<!--quoteo(post=1951129:date=Jul 12 2012, 11:32 PM:name=Classic319)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Classic319 @ Jul 12 2012, 11:32 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1951129"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Worst comment i've ever seen. There are some fact that people who never challenge are always disrespectful against who challenge :)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> It is completely factually correct, even if it doesn't go down well in these parts.
Also, Soylent beat me to it but a beta is indeed feature-complete. That doesn't mean features don't get added or removed in the beta-stages, but that only happens when a problem reveals itself in said beta-stage, as one enters it intending not to further modify the gameplay in such a way. NS2 entered the beta-stage while there will still a half-dozen things still planned for implementation, therefor by definition it cannot be a beta. Up to this point it is still is not, due to the lack of the Exo (which was also was planned pre-beta). I usually don't make a fuss when people call it a beta (one can spend his entire day going around and correct everybody on this forum), but if you're going to call out people with the beta-argument on-hand, I think it is worth pointing out. It is completely legitimate to think you wouldn't be subjected to continues gross alteration of gameplay in a beta-stage.
I recall infestation spikes being announced at the same time as enzyme cloud and rupture, though they came in later. Also I can't count the number of threads calling for AV needing a drawback (though it was hotly contested), and I thought adding one was always in the works. Though admittedly I knew there was going to be backlash as soon as I read about the change, because I never expected such a significant drawback.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Aye I wasn't talking about the addition of a drawback per se (which I think shouldn't really exist as such, there already is lack of hive-sight), but rather the kind of drawback they went with that was a complete (unpleasant) surprise to most people here I guess. A little heads-up and small amount of discussion about it beforehand would've been nice.
<!--quoteo(post=0:date=:name=Angelusz)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Angelusz)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If all developers had this mentality, we'd never see any new games.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I think that just goes to show you do not have the down-to-earth sensibility to be a developer, pragmatism isn't a dirty word in development.
<!--quoteo(post=1951086:date=Jul 13 2012, 07:10 AM:name=Floodinator)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Floodinator @ Jul 13 2012, 07:10 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1951086"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->They don't listen? So why is BB on the gorge again? And wgy can we hit Fades in blink now? Why are tier bound on number of hives again? Why can the Flamer finally do smth about the infestation?
Ah yeah because they don't listen....<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Just a point of clarification. 1) The change for BB back to gorge was not precipitated by any <b>public forum discussion</b> 2) Neither was 100% damage to fade during blink
Yes the devs listen bit its quite selective i feel (more because of convenience, time constraints i think). The good points and discussions on the public forums are rarely read in depth by devs and so when UWE finally makes a change its usually because they took 2 months longer than the wider, gameplay experienced community to figure out why an experiment wasn't working.
We can all point to changes being made by the devs that mirror stuff being said on the forum, but its <b>like painting the bullseye after hitting the target many many months after the community has</b>.
Not to say UWE isn't alot more open than many other devs out there and thats a point to their credit. But i think we should be a bit <b>realistic</b> about how open that really is. They're open to community feedback such as via email, but they really don't read the public forums much anymore unless its patch day.
And yea, Bacillus hit the nail. <!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->In a development process like this I'd probably mostly like to see <b>solid reasoning</b> for the decisions made and <b>good demontration of understanding</b> of the potential outcomes. There's nothing quite as frustrating as seeing a change made, predicting that X is going to occur and then later see the changes being reverted because of the very same X.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--quoteo(post=1951093:date=Jul 12 2012, 09:25 PM:name=Soylent_green)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Soylent_green @ Jul 12 2012, 09:25 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1951093"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It's a really bad idea to make a new engine and a new game from scratch. If they had stuck with the source engine they could have afforded all this experimenting; as it is, it's really comming down to the wire and they're still making sweeping changes.
If you're going too make your own engine, start from the game you sunk 3 painstaking years of beta testing into balancing(not alpha, actual, <b>feature-complete</b> beta). NS2 is so unlike NS1 in so many ways that it's going to take at least another year or so from feature completion to get it reasonably polished(as with NS 1.0x -> NS 2.0); it's going to be a messy launch.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Im totally agree with you! They had to make the wheel roll again. But i guess it isnt the main thought of this thread.
AngeluszHarmonic entropistJoin Date: 2003-07-10Member: 18072Members, Forum Moderators, Constellation, NS2 Playtester
edited July 2012
<!--quoteo(post=1951200:date=Jul 13 2012, 09:09 AM:name=Bacillus)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bacillus @ Jul 13 2012, 09:09 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1951200"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'm not even so much bothered where the game is going anymore, what really bothers me is the stuff coming from forum mods and so on.
There are people who have stuck with the development for more than 3 years without really having a very good idea of when and what the final product will be. Stop treating them like little children.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> You <b>choose</b> to interpret that as being condescending. It was a comment in which I clearly stated that I <b>personally</b> disagree with the statement. I even explained why I disagreed in one short point.
<!--quoteo(post=1951203:date=Jul 13 2012, 09:25 AM:name=player)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (player @ Jul 13 2012, 09:25 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1951203"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I think that just goes to show you do not have the down-to-earth sensibility to be a developer, pragmatism isn't a dirty word in development.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> One statement does not tell you what kind of person I am and what skills I possess. I'm disappointed in you for taking the low road on that one.
