I stopped playing for the time being because there's not enough variety in terms of gameplay and strategies to hold my interest as is, comebined with some not-so-great performance. My hopes is we'll see more content come about which will increase depth and variety of play. I'm sure it's coming eventually. For the time being though, I have no real interest in playing.
zombiehellmonkeyJoin Date: 2007-08-31Member: 62093Members, Squad Five Blue
edited December 2012
The game is not dead, like others have said there just seems to be performance issues that will soon be fixed. The player base will be revived soon enough when there is a Steam sale or if the developers decide to make NS2 free to play and change it to more of a TF2 store model for income. I've recently updated my NS2 map mod, so please check it out, I appreciate the feedback. I myself have been playing a lot of TF2 recently since I only started not that long ago. I play NS2 occassionally when I can get onto a server, but like the majority, I'm waiting for the performance fixes, and more available tweaking options in the main menu.
ScardyBobScardyBobJoin Date: 2009-11-25Member: 69528Forum Admins, Forum Moderators, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow
<!--quoteo(post=2041769:date=Dec 7 2012, 03:54 PM:name=MinstrelJCF)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MinstrelJCF @ Dec 7 2012, 03:54 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2041769"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->That's more stillborn, really no one ever played it period outside of one free weekend. NS2 was only stillborn competitively.
NS2 might be switching from fast population crash to slow at 1.5k and thus stick around in the Steam top 100 games for another few months thanks to the Euro pop.
<a href="http://www.steamgraph.net/index.php?action=graph&jstime=1&appid=4920&from=1350450000000&to=End+Time" target="_blank">http://www.steamgraph.net/index.php?action...amp;to=End+Time</a><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I don't have any playercount data to cite, but my experience with NS1 was similar; e.g. a spike at a release followed by a fast decline that tapered off into a steady number (like 1/3 to 1/4 of the initial spike, I'd guess). The beta NS2 releases seemed to follow a similar pattern.
Besides a few standout games (like CS1.6 or DOTA2) that pretty much seems like how playercount works in online multiplayers.
30fps, laggy, bad hitreg, badly constructed classes, clearly a maths student made this game and forgot about the physical element outside of the excel spreedsheet
More than once I've tried to find a game and literally not been able to find a single server. I set performance threshold to 80%, ping to 100, update... and nothing comes up. Nothing.
And you're telling me the game isn't dead? What planet do you live on? This wasn't a one off, this has happened in mornings, afternoons, and evenings.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Those people that quit playing are not into the competitive side of the game, they are mostly the casual "i just wanna play for a couple of rounds fun" players so that kind of stuff won't appeal to them at all/won't be even noticed.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm not competitive, I am casual. And as a casual player, NS2 is in a horrible, HORRIBLE state. Performance issues notwithstanding (as serious as they are), the vast majority of my not inconsiderable time in NS2 has been jumping from one horrible match to another. If it isn't one team stomping another, it's a bad commander or en masse ragequits the likes of which NS1 has never seen. Balance is a snowballing mess that reduces what should otherwise be pitched games into one-sided slaughters, pretty much because there is no midgame to speak of. How many times do people need to post "hey, fades are ######" before somebody wakes the ###### UP and FIXES IT???
<!--quoteo(post=2041766:date=Dec 8 2012, 10:51 AM:name=countbasie)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (countbasie @ Dec 8 2012, 10:51 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2041766"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->We have no problems finding servers in europe. But a low population has 3 reasons:
- performance - no direct reward for kills (Res for Kill for example) - no Hive teleport
Yes, I'm serious about that.
EDIT: the fourth reason may be the Aliens spawn system which often has long waiting times.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I experience 0 performance issues except for load times (which texture streaming fixed). i7 (not overclocked yet), GTX570, 8GBRAM There is plenty of reward for kills, just none that COD fans understand. No Hive teleport? You mean teleporting between hives? Are you insane? Alien spawn time is fine.
About the thread topic, game isn't dead, do wish there were more players, but in Australia the only time I can't find a game is between 3AM-6AM, or if there is one it's a 24 player one and I don't touch those.
EDIT: I will say though that NS1 is dead, and has been for several years =/ I had to play on USA servers near the end.
