Can't imagine why you haven't been hired by them as a consultant.
You're sure to bring in tons of new people to the game.
You did hear that they are making their own engine .. right? One that may have physics that behave completely different from the quake engine? That might effect things like 'bunny hopping', may or may not even have the ability for any sort of 'air control' and that may feel completely different than NS on the HL engine does ...?
In any event, I'm sure you could be like those Fortress Forever guys and make the "true" version of the game, while all the noobs go to their TF2.
<!--quoteo(post=1733595:date=Oct 22 2009, 10:27 PM:name=Silver_Fox)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Silver_Fox @ Oct 22 2009, 10:27 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1733595"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Can't imagine why you haven't been hired by them as a consultant.
You're sure to bring in tons of new people to the game.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> UWE couldn't afford my salary.
<!--quoteo(post=1733595:date=Oct 22 2009, 10:27 PM:name=Silver_Fox)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Silver_Fox @ Oct 22 2009, 10:27 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1733595"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You did hear that they are making their own engine .. right? One that may have physics that behave completely different from the quake engine? That might effect things like 'bunny hopping', may or may not even have the ability for any sort of 'air control' and that may feel completely different than NS on the HL engine does ...?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> And you wonder why people are a little skeptical of their ability to implement from scratch what was handed to them in NS1?
<!--quoteo(post=1733595:date=Oct 22 2009, 10:27 PM:name=Silver_Fox)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Silver_Fox @ Oct 22 2009, 10:27 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1733595"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->In any event, I'm sure you could be like those Fortress Forever guys and make the "true" version of the game, while all the noobs go to their TF2.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I am a member of the NS community, not the UWE community. The TF2 community is drastically different than the TFC community. I am not arguing for what the world will enjoy but rather for what I and the current NS community will enjoy. Claiming anything different would be totally arrogant, like you. Luckly for me and the rest of the NS community, UWE doesn't have the established branding to ignore the current community and target the entire world like Valve did with TF2.
I actually find homicide as probably the best poster on these boards. Him and locallyunscene. I also wouldn't call his above post right there trolling either (other than the salary part :P), he talks with facts and uses plain language.
edit: and ahh, you edited your post. But mhmm I agree and hope to see some true footage soon!
<!--quoteo(post=1733493:date=Oct 22 2009, 03:35 PM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (locallyunscene @ Oct 22 2009, 03:35 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1733493"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The word you want is bear, not bare. I don't care, this is just an internet videogame forum, but I thought you'd want to know for future reference.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Tyvm :)
Thing is people who are unhappy will complain and in this case it will appear that a lot of people are unhappy with decisions. In reality though is these people are just louder than the people who are actually happy with the decisions being made by the devs. It is much easier to make more noise complaining and whining about what the game "should be" rather than what is trying to be achieved: an updating of the NS franchise whilst still trying to keep it fun and fresh for new and old alike.
Sure there have been one or two decisions that I may not have liked but like everyone else I have not seen them in practice; We have no idea on how they will affect the gameplay until the game is actually released.
Many people keep forgetting that Charlie, Max and co. did make the first NS; which was revolutionary in the terms of the multiplayer rts/fps hybrid. They are competent game designers, if they weren't, NS2 would not exist. I would give them a chance to show you what the gameplay and engine are like before you make your final decisions on what NS2 will be like; rather than base it on their new ideas for the game.
<!--quoteo(post=1733594:date=Oct 23 2009, 12:21 AM:name=homicide)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (homicide @ Oct 23 2009, 12:21 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1733594"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I strongly believe there are members of this community that have a far better grasp of NS1 gameplay than any of the NS2 developers. The concept that "developers are almighty beings that always know best" is total bull######.
The most controversial features to carry over from any prequeal are always the unintentional mechanics that molded the prequel. In any sequel, developers must recognize and intentionally incorporate what was initially created unintentionally.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You mean exploits like bunnyhopping?
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><b>Developers</b>, "earn the right" to modify game mechanics they initially conceptualized and implemented. In contrast, there are many great aspects of NS1 that the <b>players</b> are more qualified to comment on than the actual developers - features that are crucial to NS1 gameplay but were not intentionally implemented by the developers.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Again, exploits like walls of lame, bunnyhopping, hiding in res towers, building in walls (not vents), mine ladders, unlimited jet packs based on FPS, dropping unbuilt structures to block creatures, stacked gas, abusing hitbox models (crouching lerk on ceiling) and so on that defined each release. All of which were fixed by the developers except mine ladders and bunnyhopping. Players all cried about the fixes to these things because players who play in a way that is not intended does not make them more qualified than the developers, it just makes them exploiters.
Feedback on damage ratios for bites, etc are based on actually playing the game. No player who has not yet had access to NS2 is more qualified than the developers at this point because they haven't played the game.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->In the case of NS, player control is on the top of the list. There arn't <b>just a few</b> players more qualified than the developers to mold player controls there are <b>many</b> players more qualified. Thus, when the developers start announcing changes to player control mechanics like air control, bunny hopping, restricting movement, or changing attack mechanics there are <b>many</b> players that feel they have the right to strongly voice their opinions. Telling those players, "stfu you don't know better than the developers" is well...just laughable.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Player control is nice as long as it can't be exploited. I favor a bite toggle just so I don't have to bite when I leap, but logically a skulk would bite a marine as soon as they were in range and an animal bite means they attach to their target so it makes the game more accessible for new players without punishing the experienced players. Experienced players won't be punished because they are experienced and can adapt to the new system, just like they did when maps were changed for new siege spots, turret effectiveness was changed, etc.
