My feedback on the beta...
lame-o
Join Date: 2010-04-24 Member: 71517Members
Join Date: 2010-04-24 Member: 71517Members
Hey, I've been playing build 203 and I feel that dieing has little felt consequence to the player in gameplay, I mean sure, you lose resources if you bought a weapon, and sure your team suffers because of your death, but the waiting period is like 5 seconds. I never have enough time to even begin spectating, which is kind of pointless. The way it is right now I can totally see why only games of 6 vs 6 are any fun, but that's not really the point of a great multiplayer game is it? Unless you're getting base-raped, it's just as well that you should spawn back at your base instantly, not much would change gameplay-wise imo.
I find that I don't really care if I die in NS2, even if I did spend resources on something. I'll just respawn in 5 seconds anyway, so why not rush some key location and try to do as much damage as possible? And it's not like resources are hard to get. Usually when I feel like getting a weapon I'll have enough resources for it, and when I don't I'll just rush in and die with my LMG and next time I'll have enough for a shotgun.
If the respawn times were increased to the level of NS1 - which were pretty long, sometimes 2-3 minutes iirc - and if the team sizes were increased to something like 12 vs 12, we'd have a lot bigger and more intense games, which is what I'd like to have while playing a strategic, team-based online FPS.
I find that I don't really care if I die in NS2, even if I did spend resources on something. I'll just respawn in 5 seconds anyway, so why not rush some key location and try to do as much damage as possible? And it's not like resources are hard to get. Usually when I feel like getting a weapon I'll have enough resources for it, and when I don't I'll just rush in and die with my LMG and next time I'll have enough for a shotgun.
If the respawn times were increased to the level of NS1 - which were pretty long, sometimes 2-3 minutes iirc - and if the team sizes were increased to something like 12 vs 12, we'd have a lot bigger and more intense games, which is what I'd like to have while playing a strategic, team-based online FPS.
Comments
You don't care if you die because you don't care if you win, NS2 is about holding key locations, you cannot do that if you are dead.
Also the enemy gets resources if you die.
That said, mineshaft is a great map, and I had fun, but I think it'd be way more fun on a properly balanced 32 player server.
Also, the game itself is still in need of lots of tweaking, balancing and optimization.
Also if your team dies a lot, you will eventually get egg locked or get an ever increasing spawn cue on the marine team. I think that fact alone is quite enough feedback for you to see your team is doing it wrong... You will have a nice view of the Hive or the Infantry Portals (read: helpless feeling), while you can't play and are forced to watch the battle. You can't do anything about the outcome when in the spawn cue...
And not being able to have people out in the map, will in turn mean you lose map control, which in itself means you will lose resource nodes and get pushed into your main starting location.
It is quite obvious if you keep an eye on the map, with the enemy getting closer and closer to your main base. You will eventually lose, of course public games have this chaotic nature that makes comebacks possible in some weird cases... That doesn't mean the math doesn't add up. This is one of the reasons public matches are kinda weird to use as balancing stats, but an eye is indeed kept on this data...
Not necessarily, as I've had up to 64 player matches in other games/mods that have been quite fun and strategic. The key to making it work is ensuring that the core game elements (res, spawning, map size, etc) scale with playercount.