Thanks for taking the SC2 damage approach. Will be much easier for people to understand the bonuses.
Also, the "complexity" added really isn't that complex for a game of this sort. It seems a lot more automated/background features rather than making the core of the game complex, and the background stuff isn't as important to the game at all. It'd allow for a better mastery system potentially with a lower learning curve that more experience people take advantage of, but since it's a low learning curve newbs can commit small amounts of time to learn it.
I am all for damage types, so long as the ingame audio and visual cues are consistent.
The impact sound needs to be associated with the effectiveness of the damage type. You can reward players for hitting a vulnerable target with a louder, more exciting sound. Hitting a target that is less vulnerable should generate quieter, duller sounds.
The impact particle effects equally need to reward and punish the player. Hitting the right type of target rewards you with better fireworks. More sparks, more blood splatter, whatever is needed to make it blatantly obvious whether or not you are doing a lot of damage.
These cues can be subtle, and will often go unnoticed by a player's conscious mind. This is a good thing. If they're not noticing it, it's because it appears normal to them. It's intuitive, and thus easier to learn.
<!--quoteo(post=1773848:date=Jun 7 2010, 11:40 PM:name=Goekhan)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Goekhan @ Jun 7 2010, 11:40 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1773848"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'm thinking the opposite. I think game is getting more and more simple.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I wouldn't say either way at this point. This is the first gameplay reveal that actually goes far enough to talk about any depth. So much depends on how the game itself flows, which hasn't been adressed one bit yet.
schkorpioI can mspaintJoin Date: 2003-05-23Member: 16635Members
in a way i kind of wonder why bother with damage types? it seems to be an extra unnecessary layer - why not just code everything specifically to be good at something directly. e.g. shotgun does more damage to fade, but less to onos. (no need for a damage type)
<!--quoteo(post=1773892:date=Jun 8 2010, 07:20 PM:name=schkorpio)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (schkorpio @ Jun 8 2010, 07:20 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1773892"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->in a way i kind of wonder why bother with damage types? it seems to be an extra unnecessary layer - why not just code everything specifically to be good at something directly. e.g. shotgun does more damage to fade, but less to onos. (no need for a damage type)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->All you're wanting to do is peel off the label. We're still dealing with the same idea, but we just wont have a name for it. Which will be really annoying when we want to talk about it with each other. So we'll come up with a name for it, putting us right back where we started.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Therefore every marine weapon needs to be effective at CLOSE range just like the alien melee attacks (because at close range IT IS 1 ON 1).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Depends which type of alien you mean. Aliens which dont have any ranged attacks should obviously be superior to marines in melee combat to compensate. Also Marines have the Axe so you they dont need all their guns to be good at close range.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->There is no time to organize your marines to say "ok you and you use nerve gas grenades, and you and you use HI-EX grenades, and we need 4 people with shotguns, 10 with miniguns..."<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
On a random public game thats often the case but the developers can make organisation easier simply by displaying everyone's Weapon on the scoreboard or hud. In Team Fortress 2 I'll often choose a class based on which classes my team is lacking.
You phrase your post from the marine team's point of view. Remember aliens will also have to be organised. Some aliens need to go Fade/Skulk, some need to be Gorge etc.
So wait, will there still be armor pools like in NS1? If so I think this could be really confusing, that's even more complexity than SC2 has. Personally I think aliens should not have an armor pool and instead use Light/Armored defense types, while marines should have an armor pool but no defense type just like NS1. Then you can add armor-bypassing properties to the alien attacks as you please.
Awesome! Tbh it feels in line with the damage modifiers in NS1 just a little bit more expanded.
And about the shotgun extra damage vs armor.
Sorry but it makes sense, yes i realize there are quite a few gun-nuts around here that know that shotguns without the right kind of ammo suck at penetrating stuff.
But you have to realize that most people don't know that, most people know the shotgun in games for a simple reason: Massive damage
The typical reaction for a player in any FPS game if he encounters some badass evil looking enemy is to shoot it with the strongest weapon he knows/owns which is usually a shotgun or a rocketlauncher. In the majority of games the shotgun is known to deliver pain in massive doses at close range no matter what the enemy is.
