I don't think the reaper dlc release was bad for FLG at all. When a person discovers NS2 and starts researching - chances are they are going to stumble upon NS2:C as well and vice versa.
Now, you can make the argument all you want, that a person who is given the choice between NS2 and NS2:C most likely will pick NS2 - and that it in that way has hurt FLG. But that's just a demonstration of how poorly FLG has presented their product, and cannot be the fault of UWE.
Actually what i am most annoyed about is how you think that they're totally different games, there is litterally nothing different between the "combat mod standalone" and the "full NS2 game with combat mod", it's one in the same, don't try and use slanderous accusation against me without first being put on the spot.
Have you even played both games?
If that's the case then where is the problem? You can play NS2 combat mod for free already, there are usually populated servers.
I've personally been a big supporter of Combat since the 96 hour stream hit and addressed all the issues I had with disclosure. I knew the price, I knew the content and I was able to get hyped up about it. The interaction with the devs made me feel like I was a part of something and the hourly raffle was an awesome touch to get people coming back on the stream.
As far as price goes, I was initially afraid that they would price it at around $30.
Now, I should point out that I was one of the lucky people who won a key in the raffle, but by that point I already accepted the price and made the decision to purchase the game.
$14,99 seems reasonable for what it is (though it is a shame that we, Europeans, have to pay 14,99€), and I get the feeling that if FLG re-skinned everything to look like a new game then there would suddenly be a lot less complaining about this just being a standalone mod, because of how much different the game modes are.
Combat has an issue or two, but I enjoy it.
I have high hopes for FLG and further development of Combat and its game modes and will try to support them by streaming the game and trying to convince viewers that it's worth the purchase, because I really think it is.
DC_DarklingJoin Date: 2003-07-10Member: 18068Members, Constellation, Squad Five Blue, Squad Five Silver
I think SA combat has many issues but I shall have for now faith that they shall be resolved.
It makes me unable to enjoy SA combat for prolonged time... (annoyances start to grow on me every round)
But I can see good things in the game. Good things which will be more apparent when the issues it does have are fixed.
For now I do not think 15 euro is to much. I have seen games with similar pricing, give far less and being just as popular.
Gais gais,
if you could decide working on am mod for NS2 in its current (amazing) state or just screw all that and make a real game (where you have to deal with your OWN bugs).. what would you do?
The game itself is great - it's the excellent gameplay from NS2 that we all know and love condensed into an easier-to-swallow package. I've always liked the Combat mod and this is a more polished version of that, so I'm happy with it.
The $15 price point might seem a bit extravagant since most of the content is present in NS2, but looking at this as a DLC pack for NS2 doesn't feel right to me. It's a standalone game by an independent developer and it's only right for them to ask for some money in return. I see no reason why people should intentionally try to hurt the game's sales because it has a price attached. That doesn't seem fair.
Sadly, I do look at this as a little bit of a wasted opportunity. One of the things that has always blocked NS2's ability to grow its playerbase is how complicated everything is, and I had some hope that Combat would serve as a nice gateway for people interested in NS2 - it would allow them to learn all of the game's moves and abilities, and most of the buildings and such, without the more complicated stuff like commanders and resource towers and the complicated objectives that come with it. If it had been incorporated into the base NS2 game, it might have been a substantial enough update to bring back some older players - the guys who bought NS2 but stopped playing ages ago - and served as a more accessible experience. I just don't see those same people agreeing to play 15 dollars for Combat, though. They've already paid for NS2 and lost interest - are they really going to shell out more money for a game that, on the surface, looks remarkably similar?
At the same time, FLG deserves to ask for some money for their hard work, so I can't exactly fault them for that. I wish there had been more cross-promotion between UWE, the CDT, and FLG, though. Having a Subnautica release and an NS2 patch come out at the same time as Combat couldn't have helped promotion for Combat.
IronHorseDeveloper, QA Manager, Technical Support & contributorJoin Date: 2010-05-08Member: 71669Members, Super Administrators, Forum Admins, Forum Moderators, NS2 Developer, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Subnautica Playtester, Subnautica PT Lead, Pistachionauts
Roo you've stumbled upon what has become my mantra, that I've maintained for years in these forums when moderating users: It's not the content of your post, but rather your delivery.
Surely people understand that there's more to a game than the amount of content.
So if ns2 combat had 1 weapon, 1 alien life form, 1 map you would be happy to pay 15€ because there is MORE to a game than just its content?...