I'm leaving this thread up, because I feel it's important that everyone can vent their fears and frustrations about the way things go. We are keeping a close watch on the thread, because topics like this have the tendency to run wild, turning into a "why the devs are bad" topic, which is unwanted. We love constructive criticism, however! Thank you.
<!--quoteo(post=1951122:date=Jul 13 2012, 08:56 AM:name=internetexplorer)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (internetexplorer @ Jul 13 2012, 08:56 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1951122"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><sub><!--coloro:orange--><span style="color:orange"><!--/coloro-->You need to learn not to take single lines from one post out of context to provoke.
<!--quoteo(post=1951117:date=Jul 13 2012, 12:46 AM:name=serpico)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (serpico @ Jul 13 2012, 12:46 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1951117"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I don't play anything competitively, and I haven't really played quake for more than a few hours, so maybe I'm misspeaking, but my impression was that there is a tremendous importance of twitch reflexes in quake, and the b-hopping videos i've seen of it have reinforced that. It strikes me as an extremely fast paced game where one there's a great deal of importance on being able to aim and click the fastest when someone wanders onto your screen.
tf2, i've played a ton in pubs, and in general, whenver someone is better than me at twitch movement, i can still counter them in some way by changing up my tactics. It's awfully rare (though it does happen) that I see anyone completely dominating a server, and I also don't usually see a lone star player carry a team.
When referring to "skill" i meant movement and aim specifically rather than tactics. Am I wrong in saying quake has a higher skill cap than tf2? It certainly looks a ton faster paced in videos I've seen.
The new change with fade (which most of you like) is an example of what I'm talking about. Fades who are comfortable moving around at 90 mph for most of the game are now better at fade. Marines who can hit a fade when he's zooming around at blink speed are now better against fades. Skill cap has increased. And like many changes the community wants, aesthetics has been thrown aside as an afterthought instead of a priority. "Zooming" fades are not nearly as cool in appearance or in concept as teleporting ones. My favorite blink was the "POOF GONE" one seen in the Gorilla trailer.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I absolutely agree with this post. Especially on the fade-part. It makes me sad, that the cool teleproting-mechanic won't really work, but in opposite to all the cry-babys, I can see the greater picture and realize that (against my opinion) it may be necessary to make the game better. Saying UWE doesn't listen to the community only because they don't make the game like this one community-member wants it to be, is very immature. It isn't even possible, because you can't make everyone happy. So to everyone who thinks that the devs should only listen to them: You are not the only person on the planet. Get over it.
But anyway, you shouldn't waste your time arguing with ie, serpico. He just want to "be against" and is trying so hard that he doesn't even concern about logic in his posts anymore (as seen in the AV-thread). It's sad because he can argue in a real way. But lately he seems to only like to post provoking one-liners.
<!--quoteo(post=1951211:date=Jul 13 2012, 10:11 AM:name=Angelusz)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Angelusz @ Jul 13 2012, 10:11 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1951211"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You <b>choose</b> to interpret that as being condescending. It was a comment in which I clearly stated that I <b>personally</b> disagree with the statement. I even explained why I disagreed in one short point. If that's too much for you to handle, consider not using forums.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Over the Internet you really have to start interpreting things as not sufficient or outright condescending at some point. Otherwise people can just keep dodging all day long with smiley faces and vague posts consisting of two sentences. This is where I drew the line.
What happened is you took a well written and coherent post, told that you disagree with it in ways you don't even <b>bother</b> explaining and posted one very vague and irrational point without any further backup for it. And your point still seems indicate that the whole content of the original post is void and completely detached of reality somehow.
That's just not a very respectful way to respond to a person who has apparently been around for 10 years and - as far as I can tell - kept his posting very constructive, insightful and respectful through that.
---
I know I'm nitpicking, being annoying and it's probably extremely hard to take critisism at a point like this. However, respect towards UWE is the reason why at least I am still sticking around. I'd much rather not have it on a collision course with the respect I have towards the people involved in the community. I don't want to see any public humiliation or witch hunt when problems or critisism show up, but downplaying them through somewhat official channels isn't really the thing I want to see either.
---
I think I'm done with derailing the thread though. If you feel like, I can discuss this with PMs.
Since the game is a non-feature complete beta, aka alpha, its perfectly legitimate for UWE to throw ideas around and see how they work. I would even encourage them to do so. As contrary to many others, I think THIS is the time to to it. Now many of these ideas might be silly, but still, now are the time to try them. Even though UWE wouldn't agree, true beta actually starts at @ 1.0. Then the game will be feature complete for others than PT and that's when the competativ scene can start to give real feedback on balance and that's when they can solve the issues we will find.
Remember, iirc, NS1 excelled at post 3.0. NS2 <i>will </i>be awesome around 2.0-3.0, when 1.0 "beta" is over.
And to those talking about the engine, UWE is not suicidal. They have stated several times it's their top priority. They know that this game makes or breaks around it. Why does this always has to be brought up? Just leave it. Is perfectly fine to do both your own engine and throw ideas around in an alpha. Go charlie!