So while it may not make sense from a "realistic" point of view it makes sense in a gamers point of view. And after all NS2 takes place in the future, for all we know these shotguns could be firing buckshotslugs :p
Making shotguns weak against armor would end up with way more people beeing confused than making it strong against armor. People will just go "zomg i shot that fade 5 times with my shotgun right in the face and it just raped me" not understanding what's happening and if you tell them "use your tiny pistol against it!" they gonna end up beeing completly confused.
Seriously most people don't know that shotguns don't penetrate that well... especially outside the US where most people haven't seen a shotgun outside a movie ever.
<!--quoteo(post=1773917:date=Jun 8 2010, 07:21 AM:name=Zek)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Zek @ Jun 8 2010, 07:21 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1773917"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So wait, will there still be armor pools like in NS1? If so I think this could be really confusing, that's even more complexity than SC2 has. Personally I think aliens should not have an armor pool and instead use Light/Armored defense types, while marines should have an armor pool but no defense type just like NS1. Then you can add armor-bypassing properties to the alien attacks as you please.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->I don't think armor would be very confusing to the typical FPS player, who is used to seeing armor next to health, but the rest of your suggestion is great. It would add an easy distinction between the two teams and it just seems natural that alien armor is more "connected" to their life than marine armor is respectively, since it's organic in nature.
<!--quoteo(post=1773848:date=Jun 7 2010, 06:40 PM:name=Goekhan)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Goekhan @ Jun 7 2010, 06:40 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1773848"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'm thinking the opposite. I think game is getting more and more simple.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
NS2 has Dynamic Infestion NS2 has the Power Grid NS2 has multiple Commanders with "God-like" abilities NS2 has more weapons with more diverse options NS2 has Commander only units NS2 has multiple different attacks and uses (you can bet blink is not gonna be supermanfade) NS2 has ...the list goes on
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I see this happening, so I reinforce with my D which I hope will kill or delay your C long enough for my original A to attack your B.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's what SHE said?
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->most FPS players aren't thinking in terms of damage types (and don't want to have to read online to see why their one-shot sniper shot didn't kill their target), damage types are largely omitted in FPS games.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Most, true. But those that have played Borderlands certainly know about damage types - But it would be silly to assume every NS2 player has played Borderlands (or NS1 for that matter).
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Gas - Breathing targets only (Spores, Rifle nerve gas grenades) Biological - Living/organic targets only (Parasite, Flamethrower)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Confirmed 2 'weapons' there - parasite and Rifle Nerve Gas Grens.
<!--quoteo(post=1773886:date=Jun 8 2010, 01:36 AM:name=Revenge)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Revenge @ Jun 8 2010, 01:36 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1773886"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The impact particle effects equally need to reward and punish the player. Hitting the right type of target rewards you with better fireworks. More sparks, more blood splatter, whatever is needed to make it blatantly obvious whether or not you are doing a lot of damage.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--quoteo(post=1773937:date=Jun 8 2010, 07:46 PM:name=Cyanide)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Cyanide @ Jun 8 2010, 07:46 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1773937"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=0:date=Jun 7 2010, 06:40 PM:name=Goekhan)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Goekhan @ Jun 7 2010, 06:40 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> I'm thinking the opposite. I think game is getting more and more simple.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> NS2 has Dynamic Infestion NS2 has the Power Grid NS2 has multiple Commanders with "God-like" abilities NS2 has more weapons with more diverse options NS2 has Commander only units NS2 has multiple different attacks and uses (you can bet blink is not gonna be supermanfade) NS2 has ...the list goes on <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It can't be more complex, what else can we veterans whine about then?
