after a break from playing for a month....

(DarkangelUK) #41

Everyone can do everything, just that some of it needs practice to pull off

the entire balance of the game revolves around the assumption that each soldier is fully capable of performing his task, but that one of the armies will emerge victorious. that’s kind of the whole point of the game…

Which is where skill gaps come into play, and where practice & play time should be separating players personal abilities, hence the use of matchmaking.

it’s why hacking a radar or disarming a bomb is about holding a key for a seconds instead of computer programming or electrical surgery

Brink had a single button to do everything, look how that went.

that is false. quake’s in-game tutorial is garbage and almost no new players would be able to do that jump (and it’s not even the hardest one)
i’d bet that 95% of players who played for a year can’t even complete that jump more than 5% of the time
That is personal opinion, therefore there’s no false or true, you can simply disagree.

you went out of your way to watch youtube tutorials that would scare away any reasonable person. that has nothing to do with the game as 99% of players will experience it
I’m a reasonable person, it didn’t scare me, or the countless others that vested the same interest, you’re granduring drama queen scenarios here.

giving good players a way to dominate by huge margins doesn’t really benefit a game like extraction.
it’s fine for games like starcraft 2 where the entire focus is 1v1 e-sport and the matchmaking actually works, but it just makes it impossible to get fair teams in other types of games
Again we’re back to matchmaking and ranked based match ups. I’m just curious, which other games that have matchmaking have also made it “impossible” to get fair teams?

if movement/shooting skill becomes so dominant over everything else, then why bother with this game instead of an arena shooter?

Did you even play RtCW, ET, ETQW? The movement in those had depth yet didn’t dominate the gameplay. Did you just see me mention Quake 3 then simply latch onto that and assume I meant Q3 movement?

“Q3 is an example of input vs output”
“Argh, he wants Q3 movement!”

Inferno is absolutely right, you need all aspects to be successful. Some may say that being weak in one area can be balanced by being stronger in another area, problem is, Xt’s movement has no room for skill improvement at the moment. I guess time will tell with the other additions but I may be a little sceptical given how SD really don’t want to let there be any significant sort of skill gap for it. Then there’s also the fun factor, Xt’s movement isn’t fun and there’s no real sense of accomplishment with it. Before, everyone could do everything in Xt, going by the active player count not many people thought that was fun

(stealth6) #42

I think SD should focus more on increasing the differentiation between the mercs and by that I mean throwing movement into the mix. So mercs speeds can differ & their abilities (1 merc can walk on walls while others can’t).

That would make the game easy to learn (all mercs run & shoot, it’s essentially an FPS), but hard to master. You need to know the mercs, their abilities & counters. This puts the skill into knowledge more than reaction or muscle memory, which I’m not a fan of (I think FPS games should be brainless), but I think that’s the best way to make a game easy to learn, but hard to master.

EDIT: Obv. we got a taster of this with Phantom, but I’d prefer if it was the norm instead of the exception.

(Kl3ppy) #43

I played some rounds during the weekend.
The first thing I noticed was the speed. I’m playing Titanfall on a daily basis and xt is compared to TF very slow. Was almost surprised how slow xt is.
The overall impression is good, xt is starts being fun to play (again).

(INF3RN0) #44

[QUOTE=stealth6;492950]I think SD should focus more on increasing the differentiation between the mercs and by that I mean throwing movement into the mix. So mercs speeds can differ & their abilities (1 merc can walk on walls while others can’t).
[/QUOTE]

I agree here. I especially would like to see shotgun/melee oriented mercs have a greater range of movement as the main means of weapon balance (over short-ranged/high damage). Phantom has some nifty tricks in terms of movement, but he still lacks the opportunity to be taken further. The introduction of new movement systems should make these mercs fall into place much better I think, rather than forcing them into that “pub gimmick zone”. From a weaponry point of view, I always wanted them to be movement based rather than situational glass cannons. At that point one could even brag about skill on those mercs without getting laughed at.

(INF3RN0) #45

[QUOTE=Shifty.;492952]I played some rounds during the weekend.
The first thing I noticed was the speed. I’m playing Titanfall on a daily basis and xt is compared to TF very slow. Was almost surprised how slow xt is.
The overall impression is good, xt is starts being fun to play (again).[/QUOTE]

Is TF faster in terms of sprint speed or strafe speed? And can you shoot while sprinting in it? I admit I haven’t looked at the game much more than a few twitch streams.