PS. Oh and yes, inf. spikes, clogs, free hydras are some of these silly ideas. DS.
fanaticThis post has been edited.Join Date: 2003-07-23Member: 18377Members, Constellation, Squad Five Blue
<!--quoteo(post=1951242:date=Jul 13 2012, 11:51 AM:name=Scrajm)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Scrajm @ Jul 13 2012, 11:51 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1951242"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Since the game is a non-feature complete beta, aka alpha, its perfectly legitimate for UWE to throw ideas around and see how they work. I would even encourage them to do so. As contrary to many others, I think THIS is the time to to it. Now many of these ideas might be silly, but still, now are the time to try them. Even though UWE wouldn't agree, true beta actually starts at @ 1.0. Then the game will be feature complete for others than PT and that's when the competativ scene can start to give real feedback on balance and that's when they can solve the issues we will find.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I don't necessarily disagree with you, but there is one important difference between NS1 and NS2: NS1 was free, NS2 is a commercial product. Whereas NS1 got most of its players through the already established HL1 mod community, NS2 is going to have to rely on professional game reviews and word of mouth from the players. If the game is lacking at release, it could kill the NS2 community before its' even really begun.
I don't mind trying new things and big changes either, even after release.
Trying silly ideas is not that bad, although it would be probably more efficient to give them a bit more (collective) thoughts before implementing them.
However not removing silly ideas (free hydras...) is a big problem, it means the game will not converge into something nice but into a big mess.
It's like in natural selection, the changes can be random, but the selection needs to be efficient, otherwise you don't get anything out of it.
<!--quoteo(post=1951242:date=Jul 13 2012, 10:51 AM:name=Scrajm)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Scrajm @ Jul 13 2012, 10:51 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1951242"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Since the game is a non-feature complete beta, aka alpha, its perfectly legitimate for UWE to throw ideas around and see how they work.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Well we can certainly agree it's an alpha, and as such any significant gameplay-elements should be implemented\tested at this stage.
<!--quoteo(post=1951242:date=Jul 13 2012, 10:51 AM:name=Scrajm)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Scrajm @ Jul 13 2012, 10:51 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1951242"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I would even encourage them to do so. As contrary to many others, I think THIS is the time to to it. Now many of these ideas might be silly, but still, now are the time to try them.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Except that it is so very very close to release, which is why I think they should no longer constantly change, or at least stop implementing new (non-essential) features.
<!--quoteo(post=1951242:date=Jul 13 2012, 10:51 AM:name=Scrajm)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Scrajm @ Jul 13 2012, 10:51 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1951242"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Even though UWE wouldn't agree, true beta actually starts at @ 1.0.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> No I think you may be underestimating what a beta is, as betas are by their very nature buggy and very poor-performing. You can't release a product in such a state to the public at large.
<!--quoteo(post=1951242:date=Jul 13 2012, 10:51 AM:name=Scrajm)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Scrajm @ Jul 13 2012, 10:51 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1951242"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Then the game will be feature complete for others than PT and that's when the competativ scene can start to give real feedback on balance and that's when they can solve the issues we will find.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> The competitive-scene can't really get working on this game as long as it keeps (sometimes inexplicably) change every build, and performance\hitreg is nowhere near where it needs to be. I guess it's fair to say competitive-play will follow in the wake of a beta.
<!--quoteo(post=1951242:date=Jul 13 2012, 10:51 AM:name=Scrajm)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Scrajm @ Jul 13 2012, 10:51 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1951242"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Remember, iirc, NS1 excelled at post 3.0. NS2 <i>will </i>be awesome around 2.0-3.0, when 1.0 "beta" is over.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> It is absolutely true it took years for NS1 to become as polished as it is now (but still flawed in some places). The difference with NS2 of course is that NS2 is pay-to-play, and as such they cannot afford to deliver a product that requires years of polishing still, it needs to be in an already good-state.
<!--quoteo(post=1951242:date=Jul 13 2012, 10:51 AM:name=Scrajm)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Scrajm @ Jul 13 2012, 10:51 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1951242"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->And to those talking about the engine, UWE is not suicidal. They have stated several times it's their top priority. They know that this game makes or breaks around it. Why does this always has to be brought up? Just leave it. Is perfectly fine to do both your own engine and throw ideas around in an alpha. Go charlie!<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I guess there's not much point to bringing it up, as they won't be able to change engine now anyway, but you can always reminisce on why it was not a good decision. Writing an engine from (almost) scratch doesn't happen a lot, and with good reason, as it takes a lot of time, energy and is usually not needed. If you do want to do it, and want to create a AAA+ game on top of it, AND are uncertain of how the final game will look\play, you really need a very large development-team to cope with all that.
<!--quoteo(post=1951242:date=Jul 13 2012, 10:51 AM:name=Scrajm)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Scrajm @ Jul 13 2012, 10:51 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1951242"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->PS. Oh and yes, inf. spikes, clogs, free hydras are some of these silly ideas. DS.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Yar.