<!--quoteo(post=1773669:date=Jun 6 2010, 10:57 PM:name=Flayra)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Flayra @ Jun 6 2010, 10:57 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1773669"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->To whomever mentioned that they thought this was too many damage types - if you carefully read the entire post, I'm basically trying to describe how I think this is actually more intuitive overall. Most players won't know anything about damage types and they won't need to. It will just feel right.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--quoteo(post=1773772:date=Jun 7 2010, 12:36 PM:name=Flayra)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Flayra @ Jun 7 2010, 12:36 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1773772"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Regarding "No Hidden Modifiers": these modifiers won't be hidden, they will be described in-game and hopefully shown through audio/visuals as well, so this won't be violated.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If you pull this off the first time around, I'll be amazed. Otherwise, I'm expecting this to be one of those things that sees a lot of revision during alpha/beta.
Don't worry about this being too complex. It has been said already: If you shoot that Onos with weapon A and nothing happens, well, bad luck - you die. If you come back with weapon B and shoot Mr. Onos again he will bleed, cry and you will be covered in its blood.
Do you really have to know that black magic/voodoo are responsible for this behavior? Just remember that B is better against an Onos but worse against hydras. If the game also tells you "You've got A. This is good against structures but you're gonna be smashed by anything larger than a dog *hint*", what's the problem?
schkorpioI can mspaintJoin Date: 2003-05-23Member: 16635Members
edited June 2010
something really simple that will aid all of this is that when you buy a weapon - there will be a small description of what it is good and not so good against :)
that way even if it is your first go, you will buy the right equipment for the right task
<!--quoteo(post=1773962:date=Jun 8 2010, 11:42 PM:name=schkorpio)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (schkorpio @ Jun 8 2010, 11:42 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1773962"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->EDIT: what type of damage is gorge slide?:P<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--quoteo(post=1773937:date=Jun 8 2010, 02:46 PM:name=Cyanide)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Cyanide @ Jun 8 2010, 02:46 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1773937"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->NS2 has Dynamic Infestion NS2 has the Power Grid NS2 has multiple Commanders with "God-like" abilities NS2 has more weapons with more diverse options NS2 has Commander only units NS2 has multiple different attacks and uses (you can bet blink is not gonna be supermanfade) NS2 has ...the list goes on<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not to destroy your list but complexity is not necessarily good, and even if it was, little of what you listed would make NS2 more complex than NS1. We don't even know how most of the game functions and we have no idea how DI or mulitple commanders (I've never even hear of their "god-like abilitlies," please provide a link) actually work. It remains to be seen if the power grid is actually a benefit (I think it will be) or if it will create repetitive games and limit strategies.
Saying "NS2 is better than NS1" then just listing game features doesn't make it so. Personally, I just want roles to be useful. I want the commander to actually feel like they're playing an RTS, and with commander only units, that may be the case. I want the FPS portion of the game to be slightly easier but still skill dependent (which might be the case from the changes we've heard about). I have no idea how two commanders will work and I think that's a prime example of how added complexity will not add any benefit. In my mind I see no scenario where two commanders are beneficial.
The only thing "complex" was learning how to script all the shortcut/useful commands into seperate config files to play the game fluently.
That is also the reason why +movement was added, to make it a little bit easier.
The actual gameplay is pretty easy to understand, including the Tech Trees for both unique sides. Starcraft 1/2 has more complexity in the first 5 minutes of the game than NS1 ever had.
NS2's "complexity" direction is a positive way to go.
*****
Look at some ported direct copy graphical refresh mods.
Q3F--->ETF(DEAD) TFC--->FF(About close to being DEAD as you can get.)
And those are Team Style FPSs, kind of like NS. Except NS has the RTS aspect, so it is just not a boring Team Deathmatch.
*****
I say wait till the Alpha to see if anything is out of place or completely OP; or that breaks all balance and immersion.
*****
I still think the TAZER is a good idea, just maybe it should of been an MG(Rifle) attachment instead of Secondary Weapon like the Pistol. That way you got the option of Rifle Butt/Rifle HE GL/Rifle NG GL/Flamethrower/TAZER; that is a lot of possiblities with that, and that is all the attachments that we actually know about.
