locallyunsceneFeeder of TrollsJoin Date: 2002-12-25Member: 11528Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1760751:date=Mar 22 2010, 11:12 PM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Mar 22 2010, 11:12 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760751"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->That's not dissimilar from my point, competitive and casual are not really at odds, stagnation of the game occurs because of neither and harms both, it's the major problem with NS, NS was fine for both when it began but it's been played so much that it's impossible to get into now, and so the noncompetitive players are unable to start, and the game is clogged with people who have mastered it.
A game that changes often prevents that, because everyone is always adapting, so new players can always join, the game is always new, the only real problem is graphical outdating and to be honest, NS2 looks to have such good graphical design that it's no more likely to go out of date than the alien films themselves are, it doesn't rely on fancy tech, it's just well put together and staged.
In a game with a good sized playerbase and a constant stream of new players you will be able to keep competitive and noncomptitive apart, competitive players can have clan matches or whatever and everyone else can just drift around servers playing where they land, it's when you run out of players that you get a problem.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I agree with what you said, but not with your implementation of "change". I agree with a lot of people other posters that change should be player driven and not developer driven. To use an analogy, the developers provide the stage and the props, but the players are the ones who create story.
On a more practical level I don't think UWE can add many more features after release. At least not enough to rely on that system for strategic depth. The asymmetry of NS2 is more like SC than TF2. There are balance reasons why SC has one expansion while TF2 can get new weapons and abilities every few quarters.
I reckon cs is one of the best examples of easy to pick up, hard to master.
At first you play, you might die alot learning the maps, guns, recoil etc. then you go to the point you would get 1-2 K/d ratio, maybe worse. after about a week it doesnt take long to start equalising that, even after casual gaming(30mins to an hour a day), i mean its not too hard to point and click.
Then all this depth comes in, walking,crouching, jumping around corners,flashbang use, burst fire, aiming around the general head areas as you walk through the map, etc.
Lets assume your going to a gungame server(modded, keep that in mind). you start off with the best guns in the game, as you get more kills you degrade in weaponry, going down tiers, to the point that the person to finish off with a knife kill wins the game. This is great for newbies, they join, get rolled the first 2 rounds. Then everyone is weaker then them due to weaponry , so they have a better and better chance as the game progresses.
Competitive people are satisfied generally with cs, its really deep when you involve teamwork etc.
Casual players are generally satisfied going to thier gungame or deathmatch servers, even fun game modes like cs(hostage maps) are in there, basically terrorists camp, cts flash thier way in and kill. very one sided to terrorists as they really dont have to cover more then 2 areas rather 1 batch of hostages.(DE maps)
<!--quoteo(post=1760719:date=Mar 23 2010, 03:33 AM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Mar 23 2010, 03:33 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760719"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Argument from authority is only bad if the authority isn't actually related to the subject.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> On it's own, yes. But any authority is invalid if used to argue against any other argument or evidence, and you can't come up with a workable or justified decision without those. Hence, no place in decision-making.
<!--quoteo(post=1760719:date=Mar 23 2010, 03:33 AM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Mar 23 2010, 03:33 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760719"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Left4dead doesn't really do very much with it, I think the general idea is good, considering it only has like 4 maps (or campaigns but as you play through them quickly and don't backtrack like you do in an unreal map for example, and they follow strong themes, each one is like a map in any other game.) it's lasted pretty damn long.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Well, yeah, that's what I said. It tried hard, but failed in the end. (Still a great game though)
Procedurally generated levels and content would indeed be very much at home in a game like this. Depending on how NS2 engine works, it could be a good candidate for this sort of thing. Hell, NS2 itself could be a good candidate.
<!--quoteo(post=1760728:date=Mar 23 2010, 04:34 AM:name=SentrySteve)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SentrySteve @ Mar 23 2010, 04:34 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760728"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Look at this dude trying to sound smart. Who are you trying to impress?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> People capable of processing an independent thought and not just hypocritical group-conformity high-school nonsense, possibly.