I must be playing a different game as everyone else but with every patch I see significant improvements. They're only set to release at the end of september, which is at least another 5 - 6 patches depending on how you look at it. If the patches are as significant as the last few, I don't see why they wouldn't be able to make it. Yes balance is far from perfect, particularly endgame, but I do feel like they're getting there, and as long as they iron out the biggest kinks the finetuning itself can take place post-release. Performance is slowly getting there too, if a few more patches improve upon it, then by release day it IS going to be fluently playable, at any stage of the game, for most modern PCs.
As for feature completeness, aside from the exo there's really not all that much left? I wouldn't be surprised if we see the EXO in a next patch, at which point the game is going to be pretty much feature complete. (Though I wouldn't be surprised if some features were still changed/reworked in the last few patches)
So really, I honestly do not know what some people here are going on about.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It's a really bad idea to make a new engine and a new game from scratch. If they had stuck with the source engine they could have afforded all this experimenting; as it is, it's really comming down to the wire and they're still making sweeping changes.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> The source engine, while being great, really wouldn't have cut it for what they wanted to do with it. By modern standards, it's an incredibly outdated engine. Spark is going to prove a much better investment in the long run, since it offers both better customisation as well sexier graphics.
I also don't know why you would be upset that the devs experimented this much, if anything it's a testament to UWE's determination to make NS 2 even better than the original. Granted they tried a lot of things that then got reverted, simply because what worked in NS 1 was better, but IMO it's great that they at least tried. And some things did come out from it, things that will no doubt make NS 2 just as great, if not better, than its predecessor. (In the long run)
<!--quoteo(post=1951247:date=Jul 13 2012, 12:09 PM:name=Yuuki)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Yuuki @ Jul 13 2012, 12:09 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1951247"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I don't mind trying new things and big changes either, even after release.
Trying silly ideas is not that bad, although it would be probably more efficient to give them a bit more (collective) thoughts before implementing them.
However not removing silly ideas (free hydras...) is a big problem, it means the game will not converge into something nice but into a big mess.
It's like in natural selection, the changes can be random, but the selection needs to be efficient, otherwise you don't get anything out of it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Experimenting is in many situations mighty fine, but it requires a good basic structure and base mechanics. I don't know if you can directly apply the rules of DotA family games into this, but they're quite interesting in terms of how the extra content is added and how the game reacts to it even if the game itself is practically complete.
Packing too many features on top of incomplete basic structure is going to require huge adjustments later - possibly wrecking a sizeable chunk of the benefits of the experimental features.
Some people forget that not everybody wants the same thing. Every players' gaming style differs. Some prefer marines, some prefer aliens, some play mostly gorge, some play mostly shotgun. Some people on here spoke as if the WHOLE community kept saying only ONE thing. If you pay attention to threads, it's a clusterf** of (imo) stupid ideas, emergence of unnecessary discussions and crying about nonexistent problems.
The devs don't have to tell us anything, they choose to though. They choose whom to listen, sometimes it's a good thing, sometimes it's not. But if they listened to every single poster who thinks he knows everything - this game would've been a disaster.
P.S.: Don't get me wrong, there are some very useful threads that i'm sure have been noticed. But not all of you are right, you know.
[HEI] SpadeJoin Date: 2012-04-28Member: 151223Members, Squad Five Blue
<!--quoteo(post=1951245:date=Jul 13 2012, 01:08 PM:name=fanatic)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (fanatic @ Jul 13 2012, 01:08 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1951245"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->... there is one important difference between NS1 and NS2: NS1 was free, NS2 is a commercial product. Whereas NS1 got most of its players through the already established HL1 mod community, NS2 is going to have to rely on professional game reviews and word of mouth from the players. If the game is lacking at release, it could kill the NS2 community before its' even really begun.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's the idea i was thinking about! I totally agree with you, if the game has problems at release (not enough perfs, unbalanced gameplay, etc.), NS2 will be dead and won't ever get what it deserved if there was a good release... I prefer them delete things which are inappropriate now to get them later and balance the game without them for release. The content is quite already full :)
Improve performance, get the game balanced even if you suppress the problematic thing to get it back later but balanced, keep some features for post release to make some events.
A 3.0 is already too late to take off for a commercial product! The release can strike much more players than a 3.0 event... Too many people forget this (including UWE for certain things ;) ). If release fails, the game has much more chances to fail.
Down side of keeping things for post release, patches will need much more internal playtests to get things perfectly round before each release :p Better have more time between patches than a dead game :S
<!--quoteo(post=1951245:date=Jul 13 2012, 01:08 PM:name=fanatic)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (fanatic @ Jul 13 2012, 01:08 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1951245"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I don't necessarily disagree with you, but there is one important difference between NS1 and NS2: NS1 was free, NS2 is a commercial product. Whereas NS1 got most of its players through the already established HL1 mod community, NS2 is going to have to rely on professional game reviews and word of mouth from the players. If the game is lacking at release, it could kill the NS2 community before its' even really begun.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Indeed very true. Making a game that will won´t be truly playable until around 2.0 might be hazardous for normal game companies. But UWE has something normal game companies DON'T have: zealot supporters. Just the fact that you and me and alot of others STILL are playing this game even though Charlie throws in idea after idea that just. will. not. work. for a game, let alone an e-sport, is a testament to that. The dedication from the PT day after day is another. For a normal game company I would have given up a long time ago. What I'm trying to say is that this game got some more room for errors than most companies. And I believe that they will remove the silliness soon, since again, they just cannot be suicidal.