<!--quoteo(post=1773957:date=Jun 8 2010, 01:58 PM:name=WatchMaker)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (WatchMaker @ Jun 8 2010, 01:58 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1773957"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If you pull this off the first time around, I'll be amazed. Otherwise, I'm expecting this to be one of those things that sees a lot of revision during alpha/beta.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> You should probably expect EVERYTHING to see a lot of revision during alpha/beta.
<!--quoteo(post=1773965:date=Jun 8 2010, 06:29 PM:name=SentrySteve)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SentrySteve @ Jun 8 2010, 06:29 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1773965"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Not to destroy your list but complexity is not necessarily good, and even if it was, little of what you listed would make NS2 more complex than NS1. We don't even know how most of the game functions and we have no idea how DI or mulitple commanders (I've never even hear of their "god-like abilitlies," please provide a link) actually work. It remains to be seen if the power grid is actually a benefit (I think it will be) or if it will create repetitive games and limit strategies.
Saying "NS2 is better than NS1" then just listing game features doesn't make it so. Personally, I just want roles to be useful. I want the commander to actually feel like they're playing an RTS, and with commander only units, that may be the case. I want the FPS portion of the game to be slightly easier but still skill dependent (which might be the case from the changes we've heard about). I have no idea how two commanders will work and I think that's a prime example of how added complexity will not add any benefit. In my mind I see no scenario where two commanders are beneficial.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Hey Steve. :) I'm not saying complexity is necessarily good. But NS2 is definitely shaping up to be it by the bits and pieces that are given. Even things like the larva, and how they play into respawn timers for the aliens.
Also, the god-like abilities thing has been confirmed on multiple posts, but I don't have the time to look them up. I can give you a quick example of something recently, when Flay mentioned the commander using the Whip's special bombard attack by triggering it from commander mode.
Commander definitely appears to be another layer to the game this time, as opposed to a driving restriction of gameflow it had in NS1. We're definitely gonna see far more RTS elements it appears in NS2, and I can't say that's a bad thing imo. But it definitely makes the game more complex.
NS1 is quite simple and is structured in a manner that is simple and cookie cutter. I'm glad NS2 is breaching out of that. How it plays and how fun it is, remains to be seen. :)
1) Don't overstate it. Bonuses of 10%-30% is fine. 2) Make it simple and intuitive; if things work the way you expect them to, then no explanation is needed. Squirtle has an advantage against Charmander, and it's obvious why. 3) Add some kind of feedback--aural/visual cues that let the player know whatever he's doing is working better.
Comments
Also, the "complexity" added really isn't that complex for a game of this sort. It seems a lot more automated/background features rather than making the core of the game complex, and the background stuff isn't as important to the game at all. It'd allow for a better mastery system potentially with a lower learning curve that more experience people take advantage of, but since it's a low learning curve newbs can commit small amounts of time to learn it.
The impact sound needs to be associated with the effectiveness of the damage type. You can reward players for hitting a vulnerable target with a louder, more exciting sound. Hitting a target that is less vulnerable should generate quieter, duller sounds.
The impact particle effects equally need to reward and punish the player. Hitting the right type of target rewards you with better fireworks. More sparks, more blood splatter, whatever is needed to make it blatantly obvious whether or not you are doing a lot of damage.
These cues can be subtle, and will often go unnoticed by a player's conscious mind. This is a good thing. If they're not noticing it, it's because it appears normal to them. It's intuitive, and thus easier to learn.
:|
I wouldn't say either way at this point. This is the first gameplay reveal that actually goes far enough to talk about any depth. So much depends on how the game itself flows, which hasn't been adressed one bit yet.
e.g. shotgun does more damage to fade, but less to onos. (no need for a damage type)
:|<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It'll be community mod
You heard it here first.
e.g. shotgun does more damage to fade, but less to onos. (no need for a damage type)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->All you're wanting to do is peel off the label. We're still dealing with the same idea, but we just wont have a name for it. Which will be really annoying when we want to talk about it with each other. So we'll come up with a name for it, putting us right back where we started.
