Why this game fails...

scaramooshscaramoosh Join Date: 2012-12-29 Member: 176621Members
Balance.

Simple as really, every match I ever have always goes one sided, to the point where I barely see the high end stuff. I find it really annoying finding myself wanting the rail gun mech or the basic leap for the Skulk and if you do ever get them in a game, you'll have them for 5 mins and then the match will be over. Half the time you can tell if a match is going to go badly, usually the commander drops out or you have to wait a year to even get a commander, you just instantly know then and you might as well quit out yourself. A lot of the time the teams wont be balanced, there will be this massive unbalance of where the skilled players are...

It is so hard to get a good equal game, I think over the years now I can only remember a handful of them. Most of the time I just don't bother playing because it is just so much effort to put up with all the crap games, just to maybe find one good one. For me it is why team based shooters often fail, the best ones make it so working together is just something that happens, you don't even think about it. Where you're basically playing for yourself, but yet somehow still helping out the team and friends. In Battlefield games it is done by simply dropping packs, you may do it for yourself, but other people can benefit too. In Counter Strike it is the simple act of being good, if you're that good then you can win a round by yourself and the money helps everyone on the team.

With NS2 however you're so reliant on having a good commander, if you don't (which 90% of the time you do not) then your whole team is screwed just on the back of one player. Then also you don't really have any mechanics that help out everyone, you have to actively communicate with each other and stick together, but you do not have any actions that you can do by yourself which help the team. This is fine in a private game or with a group of friends, but on public games, it just doesn't work at all. Every single game I ever have is just people always running off on their own and dying over and over. If you come up against a team which is working together, you lose, there is no individual mechanics or skill level which can help the team.

I know people are going to say "you fucking noob, go back to COD" or whatever. I like the core game, I like playing with other people, but the simple fact is that the game just makes it so hard to play. All my friends have given up on this game because they're bored of joining a game and it being so one sided all the time...

Guess what? The team you usually join is the losing team because they have people who are leaving mid game. It isn't fun always joining the losing team first and then having to play through it. It is fine joining a side which eventually loses, someone has to lose, but it isn't ever a close thing, it is always being stomped on.

Comments

  • SantaClawsSantaClaws Denmark Join Date: 2012-07-31 Member: 154491Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    edited July 2014
    Yea, the snowball effect only gives the illussion that some games are "stomps", when in reality it's often times a few minor decisions early that lead to small advantages that eventually accumulates to a big lead - this is a theme in pretty much ALL rts.

    People cry about stack way too much - as @meatmachine points out, often times one good player can carry an entire team.

    And wtf are you talking about balance for? The fact that you have one-sided games has nothing to do with balance what so ever - If anything it's just a sign of the fact that this is a highly skill-based game and that the best teams mostly wins, which is the exact opposite from the nature of an imbalanced game.

    If by stomp, you simply mean a game that doesn't lead in to prototype or 3rd hive tech - then I'm sorry to inform you, that the game was never designed for that. Those are primarily tech to end long stagnated games.
  • NordicNordic Long term camping in Kodiak Join Date: 2012-05-13 Member: 151995Members, NS2 Playtester, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Supporter, Reinforced - Silver, Reinforced - Shadow
    I competely agree with everything @d0ped0g‌ and yes it is true in US. Welding is another beneficial act for the whole team.
  • VetinariVetinari Join Date: 2013-07-23 Member: 186325Members, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Silver
    Oh, look, another one.
  • BishopCBishopC Germany Join Date: 2014-02-18 Member: 194139Members
    lwf (answering to someone who claimed the last round was stacked even though it was a hard earned turnaround)
    "Every round seems unbalanced if you only remember the last 5 minutes."
  • TerranigmaTerranigma Join Date: 2010-04-03 Member: 71158Members
    edited July 2014
    SantaClaws wrote: »
    People cry about stack way too much - as @meatmachine points out, often times one good player can carry an entire team.

    ... isn't it an odd situation that one single, good player can outweight an entire team in a game, which is supposed to be team-centered? That might not have anything to do with balance but it is after all odd when there's a game which presents itself as heavily team-based but in the long run it all comes down to the question, whether you or your opponent's have one or two superior players on their game because then it's not a team that wins the game but single individuals.

