So all CTF games are big boring compromises?
And all Domination type game modes are big boring compromises?
I disagree, but if that’s the way you feel, and SD make new maps that DO have offensive objectives for both sides, we’ll see if you play them or not.
i will never understand the reasoning behid the “objective maps will get boring fast”
why would objective maps gets boring but playing gamemodes like CTF (where you have to take the flag from one side of the map to the other evertime) or Payload in TF2 (where you have to push the same cart everytime) doesn’t get boring?
Can someone pleas explain that to me?
I was saying before a map mode with 5 rounds, that can unlock weapons or clothes/hair/helmet things like that if you win all 5 rounds also includes a big jackpot of XP
Yes they are. They’ve been the first step towards adding context to shooter matches and it’s been a good first step untill we figred out that fighting over one flag is actually way more fun than fighting over two.
And all Domination type game modes are big boring compromises?
Same development in Domination. We reckoned it was a good idea to have teams fighting over specific spots on the map. The game mode flopped in UT, was tried again in UT2k3, flopped again, then UT2k4 fixed it somewhat with double domination, reducing the locations to two. More fun but still not what we wanted. In the end we want both teams fighting over the same thing, that’s where the real visceral conflict raises it’s ugly head, that’s where players get ambitious, emotional and creative.
I disagree, but if that’s the way you feel, and SD make new maps that DO have offensive objectives for both sides, we’ll see if you play them or not.
I really don’t see the need to pour water with such excellent wine.
I would love to never see that, from SD, actually. Why? They’ve never done it before, and their games were great.
More compelling maps with dual/asymmetrical/nonlinear objectives, please?