As I said in another thread: I have come up short on figuring out why having a hard game is a problem. That has nothing to do with saying the game should cater or be for and about the competitive players. Not at all...But really I think if your first train of thought is "This game needs to become easier" then I consider it a sure way to kill a good chunk of what makes a game fun to play. (notice: a CHUNK..not everything)
But..like I also said in the other thread, maybe I'm the idiot..I just remember the hard things/challenge of NS1 was part of what I enjoyed. (despite my frequent cursing at the game :P )
InsaneAnomalyJoin Date: 2002-05-13Member: 605Members, Super Administrators, Forum Admins, NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, NS2 Developer, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, NS2 Map Tester, Subnautica Developer, Pistachionauts, Future Perfect Developer
I'm getting a bit bored of people freaking out at each other again and again over the same topics. If you can't control your urge to snipe at other users, then don't post. If you can't manage to avoid posting, then it will be managed for you.
I love how <b>I'm</b> the one who gets moderated over a polite request to stop dragging down the level of the debate. You know, rather than the <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=109124&view=findpost&p=1760557" target="_blank">bordering-on-direct-insult</a> posts earlier in the thread. Backseat moderating? What the hell, explain yourself Insane.
InsaneAnomalyJoin Date: 2002-05-13Member: 605Members, Super Administrators, Forum Admins, NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, NS2 Developer, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, NS2 Map Tester, Subnautica Developer, Pistachionauts, Future Perfect Developer
You got moderated because your post deserved it. This included an insistence that other users stop posting in this tread, which is backseat moderation from where I'm standing.
Don't assume you're being singled out in any way just because your post was the first thing I moderated today.
If you want to discourage critical debate on this forum - youre heading in the right direction imo. You also seem to have confused the meanings of "insist" and "request".
The reason I requested that he stop posting in this thread, is because his posts are for the most part irrelevant to the actual debate we're engaged in here, and practically everything he has posted so far which has been relevant, has been proven to be wrong or illogical. He's contributing nothing to the debate except forcing people to counter his posts, which is in turn preventing us from getting anywhere useful.
Your job as a moderator is not to encourage and nurture productive debate, its to ensure that the rules of the forum are followed. That said, I do not understand how you think my post was"backseat moderating". It was a request to stop hampering the progress of what could be a very productive discussion. If you want to allow it simply because he isnt breaking any of the forum rules then I'm fine with that, but dont start moderating people who are actively trying to further the debate here.
This is migrating from elitist territory into outright ridiculous. Are you serious, marks?..
Okay, moving on, where did intelligent discussion last end... If I recall correctly, the need for keeping gameplay fresh and the lack of distinction between "pub" and "comp" players, later being closer to thread's original point.
---
To the best of my understanding, "competitive" label sprung up from people identifying themselves as taking part in officially organised play, but has since been adopted as a sort of sub-culture in terms of mentality. Because our brains or upbringing seem to be inclined towards stereotyping, this had actually resulted in stark divide among gamers themselves, due to false perception that two groups are entirely exclusive or opposed in many ways. Besides the difference outlined in the very first sentence, this is just not the case.
Minding that, neither "group" is any more qualified than the other to suggest changes to the game, but more so minding that the skillset required to accomplish that differs from - even if possibly intersects with - just the experience of playing the game.
The reason "casual" players will feel overwhelmed is simply due to how vocal a minority of "competitive" players may be - and possibly the other way around - which hardly deviates from what we observe in real-life, where it's generally referred to as "stereotyping".
I just cant believe how you continue to propogate an opinion which has been proven as based on a false presumption, multiple times in this thread. I actually give up. Debating anything with you is like slamming my head into a wall. This is precisely what I was talking about in my other post where I said the reason most competetive players gave up posting on these forums is because they get drowned out by idiocy. If you are incapable of engaging in a debate - please just dont even try.
<!--quoteo(post=1760819:date=Mar 23 2010, 07:03 PM:name=marks)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (marks @ Mar 23 2010, 07:03 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760819"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I just cant believe how you continue to propogate an opinion which has been proven as based on a false presumption, multiple times in this thread. I actually give up. Debating anything with you is like slamming my head into a wall. This is precisely what I was talking about in my other post where I said the reason most competetive players gave up posting on these forums is because they get drowned out by idiocy. If you are incapable of engaging in a debate - please just dont even try.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Excuse me sir, but I have to point out that not agreeing with someone doesn't make them unable to debate, it just means they don't agree with you. The part of failure to debate is actually..well...I really mean no offense with this...but its with you. If a debate for you is about right or wrong and winning a debate, then you've completely missed the point of a debate. A debate is an exchange of viewpoints which doesn't necessarily have an outcome of someone "switching sides".