    I do in fact have the feeling that this is very much the case in NS2 and doesn't really suit the way the game wants to be perceived at first glance, namely as a team-based game. In fact, the aspects of tactics and strategy are of less importance compared to the mere ability to shoot things. It's a shooter and of course this kind of skill has to be part of NS2, however, I too got the impression that NS" puts way to much emphasis on individual skill compared to NS1 to a degree, that even the normal mode often feels like some sort of team-deathmatch. I'm convinced that NS1 has a much better balance of the three aspects individual skill, tactics und strategy. Comebacks, secret hideouts and maneuvers were much more frequent in NS1, but are hardly ever seen in NS2. I suppose the straight forward map-design (big rooms instead of hallways and ventiducts), power node-system as well as alien commander has something to do with that. UW admitted that the map-design in NS2 followed a different philosophy than NS1 and I think the lack of hideouts, dark corners, etc. combined with an all-in-all more less dynamic gameplay (no secret phasegates or bases, gorgies are more limitied in their actions) results in the fact, that firefights in larger groups occur more often and are of more importance. Either you push or you get pushed back; that is also true for NS1, but NS1 gave you more options to act outside from taking part in firefights, for example sneaking behind the frontline to set up an phasegate. You don't see that ever happen in NS2. You usually go through the front door.

    If one player can outweight an entire team, that might be OK in games like Quake or Unreal Tournament but not in a game which tries to sell itself as team-based RTS-Shooter. And I agree, that it frequently happens that entire matches are frequently dominated by merely 2 or 3 players out of 18. That's not only frustrating for new players, who expect a team-based game and find a heavily skill-based one, but also for those who can't count themselves to this minority of Pros.
  • dePARAdePARA Join Date: 2011-04-29 Member: 96321Members, Squad Five Blue
    scaramoosh wrote: »
    Then also you don't really have any mechanics that help out everyone, you have to actively communicate with each other and stick together, but you do not have any actions that you can do by yourself which help the team.

    What?

    - Welding (to weld each other helps MUCH)
    - Distractng (a so called "rambo" is pulling half of the alienteam to his position= they dont attack marines and structures)
    - Using mic and map ("guy in ore, there is an lerk behind you, you can trap him"
    - Lineblocking (One good shooting marine can block and hold a whole side of a map)
    - Resbiting/harassing (its a bit boring but this need to be done and many pub player dont doing this on both sides)

    Teamplay is not: running aound in large groups as possible, while everything goes down behind you.
    Many of these "rambos" doing 500% more usefull stuff than 6 marines in one group shooting the others ass.

    Small tip:
    Everytime you spawn, open the map and think about where to go next and why.
    "4 marines in topo? Hmm, i think thats enough, i go the other way"
  • ezekelezekel Join Date: 2012-11-29 Member: 173589Members, NS2 Map Tester
    Locklear wrote: »
    this thread is dumb

    at least someone gets to the point
  • RapGodRapGod Not entirely sure... Join Date: 2013-11-12 Member: 189322Members
    As annoying as these threads are, a lot are made from people that don't visit the forums that much. They probably won't do a search and want to give some constructive criticism for why the game is making them or friends, or whatever, leave the game. I don't think it's fair to immediately dismiss the poster or condescend on the post.

    At least post them a link to one of the threads already made (if not closed already), instead of giving the equivalent of 'why'd you post with complaints?'. Unless it's a troll, that is.

    Just don't like it when people who aren't always on the forums but play the game get tossed aside because of past trolls.
  • MrFangsMrFangs Join Date: 2013-03-27 Member: 184474Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    edited July 2014
    Terranigma wrote: »
    ...less dynamic gameplay (no secret phasegates or bases, ...
    Terranigma wrote: »
    ...options to act outside from taking part in firefights, for example sneaking behind the frontline to set up an phasegate. You don't see that ever happen in NS2. ...

    Huh? Sneaky phase gates and gorge tunnels are quite frequent in NS2, actually.

    Yes, you can't build a full base (CC/Hive) everywhere, but forward bases (both straight-forward and hidden) are perfectly viable, and seen in almost every match.