Natural Selection has been around since halflife and so has CounterStrike, it is a fair comparison on the pricetag and what you get.
You want to show me the part where I called you snobby? I said ns2 players can be snobby, I was speaking in generalities. And if you read some of the combat reviews from ns2 players, that's how it comes off. Which is exactly my point.
Alright, the following is not directed at you @Pelargir, I'm just saying:
Imagine you're not already an ns2 player, you're new to the universe and looking to be introduced thru combat. You see all these reviews from ns2 vets whose complaints aren't actually all with the game itself, but rather that it's not the same ns2 they love (duh)/it's not a cheap dlc/blah blah. The fact is, if you're an ns2 player and want to see more people in our community, bashing ns2:c for those reasons is silly and you're discouraging new players from entering our community because of YOUR expectations. So what that it's not a dlc? That wasn't an option for them, that's not what UWE approached them for. What can they or we do about that fact? Give bad reviews about the game because of the circumstances it was released under instead of the game itself? How's that help?
And no, I don't expect you to have to pay to see your brother, that's not the point I was trying to make. I'm saying it's like... your brother opens a pizza place. You think the pizza isn't like how mama made it back in the day. It's still very good, but it's not mom's pie like you had hoped. So you tell everyone and make public reviews that say dont come to my brother's pizza place - it's garbage! The reality is, it's still a yummy pizza, others would enjoy it quite a lot. But since you're part of the family and know how mama's pizza tasted, you have a nonobjective and biased opinion. You're shooting your brother in the foot by hampering his efforts and shooting yourself in the foot because what's good for your family is often good for you.
K now, that was all analogy and again I'm not saying that you @Pelargir have done that or feel that way. I'm just trying to make my point more clear.
I did. Which is why I said that I thought a standalone was justifiable.
Want to say also, we KNOW that there was almost NO PR for combat. Almost NO advertising. Nobody knows about it! That's the real failure of the game (so far). I'd say in large amounts it's NOT because of the gameplay and it's features or lack thereof depending on your opinion, but because like 99 percent of the people who know about it are ns2 players already. And like I tried to mention in my analogy earlier, this player base will be more prone to bias and more likely to be polarized by it.
I would love to see more objective reviews on steam from new players, not just from ns2 vets. But do enough people even know about it?
*EDIT
Didn't even realize there was a 2nd page when I went to respond earlier. One more thing I want to bring up...
But that's just a demonstration of how poorly FLG has presented their product, and cannot be the fault of UWE.
When you open combat, the 1st thing you see is a splash page w/ the UWE logo on it. It's huge. Just curious why they were so quiet about it. I know they're just the publishers, not the developers, but you'd still think they'd also want to advertise something that will generate some revenue for them (even if it's miniscule, maybe it could have been different) and has their name on it.
No sure if ur srs... Where'd you get that "not the same ns2 they love" from?
I get this from the reviews on the steam page as well as comments on them. I wont go into much detail. I paraphrased the sentiment. Examples: "this ruins natural selection 2" from a user after roughly 30 min. of play. Almost all the reviews up there are from griping ns2 vets. One from a new player complains and doesn't recommend because of low player count... No mention of the gameplay. How he expects more people to play if he doesn't recommend the game is beyond my logical comprehension. Most of the reviews up there are.
Read them, it's clear that ns2 vets are sort of sabotaging combat. I think it's sad they've come out so loudly to push people away from the ns2 universe... I'm pretty sure at least one of those negative reviews is from somebody who won a key... Seriously? That's trashy.
Actually what i am most annoyed about is how you think that they're totally different games, there is litterally nothing different between the "combat mod standalone" and the "full NS2 game with combat mod", it's one in the same, don't try and use slanderous accusation against me without first being put on the spot.
Have you even played both games?
If that's the case then where is the problem? You can play NS2 combat mod for free already, there are usually populated servers.
I was playing NS2: Combat earlier, and it was awful. I left the game in the middle of a match due to boredom.
So just for fun, I logged into NS2, and found a French server that was running the NS2 Combat Mod. That server had about 10 rookies playing on it.
I have no idea what UWE were thinking planning a sale at the same time as the launch of a standalone 'game/mod' that is affiliated with their own game (aside from the anniversary of NS2). I guess they must be making more money from NS2 at low price than they will from NS2 Combat.