<!--quoteo(post=2041546:date=Dec 7 2012, 08:23 AM:name=include)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (include @ Dec 7 2012, 08:23 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2041546"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Right now, the game runs horribly on some people's machines, while flawlessly on others. I'm not sure the cause, but I have a fair amount of friends that got the game that get 5-10 FPS while I get 60.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
flawless depends on your monitor. I have a 120hz, so flawless for me is 120fps. I highly doubt anybody can play this game with 120 without dipping below.
to the OP: pretty much what others have said... the game was destined to fail with the awful performance. :(
I was saying this stuff on release day and getting flames thrown back at me. It was pretty great.
The game is clearly unfinished, and this is what happens when you release unfinished games. They die.
The game also has a pretty steep learning curve... a curve that gets steeper every day. As we all get better, the new players will feel as though they're doing worse. The level of skill that some players already have has made me think "hax" more than once on someone who was legit, and it's sure as hell not fun being new and playing against a marine who knows how to track a skulk. Especially if you don't even know about things like wall jump and celerity.
I think it's gonna be really hard to draw and keep new players. I think the key will honestly be in having enough public/draft pick/weekend tourneys that get advertised in-game and out to grow the competitive scene, cause right now that's all this game's got left. If we can grow the comp scene into something sizeable, and keep it around, then we might be able to start drawing in new players again.
Another part of the problem is the majority of the servers are 18+ player limit, which really ###### the game up imo. It can be fun to have a derpy 12 on 12 match, but that's fully double the amount of players that should be on the field, and imo the game really starts to break down after 8v8
<!--quoteo(post=2041619:date=Dec 7 2012, 08:06 PM:name=ScardyBob)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ScardyBob @ Dec 7 2012, 08:06 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2041619"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Game is far from dead. For a dead FPS/RTS, take a look at <a href="http://steamgraph.net/index.php?action=graph&appid=17710&from=1352278043" target="_blank">this graph</a>.
That being said, UWE still has quite a few options to boost playercount down the road including - Steam sale - Free weekend - Popular tournament (e.g. ESL)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That link isn't working for me, shows Nuclear Dawn. For NS2: <a href="http://steamgraph.net/index.php?action=graph&appid=4920&from=1354396767" target="_blank">http://steamgraph.net/index.php?action=gra...from=1354396767</a>
<!--quoteo(post=2042116:date=Dec 8 2012, 03:08 PM:name=Zaggy)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Zaggy @ Dec 8 2012, 03:08 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2042116"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->That link isn't working for me, shows Nuclear Dawn. For NS2: <a href="http://steamgraph.net/index.php?action=graph&appid=4920&from=1354396767" target="_blank">http://steamgraph.net/index.php?action=gra...from=1354396767</a><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Is that NS2 graph showing sales or concurrent players? Really If it's sales slightly under 1700 copies a day is great while 1700 players is terrible.
EDIT: Ah, it's players after digging a little. That's...horrible. You can see the spikes on patch dates followed by another slump. That definitely tells me something, although I'm sure others are going to come to the same conclusion that doesn't need exposition.
It's getting to the point where I can't even play the game anymore, there are so few populated servers and the ones that are populated are usually pretty bad. I think a hard player cap at 16 players would've done a lot for this game at the start, tbh. The game that most people are exposed to just flat out is <b>not</b> what NS2 is supposed to be. I think that has a lot to do with why it's dying already.
<!--quoteo(post=2042133:date=Dec 9 2012, 05:44 AM:name=ritualsacrifice)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ritualsacrifice @ Dec 9 2012, 05:44 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2042133"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It's getting to the point where I can't even play the game anymore, there are so few populated servers and the ones that are populated are usually pretty bad. I think a hard player cap at 16 players would've done a lot for this game at the start, tbh. The game that most people are exposed to just flat out is <b>not</b> what NS2 is supposed to be. I think that has a lot to do with why it's dying already.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> so you basically blamed people not filling up your 16er server but in a 24er for killing the game. well. i guess they are not pointed with a gun to play on there?
