Major gameplay changes you need to make! ET/QW direction


(Rex) #1

Dear Splash Damage,

I’ve already written down a lot in the “Initial Gut Feedback” thread, but I think it’s necessary to resume, since you said you are working on the gameplay right now. I’m absolutely honest about what I say, because I want Dirty Bomb to become a great game!

It seems you just need a reminder what made your former games so great and outstanding.

If you want to please your old, loyal fans you need to turn this game into another direction, unless you’re going for something completely new as you did with Brink. But this is NOT what the core of your fans want.
A few days after I joined the pre-alpha testing, I asked myself: “What would be peoples first reaction, if a screenshot gets leaked?” I came to the conclusion it would be: “This looks just like Brink!” My assumption got confirmed later, when you released the teaser trailer. Reading many comments, feedback and listening to the opinion of my mates (which are former ET and QW players/fans), almost all are afraid it will be another Brink game with a completely different gameplay.
As I already said, the problem is not the look neither the engine, but the gameplay which doesn’t feel right at the moment. It has not much in common with your former games. Five classes and objective based gameplay are simply not enough (!), as we have seen with Brink…

At the moment we got Brink movement without smart and the shooting feels a bit like CS.
I tell you, you won’t get your old fans on board neither the success as you may wished to get, if you don’t bring back the old gameplay we all love!

It is not easy to please everyone, but I think and I try to speak for the whole ET + QW community now:

[ul]
[li]Fights aren’t lasting long enough. There is no tracking, that your crosshair needs to stay at the model for a while. Hence the one who shoots first, wins. You also can’t do much if you’re on low hp and your opponent on full. In most cases the one with more HP will win. The possibility that you compensate “shooting later” by aim should be given.
[/li]There needs to be a big skill gap between “good” and “very good” aimers!
To control the spread, the best way is just to tip a few times mouse1, but never hold it. So if one opponent is in front of you and you hold mouse1, your weapon shoots randomly anywhere, but not where you aim at. You always need to single tip mouse1 to get a decent aim. Fights feel often driven by luck, due to the spread. We don’t want this, rather we would like to have a good control of our weapon like in ET or QW.

Decrease the rate of fire, increase HP, or lower the damage per shot.
Also lower the spread to make tracking possible.
Make the fights long lasting, where a good aim feels rewarding and not “spray and pray”. But don’t forget, that you can kill really fast with a few headshots just like in ET/QW.

[li]The movement is very close to the one we’ve seen in Brink. It feels clumsy, not fast, forced.
[/li]We miss the freedom we had in ET/QW where the movement was something individual. Some players strafed infight very fast, some crouched like crazy, some were duck jumping (you crouch while you are in the air) all the time and others suddenly proned. :smiley:
If you take away the shooting, you should still be able to see the difference between a pro player and a noob only by his movement. The right movement should be something you have to learn and can be improved by training.

Add strafejumping, increase jump high, add prone, make trickjumping possible, crouch should help to defend yourself better against headshots, in general: make movement skillful and useful

[li]Maps lack of the “exploration factor”. Exploring new things on the map is a nice way to keep the motivation up.
[/li]For example: "I must stand on this railing to gain an advantage with my sniper rifle" or “I must jump down here first, that I don’t lose any health”.
The current maps don’t feel like they offer much interaction in combination with the movement.
Another big issue is, that you got sometimes only one way to get to a certain point. In comparison to ET you always had at least 2-3.
I got also the feeling too long EV stages slow the attack down.

Adapt the maps for trickjumping, create interaction between fast-paced movement and the map, more ways to approach

[li]A respawn timer like in ET/QW. Timing your attacks should be important, you must be able to watch times all the time. Since time is one major factor SD games differs from other games.
[/li][/ul]

These are some majors aspects which you should get right at first.
=> Always think about the old players who should feel familiar with the gameplay on the first try of playing.
At the beginning I was surprised when I played the pre-alpha.

I will add further aspects later which come to my mind.

Greetings Rex, one of the biggest QW fans you got


(stealth6) #2

For the fights I agree they could be slightly longer, but at what point do they become too long and you start thinking “Are my bullets even doing anything?”
In a gunfight with inferno (who finishes you quite quickly) he squeezes in 2-3 strafes already so at what point is the “dance” long enough to be satisfying.

On the movement I tend to agree, although there seems to have been improvement from the first to second build I still think it could use some work. As for strafe jumping maybe it’s too big of an issue for new players and it’s hard to balance maps with it in mind since people always find a way to break it, but crouch jump, air control and maybe a new mechanic could be interesting.
No prone though, I’m glad that’s out. Streamlines the gunplay if a model is flat on the floor it’s dead, move on.

The rest I agree on.


(Humate) #3

To use a really silly example:

Does it require effort to click on an icon sitting on your desktop?
Not exactly fun right. What about if it moved up and down side to side?
How fast/slow would it need to be in order for it to be challenging but not impossible?


(tokamak) #4

I’d pull my hair out if my desktop icons constantly moved. But that aside.

I do agree that the fire rate could be lower overall.


(stealth6) #5

[QUOTE=Humate;411508]To use a really silly example:

Does it require effort to click on an icon sitting on your desktop?
Not exactly fun right. What about if it moved up and down side to side?
How fast/slow would it need to be in order for it to be challenging but not impossible?[/QUOTE]

It’s a bit more complicated than that, the icon is moving up and down while you can move your screen up and down too (and not necessarily at the same speed) and if you take too long to click it you get a BSoD.


(iwound) #6

the sad thing is its saturday and no-ones on the servers testing/playing so not a lot of real interest even with the people here.
i agree with a lot with what the op says. with speed and death you must also consider wether an obj is more easily defendable.
atm defence is spawning in a way that they get rolled over. you have to rush to get to the action but high risk. be cautious and its too late. id like to see another map. if its as claustrophobic as these then id be worried.
the fun comes from the battle but atm it leans towards an easy death before you reach where you need to be.
if you have to think about what you need to do, your already dead.

id love all the qw feel to be here. 'cos if it aint broke don’t fix it. just make it better. but it is alpha and lots will change.


(rookie1) #7

[QUOTE=Rex;411499]…A few days after I joined the pre-alpha testing, I asked myself: “What would be peoples first reaction, if a screenshot gets leaked?” I came to the conclusion it would be: “This looks just like Brink!” My assumption got confirmed later, when you released the teaser trailer. Reading many comments, feedback and listening to the opinion of my mates (which are former ET and QW players/fans), almost all are afraid it will be another Brink game with a completely different gameplay.
As I already said, the problem is not the look neither the engine, but the gameplay…[/QUOTE]

About the look:
It has a Brink looks could had been a Et:QW look or a completly different look.
Sure Having a Brinky look may scare some…Because of Brink result .
But Id look at the Brink trailer again .and again I was exiting by it .
Unless it were a real ETQW 2 sequel with the same look of the first ,nostalic players wont be fully happy.
All older games has their fans saying when a new better graphics ,better look, try to come out ,say…isnt like the original that we had so much fun .
It just cant be reproduce unless using the same old Blue print .It could work for some game title but its risky unless a High demand is there for it.
DB is a Brink/ETQW blend If SD could integrated a Magic something that would make it distinct from the other That people could say Thats DB’s epic ways we liked.
Trailers are always thrilling (mostly)
If the thrill that we see in them could just be the same ingame ,look again the Brink trailer…Also I added a Free running video where there is stuffs in there that would be nice to see in DB in the jumping and abilities

//youtu.be/H8HYs90WXms

//youtu.be/a_aRk-_c8EI


(stealth6) #8

I don’t see what’s wrong with the Brink artstyle at all. Watching that trailer is just as amazing as it was the first time (Only thing is where is the blood, people just fall down for no reason).
Artstyle and gameplay are 2 different things, if people can’t differentiate between the two then… That’s their problem.


(Humate) #9

[QUOTE=tokamak;411510]I’d pull my hair out if my desktop icons constantly moved. But that aside.

I do agree that the fire rate could be lower overall.[/QUOTE]

Yes rate of fire is a nice start. :slight_smile:
I was playing Toomic(?), earlier in tdm only using the pistol.
That somehow made combat way more fun, even though i probably would have been better off using AR.


(mitsuhiko) #10

My assumption got confirmed later, when you released the teaser trailer. Reading many comments, feedback and listening to the opinion of my mates (which are former ET and QW players/fans), almost all are afraid it will be another Brink game with a completely different gameplay.

That is to be expected from a teaser that is basically 3 seconds of gameplay.


(iwound) #11

looks nothing like brink. brink was set on corrigated iron island, this is set in the real world.

it does have a wiff of brink i admit, like an illness your getting over, you know its there but with surgery and enough treatment you can still live a normal life. it also has a scent of counterstrike with a sprinkle of of ET.
I dont think brink is an issue here. this will stand on its own. wether good or bad. only time … will tell.


(Ashog) #12

Agree with inspektor Rex on most points. I think it has been said about movement so much that I’ll pass this time.

The weapons, ehm, ROF is certainly too high, although decreasing damage and increasing health/spawntimes is imho also an alternative to go for. But yeah, with ROF one would get the result with less pain.

I tend to not agree on the spread though (maybe my opinion changes later). I think the spread, at least with medic1 rifle is ok, approximately between ETQWs AR and ETQWPROs AR. Well, from my memories, the hip fire of MP40 from W:ET had lower spread though.