I predict NS2: Combat will be dead within the week. It just isn't a far enough departure from regular NS2 to be worthwhile.
I think most of the naysayers of NS2: Combat are actually pretty spot on, it isn't worth the value of a standalone game. I remember playing Sewlek's Factions mod a good while back, and that mod DID feel very different from NS2. I was hoping NS2 Combat would do the same, so I am pretty disappointed with what we got instead. No amount of future modding is going to improve it, this game has already had it's highest playerbase, and almost all of them are NS2 veterans. And once they all get bored, they will go back to NS2, and NS2:Combat will die.
Because harming a new indie studio just out of the reason that they don't offer you their work of over 1 year work for free is imho disrespectful against all kind of indie developers.
I don't think anybody's directly trying to harm Faultline studios. The criticism is directed at UWE. Most people are pretty apathetic towards FLG because this is their first release and they aren't exactly owed anything, let alone praise, or sales for that matter. As long as FLG agreed to a deal with UWE as their publisher, and thus UWE have a stake in combat, then they are subject to the consequences of this partnership, including the criticism. You may disagree that some of the criticism is fair, but it's most certainly enough of a grey area that it is up to debate.
I really don't think the majority of the misinformed or unreasonable reviews and mass downvoting has been done by active forum members - so it makes me wonder who this thread is directed at. You can't exactly be surprised by the online response to this either - Welcome to the internet. We may have some shitheads signed up here, and I'm probably one of them (to a degree at least), but it's a harsh world outside these forums. If anything, whilst at times it may seem like anything but, the people here are by and large more polite, patient and reasonable, when discussing ns2, in comparison to elsewhere at least.
Also, there are many people who were profoundly disappointed with ns2 when it was released, many of which played ns1 and already have a disdain for combat and remember the segmenting effect it had on the community. It is to be expected that some of these will come out of the woodwork and voice their opinion, and in not-so-nice words. On that note, you can't expect people who are unhappy with this to bother writing a 'balanced argument'. Sure, arguments like "It's just like NS2 but without the Commander" may be false, and completely ignoring the new game modes (not just regular deathmatch like ns2 minus RTS implies), maps, models, abilities, weapons etc. but nobody's going to bother including that in part of their argument unless they're writing a proper review. If a random internet commenter wants to write just 1 or 2 lines expressing dissatisfaction, they aren't going to bother offering counterpoints like "although, to be fair, it is not quite that simple - they have included ..." and I don't exactly blame them.
At the end of the day, Combat going standalone was always going to cop some flak and anyone who thought otherwise must have been wearing rose-tinted glasses. The impact this had/has on sales was the gamble FLG took when agreeing to work on this. The criticism of NS2:Combat does not reflect badly on the NS2 community, but instead highlights the unforgivingly brash nature of internet-commenters.
if I actually wanted to review the game as an anonymous nobody, I would write just 1 line:
"please make a pure action game with spark's netcode and performance" said noone ever.
I wouldn't write a long detailed review. I wouldn't talk about any great design or bad design.
I actually haven't even played the game so I'm not going to review it, but that's why I won't buy it.
if I actually wanted to review the game as an anonymous nobody, I would write just 1 line:
"please make a pure action game with spark's netcode and performance" said noone ever.
I wouldn't write a long detailed review. I wouldn't talk about any great design or bad design.
I actually haven't even played the game so I'm not going to review it, but that's why I won't buy it.
Interesting. Because of all the legitimate concerns about combat, the performance is actually very decent compared with ns2. The netcode isn't bad, which highlights how relatively poor the server and client performance in ns2.
FLG have clearly spent a lot of time stripping down combat to be fast and responsive.
So it's unfortunate that you have come to that decision based on your own preconceptions rather than reality...
if I actually wanted to review the game as an anonymous nobody, I would write just 1 line:
"please make a pure action game with spark's netcode and performance" said noone ever.
I wouldn't write a long detailed review. I wouldn't talk about any great design or bad design.
I actually haven't even played the game so I'm not going to review it, but that's why I won't buy it.
Interesting. Because of all the legitimate concerns about combat, the performance is actually very decent compared with ns2. The netcode isn't bad, which highlights how relatively poor the server and client performance in ns2.
FLG have clearly spent a lot of time stripping down combat to be fast and responsive.
So it's unfortunate that you have come to that decision based on your own preconceptions rather than reality...
The reality part is unlocked once you pay for the game and invest some hours into it. Before you pay for the game, the PR has the responsibility to convince you that it's something worthwile.