When experienced teams meet up the skulks will always land their bite after leap anyway so it won't give the skulk the advantage in that situation while still allowing a new player to get a bite or two in before dying in a regular game since shooting as a marine is just like any other FPS. Since you don't know that you will be able to change direction in midair like you could in NS1 you can't say that a flyby bite (which would latch the animal to the marine anyway...) will even be possible. You can voice your opinion all you want but you are basing your opinion on NS1 without a knowledge of NS2 physics so your speculation that flyby leap biting will be better is just speculation.
locallyunsceneFeeder of TrollsJoin Date: 2002-12-25Member: 11528Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1733661:date=Oct 23 2009, 11:33 AM:name=snooggums)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (snooggums @ Oct 23 2009, 11:33 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1733661"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You mean exploits like bunnyhopping?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> <b>Stop</b>. Just stop. We've been over this so many times I sincerely hope you're trolling.
<b>Bunny Hopping for skulk is being built into NS2</b>. Let me reiterate that; It is being <i>built into the NS2 engine for the express purpose of skulks using it</i>.
I think the devs deserve more credit than "the best parts of NS are accidental", but <b>homicide</b> is entitled to his opinion. Bunny hopping as an "exploit" cannot be explained away as "opinion" though. You don't have to use it; you can think there are better things to do, but looking down on people who use/like it will get you <i>nowhere</i>.
<!--quoteo(post=1733663:date=Oct 23 2009, 09:40 AM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (locallyunscene @ Oct 23 2009, 09:40 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1733663"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><b>Stop</b>. Just stop. We've been over this so many times I sincerely hope you're trolling.
<b>Bunny Hopping for skulk is being built into NS2</b>. Let me reiterate that; It is being <i>built into the NS2 engine for the express purpose of skulks using it</i>.
I think the devs deserve more credit than "the best parts of NS are accidental", but <b>homicide</b> is entitled to his opinion. Bunny hopping as an "exploit" cannot be explained away as "opinion" though. You don't have to use it; you can think there are better things to do, but looking down on people who use/like it will get you <i>nowhere</i>.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Bunnyhopping in NS 1 is an exploit of the HL game engine and was regarded as an exploit for several versions. It bypasses the movement speeds of the engine but was <i>accepted as part of game play for NS1</i> later on despite being fixed in other HL mods such as Counter-Strike because the fix would have caused other game play issues for non-skulk players in NS.
If there is a bounding movement feature in NS2 that is designed to allow quick movement for skulks only while still staying in the limitations of the game engine it won't be an exploit, but bunnyhopping in every other FPS game refers to exploiting the jump feature. Since I was commenting on his reference to incorporating features from the first game bunnyhopping was a perfect example because marines, gorges, onos and everyone else could do it and it was accepted even though it was an exploit. The speed of a skulk in NS1 was limited due to the prevalence of bunnyhopping. Since only skulks in NS2 will be able to 'bunnyhop', it obviously wouldn't be an exploit but also wouldn't be a direct carryover from teh first game.
Lets leave bunnyhopping out of this thread. If you REALLY want to restart a debate that has been the same every time someone brings it up, start a new thread. Please do not derail this thread.
<!--quoteo(post=1733669:date=Oct 23 2009, 04:23 PM:name=snooggums)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (snooggums @ Oct 23 2009, 04:23 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1733669"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Bunnyhopping in NS 1 is an exploit of the HL game engine and was regarded as an exploit for several versions. It bypasses the movement speeds of the engine but was <i>accepted as part of game play for NS1</i> later on despite being fixed in other HL mods such as Counter-Strike because the fix would have caused other game play issues for non-skulk players in NS.
If there is a bounding movement feature in NS2 that is designed to allow quick movement for skulks only while still staying in the limitations of the game engine it won't be an exploit, but bunnyhopping in every other FPS game refers to exploiting the jump feature. Since I was commenting on his reference to incorporating features from the first game bunnyhopping was a perfect example because marines, gorges, onos and everyone else could do it and it was accepted even though it was an exploit. The speed of a skulk in NS1 was limited due to the prevalence of bunnyhopping. Since only skulks in NS2 will be able to 'bunnyhop', it obviously wouldn't be an exploit but also wouldn't be a direct carryover from teh first game.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
nope, the internet couldn't keep its mouth shut...gg
<!--quoteo(post=1733364:date=Oct 21 2009, 10:44 PM:name=sicbud)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (sicbud @ Oct 21 2009, 10:44 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1733364"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So, everyone praises how great of a development team UWE is and how they've created one of the greatest games of all time.
But then whenever they release new info, all you guys do is ###### and act like you have no faith at all int he development team. What gives?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
A thread discussing removing bunnyhopping: <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?showtopic=107001" target="_blank">Here</a>
Which shows exactly what the OP and this thread is about. Players who ###### and moan about every change and cry about the loss of their abilities that were not intended in the first place. My reference to exploits was a direct addressing of how the players who think they know better than the developers are actually ###### about things that the developers don't want in their game in the first place. When it comes to ability changes it is simply the developers trying to get a class to serve a certain role. Lerks at one point did not have bite at all and were completely ranged fighters with spikes to shoot, when they changed that there was cry of ability loss. When bile bomb moved from Fades to Gorges there was a cry of the Devs ruining the game. Every change is followed by the people who hate change posting that the developers don't know what they are doing.