(Kl3ppy) #46

Sprint Speed + all the speed you gain with wallruns etc. Also the “normal” run speed is in TF faster than in xt. The pace is much faster than in xt (I use in both games fov=90). About shooting while sprinting I’m not sure, need to check it, never paid attention on this. But I think you can shoot while sprint.

(shaftz0r) #47

i think sprint speed is pretty much equal to Xt, but there are abilities like stim which give you speed burst for a short time. wall running adds speed and you can do an extra hop when you hit a ground surface to keep the speed, to link to another wallrun. i can fly across an entire map before someone on the ground gets even halfway. also there is a run and gun ability to unlock for pistols and smgs.

i actually made this thread because i came back to play this after a week of nonstop TF in my free time. after a couple of weeks, my opinion is largely unchanged. the shooting feels extremely lotto to me in this game, and i feel like a fat man with a massive gun trying to run around. i noticed the headshots i was getting were nowhere near the model (this is with 100+ ping) and the “walljumping” is gimmicky at best in its current form.

I dont want to continue this comparison to TF because it isnt really fair, but it is the elephant in the room since its the biggest game to come out this year, and will most likely stay that way for the majority of it. Its clear that people want a fast paced game, with a movement system that rewards you for taking the time to understand it and master it. not to mention that even after 60 hours, i still havent learned everything there is to know about the maps or how to traverse them. the shooting is meh because of the spread, but its rewarding when done right. you dont need to bait and camp for frags, in fact, its the opposite.

(biz) #48

titanfall has a fun movement system but the map design is so bad, at least for CTF

[QUOTE=INF3RN0;492928]I think your overlooking the part where shooting/movement are indeed given a lot of value, but not in the sense that they dominate the game entirely. After all they only become significant if there is a considerably large deficiency on one team, where as if you have equally matched teams in terms of raw individual performance then it comes down to the teamwork and intelligent strategy. You don’t have to be a master of movement or a master of aim to win a game in extraction, which is where what you’re saying falls apart. If extraction was indeed a dueling game or based on kill count and if you were required to master shooting and movement just to play casually, you’d be correct.

As long as a system like matchmaking is in place, the game will be enjoyable/winnable at any level- though the opportunity to surpass your opponent on an individual scale will be available in multiple categories.[/QUOTE]

you’re not wrong if there is actually a system in place for teams to be fair.

that just doesn’t work for these games though.
FPS games need way higher player counts because a fragmented player pool is connecting to nearby servers. even counterstrike’s matchmaking is mediocre despite heavy investment in it and a massive player base…

i play a lot of the “skill-based” games. they die really fast because of poor teams

quake is unplayable today outside of casual modes like FFA/CA
warsow didn’t even last 1 day because it’s just quake but even harder
tribes is just a bunch of fools ignoring the objective or grinding for more gear
NS2 never had fair teams

with the exception of warsow, those games do have some notion of skill-matching… but it doesn’t work at all.

Did you even play RtCW, ET, ETQW? The movement in those had depth yet didn’t dominate the gameplay. Did you just see me mention Quake 3 then simply latch onto that and assume I meant Q3 movement?

i played those games a ton.

did you miss the massive backlash against QW from the W:ET players? people were outraged when they could actually get killed by “lesser players” instead of being able to hop around like monkeys and take minimal damage and then heal up.

wolfenstein’s strafejumping was absolutely dominating the gameplay
the reason QW lasted longer (despite having a much smaller starting population) is because they toned down the mechanics and made the game about teamwork. less shooting/moving skill did a lot to level the playing field.

I’m not saying that W:ET wasn’t fun, but that was more because of the quake3 engine and less because objective mode was delivering a solid experience every time.
W:ET quickly devolved into announcers yelling ‘killing spree’ and ‘unstoppable’ and servers saving your XP for fancy weapons because balance was an afterthought

(DarkangelUK) #49

[QUOTE=biz;493085]titanfall is a good system but the map design is so bad, at least for CTF

you’re not wrong if there is actually a system in place for teams to be fair.

that just doesn’t work for these games though.
FPS games need way higher player counts because a fragmented player pool is connecting to nearby servers. even counterstrike’s matchmaking is mediocre despite heavy investment in it and a massive player base…

i play a lot of the “skill-based” games. they die really fast because of poor teams

quake is unplayable today outside of casual modes like FFA/CA
warsow didn’t even last 1 day because it’s just quake but even harder
tribes is just a bunch of fools ignoring the objective or grinding for more gear
NS2 never had fair teams

with the exception of warsow, those games do have some notion of skill-matching… but it doesn’t work at all.

i played those games a ton.

did you miss the massive backlash against QW from the W:ET players? people were outraged when they could actually get killed by “lesser players” instead of being able to hop around like monkeys and take minimal damage and then heal up.

wolfenstein’s strafejumping was absolutely dominating the gameplay
the reason QW lasted longer (despite having a much smaller starting population) is because they toned down the mechanics and made the game about teamwork. less shooting/moving skill did a lot to level the playing field.