AngeluszHarmonic entropistJoin Date: 2003-07-10Member: 18072Members, Forum Moderators, Constellation, NS2 Playtester
Legitimate concerns, definitely. I can tell you that Charlie and the rest of UWE fully understand that it's imperative to release a <b>good product</b> at 1.0. It's not a lack of understanding.
Personally, having experience with Natural Selection from day 1, being a part of the community for 9 years and recently getting more involved with the 'behind the scenes' part of NS2 - I have faith. They've not let me down up to this day, I trust they won't in the future.
Nobody can tell for sure how well 1.0 will work and whether it'll live up to the expectations so many have gotten. All we can do to help make it so, is to keep giving constructive feedback and remember why we're here. We love NS2 (otherwise nobody would take time to post here about it).
SewlekThe programmer previously known as SchimmelJoin Date: 2003-05-13Member: 16247Members, NS2 Developer, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Gold, Subnautica Developer
<!--quoteo(post=1951207:date=Jul 13 2012, 02:53 AM:name=elodea)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (elodea @ Jul 13 2012, 02:53 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1951207"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Just a point of clarification. 1) The change for BB back to gorge was not precipitated by any <b>public forum discussion</b> 2) Neither was 100% damage to fade during blink
Yes the devs listen bit its quite selective i feel (more because of convenience, time constraints i think). The good points and discussions on the public forums are rarely read in depth by devs and so when UWE finally makes a change its usually because they took 2 months longer than the wider, gameplay experienced community to figure out why an experiment wasn't working.
We can all point to changes being made by the devs that mirror stuff being said on the forum, but its <b>like painting the bullseye after hitting the target many many months after the community has</b>.
Not to say UWE isn't alot more open than many other devs out there and thats a point to their credit. But i think we should be a bit <b>realistic</b> about how open that really is. They're open to community feedback such as via email, but they really don't read the public forums much anymore unless its patch day.
And yea, Bacillus hit the nail.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
ns1 is like an adopted son charlie never wanted or so it seems. You would think over the many years of development they would learn what works, and what doesn't. But watching NS2 development NS1 went completely ignored (just like its vets), like it never existed. So what did they learn from ns1? Though after many failed attempt to bring new ideas into ns2, they're slowly going back to ns1 (to what used to work)
this is how NS2 development was, or still is; Replace what used to work for years with new ideas, remove what was fun and make things complicated what used to be so simple.Revert new ideas to old ideas but keep ignoring ns1 - keep asking community what they should do next. This is it pretty much.
All i can say, hope performance of the engine is extremely good so we can have mod going soon. Based on the current gameplay, don't tell me they listen to the community because they don't. The current mess of gameplay is only good to people who never played ns1. (i'm sure some select view will disagree, good for you)
They made a massive massive massive did i say massive mistake when they started developing NS2..
All these new massively different mechanics where implemented that just didn't work they spent so much time trying to make them work before realising it was futile..
Had the UWE team simply ported NS1 to the new engine every ability, stat and rule set first then tested out of new idea's on top of what was a very solid base NS1 3.0 the community right now would be far more happy and the game would be in a much better place...
It would seem to me they underestimated how good NS1 was and the team didn't fully understand why it was a good as it was...
Now they got about 2 months to pull of a miracle...
Comments
It is completely factually correct, even if it doesn't go down well in these parts.
Also, Soylent beat me to it but a beta is indeed feature-complete. That doesn't mean features don't get added or removed in the beta-stages, but that only happens when a problem reveals itself in said beta-stage, as one enters it intending not to further modify the gameplay in such a way. NS2 entered the beta-stage while there will still a half-dozen things still planned for implementation, therefor by definition it cannot be a beta. Up to this point it is still is not, due to the lack of the Exo (which was also was planned pre-beta). I usually don't make a fuss when people call it a beta (one can spend his entire day going around and correct everybody on this forum), but if you're going to call out people with the beta-argument on-hand, I think it is worth pointing out. It is completely legitimate to think you wouldn't be subjected to continues gross alteration of gameplay in a beta-stage.
<!--quoteo(post=0:date=:name=serpico)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (serpico)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I don't follow?
I recall infestation spikes being announced at the same time as enzyme cloud and rupture, though they came in later. Also I can't count the number of threads calling for AV needing a drawback (though it was hotly contested), and I thought adding one was always in the works. Though admittedly I knew there was going to be backlash as soon as I read about the change, because I never expected such a significant drawback.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Aye I wasn't talking about the addition of a drawback per se (which I think shouldn't really exist as such, there already is lack of hive-sight), but rather the kind of drawback they went with that was a complete (unpleasant) surprise to most people here I guess. A little heads-up and small amount of discussion about it beforehand would've been nice.