    (Edit: typo)
  • MephillesMephilles Germany Join Date: 2013-08-07 Member: 186634Members, NS2 Map Tester, NS2 Community Developer
    Terranigma wrote: »
    ... isn't it an odd situation that one single, good player can outweight an entire team in a game, which is supposed to be team-centered? That might not have anything to do with balance but it is after all odd when there's a game which presents itself as heavily team-based but in the long run it all comes down to the question, whether you or your opponent's have one or two superior players on their game because then it's not a team that wins the game but single individuals.

    I didn't read your post any further than this, because I'm too lazy and I think the main message is delivered in there already. I'm just quoting a friend now: when skill of a player is a numerical number, than teamwork multiplies their skill number, or with other words one snail is not the big problem, have 2 or more snails working as a team and you are screwed
  • RockyMarcRockyMarc Join Date: 2009-11-24 Member: 69519Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    I'm still having fun playing the game so I shall continue to play the game.
    :)
  • sharnrocksharnrock Join Date: 2012-11-02 Member: 166084Members
    edited July 2014
    You should play combat mode. It is literally COD or whatever with aliens and welders instead of packs.

    But like others have said, it's an RTS game. It's going to snowball usually after 12 minutes or so in favor of whoever has a 3rd tech point. Almost every game I play gets to see onos, jetpacks, and full research upgrades. Many comms avoid researching exos because the typical exo pilot lasts about 3 seconds and really ought to be buying mines.
  • joshhhjoshhh Milwaukee, WI Join Date: 2011-06-21 Member: 105717Members, NS2 Playtester, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Supporter, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow, Subnautica Playtester
    Locklear wrote: »
    this thread is dumb

    Half the threads in this forum are... but then again, I do like the entertainment.
  • RadmanRadman Join Date: 2013-04-05 Member: 184656Members
    He's got some decent points, and all those points can be solved with ranked matchmaking. The pub system is dated and obsolete, especially for a game like ns2.

    Unfortunately, that's something that should have been in at launch. It'd be hard to add it in now.
  • Classic319Classic319 Join Date: 2010-11-06 Member: 74789Members
    I'd also say, that NS2 has far less players than it deserves(on gameplay-wise etc). But it's hard to say NS2 is a failure. Actually i think it has been a very big success still, only not as big as it could've been.

    You got the point right, balance, and plus poor engine performance made people leave game rather sooner than expected(though still 4~600 concurrent players). However, NS2 has been an indie game, low budget, and for that, again, this has been a great success. Please list any indie games which has been more successful than NS2 after 2010. I'd say, Chivalry, Insurgency(almost identical, i'd say. Only more concurrent players), Minecraft(?)... and i cannot list anymore. Chivalry, Minecraft have their own reason, very casual and easy to play. Insurgency is almost perfectly stable on every aspect and even the theme itself is modern infantry combat, the most popular one, and they handled it almost perfectly, no doubt that this game has been so successful. Otherwise,,, there are even many super high budget titles which has far far less population than NS2 has had.

    So i repeat,, all u've said are completely right, but i can't agree that NS2 is a failure
  • PoNeHPoNeH Join Date: 2006-12-01 Member: 58801Members, NS2 Playtester, NS2 Map Tester
  • NordicNordic Long term camping in Kodiak Join Date: 2012-05-13 Member: 151995Members, NS2 Playtester, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Supporter, Reinforced - Silver, Reinforced - Shadow
    Terranigma wrote: »
    SantaClaws wrote: »
    People cry about stack way too much - as @meatmachine points out, often times one good player can carry an entire team.

    ... isn't it an odd situation that one single, good player can outweight an entire team in a game, which is supposed to be team-centered? That might not have anything to do with balance but it is after all odd when there's a game which presents itself as heavily team-based but in the long run it all comes down to the question, whether you or your opponent's have one or two superior players on their game because then it's not a team that wins the game but single individuals.