The maps… always a painful topic. I consider maps one of the three major reasons of Brinks long-term fail. SD should really work on maps layout more. I am not talking looks and style which I don’t care about (Brinkish or not). I am talking about planning of maps. Maybe Chris could explain it better but they seem too linear and crowded to me somehow. Almost claustrophobic. There are not many ways to apply different tactics on them, the spawn distances and paths are also not quite adequately planned. There is something that happened along the mapping way in SD since ETQW. Strange because the mapping team hasn’t changed, right?


(tokamak) #13

The beauty of ET maps is that battles could take shape in many different ways. It was entirely up to the defender where to set the strongest points and the attackers then had to think about finding the weakest point.

Brink on the other hand already had preset points of interest and that made all the matches similar. Right now DB is mildly deviating from it but by no means enough to reach ET levels of geometric brilliance.

So yeah, come on SD, you’ve already proven that you can do it.


(murka) #14

I think the biggest problems with objectives with now is the travel time to obj. Defenders have so much room for mistakes and death isn’t punished enough. The attackers could make a nice push, but there is no point as they will be back in the same situation in a few seconds. The EV also acts as a buffer for pushes. A nice push will get it moving for some time but not enough for it to be noticeable especially at current spawntimes.

In w:et a most notable example of defense positioning would be for example braundorf_b4. As defenders you could hold the gate chokepoint because it’s easiest, but at some point allies could use the side and push hard there and probably reach the objective faster. Also the plant could be timed so that the axis are killed just after their spawnwave and get a fullspawn giving little room for a defuse. Even when this ninja tactic fails, the defense frontline has been pushed back to the obj. This demonstrates how making a push can be game making or breaking and there are no buffers for mistakes like the EV is.

Tho w:et did have goldrush and the tank obj which the EV is built on, it did feel slightly different. After a push the tank could travel so much before having a firefight near it again. And in total there were only a few points the tank could be stuck at. I doubt it happened often near the allied spawn before the turn down the road to first barricade. The _te version cut the tank path short on the bridge and it seem to be a good decision. The placement of the barricade was also spot on. It was right at the start of the most difficult part of it. In short, while the tank path seemed long, it only had a few points it would stop and that made it feel like a push-based objective still. Not to mention long spawntimes allowed moving the tank quite a bit.

One thing i like about objectives is how the map layout allows for defending it. For example sewer last objective was a pretty closed area, but both teams had to access it from the same entrance(minus the quick path for strogg, but it barely mattered). This allowed for a good push to clear the area and set up its own defense. Nobody could just run so deep in and kill the covie hacking nor snipe him from miles away. In DB however, objectives are slightly too open. The gate on Waterloo Terminus for example. It does have a small indoor area where either attackers or defenders can set up, but the gate itself is on the open and any quick sniper can kill the defuser, making it too difficult to defend once planted.

Instead of reworking every map from the ground up i suggest making spawntimes longer. It should give us a new ground to base objective balance on and quite possibly it is enough to give the old feel back.


(Dragonji) #15

I totally agree with OP, I wanted to post similar thread but I wasn’t sure if I am able to do it right, so good job Rex! I think you pointed out the most of the DB’s aspects that ET/QW fans would like to be modified.

One more idea from me:
What about disabling aiming down sight? DB’s maps are quite big but streets/rooms are not long/big enough to have any advantage from ironsights IMHO. I don’t mean to remove it completely, aiming down sight could be still possible for some kinds of less powerful weapons such as pistols.


(tokamak) #16

SD has shown great competence with dynamic respawn times so I believe this will only be a matter of (play)time to get it right.


(Rex) #17

You said “approximately” now, which could be also different. In ETQW you never had to worry about controlling spead. And in ETQW promod you could even hunt snipers on far hills with your normal weapons, because they were so precise.
Just try to hold mouse1 and release all shots at once, if you are in front of an opponent and you will see what I mean. :wink:

Thanks murka for writing down what you wanted to! I agree.

Thank you, I tried my best. :slight_smile:


(Dthy) #18

Despite not even have played yet (damn Uni internet and your blocked ports!) This was a good and informative read and at least I have a very general idea of what to expect when I finally am able to play! (Just two more weeks!). Can’t believe I’m saying this, but, nice Rex! :slight_smile:


(j4b) #19

Nice read. For me its a mix of brink and the latest wolfenstein title.sometime missing the smartbutton :smiley:
There are a lot of things like movement, mapbalance and of course gunfight mechanics to work at. but at this is a early alpha stage, i can be fine with it for now.


(warbie) #20

I agree with most points and would also like less spread while hip firing and a lowering of the rate of fire. At the moment things feel very much like CoD meets ET.