Sorry for sticking my nose in, but I think a healthy debate is important rather than angry mudslinging :)
Understandable, but my point is that I cant debate with somebody who just ignores what you say to them. Its like arguing with a wall. He bases (part of) his opinion on the supposition that:
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->neither "group" is any more qualified than the other to suggest changes to the game<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> which was directly refuted <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=109124&view=findpost&p=1760701" target="_blank">here</a> and <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=109124&view=findpost&p=1760702" target="_blank">here</a> aswell as multiple other times in this thread (bearing in mind that the original discussion was regarding balance and gameplay, nothing to do with the new player experience etc).
Its comparable to me posting "the sky is green", reading 6 pages of "what the hell man, the sky is blue you moron", and then replying with "screw you its my opinion, the sky is green". Its just ridiculous.
I'm not concerned with changing his viewpoint but rather preventing other people from reading his posts and accepting it as the status quo it isnt.
<!--quoteo(post=1760819:date=Mar 23 2010, 09:03 PM:name=marks)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (marks @ Mar 23 2010, 09:03 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760819"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I just cant believe how you continue to propogate an opinion which has been proven as based on a false presumption, multiple times in this thread.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> This is not true.
<!--quoteo(post=1760819:date=Mar 23 2010, 09:03 PM:name=marks)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (marks @ Mar 23 2010, 09:03 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760819"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If you are incapable of engaging in a debate - please just dont even try.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> You openly insulted and told me to shut up. This closes doors to any further debate.
While mark is taking arguing on theinternet too srsly, it'd help if opinions werent just reposted several times, but instead if we could make our second and third post somewhat related to and in response to posts by other users. I feel we have one side that is simply ignoring some viewpoints (which is ok in a debate but poinless if one were to try to have an actual discussion) and the other side freaking out and going to the paralympics.
That said I won't respond to draco's latest on-topic points since they've already been responded to and the responses ignored.
<!--quoteo(post=1760826:date=Mar 23 2010, 07:18 PM:name=marks)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (marks @ Mar 23 2010, 07:18 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760826"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'm not concerned with changing his viewpoint but rather preventing other people from reading his posts and accepting it as the status quo it isnt.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think you should give people a little more credit than that :) I mean look at the arguments I made. I seemingly don't buy into this "status quo" and all I've done for the past 2 years or so, is read the forum, not posting in it. Q.E.D ;)
<!--quoteo(post=1760831:date=Mar 23 2010, 09:53 PM:name=tjosan)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (tjosan @ Mar 23 2010, 09:53 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760831"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->...ignoring viewpoints...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I have no idea what the whole issue is about - if anything at all. Obviously I can't reply to or remember everything.
<!--quoteo(post=1760831:date=Mar 23 2010, 09:53 PM:name=tjosan)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (tjosan @ Mar 23 2010, 09:53 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760831"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->That said I won't respond to draco's latest on-topic points since they've already been responded to and the responses ignored.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Well, yeah, that's the problem. I figured summing up whatever was going on before the thread got de-railed with this nonsense would help... Guess not.
<!--quoteo(post=1760835:date=Mar 23 2010, 10:00 PM:name=MaDMaxX)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MaDMaxX @ Mar 23 2010, 10:00 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760835"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Marks, the job of moderators on this forum is to do exactly that, it's not your job to decide who does and does not post here.
His opinions, again, are exactly that, you're in no position to say whether or not they are valid and use that as a basis for someone to stop posting.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Thanks a bunch.
InsaneAnomalyJoin Date: 2002-05-13Member: 605Members, Super Administrators, Forum Admins, NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, NS2 Developer, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, NS2 Map Tester, Subnautica Developer, Pistachionauts, Future Perfect Developer
Marks, you really don't help the case that you're not backseat moderating when you tell moderators how to moderate. You seem concerned that this thread remain on track, so it's probably better that you just let it be.
If you feel genuinely wronged and want to complain, feel free to e-mail community@unknownworlds.com.
<!--quoteo(post=1760836:date=Mar 23 2010, 07:01 PM:name=Draco_2k)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Draco_2k @ Mar 23 2010, 07:01 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760836"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I have no idea what the whole issue is about - if anything at all.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> So why are you posting?!
