NVM this is too long of a post… I need to shorten it a little…
I will eddit it then in here ^^
General thoughts about (possible) upcoming changes concerning skill ceiling, FPS, etc
onYn
(onYn)
#6
Okay so here we go…
First of all I would like to say sorry for being offensive towards SD in most of my past (and mostly very old) posts. When I don´t understand something and someone doesn´t explain it to me properly (what basically happened on those forums to most of us at some point) I tend to get more agressive - expecting someone to knock me out with good arguments in an insatnt. That´s at least was I was hoping to happen when I got mad in the past - unfortunately I never found any profound arguments that allowed me to accept what has happened. Because of that I want to ask some of the questions I had in the past in a nicer way this, as well as give my thoughts on the overall state of the game and process of development. I need to warn you tho, I am not going to really suggest anything new, rather recycle old ideas, arguing over them once again and wonder if I get a reply that actually satisfy me and allows me to see this from a new perspective in the future. Also I am going other some issues outside of the game, that are concerning all of us.
(NOTE: I am not sure if I have actually read this, or just imagined it, but I felt like SD was working on making the game less centered about tracking aim etc. and rather about using abilities properly. If that´s not the case and I am wrong, correct me on this one please.)
What was the thought process behind making the game like it is RIGHT now?
That is the first, and biggest question I never found an satisfying answer for. I am asking this on a very general level and don´t bother with specifics like why are the maps mostly tiny, why does the game feel so casualized etc… I also ask you to not understand this question as "why didn´t you make the game like I wanted it to be, but rather as “why didn´t you make the game that you had to put in the least effort while possibly generating the biggest output”.
The reason why I don´t understand this is, that in the past SD managed to do one very successful game (considering the inflationary growth of the gaming industry), and some semi successful games where only one really stood out in the end. Looking for reasons why some games were more successful then others a general rule of thumb can be assumed: The more the games differ from the one game that was actually a real success the less of a success they become themselves while rather similar games actually have some potential. Even those games with potential, needed a community that supported them with mods etc., to actually really become what they ended up being. So judging by historical developments - and those kind of judgments are more often accurate then false - it is obvious that innovating games aren´t the strength of SD while working around a unique gameplay that happened to be created at some point by this company seemed to be working quiet nicely especially with the support of it´s commuinity. This gameplay still is a niche that no one focused on, and there never was an attempt made to cultivate this gameplay properly so that we can´t judge fairly if it´s really what made those games successful or not. Because of that, there must be a profound reason why so many of the feedback which was connected to those games was ignored and many game elements that were resembling them were removed. After all it is still kinda similar, I agree but Brink for example was similar too. I think that gameplay is as fragile as cooking: mess up one element/ingredient and the whole game/meal will change to the worse by a lot.
And note please that I am not talking about an ET2 or even ET:QW2. I am pretty sure that both games could be improved by a lot - and there is a lot of improvements in DB compared to those past games already. But the deciding factor is, that many things were also taken away, changed or casualized in a way that screws up the gameplay.
So as someone who studies economics, and by that is consistently faced with stuff like product development, generating profit and aware of the importance of innovations etc. I ask, why has this path been taken considering the much lower effort/revenue ratio that could be assumed at this point as well as historical proof of little success with innovations beyond the ET genre. Don´t bother correcting me when I am wrong at any stated facts I draw this assumptions from, I may be messing some things 
Communication in the past & present
A big issues outside of the game for me is the communication and statements that simply doesn´t have any logic. I am already over the quotes that were telling how much this game is resembling SD´s best games and even is surpassing them. Also I have given up on understanding why the “fast paced fps” this was called for ages on the forums, was put into maps that simply doesn´t have enough space for a fast paced game… However, there are still many statements that contradict themselves with the current gameplay, recent changes and upcoming changes I have heard of. It´s those contradictions and misleading information that not only leads to a lot of frustration but also to tons of useless feedback (like mine probably). This happens on a large scale, but since I don´t really spend much time on those forums any more (since I don´t feel like what I am typing is of use anyway) I can´t really judge the whole picture in this case and will rather just focus on an example, that I think showcases how much misinformed we really are.