<!--quoteo(post=0:date=:name=Angelusz)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Angelusz)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If all developers had this mentality, we'd never see any new games.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think that just goes to show you do not have the down-to-earth sensibility to be a developer, pragmatism isn't a dirty word in development.
Ah yeah because they don't listen....<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Just a point of clarification.
1) The change for BB back to gorge was not precipitated by any <b>public forum discussion</b>
2) Neither was 100% damage to fade during blink
Yes the devs listen bit its quite selective i feel (more because of convenience, time constraints i think). The good points and discussions on the public forums are rarely read in depth by devs and so when UWE finally makes a change its usually because they took 2 months longer than the wider, gameplay experienced community to figure out why an experiment wasn't working.
We can all point to changes being made by the devs that mirror stuff being said on the forum, but its <b>like painting the bullseye after hitting the target many many months after the community has</b>.
Not to say UWE isn't alot more open than many other devs out there and thats a point to their credit. But i think we should be a bit <b>realistic</b> about how open that really is. They're open to community feedback such as via email, but they really don't read the public forums much anymore unless its patch day.
And yea, Bacillus hit the nail.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->In a development process like this I'd probably mostly like to see <b>solid reasoning</b> for the decisions made and <b>good demontration of understanding</b> of the potential outcomes. There's nothing quite as frustrating as seeing a change made, predicting that X is going to occur and then later see the changes being reverted because of the very same X.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If you're going too make your own engine, start from the game you sunk 3 painstaking years of beta testing into balancing(not alpha, actual, <b>feature-complete</b> beta). NS2 is so unlike NS1 in so many ways that it's going to take at least another year or so from feature completion to get it reasonably polished(as with NS 1.0x -> NS 2.0); it's going to be a messy launch.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Im totally agree with you! They had to make the wheel roll again. But i guess it isnt the main thought of this thread.
There are people who have stuck with the development for more than 3 years without really having a very good idea of when and what the final product will be. Stop treating them like little children.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You <b>choose</b> to interpret that as being condescending. It was a comment in which I clearly stated that I <b>personally</b> disagree with the statement. I even explained why I disagreed in one short point.
<!--quoteo(post=1951203:date=Jul 13 2012, 09:25 AM:name=player)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (player @ Jul 13 2012, 09:25 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1951203"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I think that just goes to show you do not have the down-to-earth sensibility to be a developer, pragmatism isn't a dirty word in development.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
One statement does not tell you what kind of person I am and what skills I possess. I'm disappointed in you for taking the low road on that one.
I'm leaving this thread up, because I feel it's important that everyone can vent their fears and frustrations about the way things go. We are keeping a close watch on the thread, because topics like this have the tendency to run wild, turning into a "why the devs are bad" topic, which is unwanted. We love constructive criticism, however! Thank you.
-Angelusz<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc--></sub><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree!!!!
tf2, i've played a ton in pubs, and in general, whenver someone is better than me at twitch movement, i can still counter them in some way by changing up my tactics. It's awfully rare (though it does happen) that I see anyone completely dominating a server, and I also don't usually see a lone star player carry a team.
When referring to "skill" i meant movement and aim specifically rather than tactics. Am I wrong in saying quake has a higher skill cap than tf2? It certainly looks a ton faster paced in videos I've seen.
The new change with fade (which most of you like) is an example of what I'm talking about. Fades who are comfortable moving around at 90 mph for most of the game are now better at fade. Marines who can hit a fade when he's zooming around at blink speed are now better against fades. Skill cap has increased. And like many changes the community wants, aesthetics has been thrown aside as an afterthought instead of a priority. "Zooming" fades are not nearly as cool in appearance or in concept as teleporting ones. My favorite blink was the "POOF GONE" one seen in the Gorilla trailer.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I absolutely agree with this post. Especially on the fade-part. It makes me sad, that the cool teleproting-mechanic won't really work, but in opposite to all the cry-babys, I can see the greater picture and realize that (against my opinion) it may be necessary to make the game better. Saying UWE doesn't listen to the community only because they don't make the game like this one community-member wants it to be, is very immature. It isn't even possible, because you can't make everyone happy. So to everyone who thinks that the devs should only listen to them: You are not the only person on the planet. Get over it.
But anyway, you shouldn't waste your time arguing with ie, serpico. He just want to "be against" and is trying so hard that he doesn't even concern about logic in his posts anymore (as seen in the AV-thread). It's sad because he can argue in a real way. But lately he seems to only like to post provoking one-liners.
Over the Internet you really have to start interpreting things as not sufficient or outright condescending at some point. Otherwise people can just keep dodging all day long with smiley faces and vague posts consisting of two sentences. This is where I drew the line.
What happened is you took a well written and coherent post, told that you disagree with it in ways you don't even <b>bother</b> explaining and posted one very vague and irrational point without any further backup for it. And your point still seems indicate that the whole content of the original post is void and completely detached of reality somehow.
That's just not a very respectful way to respond to a person who has apparently been around for 10 years and - as far as I can tell - kept his posting very constructive, insightful and respectful through that.
---
I know I'm nitpicking, being annoying and it's probably extremely hard to take critisism at a point like this. However, respect towards UWE is the reason why at least I am still sticking around. I'd much rather not have it on a collision course with the respect I have towards the people involved in the community. I don't want to see any public humiliation or witch hunt when problems or critisism show up, but downplaying them through somewhat official channels isn't really the thing I want to see either.
---
I think I'm done with derailing the thread though. If you feel like, I can discuss this with PMs.
Remember, iirc, NS1 excelled at post 3.0. NS2 <i>will </i>be awesome around 2.0-3.0, when 1.0 "beta" is over.
And to those talking about the engine, UWE is not suicidal. They have stated several times it's their top priority. They know that this game makes or breaks around it. Why does this always has to be brought up? Just leave it. Is perfectly fine to do both your own engine and throw ideas around in an alpha. Go charlie!
PS. Oh and yes, inf. spikes, clogs, free hydras are some of these silly ideas. DS.
I don't necessarily disagree with you, but there is one important difference between NS1 and NS2: NS1 was free, NS2 is a commercial product. Whereas NS1 got most of its players through the already established HL1 mod community, NS2 is going to have to rely on professional game reviews and word of mouth from the players. If the game is lacking at release, it could kill the NS2 community before its' even really begun.
Trying silly ideas is not that bad, although it would be probably more efficient to give them a bit more (collective) thoughts before implementing them.
However not removing silly ideas (free hydras...) is a big problem, it means the game will not converge into something nice but into a big mess.
It's like in natural selection, the changes can be random, but the selection needs to be efficient, otherwise you don't get anything out of it.
Well we can certainly agree it's an alpha, and as such any significant gameplay-elements should be implemented\tested at this stage.
<!--quoteo(post=1951242:date=Jul 13 2012, 10:51 AM:name=Scrajm)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Scrajm @ Jul 13 2012, 10:51 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1951242"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I would even encourage them to do so. As contrary to many others, I think THIS is the time to to it. Now many of these ideas might be silly, but still, now are the time to try them.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Except that it is so very very close to release, which is why I think they should no longer constantly change, or at least stop implementing new (non-essential) features.
<!--quoteo(post=1951242:date=Jul 13 2012, 10:51 AM:name=Scrajm)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Scrajm @ Jul 13 2012, 10:51 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1951242"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Even though UWE wouldn't agree, true beta actually starts at @ 1.0.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No I think you may be underestimating what a beta is, as betas are by their very nature buggy and very poor-performing. You can't release a product in such a state to the public at large.
<!--quoteo(post=1951242:date=Jul 13 2012, 10:51 AM:name=Scrajm)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Scrajm @ Jul 13 2012, 10:51 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1951242"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Then the game will be feature complete for others than PT and that's when the competativ scene can start to give real feedback on balance and that's when they can solve the issues we will find.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The competitive-scene can't really get working on this game as long as it keeps (sometimes inexplicably) change every build, and performance\hitreg is nowhere near where it needs to be. I guess it's fair to say competitive-play will follow in the wake of a beta.
<!--quoteo(post=1951242:date=Jul 13 2012, 10:51 AM:name=Scrajm)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Scrajm @ Jul 13 2012, 10:51 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1951242"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Remember, iirc, NS1 excelled at post 3.0. NS2 <i>will </i>be awesome around 2.0-3.0, when 1.0 "beta" is over.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It is absolutely true it took years for NS1 to become as polished as it is now (but still flawed in some places). The difference with NS2 of course is that NS2 is pay-to-play, and as such they cannot afford to deliver a product that requires years of polishing still, it needs to be in an already good-state.
<!--quoteo(post=1951242:date=Jul 13 2012, 10:51 AM:name=Scrajm)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Scrajm @ Jul 13 2012, 10:51 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1951242"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->And to those talking about the engine, UWE is not suicidal. They have stated several times it's their top priority. They know that this game makes or breaks around it. Why does this always has to be brought up? Just leave it. Is perfectly fine to do both your own engine and throw ideas around in an alpha. Go charlie!<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I guess there's not much point to bringing it up, as they won't be able to change engine now anyway, but you can always reminisce on why it was not a good decision. Writing an engine from (almost) scratch doesn't happen a lot, and with good reason, as it takes a lot of time, energy and is usually not needed. If you do want to do it, and want to create a AAA+ game on top of it, AND are uncertain of how the final game will look\play, you really need a very large development-team to cope with all that.
<!--quoteo(post=1951242:date=Jul 13 2012, 10:51 AM:name=Scrajm)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Scrajm @ Jul 13 2012, 10:51 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1951242"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->PS. Oh and yes, inf. spikes, clogs, free hydras are some of these silly ideas. DS.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yar.
As for feature completeness, aside from the exo there's really not all that much left? I wouldn't be surprised if we see the EXO in a next patch, at which point the game is going to be pretty much feature complete. (Though I wouldn't be surprised if some features were still changed/reworked in the last few patches)
So really, I honestly do not know what some people here are going on about.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It's a really bad idea to make a new engine and a new game from scratch. If they had stuck with the source engine they could have afforded all this experimenting; as it is, it's really comming down to the wire and they're still making sweeping changes.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> The source engine, while being great, really wouldn't have cut it for what they wanted to do with it. By modern standards, it's an incredibly outdated engine. Spark is going to prove a much better investment in the long run, since it offers both better customisation as well sexier graphics.