Insane, what I<i> feel</i> is apathy, having watched the momentum of real progress in this discussion between pages 2-5 interrupted by someone who self-admittedly has no ###### idea what the discussion is about in the first place.
<!--quoteo(post=1760835:date=Mar 23 2010, 07:00 PM:name=MaDMaxX)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MaDMaxX @ Mar 23 2010, 07:00 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760835"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->His opinions, again, are exactly that, you're in no position to say whether or not they are valid and use that as a basis for someone to stop posting.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why not? If his opinion is entirely based on a presumption which I can logically prove is false - why can I not call him out on that? Isnt that the kind of thing you would expect to happen in a debate? If you ask me, anybody whose opinions are based on false presumptions which, when directly pointed out to them, they just ignore - should not be contributing in a critical discussion. Am I wrong to think that?!
Marks, that's enough. You have successfully euthanized both this thread and any respect I might have had for you all in one go. That is quite enough.
<!--quoteo(post=1760848:date=Mar 23 2010, 10:42 PM:name=marks)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (marks @ Mar 23 2010, 10:42 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760848"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So why are you posting?!<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> This referred to me not knowing what your objections to my posts are, as you have never stated them.
<!--quoteo(post=1760848:date=Mar 23 2010, 10:42 PM:name=marks)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (marks @ Mar 23 2010, 10:42 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760848"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Insane, what I<i> feel</i> is apathy, having watched the momentum of real progress in this discussion between pages 2-5 interrupted by someone who self-admittedly has no ###### idea what the discussion is about in the first place.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I interrupted no one. The thread was derailed by you spewing insults in my general direction for the last two pages. I never said I didn't know what the discussion is about, I have done nothing but address it, as have others.
<!--quoteo(post=1760848:date=Mar 23 2010, 10:42 PM:name=marks)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (marks @ Mar 23 2010, 10:42 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760848"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If his opinion is entirely based on a presumption which I can logically prove is false - why can I not call him out on that?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> You can, and so far you have done neither. What this referred to was, that you cannot simply <i>declare</i> an opinion invalid, nor tell people to stop posting on that basis.
I will not discuss anything else with you, but I will ask you not to outright lie about or misrepresent myself or others.
<!--quoteo(post=1760860:date=Mar 23 2010, 07:57 PM:name=Draco_2k)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Draco_2k @ Mar 23 2010, 07:57 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760860"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This referred to me not knowing what your objections to my posts are, as you have never stated them.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You have never stated what it was that I'm supposed to have ignored, nor which part of my post you disagree with, nor did you ever attempt to bring up a counter-argument to it.
As I said, I do not know what your objections are. Enough with the insults.
I'm actually flabberghasted. The quote, in that post. And the two links to previous posts in the thread. I do not understand how you could not see that. You know why I dont even attempt to bring up a counter-argument? Because its a waste of my time arguing with you. You ignore what I say.
<!--quoteo(post=1760775:date=Mar 23 2010, 11:37 AM:name=Draco_2k)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Draco_2k @ Mar 23 2010, 11:37 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760775"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Procedurally generated levels and content would indeed be very much at home in a game like this. Depending on how NS2 engine works, it could be a good candidate for this sort of thing. Hell, NS2 itself could be a good candidate.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah hopefully it will support it, it looks promising because you have the prop heavy dressing, and the bits that aren't props are built very much like a model, so at the worst you could just export the room geometry as a model and then spawn it in later.
<!--quoteo(post=1760870:date=Mar 23 2010, 11:41 PM:name=marks)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (marks @ Mar 23 2010, 11:41 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760870"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'm actually flabberghasted. The quote, in that post. And the two links to previous posts in the thread. I do not understand how you could not see that. You know why I dont even attempt to bring up a counter-argument? Because its a waste of my time arguing with you. You ignore what I say.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I don't know what you're referring to, you still haven't stated it.
I have articulated the position you quoted many times before - including the very post you replied to with a direct insult - as well as our last exchange, which it was made in response to. The posts you quoted contain only brief mention of contrary opinion by other people, taken out of context of another discussion altogether, which I cannot accept as refutation in any possible meaning of the word.