I can´t exactly quote it since I don´t know the thread anymore where it was posted by an SD member, but somewhere a long the lines he stated that they want DB to become a “competitive FPS that allow players to grow and develop a variety of skills that can be used later on the battlefield”. I am going to break this down and show how misleading this post was. This will sound like criticism but this is about showing the issues concerning the communication and not judging any game relevant decisions.
-) Competitive: Many of tactical options, as well as individual decisions were casualized. They are simply not in the game anymore or simplified by lot. The latest one is the revive ability, that is possible for everyone now. Also the map design is rather centered about good art and fitting the game theme rather then about allowing everyone to showcase his individual skills at a specific point. Also if it comes to the merc lineups, where I really look forward to see what kind of merc compositions will work out better and which won´t work as good, I see a lot of competitive potential missed since all that matters are the mercs, there guns and abilities since everyone can do everything anyways.
-) FPS: Skill ceiling of aiming being discussed and the possibility of more game impacting merc abilities and other none FPS typical updates seem to be about to come. Also in the past I have seen way more focus on the merc and ability side then on the actual FPS aspect of the game. You can´t really call this an FPS anymore then…
-) Grow and develop a variety of skills: besides the walljumping I don´t see any benefiting skill (besides aiming with a rifle) in the game. It´s a small downgrade from what we have been used to with strafe jumping, but at least it´s not horrible, so that´s ok. I don´t see specific merc skills being required so far tho, nor feel like map knowledge does help you at all. With specific merc skills I am talking about situations where you need an enginer on that objective who not only builds the objective fast enough but also knows how to place mines correctly or need a sniper who (could) hack an objective or do some scouting while staying relevant by knowing proper positions to be effective from a huge distance. Since everyone can do everything anyways, stacking up good abilities is all that matters.
Calling it a “semi competitive, ability, london theme, based FPS with advanced movement” would be way more accurate I think… I know it´s not that different, but considering what kind of development the game went through I can not agree on calling this title fully competitive or a game that allows players to nurture and compete with various skills for example.
I think I am wrong in some cases, since this is based on arguments I mostly picked up while brainafk reading some threads in the past, so correct me if I am wrong at some specific points. However, overall I am pretty sure that you can agree on the fact of many information we get being kinda missleading in the long shot even if it´s just because SD itself doesn´t know better when stating certain things.
General thoughts about the feedback and changes I have seen being announced here and there
I have brought up the image of a person hitting a TV that stopped to work as an attempt of fixing it in the past quiet often. I honestly feel this is has gotten even more accurate over the past months. And as much as I don´t care about feedback being affected by this, I really hope that SD don´t want to find a way out of the “slump” by just “hiting the TV”.
Adjusting the skill ceiling to make the game more fun and balanced is an example of wrong interpretation of cause and symptom. Yes there aren´t currently many ways to actually win against someone who is outaiming (tracking or whatever you call it) you. But not only is this how it´s supposed to be in an FPS, but also there are many different skills and strategies that are simply not worked out well enough or do not have enough space to be played out properly. So please give us more ways to work out strategies and apply them on the maps: multiple ways to defend or attack an objective, multiple tactics, team compositions with class specific objectives, that on the other side can be taken out by super defensive defenders, medics that are unique and need to stay back in order to be able to pick others up, multiple HIGH priority targets like spawns and secondary objectives that can, but don´t have to, be game deciding depending on each teams individual strengths and weaknesses. With the current changes I honestly don´t even see how to carry a game in a draft/ranked game… the only way I have to do this is by outgunning my enemies. I can´t just hide and kill them in a blink of an eye like in CS, but I also can´t defend the objective like a super hero because I will need to kill and gib all of them instead of just the objective calss for example. As an attacker I can´t bypass the defenders and just do a secondary objective in a sneaky fashion or grab the spawn by going a very weird and long route that is almost outside of the map. There are little to no possibilities to actually surprise your enemy and by that outplay him without being actually the better “aimer”. God damn yes most of the games are being decided simply by gun power. The only way to fix this is to allow players and teams to develop individual and/or team based tactics (and there is literally a ton I could think of, that isn´t possible right now) that can be applied under given circumstances. For sure not by changing the gun fighting tho…
And concerning the rest of the argumentation I have seen about this which are pretty much made out and without ANY profound reasoning:
-
No skill in timing and positioning as well as ability usage - those can all together be solved by an improved mapdesign AND ONLY BY THAT. Gimping down the head to head fight isn´t going to improve **** in those cases and just cause even more frustrating camping based gameplay.