NS2 expected too much player knowledge to carry over from NS1, which was a game mod released almost ten years ago. The lack of any kind of tutorial and simply including a 'free roam' mode on the maps was ignorant in the extreme. You can't attract more players to a high-skill required game without explaining the basics with a reasonable and effective 'new player' tutorial. Even if it's just pop up information while in the command chair it would make everything 10x more accessible without being required to dig through Wiki's and forum topics to find out what's in the game.
YouTube video's that just show a player or commander screwing around inside the game is not a tutorial, especially if it was filmed on a build that hasn't been around for month's. If people are surprised that new players aren't sticking around they don't live in reality. Since NS2 is a different hybrid than other games, yet no tutorial is included <i>in any real shape or form</i> you're going to find people frustrated by game mechanics that are unexplained and sometimes even contrary to logic.
Specifically I'm thinking of the resource lock mechanic for Aliens. You would <i>expect</i> to be able to recycle, or get resource ticks from a hive that's the central focus of a 'resource chain', yet in fact the resource towers are the 'center' of this chain even though they still need to be connected to the hive. It just doesn't make any sense, and when you hit this game mechanic it hits you over the head with something that makes you question the developers sanity. No where is this explained, until it happens. Sure, you can say 'it's obvious you won't get resources without towers', but is it really that obvious when the resource tower dies when it's not connected to the hive? How, I ask, does this make any sense what-so-ever? (I'm not saying remove it or anything, since a topic I made on that very issue decided that it was a wonderful and useful mechanic.)
It just isn't <i>explained</i> nor is there a tutorial pop-up that explains that you lost your towers, and maybe you should build another one if you don't want to lose. It does nothing except help new players learn the game, if you expect them to start out knowing everything it's no surprise they leave for more 'accessible' games that have a similar or greater 'fun factor' without the frustration of hidden game mechanics and uncertain build orders.
I don't have a server. What I'm saying is NS2 doesn't work properly with 24 people and for many new players, well that's all they've ever seen. If the game had limited server pop to 16 the matches would start to make a lot more sense to new players. The less moving pieces something has the easier it is to take apart and understand. I think a lot of the reason people leave the game is because of the steep learning curve and how badly the game punishes you for making mistakes. New players make a lot of mistakes, and a server with 24 people playing on ns_tram is NOT the kind of environment you can learn anything from.
<!--quoteo(post=2042144:date=Dec 9 2012, 05:55 AM:name=SpaceJew)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SpaceJew @ Dec 9 2012, 05:55 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2042144"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->NS2 expected too much player knowledge to carry over from NS1, which was a game mod released almost ten years ago. The lack of any kind of tutorial and simply including a 'free roam' mode on the maps was ignorant in the extreme. You can't attract more players to a high-skill required game without explaining the basics with a reasonable and effective 'new player' tutorial. Even if it's just pop up information while in the command chair it would make everything 10x more accessible without being required to dig through Wiki's and forum topics to find out what's in the game.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
i agree, but just a minor nitpick. ns2 is not really a high-skill-required game. it just requires you to have knowledge of the game itself.
<!--quoteo(post=2042152:date=Dec 8 2012, 04:05 PM:name=cream)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cream @ Dec 8 2012, 04:05 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2042152"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->i agree, but just a minor nitpick. ns2 is not really a high-skill-required game. it just requires you to have knowledge of the game itself.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Fair enough, although if you <i>have</i> a great ability to aim and track skulks there's no denying you've got a pretty darn big advantage through the early to mid game. It's all the hidden mechanics and silly win conditions combined with obtuse and silly mechanics like egg lock that bog things down. It's completely illogical to have the team with the weakest units punished the most for dying. Oh well. We'll see if they ever rework the spawning code to account for large servers, but I'm not holding my breath.
I don't have a server. What I'm saying is NS2 doesn't work properly with 24 people and for many new players, well that's all they've ever seen. If the game had limited server pop to 16 the matches would start to make a lot more sense to new players. The less moving pieces something has the easier it is to take apart and understand. I think a lot of the reason people leave the game is because of the steep learning curve and how badly the game punishes you for making mistakes. New players make a lot of mistakes, and a server with 24 people playing on ns_tram is NOT the kind of environment you can learn anything from.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> That's true. With a hardcoded cap on 16 players (and possibly a blacklisting of the mods that tries to go above it) less players would also have experienced really bad performance problems.