    I do in fact have the feeling that this is very much the case in NS2 and doesn't really suit the way the game wants to be perceived at first glance, namely as a team-based game. In fact, the aspects of tactics and strategy are of less importance compared to the mere ability to shoot things. It's a shooter and of course this kind of skill has to be part of NS2, however, I too got the impression that NS" puts way to much emphasis on individual skill compared to NS1 to a degree, that even the normal mode often feels like some sort of team-deathmatch. I'm convinced that NS1 has a much better balance of the three aspects individual skill, tactics und strategy. Comebacks, secret hideouts and maneuvers were much more frequent in NS1, but are hardly ever seen in NS2. I suppose the straight forward map-design (big rooms instead of hallways and ventiducts), power node-system as well as alien commander has something to do with that. UW admitted that the map-design in NS2 followed a different philosophy than NS1 and I think the lack of hideouts, dark corners, etc. combined with an all-in-all more less dynamic gameplay (no secret phasegates or bases, gorgies are more limitied in their actions) results in the fact, that firefights in larger groups occur more often and are of more importance. Either you push or you get pushed back; that is also true for NS1, but NS1 gave you more options to act outside from taking part in firefights, for example sneaking behind the frontline to set up an phasegate. You don't see that ever happen in NS2. You usually go through the front door.

    If one player can outweight an entire team, that might be OK in games like Quake or Unreal Tournament but not in a game which tries to sell itself as team-based RTS-Shooter. And I agree, that it frequently happens that entire matches are frequently dominated by merely 2 or 3 players out of 18. That's not only frustrating for new players, who expect a team-based game and find a heavily skill-based one, but also for those who can't count themselves to this minority of Pros.

    To this I respond that teamwork is OP. Once you get to a certain level of play it usually is the team with more coordination winning in my pub experience. Not to say that a premier level player can still really unbalance a high level pub but the effect is diminished if there is no teamwork.
  • NeXuSNeXuS US Join Date: 2013-10-13 Member: 188681Members, NS2 Playtester, Reinforced - Silver, Reinforced - Shadow, Subnautica Playtester
    edited July 2014
    I don't see this game as a failure at all. I have well over 1000 hours in this game, which is small compared to some. Do I see it as a failure as a player? No. I've spent more time playing this game than any other game in my life. That alone should say something.
  • AnzestralAnzestral Join Date: 2013-05-21 Member: 185327Members, NS2 Playtester, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Silver, Subnautica Playtester
    edited July 2014
    There is no other game that entertained me 2500h for only about 20€.
    That is not even one cent per hour. I can hardly find any other hobby I had in my life that was as cheap as NS2, so for me it was a success.
    But I have to admit, that after all this time (also because there seems to be no active high level competitive community at the moment) I am getting tired of the game.
    Playing public is just too ridiculous most of the time and making me angry, because 75% of the players still have no clue how this game works.
  • G_LockG_Lock Playtester_ FL Join Date: 2013-04-03 Member: 184624Members, NS2 Playtester, Reinforced - Supporter, Reinforced - Silver, Reinforced - Shadow
    edited July 2014
    Hardcore games are not everyone's cup of tea...
    The snowball effect in NS2 is massive, most game are dictated within the first 5 minutes.
    Its not to say a good coordinated team cant swing it back, its just tough to do unless everyone's on the same page, which is not the case in most pubs.
    NS2 is a hardcore game end of story.

    Try captains games, gathers or scrims. the difference in game play is staggering compared to the run around blind folded mentality pub games have.
    Unfortunately these pubs is what 90% of the player base experience and why so many people are still terrible more than a year after the games release.




  • Brad2810Brad2810 Join Date: 2013-03-24 Member: 184313Members
    Play on an aussie server, our pubs are generally filled with more experienced players, and you are practically guaranteed to have people at least trying to coordinate with mics.

    Wish i could say that skill-stacks don't happen but alas, they don't happen all that often.

    We aussies are a VERY small sub-community. and so it's almost always the same 50 or so people. plus random rookies.
  • LunSeiLunSei Tarnax IV Join Date: 2014-06-21 Member: 196674Members
    edited July 2014
    Why do I keep hearing that this game "fails"?
    I've just started playing it last month, but it looks like it's doing pretty well. For a game with little publicity (I hadn't even heard about it until some weeks ago), with a steep learning curve, and which is now about two years old, I think this game is doing fine. It always has at 200-300 players online at any time of the day.

    Have you guys ever seen a game really fail?
  • G_LockG_Lock Playtester_ FL Join Date: 2013-04-03 Member: 184624Members, NS2 Playtester, Reinforced - Supporter, Reinforced - Silver, Reinforced - Shadow
    Have you guys ever seen a game really fail?

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infantry_%28video_game%29

    Miss you war zone alpha. :((
Sign In or Register to comment.