Balancing Skill vs Power...

(trickykungfu) #21

thats true. you really see them with IS far to often.

(Hundopercent) #22

[QUOTE=tokamak;505799]You’re absolutely correct. However, the FPS genre is very much alive these days. It’s just that all the F2P versions is generic **** that people can get triple A quality retail version with a lively community at the budget bin or steam sale.

This means that DB can’t and won’t get away with simply offering a polished version of Brink. Players will taste it for a bit, they won’t even dislike it or complain, they’ll just drop it and forget about it. Retail games can be profitable in that scenario, a F2P game will crash and burn.

So yes, MOBA, co-op and all the other strategic/action type of games are hot. That’s because they’re addictive, have infinite depth and don’t require a Korean degree in RTS to have fun. Mobas like Smite take what is supposed to be the best element of an MMORPG and turn it into that doesn’t suck and stays fun for hundreds of hours.

And there lies the crux. Any business guy looking at the MOBA market would stay well clear of it. It seems saturated with some really big players. And yet Blizzard has thrown in an enormous budget into the development of it’s own MOBA game.

They invented MOBA and they plan on retaking the entire genre.

They do this by taking the genre to a next level. Their maps are interactive and more dynamic. Their game modes are fresh and well, they’ve got the biggest experience when it comes to hero type characters clashing against each other.

Heroes of the Storm will succeed where any other venture will be doomed.

SD must realise that they’re the Blizzard of asymmetrical FPS. They proved that much with the ET’s, but Brink didn’t move the plot far enough to stand out.

Blizzard would fail miserably if they released just another dota with recognisable themes and skins. They’re not doing that, they’re reinventing the genre.

The same burden lies on SD right now. Reinvent objective based shooters or fail. London-based ‘protect the charge’ type maps are acceptable for beta but this alone won’t cut it. Map geometry needs to be modular and malleable, it needs to respond to the team and objectives can be much more intelligent and ‘emergent’ than simply watching that repair bar fill (Volcano anyone?). It’s also understandable that the early mercs are a bit tame but for a full version it needs to exceed TF2 in creativity or people will just shrug.

Reboot the genre or be ignored.[/QUOTE]

I can agree with most of what you said. The only glaring mistake was comparing SD to Blizzard (id software is a better comparison.) Blizzard is innovative and trims the unnecessary fat off of games/genres where as SD can only mimic and prefers to add so much fat that the end product is inedible.

It’s time to face the music people. SD is not capable of producing a product that we deem acceptable without a counter part to eliminate a majority of their terrible ideas. The smart system is probably the coolest thing they’ve ever developed and even then it was implemented with a plethora of garbage.

(tokamak) #23

And yet that’s the only way a shooter can differentiate on. The ‘no nonsense tactical shooter’ are abundant, it has a few leads and a lot of failures. There’s no room to improve there, no matter how well refined and polished and reflex-rewarding the shooter may be. These things are no longer selling points. They’re part of the expectation but by themselves it’s just noise.

And that’s where Blizzard’s HotS comparison applies. The game is refined, yes, but it’s selling point is the unique takes on the classic genre in a way that only they can pull off.

One DB round where players fight in map that is constantly and substantially formed around the player’s tactical deciscions (side objectives) where the merc’s unique and crazy abilities seamlessly integrate into those plans and you’ve won yourself a playerbase. That’s what people are waiting for.

And in a way that also reduces the power/skill dilemma. Getting your ass kicked in ETQW is tolerable simply because so much crazy is appearing on your screen. During the Valley multiplayer demo I often felt like a tourist, or a war reporter or whatever, but I didn’t mind, it was glorious enough to just look at all the players making some insane spectacle unfold in front of your eyes. Whether or not I could contribute to that was second.

(Protekt1) #24

Wow… that video sucks. CS is a massive success without casual crap like the grenade launcher.

In fact, the grenade launcher and other launchers in that game should NEVER have been put in the game as they are. By giving new players a massive CLUTCH, they never improve in the core area of the game. They clutch to their cheap overpowered crap and never become good at the game. This makes it possible for someone who has played COD for the past 8 years to be absolutely **** because they never actually learned how to improve their basics and only relied on cheap crap.

There is a huge difference between what DB needs and the grenade launcher. We needs mercs that are EASIER to learn and not STRONGER just because noobs need a build in advantage.

(INF3RN0) #25

Objectives and support roles need to mirror that of the “creep waves” in a MOBA. MOBAs are incredibly complex, however the objectives are easy to grasp and the auto-targeting of creeps and half the abilities offer enough of a personal distraction from the heavy skill based stuff and teamwork requirement that people aren’t discouraged by the highly skilled game play especially with MM. In it’s current state DB is stripped of side objs, an extra ability, and other non-skill intensive features and these need to really be there. We don’t need to necessarily make the core skills easier, what we need to do is offer more less intensive mechanics that compliment the game play. Matchups of equal skill ought to feel as though games are won through more than just aim superiority, but atm that’s all that really seems to matter; especially with the fast spawns.

(Glottis-3D) #26
  1. Skill curve in objectives.
    There should be obvious progress in side and primary objectives.
    -at map start, or even every object start we need some Noob friendly (easy to do) side objectives, that are somewhat important. Like buildable mg nests, that prevent spawn camping.
    -harder objectives (more exposed, closer to the enemy, longer time to do) for the pre-primary area. These are of much importance.
    -hardest objects, that require very good teamplay, precise timing, excelent battlesense.(Rex-skill tier)
  2. In-map progress of ability. Noobs love this.
    -get 5 turret kills and upgrade your turret to fire-bullets! Just dont OP them - if damage is increased, then rate of fire should be redused. So that upgrade is very slight.
    -get 5 mines kills, and get faster charge time. But once again, dont over power mines - once chargetime is redused, cooldown should be incr3ased.
(tokamak) #27

Easy to do objectives, or objectives that aren’t really contested will quickly feel like chores though.