<!--quoteo(post=2042158:date=Dec 9 2012, 06:10 AM:name=SpaceJew)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SpaceJew @ Dec 9 2012, 06:10 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2042158"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Fair enough, although if you <i>have</i> a great ability to aim and track skulks there's no denying you've got a pretty darn big advantage through the early to mid game. It's all the hidden mechanics and silly win conditions combined with obtuse and silly mechanics like egg lock that bog things down. It's completely illogical to have the team with the weakest units punished the most for dying. Oh well. We'll see if they ever rework the spawning code to account for large servers, but I'm not holding my breath.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
yeap. ability to aim does play a big role, but that's only after you know how the game works. there's no use in having a marine who can kill multiple skulks in a row but doesn't even know how to build a power node.
actually, i'd imagine that to be pretty hilarious if it were to happen, haha.
<!--quoteo(post=2041722:date=Dec 7 2012, 03:24 PM:name=Swiftspear)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Swiftspear @ Dec 7 2012, 03:24 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2041722"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->NS2's system requirement has put the game in the cross fire of every AAA game hitting the market<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> My impression is that most "AAA" games on the market are aimed primarily at the console market, and therefore hardware that is several years out of date. I've got a graphics card from 2007, but can run FarCry 3 at an excellent framerate, due to the console factor. Not sure that the AAA market is severely skewing NS2's demographic, here.
<!--quoteo(post=2042160:date=Dec 8 2012, 04:11 PM:name=Namm)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Namm @ Dec 8 2012, 04:11 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2042160"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->That's true. With a hardcoded cap on 16 players (and possibly a blacklisting of the mods that tries to go above it) less players would also have experienced really bad performance problems.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
True enough. When you balance for 6v6 for 'pro' players and balance for 8v8 in 'public' matches, yet all your community servers are hosting 12v12 you can see where there would be some pretty big issues. Admittedly, you can always play on official 16 person servers and choose for yourself how many people you want to play with so I'm not sure how valid this 'issue' really is. Either way, a new player won't know that 12v12 is inherently imbalanced by design.
<!--quoteo(post=2042167:date=Dec 9 2012, 06:21 AM:name=SpaceJew)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SpaceJew @ Dec 9 2012, 06:21 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2042167"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->True enough. When you balance for 6v6 for 'pro' players and balance for 8v8 in 'public' matches, yet all your community servers are hosting 12v12 you can see where there would be some pretty big issues. Admittedly, you can always play on official 16 person servers and choose for yourself how many people you want to play with so I'm not sure how valid this 'issue' really is. Either way, a new player won't know that 12v12 is inherently imbalanced by design.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
nor would they mind i think. like in ns1, some players did not play the game just to bury their heads into all that strategic depth it had to offer, so they joined 32 player servers and shot/bit everything that moved on the opposite team. it was chaotic, but i suppose there was also a bit of "casual" fun in it.
Maybe the problem really is the extremely high demands on aiming capabilty. I`m okay with being bad in this game, but i can imagine many wont. The aliens are fast as hell and that makes it difficult for both sides. This isnt something you`ll learn in a few weeks and thats the problem. This game mostly appeals to those with years of first person shooter experience and a very high mouse accuracy.
I think thats basically what makes this game a kind of niche game. It doesnt give you the rewarding feeling of being "good" very easily. It has nothing to do with complexity of the game mechanics - which are basically very simple and if you arent the commander its quite easy to understand what to do. Other commercial titles are always rewarding for less skilled players by implementing unlockables for example.
The speciality of this game and downside to being commercially very successful is how highly demanding on the skill in terms of aiming it is. Basically, most other shooters will give you the feeling of achieving something more easily. You always can camp somewhere or be lucky with someone not paying attention as a not so skilled player. But here this doesnt work - you wont hit nothing if you are not so skilled with the mouse. That will be highly demotivating right on from the start for new players.
And the times are gone where almost everyone played CS on a daily basis and it was kind of "normal" to be very skilled with FPS. That remains to some core of gamers that most likely already played FPS regularly when the genre was still CS-dominated. What we are talking here of is keeping up with years of practice for a casual fps player compared to an experienced fps player.