My post listed 9 things, yet only one of them is still used to such an extent that it will matter in the opinions of the posters that it turns into a Godwin type topic. It shows how ingrained in their behavior players get to be that they simply oppose change because it is change.
locallyunsceneFeeder of TrollsJoin Date: 2002-12-25Member: 11528Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1733675:date=Oct 23 2009, 12:54 PM:name=snooggums)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (snooggums @ Oct 23 2009, 12:54 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1733675"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Which shows exactly what the OP and this thread is about. Players who ###### and moan about every change and cry about the loss of their abilities that were not intended in the first place. My reference to exploits was a direct addressing of how the players who think they know better than the developers are actually ###### about things that the developers don't want in their game in the first place. When it comes to ability changes it is simply the developers trying to get a class to serve a certain role. Lerks at one point did not have bite at all and were completely ranged fighters with spikes to shoot, when they changed that there was cry of ability loss. When bile bomb moved from Fades to Gorges there was a cry of the Devs ruining the game. Every change is followed by the people who hate change posting that the developers don't know what they are doing.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Your "point" about "intended to be in the first release" is specious and does nothing to support your conclusion about player complaining. Not everyone is going to agree about changes to the game. You seem to be assuming these are all the same people that oppose changes and they generally are not. People have different opinions, and trying to blanket-statement it all away with "they're just scared of change" is not an argument; it's just closing your eyes and yelling at the top of your lungs, shouting down everyone trying to have a discussion. <!--quoteo(post=1733675:date=Oct 23 2009, 12:54 PM:name=snooggums)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (snooggums @ Oct 23 2009, 12:54 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1733675"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->My post listed 9 things, yet only one of them is still used to such an extent that it will matter in the opinions of the posters that it turns into a Godwin type topic. It shows how ingrained in their behavior players get to be that they simply oppose change because it is change.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Again your premise doesn't actually support your conclusion and you paint everyone with the same brush. Bhop may be a sort of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shibboleth" target="_blank">Shibboleth</a>[linked because it's a cool word] for how hardline someone is with keeping NS1 mechanics, but the addition or removal of mechanics is supported by actual argument of merits, not "change is bad" or "change is good". Address the arguments regarding gameplay if you want to have an actual discussion.
<!--quoteo(post=1733685:date=Oct 23 2009, 11:18 AM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (locallyunscene @ Oct 23 2009, 11:18 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1733685"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Address the arguments regarding gameplay if you want to have an actual discussion.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I posted those in the appropriate topic, and any defense of the changes or speculation on how changes in the engine behavior might alter game play from the HL engine based NS1 have been met with screams of "it caters to noobs and console players". All arguments about a change that they have not yet experienced are by nature fear of change.
Once the game is released they will have a basis for their opinion other than opposing change. Since it isn't something as singular as changing the order of Bile Bomb and Web in a new version of NS1 the discussion of the change between NS1 and NS2 have to take into account that there is a new engine with new behaviors and that the single change doesn't happen in a vacuum. The people who disagree with the change are arguing the change in a vacuum because they don't account for a difference in how the game will play.
Remember when the Onos hitpoints were increased along with the hitpoint box fixes to actually match the model? The jump was like 3x the original amount and people cried that it would ruin the game and they would be overpowered and that it was a change to help all the noob onos players. What actually happened is they became weaker because they could be shot by everyone that could see them and they couldn't hide behind the comm chair.
The cries before the update were done in opposition to change. The discussion was not constructive until the game was actually played and the increase was found to not even cover the difference that hitboxes made. Everyone who has made a negative comment about how change A or change B will ruin the game or cater to new players is doing so out of opposition because they don't know how the change is made in relation to all of the other changes. Speculation about change and opposition to change are not the same thing.
locallyunsceneFeeder of TrollsJoin Date: 2002-12-25Member: 11528Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1733689:date=Oct 23 2009, 01:45 PM:name=snooggums)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (snooggums @ Oct 23 2009, 01:45 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1733689"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->All arguments about a change that they have not yet experienced are by nature fear of change.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> That is simply not true. You can raise valid objections to a feature without playing it. I don't need to play with heat-seeking insta-kill rockets to know it's a bad idea.
I don't think I'm going to change your mind, but I hope you recognize the humor in complaining in a topic complaining about complaining.
<!--quoteo(post=1733663:date=Oct 23 2009, 07:40 AM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (locallyunscene @ Oct 23 2009, 07:40 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1733663"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I think the devs deserve more credit than "the best parts of NS are accidental", but <b>homicide</b> is entitled to his opinion.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not the "the best parts" but rather "some of the best parts." I am not claiming UWE is bad at developing games. I find this is true of almost all games and all development teams. I am also confident UWE is open enough to recognize the great elements of NS1 that emerged without their direct intervention and attempt to intentionally recreate them in NS2. And no, I am not just talking about bhopping but rather the MANY MANY nuances that define the game.
Anyways, posts claiming we should post nothing but statements of agreement are as worthless as their suggestion.