<!--quoteo(post=1760873:date=Mar 23 2010, 11:47 PM:name=Phase)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Phase @ Mar 23 2010, 11:47 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760873"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Can we just close this thread?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I support that motion, unfortunately.
<!--quoteo(post=1760871:date=Mar 23 2010, 11:46 PM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Mar 23 2010, 11:46 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760871"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Yeah hopefully it will support it, it looks promising because you have the prop heavy dressing, and the bits that aren't props are built very much like a model, so at the worst you could just export the room geometry as a model and then spawn it in later.
Should be worth investigating certainly.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> The details have been scarce so far, whether or not this is possible, I do not know. I remember a dev saying that only the editor stores level data in a format that is always open to change, which is one of the reasons for a performance hit it takes.
Possibly we'll be able to affects parts of the maps as accounted for during level design - weldable doors and buildings are pretty much that already - either in the game itself, or with some meddling. The prop-based levels you mentioned sounds like a great idea if it's technically possible.
Comments
A game that changes often prevents that, because everyone is always adapting, so new players can always join, the game is always new, the only real problem is graphical outdating and to be honest, NS2 looks to have such good graphical design that it's no more likely to go out of date than the alien films themselves are, it doesn't rely on fancy tech, it's just well put together and staged.
In a game with a good sized playerbase and a constant stream of new players you will be able to keep competitive and noncomptitive apart, competitive players can have clan matches or whatever and everyone else can just drift around servers playing where they land, it's when you run out of players that you get a problem.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree with what you said, but not with your implementation of "change". I agree with a lot of people other posters that change should be player driven and not developer driven. To use an analogy, the developers provide the stage and the props, but the players are the ones who create story.
On a more practical level I don't think UWE can add many more features after release. At least not enough to rely on that system for strategic depth. The asymmetry of NS2 is more like SC than TF2. There are balance reasons why SC has one expansion while TF2 can get new weapons and abilities every few quarters.
At first you play, you might die alot learning the maps, guns, recoil etc. then you go to the point you would get 1-2 K/d ratio, maybe worse.
after about a week it doesnt take long to start equalising that, even after casual gaming(30mins to an hour a day), i mean its not too hard to point and click.
Then all this depth comes in, walking,crouching, jumping around corners,flashbang use, burst fire, aiming around the general head areas as you walk through the map, etc.
Lets assume your going to a gungame server(modded, keep that in mind). you start off with the best guns in the game, as you get more kills you degrade in weaponry, going down tiers, to the point that the person to finish off with a knife kill wins the game. This is great for newbies, they join, get rolled the first 2 rounds.
Then everyone is weaker then them due to weaponry , so they have a better and better chance as the game progresses.
Competitive people are satisfied generally with cs, its really deep when you involve teamwork etc.
Casual players are generally satisfied going to thier gungame or deathmatch servers, even fun game modes like cs(hostage maps) are in there, basically terrorists camp, cts flash thier way in and kill. very one sided to terrorists as they really dont have to cover more then 2 areas rather 1 batch of hostages.(DE maps)
On it's own, yes. But any authority is invalid if used to argue against any other argument or evidence, and you can't come up with a workable or justified decision without those. Hence, no place in decision-making.
<!--quoteo(post=1760719:date=Mar 23 2010, 03:33 AM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Mar 23 2010, 03:33 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760719"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Left4dead doesn't really do very much with it, I think the general idea is good, considering it only has like 4 maps (or campaigns but as you play through them quickly and don't backtrack like you do in an unreal map for example, and they follow strong themes, each one is like a map in any other game.) it's lasted pretty damn long.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, yeah, that's what I said. It tried hard, but failed in the end. (Still a great game though)
Procedurally generated levels and content would indeed be very much at home in a game like this. Depending on how NS2 engine works, it could be a good candidate for this sort of thing. Hell, NS2 itself could be a good candidate.
<!--quoteo(post=1760728:date=Mar 23 2010, 04:34 AM:name=SentrySteve)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SentrySteve @ Mar 23 2010, 04:34 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760728"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Look at this dude trying to sound smart. Who are you trying to impress?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
People capable of processing an independent thought and not just hypocritical group-conformity high-school nonsense, possibly.
But..like I also said in the other thread, maybe I'm the idiot..I just remember the hard things/challenge of NS1 was part of what I enjoyed. (despite my frequent cursing at the game :P )
Don't assume you're being singled out in any way just because your post was the first thing I moderated today.