Bottomline is: Its the game itself which does not fit into a scheme for the perfect commercially extremely successful first person shooters. Because these dont punish less skilled players so hard. And the problem with this is, you cant learn this kind of accuracy and speed in a few days. Its just hard and very fast and thats what the people playing it mainly like about it. But i wouldnt expect everyone to be like that.
Let's not bull###### ourselves. The performance and poor balance is why people are leaving. How can you people suggest burden of knowledge and skill are deterrents when games like Defense of the Ancients and Quakelive thrive? They have the advantage of being free-to-play, but if we believed the bull###### explanation that boils down to "Gamers of today don't want skill-based games with burdens of knowledge!" then no matter how free the game is, very few would play it. People are willing to learn how to play a game with good balance and good performance no matter how much skill or knowledge it demands. It's just that Natural Selection 2 has neither of that.
<!--quoteo(post=2042027:date=Dec 8 2012, 06:28 PM:name=Ghosthree3)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ghosthree3 @ Dec 8 2012, 06:28 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2042027"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I experience 0 performance issues except for load times (which texture streaming fixed). i7 (not overclocked yet), GTX570, 8GBRAM<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Yeah, that's why you play, you got an i7...I don't understand how that disproves my point. <!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->There is plenty of reward for kills, just none that COD fans understand. No Hive teleport? You mean teleporting between hives? Are you insane?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I'd say I'm not insane, thanks for caring about that. I never played any CoD other than the first one. With my points I was referring to a working concept of a classic game that had a huge playerbase over years, and a living competitive scene, and actually still fills one server in the EU every day. It's called Natural Selection.
I said I'm serious, because I'm serious. And I am right. Unfortunately you will never know, if they don't try it. They tried RfK, but they implemented it wrong and threw it away in a jiffy.
Charlie balances the game around the RTS apect and numbers. But the majority on a server plays a FPS. The points I made lead to more fun on the FPS side. And more fun on the FPS side leads to more players.
I'm neither insane nor stupid nor do I try to offend the devs. I'm plain right.
People who are blaming the population woes on bad performance are living in a dream world. Yes the game has bad performance, its coded in lua for some dumb reason, making it a cpu chomper.
The game suffers from many more problems, like it or not the modern 14 year old gamer craves progression of some sort, of which ns2 offers none. There is not strategic variation, its very much like a flavour of the month situation in any mmo, the nerf something, and soon all you see is one strategy (early onos is a good example).
People who see the game as a e-sport are delusional as becoming a esport requires a massive fanbase to wwatch said game. Look at the big games, LoL, SC2, etc all have massive fanbases.
I would of liked to see a game in either source or a well established engine for good performance, and then more strategic options/variations. Currently everygame in pubs and competitive play have strategies that are cookie cutter and only change when a patch hits.
You can only play the same thing for so long until you get bored (unless your a brainded cs 1.6 player). And this simple fact dooms the game.
The main cause of low player population was a lack of advertising and the decision to develop the game on an engine other than source, which in turn led to the development being extremely delayed. You don't launch a new engine with a game that no one is/ is going to play.
ScardyBobScardyBobJoin Date: 2009-11-25Member: 69528Forum Admins, Forum Moderators, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow
<!--quoteo(post=2042129:date=Dec 8 2012, 01:34 PM:name=SpaceJew)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SpaceJew @ Dec 8 2012, 01:34 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2042129"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Is that NS2 graph showing sales or concurrent players? Really If it's sales slightly under 1700 copies a day is great while 1700 players is terrible.
EDIT: Ah, it's players after digging a little. That's...horrible. You can see the spikes on patch dates followed by another slump. That definitely tells me something, although I'm sure others are going to come to the same conclusion that doesn't need exposition.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Its not bad, this is the trend of pretty much every game release. Player population always drops in a <a href="http://steamgraph.net/index.php?action=graph&jstime=1&appid=200710q200510q201790q202990&from=1341126000000&to=End+Time" target="_blank">roughly logarithmic faction from release day</a>. NS2 wasn't likely to gain the huge 10,000+ launch day playercount because its a much more niche game than many FPS games.
I'd say NS2 is probably in the mid-to-high range for playercount for indie games.
Comments
NS2 might be switching from fast population crash to slow at 1.5k and thus stick around in the Steam top 100 games for another few months thanks to the Euro pop.