I also don't know why you would be upset that the devs experimented this much, if anything it's a testament to UWE's determination to make NS 2 even better than the original. Granted they tried a lot of things that then got reverted, simply because what worked in NS 1 was better, but IMO it's great that they at least tried. And some things did come out from it, things that will no doubt make NS 2 just as great, if not better, than its predecessor. (In the long run)
Trying silly ideas is not that bad, although it would be probably more efficient to give them a bit more (collective) thoughts before implementing them.
However not removing silly ideas (free hydras...) is a big problem, it means the game will not converge into something nice but into a big mess.
It's like in natural selection, the changes can be random, but the selection needs to be efficient, otherwise you don't get anything out of it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Experimenting is in many situations mighty fine, but it requires a good basic structure and base mechanics. I don't know if you can directly apply the rules of DotA family games into this, but they're quite interesting in terms of how the extra content is added and how the game reacts to it even if the game itself is practically complete.
Packing too many features on top of incomplete basic structure is going to require huge adjustments later - possibly wrecking a sizeable chunk of the benefits of the experimental features.
The devs don't have to tell us anything, they choose to though. They choose whom to listen, sometimes it's a good thing, sometimes it's not. But if they listened to every single poster who thinks he knows everything - this game would've been a disaster.
P.S.: Don't get me wrong, there are some very useful threads that i'm sure have been noticed. But not all of you are right, you know.
That's the idea i was thinking about! I totally agree with you, if the game has problems at release (not enough perfs, unbalanced gameplay, etc.), NS2 will be dead and won't ever get what it deserved if there was a good release... I prefer them delete things which are inappropriate now to get them later and balance the game without them for release. The content is quite already full :)
Improve performance, get the game balanced even if you suppress the problematic thing to get it back later but balanced, keep some features for post release to make some events.
A 3.0 is already too late to take off for a commercial product! The release can strike much more players than a 3.0 event... Too many people forget this (including UWE for certain things ;) ). If release fails, the game has much more chances to fail.
Down side of keeping things for post release, patches will need much more internal playtests to get things perfectly round before each release :p Better have more time between patches than a dead game :S
Indeed very true. Making a game that will won´t be truly playable until around 2.0 might be hazardous for normal game companies. But UWE has something normal game companies DON'T have: zealot supporters. Just the fact that you and me and alot of others STILL are playing this game even though Charlie throws in idea after idea that just. will. not. work. for a game, let alone an e-sport, is a testament to that. The dedication from the PT day after day is another. For a normal game company I would have given up a long time ago. What I'm trying to say is that this game got some more room for errors than most companies. And I believe that they will remove the silliness soon, since again, they just cannot be suicidal.
Personally, having experience with Natural Selection from day 1, being a part of the community for 9 years and recently getting more involved with the 'behind the scenes' part of NS2 - I have faith. They've not let me down up to this day, I trust they won't in the future.
Nobody can tell for sure how well 1.0 will work and whether it'll live up to the expectations so many have gotten. All we can do to help make it so, is to keep giving constructive feedback and remember why we're here. We love NS2 (otherwise nobody would take time to post here about it).
1) The change for BB back to gorge was not precipitated by any <b>public forum discussion</b>
2) Neither was 100% damage to fade during blink
Yes the devs listen bit its quite selective i feel (more because of convenience, time constraints i think). The good points and discussions on the public forums are rarely read in depth by devs and so when UWE finally makes a change its usually because they took 2 months longer than the wider, gameplay experienced community to figure out why an experiment wasn't working.
We can all point to changes being made by the devs that mirror stuff being said on the forum, but its <b>like painting the bullseye after hitting the target many many months after the community has</b>.
Not to say UWE isn't alot more open than many other devs out there and thats a point to their credit. But i think we should be a bit <b>realistic</b> about how open that really is. They're open to community feedback such as via email, but they really don't read the public forums much anymore unless its patch day.
And yea, Bacillus hit the nail.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
im just not responding to everything, thats all
this is how NS2 development was, or still is; Replace what used to work for years with new ideas, remove what was fun and make things complicated what used to be so simple.Revert new ideas to old ideas but keep ignoring ns1 - keep asking community what they should do next. This is it pretty much.
All i can say, hope performance of the engine is extremely good so we can have mod going soon. Based on the current gameplay, don't tell me they listen to the community because they don't. The current mess of gameplay is only good to people who never played ns1. (i'm sure some select view will disagree, good for you)
They made a massive massive massive did i say massive mistake when they started developing NS2..
All these new massively different mechanics where implemented that just didn't work they spent so much time trying to make them work before realising it was futile..
Had the UWE team simply ported NS1 to the new engine every ability, stat and rule set first then tested out of new idea's on top of what was a very solid base NS1 3.0 the community right now would be far more happy and the game would be in a much better place...
It would seem to me they underestimated how good NS1 was and the team didn't fully understand why it was a good as it was...
Now they got about 2 months to pull of a miracle...
-Angelusz<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->