Depends which type of alien you mean. Aliens which dont have any ranged attacks should obviously be superior to marines in melee combat to compensate. Also Marines have the Axe so you they dont need all their guns to be good at close range.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->There is no time to organize your marines to say "ok you and you use nerve gas grenades, and you and you use HI-EX grenades, and we need 4 people with shotguns, 10 with miniguns..."<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
On a random public game thats often the case but the developers can make organisation easier simply by displaying everyone's Weapon on the scoreboard or hud. In Team Fortress 2 I'll often choose a class based on which classes my team is lacking.
You phrase your post from the marine team's point of view. Remember aliens will also have to be organised. Some aliens need to go Fade/Skulk, some need to be Gorge etc.
And about the shotgun extra damage vs armor.
Sorry but it makes sense, yes i realize there are quite a few gun-nuts around here that know that shotguns without the right kind of ammo suck at penetrating stuff.
But you have to realize that most people don't know that, most people know the shotgun in games for a simple reason: Massive damage
The typical reaction for a player in any FPS game if he encounters some badass evil looking enemy is to shoot it with the strongest weapon he knows/owns which is usually a shotgun or a rocketlauncher. In the majority of games the shotgun is known to deliver pain in massive doses at close range no matter what the enemy is.
So while it may not make sense from a "realistic" point of view it makes sense in a gamers point of view.
And after all NS2 takes place in the future, for all we know these shotguns could be firing buckshotslugs :p
Making shotguns weak against armor would end up with way more people beeing confused than making it strong against armor. People will just go "zomg i shot that fade 5 times with my shotgun right in the face and it just raped me" not understanding what's happening and if you tell them "use your tiny pistol against it!" they gonna end up beeing completly confused.
Seriously most people don't know that shotguns don't penetrate that well... especially outside the US where most people haven't seen a shotgun outside a movie ever.
Btw: Gas grenades *drool*
NS2 has Dynamic Infestion
NS2 has the Power Grid
NS2 has multiple Commanders with "God-like" abilities
NS2 has more weapons with more diverse options
NS2 has Commander only units
NS2 has multiple different attacks and uses (you can bet blink is not gonna be supermanfade)
NS2 has ...the list goes on
That's what SHE said?
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->most FPS players aren't thinking in terms of damage types (and don't want to have to read online to see why their one-shot sniper shot didn't kill their target), damage types are largely omitted in FPS games.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Most, true. But those that have played Borderlands certainly know about damage types - But it would be silly to assume every NS2 player has played Borderlands (or NS1 for that matter).
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Gas - Breathing targets only (Spores, Rifle nerve gas grenades)
Biological - Living/organic targets only (Parasite, Flamethrower)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Confirmed 2 'weapons' there - parasite and Rifle Nerve Gas Grens.
Can't wait for the aaaaalphaaaaa!
this.
I'm thinking the opposite. I think game is getting more and more simple.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
NS2 has Dynamic Infestion
NS2 has the Power Grid
NS2 has multiple Commanders with "God-like" abilities
NS2 has more weapons with more diverse options
NS2 has Commander only units
NS2 has multiple different attacks and uses (you can bet blink is not gonna be supermanfade)
NS2 has ...the list goes on
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It can't be more complex, what else can we veterans whine about then?
<!--quoteo(post=1773772:date=Jun 7 2010, 12:36 PM:name=Flayra)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Flayra @ Jun 7 2010, 12:36 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1773772"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Regarding "No Hidden Modifiers": these modifiers won't be hidden, they will be described in-game and hopefully shown through audio/visuals as well, so this won't be violated.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If you pull this off the first time around, I'll be amazed. Otherwise, I'm expecting this to be one of those things that sees a lot of revision during alpha/beta.
It has been said already: If you shoot that Onos with weapon A and nothing happens, well, bad luck - you die. If you come back with weapon B and shoot Mr. Onos again he will bleed, cry and you will be covered in its blood.
Do you really have to know that black magic/voodoo are responsible for this behavior?
Just remember that B is better against an Onos but worse against hydras.