<a href="http://www.steamgraph.net/index.php?action=graph&jstime=1&appid=4920&from=1350450000000&to=End+Time" target="_blank">http://www.steamgraph.net/index.php?action...amp;to=End+Time</a><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I don't have any playercount data to cite, but my experience with NS1 was similar; e.g. a spike at a release followed by a fast decline that tapered off into a steady number (like 1/3 to 1/4 of the initial spike, I'd guess). The beta NS2 releases seemed to follow a similar pattern.
Besides a few standout games (like CS1.6 or DOTA2) that pretty much seems like how playercount works in online multiplayers.
30fps, laggy, bad hitreg, badly constructed classes, clearly a maths student made this game and forgot about the physical element outside of the excel spreedsheet
And you're telling me the game isn't dead? What planet do you live on? This wasn't a one off, this has happened in mornings, afternoons, and evenings.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Those people that quit playing are not into the competitive side of the game, they are mostly the casual "i just wanna play for a couple of rounds fun" players so that kind of stuff won't appeal to them at all/won't be even noticed.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm not competitive, I am casual. And as a casual player, NS2 is in a horrible, HORRIBLE state. Performance issues notwithstanding (as serious as they are), the vast majority of my not inconsiderable time in NS2 has been jumping from one horrible match to another. If it isn't one team stomping another, it's a bad commander or en masse ragequits the likes of which NS1 has never seen. Balance is a snowballing mess that reduces what should otherwise be pitched games into one-sided slaughters, pretty much because there is no midgame to speak of. How many times do people need to post "hey, fades are ######" before somebody wakes the ###### UP and FIXES IT???
- performance
- no direct reward for kills (Res for Kill for example)
- no Hive teleport
Yes, I'm serious about that.
EDIT: the fourth reason may be the Aliens spawn system which often has long waiting times.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I experience 0 performance issues except for load times (which texture streaming fixed). i7 (not overclocked yet), GTX570, 8GBRAM
There is plenty of reward for kills, just none that COD fans understand.
No Hive teleport? You mean teleporting between hives? Are you insane?
Alien spawn time is fine.
About the thread topic, game isn't dead, do wish there were more players, but in Australia the only time I can't find a game is between 3AM-6AM, or if there is one it's a 24 player one and I don't touch those.
EDIT: I will say though that NS1 is dead, and has been for several years =/ I had to play on USA servers near the end.
flawless depends on your monitor. I have a 120hz, so flawless for me is 120fps. I highly doubt anybody can play this game with 120 without dipping below.
to the OP: pretty much what others have said... the game was destined to fail with the awful performance. :(
The game is clearly unfinished, and this is what happens when you release unfinished games. They die.
The game also has a pretty steep learning curve... a curve that gets steeper every day. As we all get better, the new players will feel as though they're doing worse. The level of skill that some players already have has made me think "hax" more than once on someone who was legit, and it's sure as hell not fun being new and playing against a marine who knows how to track a skulk. Especially if you don't even know about things like wall jump and celerity.
I think it's gonna be really hard to draw and keep new players. I think the key will honestly be in having enough public/draft pick/weekend tourneys that get advertised in-game and out to grow the competitive scene, cause right now that's all this game's got left. If we can grow the comp scene into something sizeable, and keep it around, then we might be able to start drawing in new players again.
Another part of the problem is the majority of the servers are 18+ player limit, which really ###### the game up imo. It can be fun to have a derpy 12 on 12 match, but that's fully double the amount of players that should be on the field, and imo the game really starts to break down after 8v8
That being said, UWE still has quite a few options to boost playercount down the road including
- Steam sale
- Free weekend
- Popular tournament (e.g. ESL)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That link isn't working for me, shows Nuclear Dawn.
For NS2:
<a href="http://steamgraph.net/index.php?action=graph&appid=4920&from=1354396767" target="_blank">http://steamgraph.net/index.php?action=gra...from=1354396767</a>
For NS2:
<a href="http://steamgraph.net/index.php?action=graph&appid=4920&from=1354396767" target="_blank">http://steamgraph.net/index.php?action=gra...from=1354396767</a><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
he's trying to give you an example of a dead fps/rts game that isn't ns2.
