After seeing the screenshots full size at home, I can safely say I don't think the skulks are over-sized at all. I mean, if you look close enough, the back side of their bodies are pretty small, slender, and short. I think the big head and big front legs throw people off who initially expect more balance, like a regular 4 legged animal. I was scared at first about their size when I first saw these pics at work, but seriously, they look about the same as NS1 models as far as size goes. I think we've just got a classic case of post-update whistle-blowing.
Looking great guys. Thanks for the mass of information and the screenshots. Just, try to keep it coming more regularly if you can? ;)
EDIT
Also, due to someone else's keen eye earlier about something said during an interview, whats up with the bit about vents being used only for the smaller aliens like skulks and lerks? That has a tone to it that suggests marines won't be able to crawl (or more importantly, Jet-pack?) through the vents. Taking the fade's ability to maneuver through the vents would really change things as well...
<!--quoteo(post=1735973:date=Nov 4 2009, 12:30 AM:name=Kouji_San)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kouji_San @ Nov 4 2009, 12:30 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1735973"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I find it very intriguing that all of this will be done by 5 peeps! Also this engine is going to kick ass vs most engines. The development talk I've read in the interviews is simply amazing... Heck even Valve has failed in producing a realtime editing engine!
UWE can show the big players out there that quality can be done properly with a small budget and team. Let's hope they all learn from it and maybe even try and get a SDK licence from UWE for the NS2 engine due to awesomesauceEditing :P
Does it show I am impatiently waiting on the SDK/TR :D<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I don't think valve was really trying to make one.
HL2 is an old game, you couldn't simulate its graphics in realtime when it was out, which is why it used things like pre-baked lighting which is far more efficient than ANY dynamic system and often gives better results, assuming you don't move things around a lot.
Most games just don't need realtime editors, because most dev teams can work without them, although it is nice to see what you're doing in real time, it is certainly not neccesary to produce good stuff. The selling point is the game, not the tools used to make it, even for games like HL2 very few people will use the editors compared to the people who will buy it, most people who play games don't also make them. So accordingly there is far less polish on the tools than on the game.
Thing is though, it's sure handy to have. Unreal has a very nice lighting preview which predicts how lighting will look in real time, but it's a prediction and definitely doesn't show the final result. If you're mapping in Source however, lighting is a huge time waster, you guess where to put lighting, compile the map, wait atleast 20 minutes, spend 10 minutes booting up the game, loading the map and checking out the lighting. You then realise the lighting is wrong and possibly repeat this process several times just to tweak it. Now that is a nightmare and a reason UWE chose realtime lighting preview, they didn't have time to waste mapping like this, so they made editing as fast and streamlined as possible.
Not only that but from the videos, importing textures is as easy as a drag and drop from photoshop and I think models are similar.
In the interview with Shacknews, you say that you want a game to last 15-20 minutes. I'm just one user, and you probably don't care - but this fact here made me decide not to preorder the game. A loss should feel like a loss, and it doesn't after just 15min of play. How much strategy will you fit into 20minutes without it turning into some action-combat mod (that a big part of your community hated, by the way).
And I agree with the previous posters that the skulk model looks a bit too big.
<!--quoteo(post=1736117:date=Nov 4 2009, 10:56 AM:name=eoy)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (eoy @ Nov 4 2009, 10:56 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1736117"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->In the interview with Shacknews, you say that you want a game to last 15-20 minutes. I'm just one user, and you probably don't care - but this fact here made me decide not to preorder the game. A loss should feel like a loss, and it doesn't after just 15min of play. How much strategy will you fit into 20minutes without it turning into some action-combat mod (that a big part of your community hated, by the way).
And I agree with the previous posters that the skulk model looks a bit too big.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
While the games that lasted anywhere from 45-60 minutes were often fun and intriguing, they also got rather boring and non-illustrious. Generally those games would reach standoffs, and then all of a sudden one team would win in under 5 minutes thanks to some huge push by either side. I think they want to balance it out a bit more and force teams to get right into the thick of the battle quickly.
I think they also might be doing this to attract new customers. Ask most gamers this question: "How long do you think an average round for online game should take?" The most common answer you will get is probably 15-20 minutes. I don't think a lot of new gamers will be attracted by the sometimes hour long standoffs.
Kouji_SanSr. Hινε UÏкεεÏεг - EUPT DeputyThe NetherlandsJoin Date: 2003-05-13Member: 16271Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue
edited November 2009
Funny thing is even Charlie can't predict this without serious playtesting... Games could be longer if this grid based system for resources and map control give the RTS (CoH like) things to change the battle from a win to a losing scenario. And even then, turning that around it could be a tug of war back and forth, changing this 15-20 minute statement into longer games...
@Chris0132
I was just saying that the tools will give a very small team a good change to create a game with lots of content without the time it normally takes. Something bigger companies could embrace if they want to work faster and perhaps give us games with more content. Since most games currently released are pretty much small compared to older games (this is where a series/episodically content comes in). Due to the sheer design time and compile times to test stuff out. I think any smart company would embrace such a tech purely for the Time is Money factor :P
And yes HL2 is getting older, but the engine still has some nice surprises up its sleeve. And indeed, back then and in some rare cases, realtime lighting still loses to the old school lightmaps. Lightmaps can look and feel much more vibrant if done right. However tech is constantly changing and improving that even currently isn't really the case any more
Annotate any competitive match played and you'll see how strategy and depth come into play during ~10 minute rounds. There's an awful lot of decision making going on very quickly.
Most people don't have time to play hour long rounds and to be quite honest, these huge long games often have a lot less strategy to them than shorter, balanced rounds. They get bogged down in stalemates where one half of the map is OCed up and the other half is covered by HA marines and each side are just meatgrinding in a few select chokepoints until someone ninjas a phasegate up/down or kills the AA.
<!--quoteo(post=1736105:date=Nov 4 2009, 05:10 PM:name=Fortune)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Fortune @ Nov 4 2009, 05:10 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1736105"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If you're mapping in Source however, lighting is a huge time waster, you guess where to put lighting, compile the map, wait atleast 20 minutes, spend 10 minutes booting up the game, loading the map and checking out the lighting. You then realise the lighting is wrong and possibly repeat this process several times just to tweak it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Isn't there an option now for the 3d view to show lighting on the fly?
<!--quoteo(post=1736200:date=Nov 4 2009, 09:56 PM:name=Align)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Align @ Nov 4 2009, 09:56 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1736200"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Isn't there an option now for the 3d view to show lighting on the fly?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes but it easily crashes, if you get it working at all and like unreal it's a prediction. Spark will show you what you'll see in the game, the others just give you an idea.
<!--quoteo(post=1736117:date=Nov 4 2009, 12:56 PM:name=eoy)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (eoy @ Nov 4 2009, 12:56 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1736117"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->In the interview with Shacknews, you say that you want a game to last 15-20 minutes. I'm just one user, and you probably don't care - but this fact here made me decide not to preorder the game. A loss should feel like a loss, and it doesn't after just 15min of play. How much strategy will you fit into 20minutes without it turning into some action-combat mod (that a big part of your community hated, by the way).
And I agree with the previous posters that the skulk model looks a bit too big.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Most competitive strategy games have rounds that last around 20 minutes. Usually the longer the game is, the less decisions that must be made every minute.
<!--quoteo(post=1736253:date=Nov 4 2009, 10:09 PM:name=Sirot)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Sirot @ Nov 4 2009, 10:09 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1736253"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Most competitive strategy games have rounds that last around 20 minutes. Usually the longer the game is, the less decisions that must be made every minute.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Well most competitive strategy games have only a few people playing at a time, and each individual can control alot of units. Not so with NS. My personal opionin is that the game should last usualy around a half hour. With the rare game lasting an hour or so max.
The best games of NS were the ones that lasted 3 hours. Then the marines took Red Room and ###### hit the fan.
I really don't like short multiplayer games. If the competitive players can finish a round of NS2 in 10 minutes, fine - whatever. They can eat molten lead for all I care about them. But I'm with Eoy on this one - 30 minutes is what I'm used to for being the 'normal' length of a multiplayer game. NS rounds usually were about this long, sometimes stretching to about 45 minutes, worst case an hour. Extreme cases, longer.
Thing is, this was FINE. Most of my great memories from NS are from games that were longish - the exception being the inevitable start-game skulkrush that wins... or the gorgerush :D
BadMouthIt ceases to be exclusive when you can have a custom member titlJoin Date: 2004-05-21Member: 28815Members
I think a game should not last more than 30 minutes. Speaking for myself, I do have other things I need to do in life so it would be nice to be able to play for 20 minutes thereabout, then decide on whether I want to go onto another game or whether I should be doing something else. Games that go on for too long are indeed epic but after a while, I either feel like it tends to get boring, especially when the game stops being dynamic. Besides, people do actually take bathroom breaks.
I'm going to have to agree, 15-20 minutes just seems too short. 20-30 minutes seems like a better place. And it would be great if the 30 second games would go away, they were fun once in a great while, but made the next game turtle-y usually.
Now this looks awesome. The power cords hanging around in the first screenshot and the pipes in the vent in the second screenshot sure could use higher detail versions of themselves, though. Thinking of the painful fps back in the days on my old machine I concur to making everything render as fast as possible. However considering the year we live in and the ridiculously awesome graphics you can already see in other games today, high fidelity models should be an option. This doesn't work against your intentio of having people not need to upgrade their systems - everyone be free to choose the graphical detail-level. Everything else is awesome. =)
I gotta agree with the longer rounds argument. Those long epic battles was one of the main reasons why I was hooked in the early days. As things started getting faster and quicker, I found things to be more boring. Giving the other team a chance to make a comeback was so great, having the match decided within the first 10 minutes is lame IMO.
I hear people who want the "long epic battles" and usually the words "long" and "epic" are side by side as if the two are somehow related. I bet UWE could make the games as long as hell but that doesn't mean they'll somehow be this intense battle. And please don't forget that most NS1 games that were long were long because one team was crammed up surviving off res for kills while the other team slowly chips them away. A clear victor was decided but due to bad game design the round went on and on.
The "long epic" games occurred on the rare instances where the two teams were very evenly balanced. There's no reason to think this will change in NS2 as most games go on longer when player skill is balanced.
<!--quoteo(post=1736439:date=Nov 6 2009, 12:40 AM:name=SentrySteve)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SentrySteve @ Nov 6 2009, 12:40 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1736439"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I hear people who want the "long epic battles" and usually the words "long" and "epic" are side by side as if the two are somehow related. I bet UWE could make the games as long as hell but that doesn't mean they'll somehow be this intense battle. And please don't forget that most NS1 games that were long were long because one team was crammed up surviving off res for kills while the other team slowly chips them away. A clear victor was decided but due to bad game design the round went on and on.
The "long epic" games occurred on the rare instances where the two teams were very evenly balanced. There's no reason to think this will change in NS2 as most games go on longer when player skill is balanced.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This. The post 3.2 NS still has plenty of potential to have long standoffs, assuming the teams are balanced enough, in which case it really IS epic. As opposed to purposefully slow gameplay, to where it takes you 25 minutes to get where you would have gotten in just 10 in the faster gameplay model. Theres nothing epic about it. Thats just slow gameplay.
I've actually found that Epic games stem more from random acts of risk on the part of one of the teams. For example when the aliens have 2 hive lockdown and go for thta 3rd hive the marines might try to get a phase on one of the poorly defended other hives. 9/10 times that try fails and does little but prolong the game for 2-3 min, but sometimes they get it up and take down a hive and can prolong the game for up to 15 more minutes! Not trying to discredit the idea that Epic Game = even teams, just trying to point out that sometimes its definitely a little luck.
<!--quoteo(post=1736457:date=Nov 6 2009, 04:50 AM:name=JAmazon)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (JAmazon @ Nov 6 2009, 04:50 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1736457"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I've actually found that Epic games stem more from random acts of risk on the part of one of the teams. For example when the aliens have 2 hive lockdown and go for thta 3rd hive the marines might try to get a phase on one of the poorly defended other hives. 9/10 times that try fails and does little but prolong the game for 2-3 min, but sometimes they get it up and take down a hive and can prolong the game for up to 15 more minutes! Not trying to discredit the idea that Epic Game = even teams, just trying to point out that sometimes its definitely a little luck.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
To me this still translates into "good teams." Ninja-ing a hive usually requires good planning/wiles by a commander, and a good ninja marine, and decent team coordination.
But yes, overall, you are correct, that is another example of games being epic in the current setting
Oh, how many times have the aliens have 3 hives. And then some sneaky little marine gets a PG up and down goes one hive in 30 sec. Then relocate to that hive location and siege out one of the last 2 hives for the win. And every time it happens, on eather team, you got to respect the spirit of not giving up.
The game time will never be settle for half the player. I's say it depends on the style that is played.
1 Clanner: ENSL at first was diveded into 3 groups (top/middle/casual) For what i saw as a refere on early ENSL; game doesn't last more than 10mins for top clans. In fact 10 mins games were rare (around 8.30 ). Then the second and third level was around 15min max.
2 FFA / casual: It's hard to guess. It mostly depends on who's there and how they organize and how many players are on the server.
I like the two styles. We can only hope for the developpers to address this things with some dynamic settings. or profile : 'tournament' / ffa. I mean deeper than what we have today (bullet damage or life point for units etc). It can be hard to balance but doing it that way allows greater flexibility. And so, having more people (player levels) joining and enjoy the game itself.
I'm probably a bit more relaxed (aka lame player) compared to clanners etc. because I like both gameplay styles.
If I want a fast blast without the need to allow time for an epic I tend to go for combat maps - and if i've got more time to kill i'll happily go for "longer" NS maps - I really don't mind if they end up being epic, i'm in it for the fun of playing. Just don't ask me to comm unless you want to lose :-}
I'm just as happy as a xeno-addicted skulk with the worst kill:deaths ratio in the known universe as I am with HA and HMG tearing up a hive.
I have been following this project for quiet some time now. Been a HUGE fan of NS1 and I can't wait to get my hands on a playable version. But what makes your company as game developers better then the rest imo is the personal touch, it's a young and new studio that hasn't been blinded by the money and greed. Look at Infinity Ward.. hell of a developer, great reputation and within 1 month they lost all my respect and I will pirate their game out of principle matters.
I REALY hope you guys keep doing like you do right now, stay independent, listen close to what the community wants and just keep your heads on earth even when sales on this game go sky high! You never know what can happen, just think about the support from the community that got you this far. The community made what you are now, don't ruin it!
Oh.. cba that the release date of the alfa has been pushed back, I rather wait then play a buggy game that is clearly rushed and unfinished! Keep up the good work!
<!--quoteo(post=1736861:date=Nov 9 2009, 07:53 PM:name=Align)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Align @ Nov 9 2009, 07:53 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1736861"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Well. The alpha IS going to be a buggy unfinished game, technically...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
True, but this doesn't mean you can't make a alpha that's close to release material, releasing a alpha version of a game doesn't mean launching something in the big wide world that aint working correctly and is hardly playable. And ye, it's an alpha and there will be bugs and most people will understand that.
Comments
Looking great guys. Thanks for the mass of information and the screenshots. Just, try to keep it coming more regularly if you can? ;)
EDIT
Also, due to someone else's keen eye earlier about something said during an interview, whats up with the bit about vents being used only for the smaller aliens like skulks and lerks? That has a tone to it that suggests marines won't be able to crawl (or more importantly, Jet-pack?) through the vents. Taking the fade's ability to maneuver through the vents would really change things as well...
UWE can show the big players out there that quality can be done properly with a small budget and team. Let's hope they all learn from it and maybe even try and get a SDK licence from UWE for the NS2 engine due to awesomesauceEditing :P
Does it show I am impatiently waiting on the SDK/TR :D<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I don't think valve was really trying to make one.
HL2 is an old game, you couldn't simulate its graphics in realtime when it was out, which is why it used things like pre-baked lighting which is far more efficient than ANY dynamic system and often gives better results, assuming you don't move things around a lot.
Most games just don't need realtime editors, because most dev teams can work without them, although it is nice to see what you're doing in real time, it is certainly not neccesary to produce good stuff. The selling point is the game, not the tools used to make it, even for games like HL2 very few people will use the editors compared to the people who will buy it, most people who play games don't also make them. So accordingly there is far less polish on the tools than on the game.
Not only that but from the videos, importing textures is as easy as a drag and drop from photoshop and I think models are similar.
And I agree with the previous posters that the skulk model looks a bit too big.
And I agree with the previous posters that the skulk model looks a bit too big.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
While the games that lasted anywhere from 45-60 minutes were often fun and intriguing, they also got rather boring and non-illustrious. Generally those games would reach standoffs, and then all of a sudden one team would win in under 5 minutes thanks to some huge push by either side. I think they want to balance it out a bit more and force teams to get right into the thick of the battle quickly.
I think they also might be doing this to attract new customers. Ask most gamers this question: "How long do you think an average round for online game should take?" The most common answer you will get is probably 15-20 minutes. I don't think a lot of new gamers will be attracted by the sometimes hour long standoffs.
Just my opinion though, of course.
@Chris0132
I was just saying that the tools will give a very small team a good change to create a game with lots of content without the time it normally takes. Something bigger companies could embrace if they want to work faster and perhaps give us games with more content. Since most games currently released are pretty much small compared to older games (this is where a series/episodically content comes in). Due to the sheer design time and compile times to test stuff out. I think any smart company would embrace such a tech purely for the Time is Money factor :P
And yes HL2 is getting older, but the engine still has some nice surprises up its sleeve. And indeed, back then and in some rare cases, realtime lighting still loses to the old school lightmaps. Lightmaps can look and feel much more vibrant if done right. However tech is constantly changing and improving that even currently isn't really the case any more
Most people don't have time to play hour long rounds and to be quite honest, these huge long games often have a lot less strategy to them than shorter, balanced rounds. They get bogged down in stalemates where one half of the map is OCed up and the other half is covered by HA marines and each side are just meatgrinding in a few select chokepoints until someone ninjas a phasegate up/down or kills the AA.
Isn't there an option now for the 3d view to show lighting on the fly?
Yes but it easily crashes, if you get it working at all and like unreal it's a prediction. Spark will show you what you'll see in the game, the others just give you an idea.
well truly, most everyone is positive. thanks for the update guys!
my 2 cents:
way to go dev team!!!!!!! I am glad that beer money i sent is being put to good use. keep up the excellent work!
*patiently awaiting NS2 with great anticipation*
And I agree with the previous posters that the skulk model looks a bit too big.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Most competitive strategy games have rounds that last around 20 minutes. Usually the longer the game is, the less decisions that must be made every minute.
Well most competitive strategy games have only a few people playing at a time, and each individual can control alot of units. Not so with NS. My personal opionin is that the game should last usualy around a half hour. With the rare game lasting an hour or so max.
I really don't like short multiplayer games. If the competitive players can finish a round of NS2 in 10 minutes, fine - whatever. They can eat molten lead for all I care about them. But I'm with Eoy on this one - 30 minutes is what I'm used to for being the 'normal' length of a multiplayer game. NS rounds usually were about this long, sometimes stretching to about 45 minutes, worst case an hour. Extreme cases, longer.
Thing is, this was FINE. Most of my great memories from NS are from games that were longish - the exception being the inevitable start-game skulkrush that wins... or the gorgerush :D
The "long epic" games occurred on the rare instances where the two teams were very evenly balanced. There's no reason to think this will change in NS2 as most games go on longer when player skill is balanced.
The "long epic" games occurred on the rare instances where the two teams were very evenly balanced. There's no reason to think this will change in NS2 as most games go on longer when player skill is balanced.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This. The post 3.2 NS still has plenty of potential to have long standoffs, assuming the teams are balanced enough, in which case it really IS epic. As opposed to purposefully slow gameplay, to where it takes you 25 minutes to get where you would have gotten in just 10 in the faster gameplay model. Theres nothing epic about it. Thats just slow gameplay.
To me this still translates into "good teams." Ninja-ing a hive usually requires good planning/wiles by a commander, and a good ninja marine, and decent team coordination.
But yes, overall, you are correct, that is another example of games being epic in the current setting
1 Clanner:
ENSL at first was diveded into 3 groups (top/middle/casual)
For what i saw as a refere on early ENSL; game doesn't last more than 10mins for top clans. In fact 10 mins games were rare (around 8.30 ).
Then the second and third level was around 15min max.
2 FFA / casual:
It's hard to guess. It mostly depends on who's there and how they organize and how many players are on the server.
I like the two styles. We can only hope for the developpers to address this things with some dynamic settings. or profile : 'tournament' / ffa. I mean deeper than what we have today (bullet damage or life point for units etc). It can be hard to balance but doing it that way allows greater flexibility. And so, having more people (player levels) joining and enjoy the game itself.
If I want a fast blast without the need to allow time for an epic I tend to go for combat maps - and if i've got more time to kill i'll happily go for "longer" NS maps - I really don't mind if they end up being epic, i'm in it for the fun of playing. Just don't ask me to comm unless you want to lose :-}
I'm just as happy as a xeno-addicted skulk with the worst kill:deaths ratio in the known universe as I am with HA and HMG tearing up a hive.
I REALY hope you guys keep doing like you do right now, stay independent, listen close to what the community wants and just keep your heads on earth even when sales on this game go sky high! You never know what can happen, just think about the support from the community that got you this far. The community made what you are now, don't ruin it!
Oh.. cba that the release date of the alfa has been pushed back, I rather wait then play a buggy game that is clearly rushed and unfinished! Keep up the good work!
True, but this doesn't mean you can't make a alpha that's close to release material, releasing a alpha version of a game doesn't mean launching something in the big wide world that aint working correctly and is hardly playable. And ye, it's an alpha and there will be bugs and most people will understand that.