<!--quoteo(post=1733691:date=Oct 23 2009, 10:13 AM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (locallyunscene @ Oct 23 2009, 10:13 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1733691"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->That is simply not true. You can raise valid objections to a feature without playing it. I don't need to play with heat-seeking insta-kill rockets to know it's a bad idea.
I don't think I'm going to change your mind, but I hope you recognize the humor in complaining in a topic complaining about complaining.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I liked my example of no-clip marines with lazerbeams shooting out their crapholes more, meh.
<!--quoteo(post=1733691:date=Oct 23 2009, 12:13 PM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (locallyunscene @ Oct 23 2009, 12:13 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1733691"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->That is simply not true. You can raise valid objections to a feature without playing it. I don't need to play with heat-seeking insta-kill rockets to know it's a bad idea.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That is an obvious exaggeration in relation to NS, and therefore not comparable to a minor game play change. Some games may have heat seeking insta kill rockets (blue shells on MarioKart/group shot rockets in Unreal Tournament anyone?) that aren't a bad idea.
The discussion on this forum isn't about game breaking changes. They are about switching up abilities and making those abilities fit the game. The people who are opposing differences between the first game and this are very forceful in their disagreement and are basing their objections on NS1 game play or by assuming any change that makes doing something less annoying is catering to 'noobs'. There is no rational discussion other than 'it makes it easier for someone to bite after leaping and I don't like that'. Everything else is based on what they think combat will be like. Therefore they do need to play it to find out if it is a bad idea to change or not.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I don't think I'm going to change your mind, but I hope you recognize the humor in complaining in a topic complaining about complaining.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Offering an opinion is not complaining. I have not told them to stop, I'm just saying why their arguments against change are baseless <i>at this time</i>. Examining and discussing an observed behavior is not complaining. Saying someone ruined a thread by mentioning a specific item is complaining.
<!--quoteo(post=1733696:date=Oct 23 2009, 06:41 PM:name=homicide)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (homicide @ Oct 23 2009, 06:41 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1733696"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I liked my example of no-clip marines with lazerbeams shooting out their crapholes more, meh.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> [bad humour] Who knows if they'll thank you for the idea on next twitter. [/bad humour]
<!--quoteo(post=1733663:date=Oct 23 2009, 10:40 AM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (locallyunscene @ Oct 23 2009, 10:40 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1733663"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><b>Bunny Hopping for skulk is being built into NS2</b>. Let me reiterate that; It is being <i>built into the NS2 engine for the express purpose of skulks using it</i>.
I think the devs deserve more credit than "the best parts of NS are accidental", but <b>homicide</b> is entitled to his opinion. Bunny hopping as an "exploit" cannot be explained away as "opinion" though. You don't have to use it; you can think there are better things to do, but looking down on people who use/like it will get you <i>nowhere</i>.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But what about bunnyhopping for gorge, fade, and onos? I actually really relied on bunnyhopping with those classes as well. But that's not a complaint I'm making, I'm just saying that I would hope that it was allowed / enabled for all.
While I disagree that the best parts of NS are accidental, I do think the sum of NS1's own work plus the accidental additions like air control made the game absolutely incredible. Its almost to the point where I can hardly stand playing most other games. I fell in love with the way movement works in NS1 and I was never able to leave...
I tend to feel that this is simply a case of too much feedback, too little praise about ideas that people like. When you only see criticism, you become negative about the project as a whole.
Constructive feedback is good; too much feedback is bad.
I have a large amount faith in the team that is creating NS2, that being said, I am still going to voice my concerns over an idea they put forward if I dislike it. That is a big part of the role these forums play amirite?
But the fact still remains, Natural Selection 1 was just so fantastic that whenever they reveal an idea to the community that sounds like it could have a large impact on gameplay, we comment. Isn't that natural and expected? To imply that this is wrong, is silly. Yes, criticism isn't always nice, but it's because we care, not because we are hating (In the most part. I can't speak for everyone)
Of course we want a sequel, and that does mean that things do need to be changed, but that in no way means we can't be worried, express our fears/concerns, express praise for certain ideas... etc. If you are sick and tired of hearing us express our concerns, don't open the thread. This is a forum open to everyone in the natural selection community.
<!--quoteo(post=1733699:date=Oct 23 2009, 07:00 PM:name=snooggums)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (snooggums @ Oct 23 2009, 07:00 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1733699"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Some games may have heat seeking insta kill rockets (blue shells on MarioKart/group shot rockets in Unreal Tournament anyone?) that aren't a bad idea.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I absolutely agree with the premise of this thread, but I must point out that blue shells in Mario Kart were a terrible idea. Red shells = ok. Blue shells suck and should never have been implemented.
<!--quoteo(post=1733482:date=Oct 22 2009, 12:56 PM:name=Grave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Grave @ Oct 22 2009, 12:56 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1733482"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->halo one was one of the greatest things created. halo 2 sucked fat donkey di#k halo three tried hard to fix what it destroyed, but it was too horribly mangled. still fun to be had, for sure, but nothing like halo 1.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ya i don't know. I finally have a video card that kicks serious ass and, as most people who get new cards do, i sampled every game out there, including older games that i could never play...
FFS halo2 looked like it could be a nintendo 64 game... couldn't believe how crappy it looked with all detail settings maxed. At that point halo was dead to me. AVP2 looks seriously better IMHO.