-
No different “aim” skills being important in the game. So first of all even with usual rifles you need to get on top of your target first. So only this already blows away this argument. On top of that you have shotguns and sniper rifles that allow you to flick shot as much as you want - and you will actually be able to benefit from it. And to round this nonsense up: some of the best individuals who I ever saw mastering this kind of gameplay where actually COMPLETELEY different in therms of aim skill. One of them was mostly good at tracking, while the other one was rather pin point accurate but not tracking as well. Since I have watched many demos and learned from them back then I am not making blind assumptions this time, but state some facts.
-
Various arguments about this being hard to master for people who get new to the game etc… Yeah well if you want to make a browser game where you can play the game properly after a 30 secounds tutorial go and play with your smartphone :). Nether have seen such a joke argument for a game… no matter if it´s a sports, board or a computergame. Various examples like CS or LoL are just examples that make my doubt someones intelligence who is arguing like this. If someone plays one of those games without having played any genre similar game before they will look just as foolish as people who start playing DB for the first time. I myself can remember how I used more then just a full magazine of my primary weapon, as well as my secondary weapon and ended up in a knife fight in the end in order to get someone down in cs, or the countless loI games I played like a moron not only not understanding the game but failing multiple times on very substantial mechanical level.
Instead of actually fixing the issue you will only change how much depth and how much of along therm learning curve (and by that motivation) there is in this game. Also many different frustrating aspects may arise then, like the game becoming rather focused about camping. For me the ability to aim while pressing “A” and “D” is something that needs you to coordinate probably and coordinating your hands is something you can train very well, like playing an instrument. It is something that you can continue improving, even after 1000 hours of playing. After some time you also start to realize patterns, you realize how people can move during a combat and given circumstances. Playing against the same opponents over and over again will allow you to understand even player specific patterns, like people who change there direction more frequently while others prefer to go in one direction for a longer time. Realizing those patterns, and implementing them into how you fight against certain people can actually give you the edge in game deciding fights. There are also different ways to play this way of fast paced combat, and unlike the mostly stationary approach like in CS there are multiple ways to work around being general untalented if it comes to fast precise mouse movements.
This however is just an example, and you could argue that all of this sounds so much like ET or ET:QW where there are many better game mechanics to be implemented. The point is, that adjusting the skill ceiling isn´t going to fix any issues (unlike adressed in couple different statements) since it´s not about aiming being too “relevant” but other aspects of gameplay being too irrelevant. Realizing the difference between cause and symptom is crucial in order to fix the issue instead of just covering it up.
Thoughts about the current game, what I like and the future
So the current game is still wibelly wobelly for me. I still see stuff that doesnt wark together, like the fast paced gameplay, aim tracking on tiny maps with little to no tactical possibilities. Some of those points really still doesn´t work together and some changes still need to happen and it doesn´t even matter in which direction they go, as long as they make sense and work nicely when put together. But I also have seen couple improvements. I like some of the map changes and mercs. I was positively surprised with the tutorial even tho it still needs some work, not essentially in therms of quality but of ammount of information passed on (what obviously doesn´t haven to happen all in one tutorial!).
What I like to see in the future is quiet simple. I would like to have accurate information on how SD people see the game, how they like it and how they want it to be, possible summed up in a thread. At the same time, I would like to know when I read some feedback about what SD guys actually think about it, if it could suite the game, or if it´s just miles away from they are looking for. I want to help them by giving them feedback that is going with the flow of the work they do, and not against it. I know that the more ideas the more you can choose from, but the more information a human has, the more creative he can become, and the more quality feedback you will get, with ideas that actually support the ideas you have and not contradict them.