Being the smartass afterwards, I think the marathon livestream wasn't exactly the best way to advertise NS2:C. At least what I miss is a dense, 5-15 minute video or at least a FAQ where they go "This is why it's good and this is why you want to pay 15 bucks for it. This is why it's a worthy standalone." Right now a lot of the critique is revolving around stuff that popped to my mind right away when I heard there's some kind of Combat standalone coming up. Up to this point I have only a faint idea whether any of my worries actually resonate in the game itself, but I don't think there has been enough clear cut info to win over my confidence either.
Without any better idea, it's often best to see how the release goes. And when the release goes like this...
I think in your context you meant the content is what would make a player choose between one or the other, but I was just trying to use your comment to bring up another point that I was curious about... why has UWE been so quiet about Combat when it's something that's also got their name on it.
I don't think it's Faultline's fault alone that almost nobody knows about their game. When you open up Combat, you still see UWE's logo. And there's not a single mention of Combat's release on Unknown World's website.
I think in your context you meant the content is what would make a player choose between one or the other, but I was just trying to use your comment to bring up another point that I was curious about... why has UWE been so quiet about Combat when it's something that's also got their name on it.
I don't think it's Faultline's fault alone that almost nobody knows about their game. When you open up Combat, you still see UWE's logo. And there's not a single mention of Combat's release on Unknown World's website.
+ a few announces on their Facebook page. But I guess you were talking about a proper new on their main website, which is right in that case. I see the logic here 'because all the news on their website relink to their other subsection: Subnautica and NS2 and as FLG made their announcement on their own website...
if I actually wanted to review the game as an anonymous nobody, I would write just 1 line:
"please make a pure action game with spark's netcode and performance" said noone ever.
I wouldn't write a long detailed review. I wouldn't talk about any great design or bad design.
I actually haven't even played the game so I'm not going to review it, but that's why I won't buy it.
Interesting. Because of all the legitimate concerns about combat, the performance is actually very decent compared with ns2. The netcode isn't bad, which highlights how relatively poor the server and client performance in ns2.
FLG have clearly spent a lot of time stripping down combat to be fast and responsive.
So it's unfortunate that you have come to that decision based on your own preconceptions rather than reality...
@Roobubba I completely disagree with this. I have objectively found performance to be worse and have proved it in benchmarks.
That benchmark proves nothing without giving a live demo of what was actually going on screen in both games. There's no indication of how many players ware playing, how "busy" the game was in terms of structures infestation etc. For all we know you ware just bouncing about the readyroom for the NS2 test.
I have found that combat is a lot less taxing on my system, and was able to bump up my settings while streaming without taking a big hit in performance like I do with NS2.
That's my subjective experience though, because there's no such thing as an "objective" benchmark.
That benchmark proves nothing without giving a live demo of what was actually going on screen in both games. There's no indication of how many players ware playing, how "busy" the game was in terms of structures infestation etc. For all we know you ware just bouncing about the readyroom for the NS2 test.
I have found that combat is a lot less taxing on my system, and was able to bump up my settings while streaming without taking a big hit in performance like I do with NS2.
That's my subjective experience though, because there's no such thing as an "objective" benchmark.
For the sake of objectiveness:
Specs and settings are provided on the benchmark.
Both games when recording were in 20 player servers and the first 5 minutes of the game playing as marines, doing random engagment type stuff, fighting skulks, building structures, moving between rooms etc. I made sure to make it the most fair benchmark possible.
Yes you are correct, fps can vary with the amount of entities but I didn't find it to affect that much when comparing the two games.
Lol, no such thing as an objective benchmark are you joking? This isn't perfect but its as close as I could make it.
Lol, no such thing as an objective benchmark are you joking? This isn't perfect but its as close as I could make it.
That benchmark is only true for your particular setup. User PCs have way too many additional factors that weigh in on performance of particular software, making it highly subjective. At best, a benchmark will give you a rough idea of how a game might behave on your system, but I'd never call it "objective".
Lol, no such thing as an objective benchmark are you joking? This isn't perfect but its as close as I could make it.
That benchmark is only true for your particular setup. User PCs have way too many additional factors that weigh in on performance of particular software, making it highly subjective. At best, a benchmark will give you a rough idea of how a game might behave on your system, but I'd never call it "objective".