For NS2:
<a href="http://steamgraph.net/index.php?action=graph&appid=4920&from=1354396767" target="_blank">http://steamgraph.net/index.php?action=gra...from=1354396767</a><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Is that NS2 graph showing sales or concurrent players? Really If it's sales slightly under 1700 copies a day is great while 1700 players is terrible.
EDIT: Ah, it's players after digging a little. That's...horrible. You can see the spikes on patch dates followed by another slump. That definitely tells me something, although I'm sure others are going to come to the same conclusion that doesn't need exposition.
so you basically blamed people not filling up your 16er server but in a 24er for killing the game. well. i guess they are not pointed with a gun to play on there?
YouTube video's that just show a player or commander screwing around inside the game is not a tutorial, especially if it was filmed on a build that hasn't been around for month's. If people are surprised that new players aren't sticking around they don't live in reality. Since NS2 is a different hybrid than other games, yet no tutorial is included <i>in any real shape or form</i> you're going to find people frustrated by game mechanics that are unexplained and sometimes even contrary to logic.
Specifically I'm thinking of the resource lock mechanic for Aliens. You would <i>expect</i> to be able to recycle, or get resource ticks from a hive that's the central focus of a 'resource chain', yet in fact the resource towers are the 'center' of this chain even though they still need to be connected to the hive. It just doesn't make any sense, and when you hit this game mechanic it hits you over the head with something that makes you question the developers sanity. No where is this explained, until it happens. Sure, you can say 'it's obvious you won't get resources without towers', but is it really that obvious when the resource tower dies when it's not connected to the hive? How, I ask, does this make any sense what-so-ever? (I'm not saying remove it or anything, since a topic I made on that very issue decided that it was a wonderful and useful mechanic.)
It just isn't <i>explained</i> nor is there a tutorial pop-up that explains that you lost your towers, and maybe you should build another one if you don't want to lose. It does nothing except help new players learn the game, if you expect them to start out knowing everything it's no surprise they leave for more 'accessible' games that have a similar or greater 'fun factor' without the frustration of hidden game mechanics and uncertain build orders.
I don't have a server. What I'm saying is NS2 doesn't work properly with 24 people and for many new players, well that's all they've ever seen. If the game had limited server pop to 16 the matches would start to make a lot more sense to new players. The less moving pieces something has the easier it is to take apart and understand. I think a lot of the reason people leave the game is because of the steep learning curve and how badly the game punishes you for making mistakes. New players make a lot of mistakes, and a server with 24 people playing on ns_tram is NOT the kind of environment you can learn anything from.
i agree, but just a minor nitpick. ns2 is not really a high-skill-required game. it just requires you to have knowledge of the game itself.
Fair enough, although if you <i>have</i> a great ability to aim and track skulks there's no denying you've got a pretty darn big advantage through the early to mid game. It's all the hidden mechanics and silly win conditions combined with obtuse and silly mechanics like egg lock that bog things down. It's completely illogical to have the team with the weakest units punished the most for dying. Oh well. We'll see if they ever rework the spawning code to account for large servers, but I'm not holding my breath.
I don't have a server. What I'm saying is NS2 doesn't work properly with 24 people and for many new players, well that's all they've ever seen. If the game had limited server pop to 16 the matches would start to make a lot more sense to new players. The less moving pieces something has the easier it is to take apart and understand. I think a lot of the reason people leave the game is because of the steep learning curve and how badly the game punishes you for making mistakes. New players make a lot of mistakes, and a server with 24 people playing on ns_tram is NOT the kind of environment you can learn anything from.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's true. With a hardcoded cap on 16 players (and possibly a blacklisting of the mods that tries to go above it) less players would also have experienced really bad performance problems.
yeap. ability to aim does play a big role, but that's only after you know how the game works. there's no use in having a marine who can kill multiple skulks in a row but doesn't even know how to build a power node.
actually, i'd imagine that to be pretty hilarious if it were to happen, haha.
My impression is that most "AAA" games on the market are aimed primarily at the console market, and therefore hardware that is several years out of date. I've got a graphics card from 2007, but can run FarCry 3 at an excellent framerate, due to the console factor. Not sure that the AAA market is severely skewing NS2's demographic, here.
