Are Smaller Teams Better?

13»

Comments

  • HarimauHarimau Join Date: 2007-12-24 Member: 63250Members
    edited January 2009
    This is a bit (a month) late, but...
    <!--quoteo(post=1695935:date=Dec 12 2008, 08:36 AM:name=Radix)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Radix @ Dec 12 2008, 08:36 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1695935"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->EDIT: The gamasutra article establishes "engagement and emotional and cognitive responses to content", not what gives them a feeling of satisfaction or enjoyment, let alone what they consider fun. There is no link between that article and a game's quality, because for instance, it would rate demonstratively low if a player was involved in a chess game. Chess is still one of the best games ever made.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    Not to rain on your parade but, the article is called:
    <b>Shoot to Thrill: Bio-Sensory Reactions to 3D Shooting Games</b>
    Last I checked, Chess wasn't a 3D Shooting Game.
    But I've been wrong before...

    <!--quoteo(post=1696017:date=Dec 13 2008, 09:57 AM:name=Zek)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Zek @ Dec 13 2008, 09:57 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1696017"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The simple reality is that different people have different preferences. Some prefer tight teams and sparse action, others prefer a constant 32-man bloodbath.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    Exactly. So the solution is.. choice, options. "Variety is etc. etc." whatever that dude a few weeks back said.

    Regarding.. was it Crispix that said it?.. how with larger maps (or maps made for more players) or large numbers of players, the commander loses control because things become too chaotic... Won't this be solved by (auto-)squads? You could say that each squad becomes treated as a single unit, so rather than a commander having to command up to 15 individual units, he needs only command two or three or four.
  • 1mannARMEE1mannARMEE Join Date: 2008-09-23 Member: 65064Members
    <!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Dynamic map sizing is going to add a lot of extra work to the map developers and from my knowledge, most of the maps for NS2 are going to be community created. It will increase the production time of individual maps and less maps would be made overall. Additionally, it'll make learning a map extremely difficult because it keeps changing depending on the number of players on the server. : /<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

    Is it really that hard to do ? Its probably gives you some extra time to think about the balancing of a map, but It would be worth it.
    And additionally those maps are harder to learn AND for that reason they don't get boring that fast.
    Just an idea, because it would solve all "our" problems perfectly (except the time problem) but if the community is providing the maps, probably some time ahead of the release of the game itself. I think except to the time problem there are no other problems.
  • invader Ziminvader Zim Join Date: 2007-09-20 Member: 62376Members
    imo the bigger the game interms of players the less competative and hardcore it is and the more casual. (on most pubs anyway)

    i like both hardcore and casual ive had great fun on both 6v6/8v8 and 14v14/16v16 esc servers.

    Id like ns2 to work for both. For me i think this is more an issue of community than game design, Details aside ns 1 works reasonably well at both scales, theres just a lack of servers, and especially smaller servers.

    In ns2 id like to see different map sets for bigger and smaller servers. Maybe just modifications of the same maps. But if there are smaller servers and bigger servers will they all be supported?
  • TheMoldyOneTheMoldyOne Join Date: 2007-07-26 Member: 61682Members
    It goes with the players and how good they are with Team playing.
Sign In or Register to comment.