Yes, my benchmark is only relevant to my system, but it is still objective within the context of my setup. It is using raw numbers and figures to show data over time. That is objective, unless I were to tamper with the results between the two games based on a prejudice of mine.
Edit: Strange that Sebb would disagree, as I was basically agreeing with him. So I guess I'll have to clarify:
Objective: "based on facts rather than feelings or opinions : not influenced by feelings"
Universal: "done or experienced by everyone : existing or available for everyone"
Sebb is correctly using the term objective, while Maxx is saying it's not objective because it only applies to Sebbs' system. Maxx is conflating objective with universal. Or maybe they both are, in the light of the disagree lol, idk at this point.
Comments
Now, you can make the argument all you want, that a person who is given the choice between NS2 and NS2:C most likely will pick NS2 - and that it in that way has hurt FLG. But that's just a demonstration of how poorly FLG has presented their product, and cannot be the fault of UWE.
Have you even played both games?
If that's the case then where is the problem? You can play NS2 combat mod for free already, there are usually populated servers.
As far as price goes, I was initially afraid that they would price it at around $30.
Now, I should point out that I was one of the lucky people who won a key in the raffle, but by that point I already accepted the price and made the decision to purchase the game.
$14,99 seems reasonable for what it is (though it is a shame that we, Europeans, have to pay 14,99€), and I get the feeling that if FLG re-skinned everything to look like a new game then there would suddenly be a lot less complaining about this just being a standalone mod, because of how much different the game modes are.
Combat has an issue or two, but I enjoy it.
I have high hopes for FLG and further development of Combat and its game modes and will try to support them by streaming the game and trying to convince viewers that it's worth the purchase, because I really think it is.
It makes me unable to enjoy SA combat for prolonged time... (annoyances start to grow on me every round)
But I can see good things in the game. Good things which will be more apparent when the issues it does have are fixed.
For now I do not think 15 euro is to much. I have seen games with similar pricing, give far less and being just as popular.
if you could decide working on am mod for NS2 in its current (amazing) state or just screw all that and make a real game (where you have to deal with your OWN bugs).. what would you do?
The $15 price point might seem a bit extravagant since most of the content is present in NS2, but looking at this as a DLC pack for NS2 doesn't feel right to me. It's a standalone game by an independent developer and it's only right for them to ask for some money in return. I see no reason why people should intentionally try to hurt the game's sales because it has a price attached. That doesn't seem fair.
Sadly, I do look at this as a little bit of a wasted opportunity. One of the things that has always blocked NS2's ability to grow its playerbase is how complicated everything is, and I had some hope that Combat would serve as a nice gateway for people interested in NS2 - it would allow them to learn all of the game's moves and abilities, and most of the buildings and such, without the more complicated stuff like commanders and resource towers and the complicated objectives that come with it. If it had been incorporated into the base NS2 game, it might have been a substantial enough update to bring back some older players - the guys who bought NS2 but stopped playing ages ago - and served as a more accessible experience. I just don't see those same people agreeing to play 15 dollars for Combat, though. They've already paid for NS2 and lost interest - are they really going to shell out more money for a game that, on the surface, looks remarkably similar?
At the same time, FLG deserves to ask for some money for their hard work, so I can't exactly fault them for that. I wish there had been more cross-promotion between UWE, the CDT, and FLG, though. Having a Subnautica release and an NS2 patch come out at the same time as Combat couldn't have helped promotion for Combat.
It's not the content of your post, but rather your delivery.
Natural Selection has been around since halflife and so has CounterStrike, it is a fair comparison on the pricetag and what you get.
You want to show me the part where I called you snobby? I said ns2 players can be snobby, I was speaking in generalities. And if you read some of the combat reviews from ns2 players, that's how it comes off. Which is exactly my point.
Alright, the following is not directed at you @Pelargir, I'm just saying:
Imagine you're not already an ns2 player, you're new to the universe and looking to be introduced thru combat. You see all these reviews from ns2 vets whose complaints aren't actually all with the game itself, but rather that it's not the same ns2 they love (duh)/it's not a cheap dlc/blah blah. The fact is, if you're an ns2 player and want to see more people in our community, bashing ns2:c for those reasons is silly and you're discouraging new players from entering our community because of YOUR expectations. So what that it's not a dlc? That wasn't an option for them, that's not what UWE approached them for. What can they or we do about that fact? Give bad reviews about the game because of the circumstances it was released under instead of the game itself? How's that help?