True enough. When you balance for 6v6 for 'pro' players and balance for 8v8 in 'public' matches, yet all your community servers are hosting 12v12 you can see where there would be some pretty big issues. Admittedly, you can always play on official 16 person servers and choose for yourself how many people you want to play with so I'm not sure how valid this 'issue' really is. Either way, a new player won't know that 12v12 is inherently imbalanced by design.
nor would they mind i think. like in ns1, some players did not play the game just to bury their heads into all that strategic depth it had to offer, so they joined 32 player servers and shot/bit everything that moved on the opposite team. it was chaotic, but i suppose there was also a bit of "casual" fun in it.
I think thats basically what makes this game a kind of niche game. It doesnt give you the rewarding feeling of being "good" very easily. It has nothing to do with complexity of the game mechanics - which are basically very simple and if you arent the commander its quite easy to understand what to do. Other commercial titles are always rewarding for less skilled players by implementing unlockables for example.
The speciality of this game and downside to being commercially very successful is how highly demanding on the skill in terms of aiming it is. Basically, most other shooters will give you the feeling of achieving something more easily. You always can camp somewhere or be lucky with someone not paying attention as a not so skilled player. But here this doesnt work - you wont hit nothing if you are not so skilled with the mouse. That will be highly demotivating right on from the start for new players.
And the times are gone where almost everyone played CS on a daily basis and it was kind of "normal" to be very skilled with FPS. That remains to some core of gamers that most likely already played FPS regularly when the genre was still CS-dominated. What we are talking here of is keeping up with years of practice for a casual fps player compared to an experienced fps player.
Bottomline is: Its the game itself which does not fit into a scheme for the perfect commercially extremely successful first person shooters. Because these dont punish less skilled players so hard. And the problem with this is, you cant learn this kind of accuracy and speed in a few days. Its just hard and very fast and thats what the people playing it mainly like about it. But i wouldnt expect everyone to be like that.
Yeah, that's why you play, you got an i7...I don't understand how that disproves my point.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->There is plenty of reward for kills, just none that COD fans understand.
No Hive teleport? You mean teleporting between hives? Are you insane?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'd say I'm not insane, thanks for caring about that. I never played any CoD other than the first one. With my points I was referring to a working concept of a classic game that had a huge playerbase over years, and a living competitive scene, and actually still fills one server in the EU every day. It's called Natural Selection.
I said I'm serious, because I'm serious. And I am right. Unfortunately you will never know, if they don't try it. They tried RfK, but they implemented it wrong and threw it away in a jiffy.
Charlie balances the game around the RTS apect and numbers. But the majority on a server plays a FPS. The points I made lead to more fun on the FPS side. And more fun on the FPS side leads to more players.
I'm neither insane nor stupid nor do I try to offend the devs. I'm plain right.
The game suffers from many more problems, like it or not the modern 14 year old gamer craves progression of some sort, of which ns2 offers none. There is not strategic variation, its very much like a flavour of the month situation in any mmo, the nerf something, and soon all you see is one strategy (early onos is a good example).
People who see the game as a e-sport are delusional as becoming a esport requires a massive fanbase to wwatch said game. Look at the big games, LoL, SC2, etc all have massive fanbases.
I would of liked to see a game in either source or a well established engine for good performance, and then more strategic options/variations. Currently everygame in pubs and competitive play have strategies that are cookie cutter and only change when a patch hits.
You can only play the same thing for so long until you get bored (unless your a brainded cs 1.6 player). And this simple fact dooms the game.
EDIT: Ah, it's players after digging a little. That's...horrible. You can see the spikes on patch dates followed by another slump. That definitely tells me something, although I'm sure others are going to come to the same conclusion that doesn't need exposition.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Its not bad, this is the trend of pretty much every game release. Player population always drops in a <a href="http://steamgraph.net/index.php?action=graph&jstime=1&appid=200710q200510q201790q202990&from=1341126000000&to=End+Time" target="_blank">roughly logarithmic faction from release day</a>. NS2 wasn't likely to gain the huge 10,000+ launch day playercount because its a much more niche game than many FPS games.
I'd say NS2 is probably in the mid-to-high range for playercount for indie games.