What i could never understand is how my laptop could run Doom3 but not halo 2? Maybe i was not using the right cracks at the time :P
Also Dead Space... question is... do i even want to play it... That retarded anime movie thing they did sort of ruins the whole game, and yes the monsters look stupid as hell.
LMAO @ the new operation flashpoint. Only played the game for about a minute. At some point between the unusually weak+inaccurate primary weapon, and the non stop broken record that is my team calling out enemy riflemen 200 yards... blah blah blah... enemy riflemen neutralized (because they are all useless and i have to be the one to kill or we all die!).... Out comes china-or-russia-or-both/haji-man #2.... ENEMY RIFLEMEN 200 YARDS!!!!... o and the barren terrain (sort of looks like metaluna from mst3k).... needless to say i'm glad i didn't go buy that game first and find out it sucked second.
Ok i learned my lesson after paying $20 for FarCry 2, and then finding how hard it sucked.... 1. i learned... NEVER BUY A UBISOFT GAME EVER... because their will never be a kick ass SDK or mods... stupid worthless games that they make :facepalm: 2. i learned... don't buy a game that promises miles and miles of "open terrain".... because the reality is your driving around a tight narrow dirt road and staring at a map 100% of the time... :P 3. the pathetic g3a3 in the game looks exactly the same way it did when i first saw it in RavenShield.... just a little green in the texture... which probably came from some later rainbosix incarnate :facepalm:
<!--quoteo(post=1734081:date=Oct 26 2009, 10:16 AM:name=FocusedWolf)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (FocusedWolf @ Oct 26 2009, 10:16 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1734081"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->2. i learned... don't buy a game that promises miles and miles of "open terrain".... because the reality is your driving around a tight narrow dirt road and staring at a map 100% of the time... :P<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
ARMA and ARMA 2 to have miles and miles of open terrain, ARMA 2 is beautiful, not restricted and allows a multiple kilometer viewing distance. Sure, I hate the game play but the game world itself is truly open.
Project Reality, a mod for Battlefield 2 has a couple of 4km x4km (so 16 sq km) maps that use the whole area and most future maps are that size also. View distance is long but limited due to some BF2 engine issues so it is not as awesome as ARMA to look at.
It can be done, not enough game companies are doing it.
<!--quoteo(post=1734085:date=Oct 26 2009, 11:57 AM:name=snooggums)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (snooggums @ Oct 26 2009, 11:57 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1734085"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It can be done, not enough game companies are doing it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think the problem they face is that now it will take 10x more months to make a map that has meaningful detail... or else it's just the same house over and over (i.e. bad company)... or the same pine tree (i.e. ghost recon etc). And ya the technical issues of optimizing it all.
Wish i could find a multiplayer game dealing with space exploration (not something super futuristic... more like present day technology + a hyper drive or something lol)... and actually taking part in the design of the ship/expedition/mission. Probably would be boring to most people. Think i just described SpaceBuild for garrysmod. :P
Because every time a change is announced everyone debates furiously about how removing/adding such a thing will ruin the experience.
Which is downright stupid because they are talking about the NS1 experience, so they don't realise that the new changes are creating a new set of gameplay mechanics. And considering we have little information about gameplay in NS2, most of the arguments involve assumptions derived from Natural Selection 1.
Comments
You're sure to bring in tons of new people to the game.
You did hear that they are making their own engine .. right? One that may have physics that behave completely different from the quake engine? That might effect things like 'bunny hopping', may or may not even have the ability for any sort of 'air control' and that may feel completely different than NS on the HL engine does ...?
In any event, I'm sure you could be like those Fortress Forever guys and make the "true" version of the game, while all the noobs go to their TF2.
You're sure to bring in tons of new people to the game.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
UWE couldn't afford my salary.
<!--quoteo(post=1733595:date=Oct 22 2009, 10:27 PM:name=Silver_Fox)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Silver_Fox @ Oct 22 2009, 10:27 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1733595"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You did hear that they are making their own engine .. right? One that may have physics that behave completely different from the quake engine? That might effect things like 'bunny hopping', may or may not even have the ability for any sort of 'air control' and that may feel completely different than NS on the HL engine does ...?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And you wonder why people are a little skeptical of their ability to implement from scratch what was handed to them in NS1?
<!--quoteo(post=1733595:date=Oct 22 2009, 10:27 PM:name=Silver_Fox)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Silver_Fox @ Oct 22 2009, 10:27 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1733595"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->In any event, I'm sure you could be like those Fortress Forever guys and make the "true" version of the game, while all the noobs go to their TF2.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I am a member of the NS community, not the UWE community. The TF2 community is drastically different than the TFC community. I am not arguing for what the world will enjoy but rather for what I and the current NS community will enjoy. Claiming anything different would be totally arrogant, like you. Luckly for me and the rest of the NS community, UWE doesn't have the established branding to ignore the current community and target the entire world like Valve did with TF2.
These threads lately have been about as interesting as the concept updates
I still have hope of seeing actual in game footage before 2010
You know of a marine shooting at a skulk - or a skulk moving down an actual map which we will play on
edit: and ahh, you edited your post. But mhmm I agree and hope to see some true footage soon!
Tyvm :)
Sure there have been one or two decisions that I may not have liked but like everyone else I have not seen them in practice; We have no idea on how they will affect the gameplay until the game is actually released.
Many people keep forgetting that Charlie, Max and co. did make the first NS; which was revolutionary in the terms of the multiplayer rts/fps hybrid. They are competent game designers, if they weren't, NS2 would not exist. I would give them a chance to show you what the gameplay and engine are like before you make your final decisions on what NS2 will be like; rather than base it on their new ideas for the game.
The most controversial features to carry over from any prequeal are always the unintentional mechanics that molded the prequel. In any sequel, developers must recognize and intentionally incorporate what was initially created unintentionally.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You mean exploits like bunnyhopping?
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><b>Developers</b>, "earn the right" to modify game mechanics they initially conceptualized and implemented. In contrast, there are many great aspects of NS1 that the <b>players</b> are more qualified to comment on than the actual developers - features that are crucial to NS1 gameplay but were not intentionally implemented by the developers.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Again, exploits like walls of lame, bunnyhopping, hiding in res towers, building in walls (not vents), mine ladders, unlimited jet packs based on FPS, dropping unbuilt structures to block creatures, stacked gas, abusing hitbox models (crouching lerk on ceiling) and so on that defined each release. All of which were fixed by the developers except mine ladders and bunnyhopping. Players all cried about the fixes to these things because players who play in a way that is not intended does not make them more qualified than the developers, it just makes them exploiters.
Feedback on damage ratios for bites, etc are based on actually playing the game. No player who has not yet had access to NS2 is more qualified than the developers at this point because they haven't played the game.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->In the case of NS, player control is on the top of the list. There arn't <b>just a few</b> players more qualified than the developers to mold player controls there are <b>many</b> players more qualified. Thus, when the developers start announcing changes to player control mechanics like air control, bunny hopping, restricting movement, or changing attack mechanics there are <b>many</b> players that feel they have the right to strongly voice their opinions. Telling those players, "stfu you don't know better than the developers" is well...just laughable.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Player control is nice as long as it can't be exploited. I favor a bite toggle just so I don't have to bite when I leap, but logically a skulk would bite a marine as soon as they were in range and an animal bite means they attach to their target so it makes the game more accessible for new players without punishing the experienced players. Experienced players won't be punished because they are experienced and can adapt to the new system, just like they did when maps were changed for new siege spots, turret effectiveness was changed, etc.
When experienced teams meet up the skulks will always land their bite after leap anyway so it won't give the skulk the advantage in that situation while still allowing a new player to get a bite or two in before dying in a regular game since shooting as a marine is just like any other FPS. Since you don't know that you will be able to change direction in midair like you could in NS1 you can't say that a flyby bite (which would latch the animal to the marine anyway...) will even be possible. You can voice your opinion all you want but you are basing your opinion on NS1 without a knowledge of NS2 physics so your speculation that flyby leap biting will be better is just speculation.
<b>Stop</b>. Just stop. We've been over this so many times I sincerely hope you're trolling.
<b>Bunny Hopping for skulk is being built into NS2</b>. Let me reiterate that; It is being <i>built into the NS2 engine for the express purpose of skulks using it</i>.
I think the devs deserve more credit than "the best parts of NS are accidental", but <b>homicide</b> is entitled to his opinion. Bunny hopping as an "exploit" cannot be explained away as "opinion" though. You don't have to use it; you can think there are better things to do, but looking down on people who use/like it will get you <i>nowhere</i>.
Well, unless the internet has some serious self restraint today this thread is officially boned...
<b>Bunny Hopping for skulk is being built into NS2</b>. Let me reiterate that; It is being <i>built into the NS2 engine for the express purpose of skulks using it</i>.
I think the devs deserve more credit than "the best parts of NS are accidental", but <b>homicide</b> is entitled to his opinion. Bunny hopping as an "exploit" cannot be explained away as "opinion" though. You don't have to use it; you can think there are better things to do, but looking down on people who use/like it will get you <i>nowhere</i>.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Bunnyhopping in NS 1 is an exploit of the HL game engine and was regarded as an exploit for several versions. It bypasses the movement speeds of the engine but was <i>accepted as part of game play for NS1</i> later on despite being fixed in other HL mods such as Counter-Strike because the fix would have caused other game play issues for non-skulk players in NS.
If there is a bounding movement feature in NS2 that is designed to allow quick movement for skulks only while still staying in the limitations of the game engine it won't be an exploit, but bunnyhopping in every other FPS game refers to exploiting the jump feature. Since I was commenting on his reference to incorporating features from the first game bunnyhopping was a perfect example because marines, gorges, onos and everyone else could do it and it was accepted even though it was an exploit. The speed of a skulk in NS1 was limited due to the prevalence of bunnyhopping. Since only skulks in NS2 will be able to 'bunnyhop', it obviously wouldn't be an exploit but also wouldn't be a direct carryover from teh first game.
If there is a bounding movement feature in NS2 that is designed to allow quick movement for skulks only while still staying in the limitations of the game engine it won't be an exploit, but bunnyhopping in every other FPS game refers to exploiting the jump feature. Since I was commenting on his reference to incorporating features from the first game bunnyhopping was a perfect example because marines, gorges, onos and everyone else could do it and it was accepted even though it was an exploit. The speed of a skulk in NS1 was limited due to the prevalence of bunnyhopping. Since only skulks in NS2 will be able to 'bunnyhop', it obviously wouldn't be an exploit but also wouldn't be a direct carryover from teh first game.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
nope, the internet couldn't keep its mouth shut...gg
<!--quoteo(post=1733364:date=Oct 21 2009, 10:44 PM:name=sicbud)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (sicbud @ Oct 21 2009, 10:44 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1733364"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So, everyone praises how great of a development team UWE is and how they've created one of the greatest games of all time.
But then whenever they release new info, all you guys do is ###### and act like you have no faith at all int he development team. What gives?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
A thread discussing removing bunnyhopping: <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?showtopic=107001" target="_blank">Here</a>
Which shows exactly what the OP and this thread is about. Players who ###### and moan about every change and cry about the loss of their abilities that were not intended in the first place. My reference to exploits was a direct addressing of how the players who think they know better than the developers are actually ###### about things that the developers don't want in their game in the first place. When it comes to ability changes it is simply the developers trying to get a class to serve a certain role. Lerks at one point did not have bite at all and were completely ranged fighters with spikes to shoot, when they changed that there was cry of ability loss. When bile bomb moved from Fades to Gorges there was a cry of the Devs ruining the game. Every change is followed by the people who hate change posting that the developers don't know what they are doing.
My post listed 9 things, yet only one of them is still used to such an extent that it will matter in the opinions of the posters that it turns into a Godwin type topic. It shows how ingrained in their behavior players get to be that they simply oppose change because it is change.
Your "point" about "intended to be in the first release" is specious and does nothing to support your conclusion about player complaining. Not everyone is going to agree about changes to the game. You seem to be assuming these are all the same people that oppose changes and they generally are not. People have different opinions, and trying to blanket-statement it all away with "they're just scared of change" is not an argument; it's just closing your eyes and yelling at the top of your lungs, shouting down everyone trying to have a discussion.
<!--quoteo(post=1733675:date=Oct 23 2009, 12:54 PM:name=snooggums)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (snooggums @ Oct 23 2009, 12:54 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1733675"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->My post listed 9 things, yet only one of them is still used to such an extent that it will matter in the opinions of the posters that it turns into a Godwin type topic. It shows how ingrained in their behavior players get to be that they simply oppose change because it is change.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Again your premise doesn't actually support your conclusion and you paint everyone with the same brush. Bhop may be a sort of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shibboleth" target="_blank">Shibboleth</a>[linked because it's a cool word] for how hardline someone is with keeping NS1 mechanics, but the addition or removal of mechanics is supported by actual argument of merits, not "change is bad" or "change is good". Address the arguments regarding gameplay if you want to have an actual discussion.
I posted those in the appropriate topic, and any defense of the changes or speculation on how changes in the engine behavior might alter game play from the HL engine based NS1 have been met with screams of "it caters to noobs and console players". All arguments about a change that they have not yet experienced are by nature fear of change.
Once the game is released they will have a basis for their opinion other than opposing change. Since it isn't something as singular as changing the order of Bile Bomb and Web in a new version of NS1 the discussion of the change between NS1 and NS2 have to take into account that there is a new engine with new behaviors and that the single change doesn't happen in a vacuum. The people who disagree with the change are arguing the change in a vacuum because they don't account for a difference in how the game will play.
Remember when the Onos hitpoints were increased along with the hitpoint box fixes to actually match the model? The jump was like 3x the original amount and people cried that it would ruin the game and they would be overpowered and that it was a change to help all the noob onos players. What actually happened is they became weaker because they could be shot by everyone that could see them and they couldn't hide behind the comm chair.
The cries before the update were done in opposition to change. The discussion was not constructive until the game was actually played and the increase was found to not even cover the difference that hitboxes made. Everyone who has made a negative comment about how change A or change B will ruin the game or cater to new players is doing so out of opposition because they don't know how the change is made in relation to all of the other changes. Speculation about change and opposition to change are not the same thing.
That is simply not true. You can raise valid objections to a feature without playing it. I don't need to play with heat-seeking insta-kill rockets to know it's a bad idea.
I don't think I'm going to change your mind, but I hope you recognize the humor in complaining in a topic complaining about complaining.
Not the "the best parts" but rather "some of the best parts." I am not claiming UWE is bad at developing games. I find this is true of almost all games and all development teams. I am also confident UWE is open enough to recognize the great elements of NS1 that emerged without their direct intervention and attempt to intentionally recreate them in NS2. And no, I am not just talking about bhopping but rather the MANY MANY nuances that define the game.
Anyways, posts claiming we should post nothing but statements of agreement are as worthless as their suggestion.
I don't think I'm going to change your mind, but I hope you recognize the humor in complaining in a topic complaining about complaining.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I liked my example of no-clip marines with lazerbeams shooting out their crapholes more, meh.
That is an obvious exaggeration in relation to NS, and therefore not comparable to a minor game play change. Some games may have heat seeking insta kill rockets (blue shells on MarioKart/group shot rockets in Unreal Tournament anyone?) that aren't a bad idea.
The discussion on this forum isn't about game breaking changes. They are about switching up abilities and making those abilities fit the game. The people who are opposing differences between the first game and this are very forceful in their disagreement and are basing their objections on NS1 game play or by assuming any change that makes doing something less annoying is catering to 'noobs'. There is no rational discussion other than 'it makes it easier for someone to bite after leaping and I don't like that'. Everything else is based on what they think combat will be like. Therefore they do need to play it to find out if it is a bad idea to change or not.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I don't think I'm going to change your mind, but I hope you recognize the humor in complaining in a topic complaining about complaining.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Offering an opinion is not complaining. I have not told them to stop, I'm just saying why their arguments against change are baseless <i>at this time</i>. Examining and discussing an observed behavior is not complaining. Saying someone ruined a thread by mentioning a specific item is complaining.