And no, I don't expect you to have to pay to see your brother, that's not the point I was trying to make. I'm saying it's like... your brother opens a pizza place. You think the pizza isn't like how mama made it back in the day. It's still very good, but it's not mom's pie like you had hoped. So you tell everyone and make public reviews that say dont come to my brother's pizza place - it's garbage! The reality is, it's still a yummy pizza, others would enjoy it quite a lot. But since you're part of the family and know how mama's pizza tasted, you have a nonobjective and biased opinion. You're shooting your brother in the foot by hampering his efforts and shooting yourself in the foot because what's good for your family is often good for you.
K now, that was all analogy and again I'm not saying that you @Pelargir have done that or feel that way. I'm just trying to make my point more clear.
I did. Which is why I said that I thought a standalone was justifiable.
Want to say also, we KNOW that there was almost NO PR for combat. Almost NO advertising. Nobody knows about it! That's the real failure of the game (so far). I'd say in large amounts it's NOT because of the gameplay and it's features or lack thereof depending on your opinion, but because like 99 percent of the people who know about it are ns2 players already. And like I tried to mention in my analogy earlier, this player base will be more prone to bias and more likely to be polarized by it.
I would love to see more objective reviews on steam from new players, not just from ns2 vets. But do enough people even know about it?
*EDIT
Didn't even realize there was a 2nd page when I went to respond earlier. One more thing I want to bring up...
When you open combat, the 1st thing you see is a splash page w/ the UWE logo on it. It's huge. Just curious why they were so quiet about it. I know they're just the publishers, not the developers, but you'd still think they'd also want to advertise something that will generate some revenue for them (even if it's miniscule, maybe it could have been different) and has their name on it.
Read them, it's clear that ns2 vets are sort of sabotaging combat. I think it's sad they've come out so loudly to push people away from the ns2 universe... I'm pretty sure at least one of those negative reviews is from somebody who won a key... Seriously? That's trashy.
Not sure exactly if you're agreeing or disagreeing there...
I was playing NS2: Combat earlier, and it was awful. I left the game in the middle of a match due to boredom.
So just for fun, I logged into NS2, and found a French server that was running the NS2 Combat Mod. That server had about 10 rookies playing on it.
I have no idea what UWE were thinking planning a sale at the same time as the launch of a standalone 'game/mod' that is affiliated with their own game (aside from the anniversary of NS2). I guess they must be making more money from NS2 at low price than they will from NS2 Combat.
I predict NS2: Combat will be dead within the week. It just isn't a far enough departure from regular NS2 to be worthwhile.
I think most of the naysayers of NS2: Combat are actually pretty spot on, it isn't worth the value of a standalone game. I remember playing Sewlek's Factions mod a good while back, and that mod DID feel very different from NS2. I was hoping NS2 Combat would do the same, so I am pretty disappointed with what we got instead. No amount of future modding is going to improve it, this game has already had it's highest playerbase, and almost all of them are NS2 veterans. And once they all get bored, they will go back to NS2, and NS2:Combat will die.
I don't think anybody's directly trying to harm Faultline studios. The criticism is directed at UWE. Most people are pretty apathetic towards FLG because this is their first release and they aren't exactly owed anything, let alone praise, or sales for that matter. As long as FLG agreed to a deal with UWE as their publisher, and thus UWE have a stake in combat, then they are subject to the consequences of this partnership, including the criticism. You may disagree that some of the criticism is fair, but it's most certainly enough of a grey area that it is up to debate.
I really don't think the majority of the misinformed or unreasonable reviews and mass downvoting has been done by active forum members - so it makes me wonder who this thread is directed at. You can't exactly be surprised by the online response to this either - Welcome to the internet. We may have some shitheads signed up here, and I'm probably one of them (to a degree at least), but it's a harsh world outside these forums. If anything, whilst at times it may seem like anything but, the people here are by and large more polite, patient and reasonable, when discussing ns2, in comparison to elsewhere at least.
Also, there are many people who were profoundly disappointed with ns2 when it was released, many of which played ns1 and already have a disdain for combat and remember the segmenting effect it had on the community. It is to be expected that some of these will come out of the woodwork and voice their opinion, and in not-so-nice words. On that note, you can't expect people who are unhappy with this to bother writing a 'balanced argument'. Sure, arguments like "It's just like NS2 but without the Commander" may be false, and completely ignoring the new game modes (not just regular deathmatch like ns2 minus RTS implies), maps, models, abilities, weapons etc. but nobody's going to bother including that in part of their argument unless they're writing a proper review. If a random internet commenter wants to write just 1 or 2 lines expressing dissatisfaction, they aren't going to bother offering counterpoints like "although, to be fair, it is not quite that simple - they have included ..." and I don't exactly blame them.
At the end of the day, Combat going standalone was always going to cop some flak and anyone who thought otherwise must have been wearing rose-tinted glasses. The impact this had/has on sales was the gamble FLG took when agreeing to work on this. The criticism of NS2:Combat does not reflect badly on the NS2 community, but instead highlights the unforgivingly brash nature of internet-commenters.
I wouldn't write a long detailed review. I wouldn't talk about any great design or bad design.
I actually haven't even played the game so I'm not going to review it, but that's why I won't buy it.
Interesting. Because of all the legitimate concerns about combat, the performance is actually very decent compared with ns2. The netcode isn't bad, which highlights how relatively poor the server and client performance in ns2.
FLG have clearly spent a lot of time stripping down combat to be fast and responsive.
So it's unfortunate that you have come to that decision based on your own preconceptions rather than reality...
The reality part is unlocked once you pay for the game and invest some hours into it. Before you pay for the game, the PR has the responsibility to convince you that it's something worthwile.
Being the smartass afterwards, I think the marathon livestream wasn't exactly the best way to advertise NS2:C. At least what I miss is a dense, 5-15 minute video or at least a FAQ where they go "This is why it's good and this is why you want to pay 15 bucks for it. This is why it's a worthy standalone." Right now a lot of the critique is revolving around stuff that popped to my mind right away when I heard there's some kind of Combat standalone coming up. Up to this point I have only a faint idea whether any of my worries actually resonate in the game itself, but I don't think there has been enough clear cut info to win over my confidence either.
Without any better idea, it's often best to see how the release goes. And when the release goes like this...
I find performance to be the same as NS2. It's fine until someone starts using a flamer then I get 35FPS.
the reality of NS2's combat will influence the perception of the mod more than the reality of the mod
there isn't really a right way to make combat successful
anything NS2-related is going to be a tough sell because NS2 is flawed
the associations people make are real, even if they aren't rational
I don't think it's Faultline's fault alone that almost nobody knows about their game. When you open up Combat, you still see UWE's logo. And there's not a single mention of Combat's release on Unknown World's website.
Well, part of the main page. http://unknownworlds.com/
"NS2: Combat, From Mod to Steam."
+ a few announces on their Facebook page. But I guess you were talking about a proper new on their main website, which is right in that case. I see the logic here 'because all the news on their website relink to their other subsection: Subnautica and NS2 and as FLG made their announcement on their own website...
@Roobubba I completely disagree with this. I have objectively found performance to be worse and have proved it in benchmarks.
I have found that combat is a lot less taxing on my system, and was able to bump up my settings while streaming without taking a big hit in performance like I do with NS2.
That's my subjective experience though, because there's no such thing as an "objective" benchmark.
For the sake of objectiveness:
Specs and settings are provided on the benchmark.
Both games when recording were in 20 player servers and the first 5 minutes of the game playing as marines, doing random engagment type stuff, fighting skulks, building structures, moving between rooms etc. I made sure to make it the most fair benchmark possible.
Yes you are correct, fps can vary with the amount of entities but I didn't find it to affect that much when comparing the two games.
Lol, no such thing as an objective benchmark are you joking? This isn't perfect but its as close as I could make it.
That benchmark is only true for your particular setup. User PCs have way too many additional factors that weigh in on performance of particular software, making it highly subjective. At best, a benchmark will give you a rough idea of how a game might behave on your system, but I'd never call it "objective".
Yes, my benchmark is only relevant to my system, but it is still objective within the context of my setup. It is using raw numbers and figures to show data over time. That is objective, unless I were to tamper with the results between the two games based on a prejudice of mine.
Edit: Strange that Sebb would disagree, as I was basically agreeing with him. So I guess I'll have to clarify:
Objective: "based on facts rather than feelings or opinions : not influenced by feelings"
Universal: "done or experienced by everyone : existing or available for everyone"
Sebb is correctly using the term objective, while Maxx is saying it's not objective because it only applies to Sebbs' system. Maxx is conflating objective with universal. Or maybe they both are, in the light of the disagree lol, idk at this point.