The reason I requested that he stop posting in this thread, is because his posts are for the most part irrelevant to the actual debate we're engaged in here, and practically everything he has posted so far which has been relevant, has been proven to be wrong or illogical. He's contributing nothing to the debate except forcing people to counter his posts, which is in turn preventing us from getting anywhere useful.
Your job as a moderator is not to encourage and nurture productive debate, its to ensure that the rules of the forum are followed. That said, I do not understand how you think my post was"backseat moderating". It was a request to stop hampering the progress of what could be a very productive discussion. If you want to allow it simply because he isnt breaking any of the forum rules then I'm fine with that, but dont start moderating people who are actively trying to further the debate here.
Okay, moving on, where did intelligent discussion last end... If I recall correctly, the need for keeping gameplay fresh and the lack of distinction between "pub" and "comp" players, later being closer to thread's original point.
---
To the best of my understanding, "competitive" label sprung up from people identifying themselves as taking part in officially organised play, but has since been adopted as a sort of sub-culture in terms of mentality. Because our brains or upbringing seem to be inclined towards stereotyping, this had actually resulted in stark divide among gamers themselves, due to false perception that two groups are entirely exclusive or opposed in many ways. Besides the difference outlined in the very first sentence, this is just not the case.
Minding that, neither "group" is any more qualified than the other to suggest changes to the game, but more so minding that the skillset required to accomplish that differs from - even if possibly intersects with - just the experience of playing the game.
The reason "casual" players will feel overwhelmed is simply due to how vocal a minority of "competitive" players may be - and possibly the other way around - which hardly deviates from what we observe in real-life, where it's generally referred to as "stereotyping".
Imho.
Excuse me sir, but I have to point out that not agreeing with someone doesn't make them unable to debate, it just means they don't agree with you. The part of failure to debate is actually..well...I really mean no offense with this...but its with you. If a debate for you is about right or wrong and winning a debate, then you've completely missed the point of a debate. A debate is an exchange of viewpoints which doesn't necessarily have an outcome of someone "switching sides".
Sorry for sticking my nose in, but I think a healthy debate is important rather than angry mudslinging :)
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->neither "group" is any more qualified than the other to suggest changes to the game<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
which was directly refuted <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=109124&view=findpost&p=1760701" target="_blank">here</a> and <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=109124&view=findpost&p=1760702" target="_blank">here</a> aswell as multiple other times in this thread (bearing in mind that the original discussion was regarding balance and gameplay, nothing to do with the new player experience etc).
Its comparable to me posting "the sky is green", reading 6 pages of "what the hell man, the sky is blue you moron", and then replying with "screw you its my opinion, the sky is green". Its just ridiculous.
I'm not concerned with changing his viewpoint but rather preventing other people from reading his posts and accepting it as the status quo it isnt.
This is not true.
<!--quoteo(post=1760819:date=Mar 23 2010, 09:03 PM:name=marks)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (marks @ Mar 23 2010, 09:03 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760819"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If you are incapable of engaging in a debate - please just dont even try.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You openly insulted and told me to shut up. This closes doors to any further debate.
That said I won't respond to draco's latest on-topic points since they've already been responded to and the responses ignored.
I think you should give people a little more credit than that :)
I mean look at the arguments I made. I seemingly don't buy into this "status quo" and all I've done for the past 2 years or so, is read the forum, not posting in it. Q.E.D ;)
His opinions, again, are exactly that, you're in no position to say whether or not they are valid and use that as a basis for someone to stop posting.
This is called debate, what do you want? a medal? a prize giving? you're not going to "win" on the internet, it's not how things work.
I have no idea what the whole issue is about - if anything at all. Obviously I can't reply to or remember everything.
<!--quoteo(post=1760831:date=Mar 23 2010, 09:53 PM:name=tjosan)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (tjosan @ Mar 23 2010, 09:53 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760831"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->That said I won't respond to draco's latest on-topic points since they've already been responded to and the responses ignored.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, yeah, that's the problem. I figured summing up whatever was going on before the thread got de-railed with this nonsense would help... Guess not.