In map progress is crucial yeah. Not just ‘noobs’ love this, everyone does. It’s addictive as hell and a core reason why Moba’s are so popular. Every match is a little rat race to the top. You get to compare yourself against your team as well as against your opponents.

(Glottis-3D) #28

There should be an obvious challenge in all objectives. But the main goal of these objects is to make newcomers feel important. It works very well, i built dozens of mg nests in the Valley, before i could build a bridge for the MPC. It is just a matter of micro balance. Exposition to the enemy and time to perform.

(tokamak) #29

That´s an excellent example actually. The MG tower in Valley was easy to construct but incredibly difficult to destroy. The risk/reward for either side was completely different.

An example of how not to do it would be Siwa Oasis first pump right next to the starting spawn. Other than giving the attackers a slight delay on the first attack wave it really doesn’t have much of a purpose.

(DJswirlyAlien) #30

Just feel the need to point out that chess and poker are not sports by any complete definition of sports. In fact chess is the massive pain in the arse that you have to address when defining a sport. And don’t even get me started on the term “e-sports”.

Otherwise 2 good videos. I would be surprised if designer didn’t know this stuff already but it wasn’t apparent to us gamers.

(Bitey) #31

[QUOTE=DJswirlyAlien;505855]Just feel the need to point out that chess and poker are not sports by any complete definition of sports. In fact chess is the massive pain in the arse that you have to address when defining a sport. And don’t even get me started on the term “e-sports”.

Otherwise 2 good videos. I would be surprised if designer didn’t know this stuff already but it wasn’t apparent to us gamers.[/QUOTE]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-sport

MIND POWER!

(tokamak) #32

Yeah this is just semantics. His analogy applies to every activity where people compete for entertainment.

(Erkin31) #33

feel the game is too hard for new/newbie players from both a fun and effectiveness point of view

Dirty Bomb is easy to use for new players. Movements are limited and weapons are accurate.
I really think that CS is harder, weapons are totally inaccurate in the hands of noobsso two noobs will have problems to hit each other.

New players will affront veteran players, this is the reality of each game. If new players are raped, it does not mean that the game is too hard. This is the simple logic of the learning.

The video made me laugh. An easy move on SF4 ? No ! I play a lot of SF4 since some months, here my stats :


(The three first lines : Number of fights, number of victories, victory rate)

There now easy move which will make the game easy to learn because each move are complex (framedata) and the majority of moves can be punished.
The example of noobtube is also a bad example, this kind of elements is the reason that make me quit the game rapidly.
Power with no skill = Beeeeerrrrkk.
Power should only be the result of an effort, even if this power is “limited”.

The problem with DB is that the game have small maps with limited objectives in interactivity.
When I started to play to ET and that I was a big noob not able to defeat a lot of my opponents. I was still able to help my team in engineer thanks to the primary/secondary objectives, the mines (big maps, multiple spawn. You could prepare the ground).

(Erkin31) #34

Oooops. (10 chars)

(Glottis-3D) #35

Noobs need space, to realy have some time to think, and react. Some will take the longest but safe route in order toavoid raping. But we dont have these routes atm.

(tokamak) #36

Yeah I remember that from early W:ET. There’s a huge difference between having 30 or even 50 minutes to complete an entire map or to beat a time.

There’s a risk/time trade off and when you got more time you can afford to reduce the risk (detours) to ensure a solid win. There was no rush and there certainly wasn’t wave after wave of throwing yourself at the opponent.

Even though the maps are attacker biased, this little fact hands a huge advantage to the defenders. They’re not the ones in a rush. In W:ET you couldn’t really use the clock against the attackers in the same way. But in DB you know that the attacker’s limitations increase with every minute making them more and more predictable.

(stealth6) #37

[QUOTE=Erkin31;505937]Dirty Bomb is easy to use for new players. Movements are limited and weapons are accurate.
I really think that CS is harder, weapons are totally inaccurate in the hands of noobsso two noobs will have problems to hit each other.[/QUOTE]

Agree, in CS you need to learn the maps, spots to throw smokes, spots where players will hide, learn recoil patterns, … I was ranked Master guardian 2 and when placed a against a player just 2 ranks higher I’d loose the majority of the time, but pit me against somebody 2 ranks lower and I’d win most of the time.
DB is supposed to be a competitive FPS, but CS blows it out of the water.

PS CS even has bunnyhopping… Community created content… community servers…

(warbie) #38

And back in the day CS was considered a nub shooter by many who played RTCW - with way too much hinging and being decided on randomness than consistent teamplay and aiming/movement skills. How far the mighty have fallen for CS to now be considered the primo team, skill based shooter these days.

(Erkin31) #39

I used CS as example because it’s the most played FPS. But for me, the most skilled FPS of this last years is Tribes Ascend.

With Tribes Ascend, we can say that the game is hard for new players, even on a server with only new players.
There is no “easy power”, maybe the tank, but a noob tank can be easily destroyed by noob players without vehicles (turrets, missile launcher, grenade laucher, mines, sticky grenades + invisibility, etc.).
Of course, there are not a lot of players on Tribes ascend, but it makes the game really fun to play. I don’t know another FPS where you are so happy to frag other players.
Power = Skill/effort = FUN

(tokamak) #40

Shattered Horizon would take that price if it would be played more than every odd monday.