I’m not saying that W:ET wasn’t fun, but that was more because of the quake3 engine and less because objective mode was delivering a solid experience every time.
W:ET quickly devolved into announcers yelling ‘killing spree’ and ‘unstoppable’ and servers saving your XP for fancy weapons because balance was an afterthought[/QUOTE]

We must have played different versions of those games then. ET was dominated by strafers? Sorry but you lost all credability there which wrote off the rest, I think we’re done here.

(shaftz0r) #50

um. you might just be bad at the movement system, or need to put more time into it. there’s really one map i can think of that doesnt really work for ctf, all of the rest are almost designed around it.

[QUOTE=biz;493085]that just doesn’t work for these games though.
FPS games need way higher player counts because a fragmented player pool is connecting to nearby servers. even counterstrike’s matchmaking is mediocre despite heavy investment in it and a massive player base…[/quote]

wut? cs:go is still massively popular because the matchmaking is so good. people play to advance their rank and play against peers. from what ive witnessed and have been told by top level friends, they love it, and its done extremely well.

[QUOTE=biz;493085]quake is unplayable today outside of casual modes like FFA/CA
tribes is just a bunch of fools ignoring the objective or grinding for more gear
NS2 never had fair teams[/quote]

these are entirely your opinions, and the thousands of people that play them every day would disagree completely

the backlash was against vehicles and an abhorant engine (idtech4). again sounds like you cant aim.

[QUOTE=biz;493085]wolfenstein’s strafejumping was absolutely dominating the gameplay
the reason QW lasted longer (despite having a much smaller starting population) is because they toned down the mechanics and made the game about teamwork. less shooting/moving skill did a lot to level the playing field.

I’m not saying that W:ET wasn’t fun, but that was more because of the quake3 engine and less because objective mode was delivering a solid experience every time.
W:ET quickly devolved into announcers yelling ‘killing spree’ and ‘unstoppable’ and servers saving your XP for fancy weapons because balance was an afterthought[/QUOTE]

what in the hell? you dont get new weapons, and ET still to this day has 3 times the playerbase that QW ever had. i think we live in parallel dimensions.

(biz) #51

it’s getting kind of off topic, especially when you just question people’s skill level instead of understanding anything about the games and the settings
movement should be fun, but the trend is that massive skill gaps result in dead games.

it’s funny to see people riding q3/et as examples for so long… it actually happens in every forum. i love those games, but the reality is that there’s a difference between getting a player base because of lack of competition, and getting a player base in 2014

quake / warsow / tribes / et / etqw / ns are just popular in name. they are extremely inactive, objectively speaking. and when you narrow that down to specific modes (eg. exclude Clan Arena / instagib), they are even deader.
brush it off as an opinion if you want. your personal feelings don’t really matter when it comes to activity and how close rounds actually are

titanfall does give the genre some hope when it comes to interesting movement still being viable, but its accessibility has a lot to do with cod-style mechanics and being designed as a casual game instead of a competitive one

(DarkangelUK) #52

The problem here is that you’re brushing them off after years of life and taking their activity now, but I must emphasise YEARS of life, because there was enough depth to carry them along for years because the gameplay offered more beyond just shooting. The average OCD gamer these days barely sticks to a game for a few months to a year then moves onto the next thing. This is a F2P game that SD want to have a long shelf life, you don’t get that by offering no depth. Sorry to completely disagree, but SD should absolutely look at the games that have lasted almost a decade and still have people playing them because they’re being played for a reason, and gimping them isn’t one. With each iteration of their games they’ve dumbed down and curbed the movement, and each iteration has died a quicker and quicker death… that’s quite a pattern to just brush aside and ignore.

(Anti) #53

World of Warcraft it is then! :tongue::wink:

(DarkangelUK) #54

I feel like Leeroy Jenkins everytime I rush the enemy :smiley: