Db client necessites for game to be massive appealing and easy!

(fatal1tybrand) #1

DB,

Here is some serious issues I think every FPS game should be taking into account… League of Legends has already proven their GUI system WORKS!

In FPS GAMING, we need an easy way for the user to be thrown in a REAL match 5v5. I don’t want to join a server and wait for people to join all day and be playing 4on5 or 7on8. In LOL, the game penalizes you for leaving a game before its finishes and bans you temporarily for 5 minutes before your allowed to queue up again.

We have to make it EASY for people to play the game. Not everyone is a pro/hardcore gamer like Paul and badman.

If you become the first company to tackle this issue like LOL did, you make it very easy for those users to possibly say, hey lets go play some Dirty Bomb.

I’m tired of seeing FPS GAMING - PC not easily attainable by the mainstream. It’s because your not telling the gamer what to do, your giving him TOO MANY OPTIONS. Make it simple, do you want to play 5v5 or 8v8? Set it in STONE. Have only two gamemodes.

Make them hit PLAY and they are forced to play on whatever server you put them to play on. Match them up against another 5 guys who has similar ELO or ranking. I want FPS gaming to have what LOL has, and I feel if we can force the gamers to just deal with it over time, it’ll be much easier to have matches etc.

We have to start somewhere, and I would love to see it start here!

Johnathan ‘fatal1ty’ Wendel

(Valdez) #2

Who is this Fatal1ty guy anyways?? his first post and he acts like he has a ton of experience with gaming / first person shooters. http://forums.warchest.com/showthread.php/33608-Introduce-Yourself!

In all seriousness, I think this is a brilliant idea and really hope something like this gets incorporated into dirty bomb.

(stealth6) #3

I like the idea of a LoL/Dota like match system, but I’m not a fan of it being the only way to play. (Thinking of playing on a communities server for instance or manually selecting the server with the best ping for you)

(Volcano) #4

[QUOTE=Valdez;429611]Who is this Fatal1ty guy anyways?? his first post and he acts like he has a ton of experience with gaming / first person shooters.
[/QUOTE]

(Hundopercent) #5

Damn rookies around here join up and think they know what’s good for the game.

For ranked play I agree, that would be so nice to just hop on voice, join up as 5 and start playing against 5 people for the entire night. At the same time, not everyone wants to play like that. Some people really like custom servers (i.e. practice mode for LoL) and they should be available.

Less modes the better though, that way you don’t have too many players spread out and it’s hard to get a full server.

(Mustang) #6

This is pretty much exactly what Anti has been saying to all of us that is what they’re planning to do.

So looks like everyone is on the same page with this one.

Aww bless his cotton socks… pats Volcano condescendingly on the head

(LaVaGoD) #7

Agree

If I have a favorite server I would want to be able to play there. I do agree though that a match system or Quick Play would also be a must. I think you can make both options pretty easy and intuitive enough that it won’t be confusing. Trying to reinvent the wheel might be a gamble as systems like these are already out there and can be adopted quite easily.

(nailzor) #8

I agree with the world champ.

(ImageOmega) #9

I wrote about this in one of my articles on Dirty Bombers. http://dirtybombers.com/dirtybombers/secrets-of-a-strong-community/

It is absolutely imperative that an easy match making feature be included in the game. People should be able to join a match easily or hop on their favorite dedicated server. This would help out the competitive players and the casual gamers alike.

(Evil-Doer) #10

Absolutely couldn’t agree more Mr. Wendel. This could be such a fabulous trend to start across the boards for FPS games.

(EnderWiggin.DA.) #11

I’d rather have options. BF3/BC2 has this option, OR you can use the server browser. L4D as well.
I would honestly never use this feature unless it is improved over versions used in other games. I have friends from Toronto to the west coast and we know Dallas is the best middle ground for us in terms of ping. Even if you put in logic to pick the best average ping for the current party there is no guarantee that all my friends will be on when we initially form the party.

(ImageOmega) #12

[QUOTE=EnderWiggin.DA.;429627]I’d rather have options. BF3/BC2 has this option, OR you can use the server browser. L4D as well.
I would honestly never use this feature unless it is improved over versions used in other games. I have friends from Toronto to the west coast and we know Dallas is the best middle ground for us in terms of ping. Even if you put in logic to pick the best average ping for the current party there is no guarantee that all my friends will be on when we initially form the party.[/QUOTE]

The way you’re thinking about match making is not what everyone is advocating. BF3 does not have a match making system in the sense that it will provide you a competitive # versus # where everyone starts playing from the beginning. BF3 just matches you up to a server that has people playing in your preferred game mode and it does not matter whether or not its in progress or not.

The best FPS game to compare match making features would be CS:GO. You get your team of players together, join a lobby, and hit “find a match”. Then your five players would get matched up with another group of five players (based on skill, location, or whatever). It was a system that had a lot of room for improvement, but it worked. During the match if a player drops he is replaced by a bot (that can be taken over) and the player who dropped is penalized for doing so. It’s not a system where someone else can just pop in and take his/her place.

(EnderWiggin.DA.) #13

So like Quakelive?
I’m not arguing against the ability. I’m just saying I’d never use it and I’d prefer to have the option to use it or not.

(biggyyyb) #14

It is true that too many game modes etc. can create splits in the community as well.

Although one of the reasons I used to love playing Enemy Territory for was the old 16v16 objective servers. I would always join the team with fewer players (often Allies on Battery), get rolled for 15 minutes and then somehow break through to complete the objective with less than a minute to spare (cue pub hero mm1).

+1 though, pick a team size, then click “play now!”.

(ImageOmega) #15

[QUOTE=EnderWiggin.DA.;429631]So like Quakelive?
I’m not arguing against the ability. I’m just saying I’d never use it and I’d prefer to have the option to use it or not.[/QUOTE]

QuakeLive doesn’t have this system either. QuakeLive basically just has dedicated servers that people can hop on and off as they go. There’s an auto join a match feature, but, again, it just matches you to whatever mode you prefer.

CS:GO’s match making is really the best comparison.

(biggyyyb) #16

Quake Live also does a “skill level” rating/matching system that highlights by colour (grey, green, yellow, red), so players can easily see what the average skill is on the server. Definitely a plus for players wanting to A, to play against/with players of a similar level or B, seek a challenge against/with better players. There are also server settings to block players below/above certain skill levels from entering a server as well.

(ImageOmega) #17

As frustrating as it can be to have someone who is not as skilled on your team, I think this was the silliest feature for QuakeLive. Most of the time tiers are ignored and all it does it splinter the community and also prevents bad players from playing with good players in the sense that they could learn more from watching/playing with better players.

In case anyone wants to look me up on QuakeLive btw, my name is ImageOmega on there too. =]

(INF3RN0) #18

I can agree to some extent, however only 2 game modes feels rather limited considering the f2p market. 2 official main game modes however is fine by me, especially for something like a ranked system. These would definitely be OBJ and SW. Other modes should be allowed to operate as well though, and mod support on top of that. As far as server joining options, a lot of people from these games demand dedicated servers that they can host themselves. Having a quick join que like LoL for a pub/ranked system however would be an excellent feature for creating more balanced games as well as allowing people to compete on a pub level and climb the skill groups. I can see both systems being combined or simply running side by side and satisfying the masses.

Excerpt of my thoughts/ideas on the subject from previous threads.

[QUOTE=INF3RN0;416936]I’ve listed these before, but I really think that a good system of allowing a player base to have a solid set of server type options, as well as offering stepping stones to higher level play and match making would offer a great means of building a strong player base. These ideas are stolen from other games mostly, but pretty much coincide with what your listing here Sock. I can see myself wanting to use about all these server types depending on my mood, as well as finding balanced games and challenging myself with a ranked ladder system. I would also add that a seasonal system on ladders would allow players who had improved, but were still stuck in lower division games to successfully transition to the next level (see sc2/LoL).

-Clan server list (player bought/managed servers) w/ quick join

This is for the traditional ET players and clans who want full control over server management. These games may not offer consistent balanced games, but they are non-biased towards players who don’t mind it and just want to play with friends. These would also be used for scheduled clan matches or competitive tournaments, and custom server configurations.

-Normal/Hardcore Mode Matchmaking Queue (differ in terms of spawn timers and other settings that might be too ‘hardcore’ for newbies)

Matchmaking based on collected player data/statistics (placement matches to begin perhaps). These would offer unranked games for players seeking their skill niche and other players of equal skill in a pub environment. Normal/Hardcore modes allowing players to slowly transition into more intense/complicated modes of play, and eventual ranked pug style matches.

-Ranked Ladder Solo Matchmaking Queue (maybe up to 2 friends for joint queues)

A mode of semi-competitive play where random players of equal skill are matched and must attempt the best adhoc teamwork possible in order to achieve victory; and work their way up the ladder. This would be the most intensive way for players to find self improvement and hopefully choose to participate in competitive events and form teams with the players they meet on ladder.

-Hardcore Mode Clan Matchmaking

Unranked matchmaking between clans of similar win% in different divisions of skill level. This would be less competitive than Ranked mode, but would offer new/casual clans to test the waters, find improvement, or just have fun unscheduled matches with those of equal skill.

-Clan Challenge Mode

Allowing players to challenge another clan of any skill level to an unranked scrimmage.

-Ranked Clan Matchmaking

The highest form of organized play, where clans compete via ladder match making for the top ranking.[/QUOTE]

(biggyyyb) #19

Well yeah that was my point, whoever was in control of the server could configure the join rules. However this was mostly just “pro” players not wanting to play with newbies etc.

The biggest mistake with QL was the splitting of content between pricing packs (Standard, Premium and Pro). Not allowing players to play on certain maps without paying more was a massive mistake. Now that is something that will split a community.

(ImageOmega) #20

I agree with you both here. I think dedicated servers and match making (cs:go team competition style) is the way to go here.

I do think John is on to something when he says limit the choices. Do I think there should be mod support and different game modes? Absolutely.

But, when it comes to competitive or match making play I think Splash Damage should define the standard and limit the choices. It’s like going to a restaurant and getting a huge menu. You don’t know what to order because there are so many choices. Regarding games, this leaves players split picking between the modes. CoD:BLOPS2 is a prime example of this as you can see just how wide spread the player base is based on game modes. The majority of the players ended up playing TDM in BLOPS2 which was not the touted “competitive mode”.

Fewer options for match making and competitive play for sure. I am pretty sure I highlight this all in the DirtyBombers article I linked above. =]

I think it is time for a refresh article on what I think Match Making should be.