If the game also tells you "You've got A. This is good against structures but you're gonna be smashed by anything larger than a dog *hint*", what's the problem?
that way even if it is your first go, you will buy the right equipment for the right task
EDIT: what type of damage is gorge slide?:P
Death obviously.
NS2 has the Power Grid
NS2 has multiple Commanders with "God-like" abilities
NS2 has more weapons with more diverse options
NS2 has Commander only units
NS2 has multiple different attacks and uses (you can bet blink is not gonna be supermanfade)
NS2 has ...the list goes on<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not to destroy your list but complexity is not necessarily good, and even if it was, little of what you listed would make NS2 more complex than NS1. We don't even know how most of the game functions and we have no idea how DI or mulitple commanders (I've never even hear of their "god-like abilitlies," please provide a link) actually work. It remains to be seen if the power grid is actually a benefit (I think it will be) or if it will create repetitive games and limit strategies.
Saying "NS2 is better than NS1" then just listing game features doesn't make it so. Personally, I just want roles to be useful. I want the commander to actually feel like they're playing an RTS, and with commander only units, that may be the case. I want the FPS portion of the game to be slightly easier but still skill dependent (which might be the case from the changes we've heard about). I have no idea how two commanders will work and I think that's a prime example of how added complexity will not add any benefit. In my mind I see no scenario where two commanders are beneficial.
Especially the Marine Commander.
The only thing "complex" was learning how to script all the shortcut/useful commands into seperate config files to play the game fluently.
That is also the reason why +movement was added, to make it a little bit easier.
The actual gameplay is pretty easy to understand, including the Tech Trees for both unique sides. Starcraft 1/2 has more complexity in the first 5 minutes of the game than NS1 ever had.
NS2's "complexity" direction is a positive way to go.
*****
Look at some ported direct copy graphical refresh mods.
Q3F--->ETF(DEAD)
TFC--->FF(About close to being DEAD as you can get.)
And those are Team Style FPSs, kind of like NS. Except NS has the RTS aspect, so it is just not a boring Team Deathmatch.
*****
I say wait till the Alpha to see if anything is out of place or completely OP; or that breaks all balance and immersion.
*****
I still think the TAZER is a good idea, just maybe it should of been an MG(Rifle) attachment instead of Secondary Weapon like the Pistol. That way you got the option of Rifle Butt/Rifle HE GL/Rifle NG GL/Flamethrower/TAZER; that is a lot of possiblities with that, and that is all the attachments that we actually know about.
You should probably expect EVERYTHING to see a lot of revision during alpha/beta.
Saying "NS2 is better than NS1" then just listing game features doesn't make it so. Personally, I just want roles to be useful. I want the commander to actually feel like they're playing an RTS, and with commander only units, that may be the case. I want the FPS portion of the game to be slightly easier but still skill dependent (which might be the case from the changes we've heard about). I have no idea how two commanders will work and I think that's a prime example of how added complexity will not add any benefit. In my mind I see no scenario where two commanders are beneficial.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Hey Steve. :) I'm not saying complexity is necessarily good. But NS2 is definitely shaping up to be it by the bits and pieces that are given. Even things like the larva, and how they play into respawn timers for the aliens.
Also, the god-like abilities thing has been confirmed on multiple posts, but I don't have the time to look them up. I can give you a quick example of something recently, when Flay mentioned the commander using the Whip's special bombard attack by triggering it from commander mode.
Commander definitely appears to be another layer to the game this time, as opposed to a driving restriction of gameflow it had in NS1. We're definitely gonna see far more RTS elements it appears in NS2, and I can't say that's a bad thing imo. But it definitely makes the game more complex.
NS1 is quite simple and is structured in a manner that is simple and cookie cutter. I'm glad NS2 is breaching out of that. How it plays and how fun it is, remains to be seen. :)
1) Don't overstate it. Bonuses of 10%-30% is fine.
2) Make it simple and intuitive; if things work the way you expect them to, then no explanation is needed. Squirtle has an advantage against Charmander, and it's obvious why.
3) Add some kind of feedback--aural/visual cues that let the player know whatever he's doing is working better.
Batman is right.