[bad humour] Who knows if they'll thank you for the idea on next twitter. [/bad humour]
I think the devs deserve more credit than "the best parts of NS are accidental", but <b>homicide</b> is entitled to his opinion. Bunny hopping as an "exploit" cannot be explained away as "opinion" though. You don't have to use it; you can think there are better things to do, but looking down on people who use/like it will get you <i>nowhere</i>.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But what about bunnyhopping for gorge, fade, and onos? I actually really relied on bunnyhopping with those classes as well. But that's not a complaint I'm making, I'm just saying that I would hope that it was allowed / enabled for all.
While I disagree that the best parts of NS are accidental, I do think the sum of NS1's own work plus the accidental additions like air control made the game absolutely incredible. Its almost to the point where I can hardly stand playing most other games. I fell in love with the way movement works in NS1 and I was never able to leave...
Constructive feedback is good; too much feedback is bad.
I have a large amount faith in the team that is creating NS2, that being said, I am still going to voice my concerns over an idea they put forward if I dislike it. That is a big part of the role these forums play amirite?
But the fact still remains, Natural Selection 1 was just so fantastic that whenever they reveal an idea to the community that sounds like it could have a large impact on gameplay, we comment. Isn't that natural and expected? To imply that this is wrong, is silly. Yes, criticism isn't always nice, but it's because we care, not because we are hating (In the most part. I can't speak for everyone)
Of course we want a sequel, and that does mean that things do need to be changed, but that in no way means we can't be worried, express our fears/concerns, express praise for certain ideas... etc. If you are sick and tired of hearing us express our concerns, don't open the thread. This is a forum open to everyone in the natural selection community.
I absolutely agree with the premise of this thread, but I must point out that blue shells in Mario Kart were a terrible idea. Red shells = ok. Blue shells suck and should never have been implemented.
halo 2 sucked fat donkey di#k
halo three tried hard to fix what it destroyed, but it was too horribly mangled. still fun to be had, for sure, but nothing like halo 1.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ya i don't know. I finally have a video card that kicks serious ass and, as most people who get new cards do, i sampled every game out there, including older games that i could never play...
FFS halo2 looked like it could be a nintendo 64 game... couldn't believe how crappy it looked with all detail settings maxed. At that point halo was dead to me. AVP2 looks seriously better IMHO.
What i could never understand is how my laptop could run Doom3 but not halo 2? Maybe i was not using the right cracks at the time :P
Also Dead Space... question is... do i even want to play it... That retarded anime movie thing they did sort of ruins the whole game, and yes the monsters look stupid as hell.
LMAO @ the new operation flashpoint. Only played the game for about a minute. At some point between the unusually weak+inaccurate primary weapon, and the non stop broken record that is my team calling out enemy riflemen 200 yards... blah blah blah... enemy riflemen neutralized (because they are all useless and i have to be the one to kill or we all die!).... Out comes china-or-russia-or-both/haji-man #2.... ENEMY RIFLEMEN 200 YARDS!!!!... o and the barren terrain (sort of looks like metaluna from mst3k).... needless to say i'm glad i didn't go buy that game first and find out it sucked second.
Ok i learned my lesson after paying $20 for FarCry 2, and then finding how hard it sucked....
1. i learned... NEVER BUY A UBISOFT GAME EVER... because their will never be a kick ass SDK or mods... stupid worthless games that they make :facepalm:
2. i learned... don't buy a game that promises miles and miles of "open terrain".... because the reality is your driving around a tight narrow dirt road and staring at a map 100% of the time... :P
3. the pathetic g3a3 in the game looks exactly the same way it did when i first saw it in RavenShield.... just a little green in the texture... which probably came from some later rainbosix incarnate :facepalm:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So lets hope NS2 succeeds where these other companies have failed. Also we should all be very thankful it will have a SDK.
ARMA and ARMA 2 to have miles and miles of open terrain, ARMA 2 is beautiful, not restricted and allows a multiple kilometer viewing distance. Sure, I hate the game play but the game world itself is truly open.
Project Reality, a mod for Battlefield 2 has a couple of 4km x4km (so 16 sq km) maps that use the whole area and most future maps are that size also. View distance is long but limited due to some BF2 engine issues so it is not as awesome as ARMA to look at.
It can be done, not enough game companies are doing it.
I think the problem they face is that now it will take 10x more months to make a map that has meaningful detail... or else it's just the same house over and over (i.e. bad company)... or the same pine tree (i.e. ghost recon etc). And ya the technical issues of optimizing it all.
Wish i could find a multiplayer game dealing with space exploration (not something super futuristic... more like present day technology + a hyper drive or something lol)... and actually taking part in the design of the ship/expedition/mission. Probably would be boring to most people. Think i just described SpaceBuild for garrysmod. :P
Which is downright stupid because they are talking about the NS1 experience, so they don't realise that the new changes are creating a new set of gameplay mechanics. And considering we have little information about gameplay in NS2, most of the arguments involve assumptions derived from Natural Selection 1.