In therms of the game itself, I honestly don´t know where we are going so I can´t tell clearly what I want to see… I can tell you that if we actually get the same picture of the game that is being developed here. So as far as the game goes: I just want it to be put together nicely… I don´t care which game mechanics are going to end up being in the game as long as they just support each other and give a nice game in the end. That´s all 
Sorry for the insane long post, and I hope that everyone who actually has read it or only parts of it, at least enjoyed the read a little.
cheers,
onYn
Finko
(Finko)
#7
OnYn aka Leo Tolstoy
Good post anyway, i agree with some of your arguments, esecialy “General thoughts about the feedback and changes I have seen being announced here and there” part.
stealth6
(stealth6)
#8
I feel like it’s a waste of time to make huge feedback posts on the forums, unless it helps you vent your frustration (aka if it helps you great, but don’t expect SD to read it). Feedback posts are like throwing buoys in front of an oil tanker.
I had written more here, but then I decided to take my own advice.
Since we don’t have communication let’s start the speculation:
MissMurder mentioned on Nexon forums that the forums will finally be upgraded somewhere late October early November to coincide with other things.
http://forums.nexon.net/showthread.php?1049904-Nexon&p=8893021&viewfull=1#post8893021
Meanwhile Silvanoshi’s been dumping information in the public dirty bomb boards…
Open Beta soon?
tokamak
(tokamak)
#9
Your entire post is basically
please give us more ways to work out strategies and apply them on the maps
And everyone agrees. Even SD agrees. They just want the gunplay to be correct before moving on to more elaborate parts of the game. You can clearly see this by comparing the old maps to the new maps.
onYn
(onYn)
#10
It´s not only that. It´s also asking for reasoning for why the game is like it is right now (the issue of not enough strategies and ways to apply them on the map didn´t just pop up yesterday…) as well as covering the major misleading communication between testers and developers. I go over my fear of issues being addressed in wrong ways and my thoughts about the currently most discussed topic of the “correct gunplay” where I find the reasoning behind the argumentation for changing it simply wrong on every single level.
If for example SD states that they want to casualize it even further and make the barrier to entry as low as possible (what also has many bad aspects too it if you REALY think about it) then your summary would actually be enough - but obviously that´s not the case.
xdc
(xdc)
#11
maps, maps, maps … first off.
second, there is a lack of versatility with players (not including map design in conjuction with walljumping)
there is no bunny hopping or lack of (maybe allow an extra hop before diminishing returns?),
no strafe jumping or atleast, jumping down a ramp to get a extra speed boost (again map design),
i havent noticed the ability to shoot through anything (wooden planks, etc. again map design),
the map remains static throughout the whole game, except randomly placed explosives(cars/etc) and objectives (destroyable boxes that can be hid behind for limited protection)
there is always a limited amount of height in the map (game is mainly played with left/right aim),
there are very few or no surprise attacks in the design of the map (enemy player dropping from roof cellar),
maps have nothing that add to unique gameplay:
underwater routes where players can drown,
dropping from a tall building and landing on a trampoline,
areas in map where players are usually at a higher speed ( sprinting down a ramp),
dome started to add more interesting gameplay, for example players on roofs and underground areas that extend to other parts of the map
Glottis-3D
(Glottis-3D)
#12
[QUOTE=xdc;511653]maps, maps, maps … first off.
second, there is a lack of versatility with players (not including map design in conjuction with walljumping)
there is no bunny hopping or lack of (maybe allow an extra hop before diminishing returns?),
no strafe jumping or atleast, jumping down a ramp to get a extra speed boost (again map design),
i havent noticed the ability to shoot through anything (wooden planks, etc. again map design),
the map remains static throughout the whole game, except randomly placed explosives(cars/etc) and objectives (destroyable boxes that can be hid behind for limited protection)
there is always a limited amount of height in the map (game is mainly played with left/right aim),
there are very few or no surprise attacks in the design of the map (enemy player dropping from roof cellar),
maps have nothing that add to unique gameplay:
underwater routes where players can drown,
dropping from a tall building and landing on a trampoline,
areas in map where players are usually at a higher speed ( sprinting down a ramp),
dome started to add more interesting gameplay, for example players on roofs and underground areas that extend to other parts of the map[/QUOTE]
very good points!!