commander could crush aliens with lifts and electrocute aliens at certain locations. Commander could open and block certain locations. One of the more obvious ideas is to allow the commander to use the turrets much like was done in Tribes1/2. To balance out the fact that aliens dont have a commander, the hives could also be used as command chair for aliens. This might allow for a more balanced feel between the 2 teams. Just thoughts off the top of my head.
Anyway before this can become a 'retail' AAA title there has to be more thoughts on design of the commander to make it less of a potential of handicapping a team and making it extremely fun for that player.
I command pretty much one out of every 3 games. If not more. Every server seems to always have a commander these days, whether hes decent or not.
What i'm saying is, those people WANT to command. People often fight over it. I think its just you who doesn't enjoy commanding.
Oh and giving the comm the ability to electrocute aliens via buttons and such? Sounds like a really, really bad idea.