<!--quoteo(post=1760835:date=Mar 23 2010, 10:00 PM:name=MaDMaxX)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MaDMaxX @ Mar 23 2010, 10:00 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760835"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Marks, the job of moderators on this forum is to do exactly that, it's not your job to decide who does and does not post here.
His opinions, again, are exactly that, you're in no position to say whether or not they are valid and use that as a basis for someone to stop posting.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thanks a bunch.
If you feel genuinely wronged and want to complain, feel free to e-mail community@unknownworlds.com.
So why are you posting?!
Insane, what I<i> feel</i> is apathy, having watched the momentum of real progress in this discussion between pages 2-5 interrupted by someone who self-admittedly has no ###### idea what the discussion is about in the first place.
<!--quoteo(post=1760835:date=Mar 23 2010, 07:00 PM:name=MaDMaxX)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MaDMaxX @ Mar 23 2010, 07:00 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760835"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->His opinions, again, are exactly that, you're in no position to say whether or not they are valid and use that as a basis for someone to stop posting.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why not? If his opinion is entirely based on a presumption which I can logically prove is false - why can I not call him out on that? Isnt that the kind of thing you would expect to happen in a debate? If you ask me, anybody whose opinions are based on false presumptions which, when directly pointed out to them, they just ignore - should not be contributing in a critical discussion. Am I wrong to think that?!
Marks, that's enough. You have successfully euthanized both this thread and any respect I might have had for you all in one go. That is quite enough.
<!--quoteo(post=1760848:date=Mar 23 2010, 10:42 PM:name=marks)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (marks @ Mar 23 2010, 10:42 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760848"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So why are you posting?!<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This referred to me not knowing what your objections to my posts are, as you have never stated them.
<!--quoteo(post=1760848:date=Mar 23 2010, 10:42 PM:name=marks)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (marks @ Mar 23 2010, 10:42 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760848"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Insane, what I<i> feel</i> is apathy, having watched the momentum of real progress in this discussion between pages 2-5 interrupted by someone who self-admittedly has no ###### idea what the discussion is about in the first place.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I interrupted no one. The thread was derailed by you spewing insults in my general direction for the last two pages. I never said I didn't know what the discussion is about, I have done nothing but address it, as have others.
<!--quoteo(post=1760848:date=Mar 23 2010, 10:42 PM:name=marks)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (marks @ Mar 23 2010, 10:42 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760848"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If his opinion is entirely based on a presumption which I can logically prove is false - why can I not call him out on that?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You can, and so far you have done neither. What this referred to was, that you cannot simply <i>declare</i> an opinion invalid, nor tell people to stop posting on that basis.
I will not discuss anything else with you, but I will ask you not to outright lie about or misrepresent myself or others.
<a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=109124&view=findpost&p=1760826" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/in...t&p=1760826</a>
Lie more please.
As I said, I do not know what your objections are. Enough with the insults.
Yeah hopefully it will support it, it looks promising because you have the prop heavy dressing, and the bits that aren't props are built very much like a model, so at the worst you could just export the room geometry as a model and then spawn it in later.
Should be worth investigating certainly.
I don't know what you're referring to, you still haven't stated it.
I have articulated the position you quoted many times before - including the very post you replied to with a direct insult - as well as our last exchange, which it was made in response to. The posts you quoted contain only brief mention of contrary opinion by other people, taken out of context of another discussion altogether, which I cannot accept as refutation in any possible meaning of the word.
<!--quoteo(post=1760873:date=Mar 23 2010, 11:47 PM:name=Phase)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Phase @ Mar 23 2010, 11:47 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760873"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Can we just close this thread?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I support that motion, unfortunately.
<!--quoteo(post=1760871:date=Mar 23 2010, 11:46 PM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Mar 23 2010, 11:46 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760871"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Yeah hopefully it will support it, it looks promising because you have the prop heavy dressing, and the bits that aren't props are built very much like a model, so at the worst you could just export the room geometry as a model and then spawn it in later.
Should be worth investigating certainly.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The details have been scarce so far, whether or not this is possible, I do not know. I remember a dev saying that only the editor stores level data in a format that is always open to change, which is one of the reasons for a performance hit it takes.
Possibly we'll be able to affects parts of the maps as accounted for during level design - weldable doors and buildings are pretty much that already - either in the game itself, or with some meddling. The prop-based levels you mentioned sounds like a great idea if it's technically possible.