Yeah I don't really mind if it takes a year, as you say as long as they don't run out of funding halfway through.
I just don't think saying 'look at what we've done so far' is really a good way to convince people it won't take a long time, because you kind of have to assume that it will speed up if you want to think it'll be done within the year.
<!--quoteo(post=1863999:date=Jul 27 2011, 10:27 PM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Jul 27 2011, 10:27 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1863999"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Well, strictly speaking, from memory in one year we've got 1 new lifeform, phase gates and arcs, and the game has gone from just about functional on rockdown to just about functional on tram, oh and we had flamethrowers introduced in a very half-assed form.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Maybe instead of "from memory" you should go back and read all the patch notes. Yes, there have been plenty of other big features, such as the first pass at the Infestation and cysts, but also a million other fixes, optimizations, and features. I'm sorry, but you can't just measure development progress based solely on the addition of new player classes and maps, and it's frankly just flat out disrespectful to all the hard work that's been put in up to this point.
One of the big reasons why the "flashy" features like the Onos have not been put in yet, is due to all of the large and time consuming work going on under the hood, so to speak, on the basic architecture of the engine. A lot of large systems have been added or reworked, and the majority of that work is coming to completion. <!--quoteo(post=1864004:date=Jul 27 2011, 10:37 PM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Jul 27 2011, 10:37 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1864004"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->fade has only recently become anything approaching balanced and fun for both sides, so it took a year to get the fade in and sort of balanced, therefore it will presumably take a year to get the onos in and sort of balanced, just as it will take a year to get another major performance improvement which you're going to need and more in order to get a playable game all the way through, going by previous experience anyway.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> If we had all spent the last year only focused on getting the Fade in and working and balanced in the game, then maybe you'd have something about it taking another year to get the Onos in. However, the actual amount of work on the Fade was a small fraction of the past year, since we've also done an immeasurable amount of work on all the other alien player classes, marine weapons and tech, commander mode, etc. The Onos will be in the game and functioning this year, but as far as being fully balanced and polished, we plan on still tweaking balance and polish on most of the game even after NS2 1.0 is released, since its unlikely that everything will be perfect right away. <!--quoteo(post=1864007:date=Jul 27 2011, 10:44 PM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Jul 27 2011, 10:44 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1864007"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'm just saying it does seem like it will take another year or so to get the game finished.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> While its debatable about whether or not its going to take another year before NS2 is finished, that is not even why I'm discussing this. Its not about whether we'll be finished in another year, its that people are saying ridiculous things like all that will be done on the game a year from now is being "near to the release of the Onos".
Kouji_SanSr. Hινε UÏкεεÏεг - EUPT DeputyThe NetherlandsJoin Date: 2003-05-13Member: 16271Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue
Well performance is apparently a bit better, was never able to do this even with the old lork on tram on build pre-180...
<div align='center'>Introducing the Amazing Flying Kouji! <center><object width="450" height="356"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/PgB1lya3xz8"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/PgB1lya3xz8" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="450" height="356"></embed></object></center> <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PgB1lya3xz8" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PgB1lya3xz8</a> also I found a weird little bug with the server browser when running a listenserver, there are two instances in the server browser</div>
<!--quoteo(post=1864016:date=Jul 28 2011, 01:42 AM:name=Kouji_San)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kouji_San @ Jul 28 2011, 01:42 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1864016"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Well performance is apparently a bit better, was never able to do this even with the old lork on tram on build pre-180...
<div align='center'>Introducing the Amazing Flying Kouji! <center><object width="450" height="356"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/PgB1lya3xz8"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/PgB1lya3xz8" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="450" height="356"></embed></object></center> <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PgB1lya3xz8" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PgB1lya3xz8</a> also I found a weird little bug with the server browser when running a listenserver, there are two instances in the server browser</div><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> You may wanna try twilightblue's lerk flight (if its working in 182) its very good.
<!--quoteo(post=1864016:date=Jul 28 2011, 01:42 AM:name=Kouji_San)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kouji_San @ Jul 28 2011, 01:42 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1864016"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->also I found a weird little bug with the server browser when running a listenserver, there are two instances in the server browser<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> That sounds about right. One instance comes from the Master-Server, and the other comes from a .255 LAN-scan.
<!--quoteo(post=1864015:date=Jul 28 2011, 12:39 AM:name=Squeal_Like_A_Pig)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Squeal_Like_A_Pig @ Jul 28 2011, 12:39 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1864015"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Maybe instead of "from memory" you should go back and read all the patch notes. Yes, there have been plenty of other big features, such as the first pass at the Infestation and cysts, but also a million other fixes, optimizations, and features. I'm sorry, but you can't just measure development progress based solely on the addition of new player classes and maps, and it's frankly just flat out disrespectful to all the hard work that's been put in up to this point.
One of the big reasons why the "flashy" features like the Onos have not been put in yet, is due to all of the large and time consuming work going on under the hood, so to speak, on the basic architecture of the engine. A lot of large systems have been added or reworked, and the majority of that work is coming to completion.
If we had all spent the last year only focused on getting the Fade in and working and balanced in the game, then maybe you'd have something about it taking another year to get the Onos in. However, the actual amount of work on the Fade was a small fraction of the past year, since we've also done an immeasurable amount of work on all the other alien player classes, marine weapons and tech, commander mode, etc. The Onos will be in the game and functioning this year, but as far as being fully balanced and polished, we plan on still tweaking balance and polish on most of the game even after NS2 1.0 is released, since its unlikely that everything will be perfect right away.
While its debatable about whether or not its going to take another year before NS2 is finished, that is not even why I'm discussing this. Its not about whether we'll be finished in another year, its that people are saying ridiculous things like all that will be done on the game a year from now is being "near to the release of the Onos".
--Cory<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
We don't actually see most of that though, if you spend weeks going through the game and rewriting half the engine, to do something that's neccesary for you to implement something else further down the line, we won't notice unless it has some 'flashy' effect on the game.
What matters to players is the end result, if you spend a tiny amount of work to put the fade in, yay that's awesome, we get a new class, it has a visible impact on the game, if you spend five months rewriting the rendering system for some reason but it looks more or less the same at the end, ok? Is it going to increase my fps? No? Well, good job I guess, when's the onos coming? Even if it does fix things, like the work that was done to fix the hitreg issues, it's still comparatively minor conceptually. To an outside observer you've spent a long time going from having guns that shoot at the aliens and do damage, to having guns that shoot at the aliens and do damage with slightly more reliability, despite the fact that it probably took a lot of going through the code and looking at why it's bugging out and trying fixes and retrying fixes until it was eventually fixed.
If we can't see it, it doesn't look like work, and it doesn't make the game better until it actually makes the game better, I and most other people aren't very knowledgeable about technical issues, so while someone working on the game might find a major rewrite very helpful, like with the new animation system you added, I'm sure that's marvellously helpful to all the people working with animations and will probably allow them to get their work done a lot faster, if all it does for a player at the moment is fix a few minor animation hitches, it isn't going to look like much progress, and people are going to feel as though you aren't working very hard or you don't know what you're doing or other things which I imagine you find very annoying.
<!--quoteo(post=1864020:date=Jul 28 2011, 12:56 AM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Jul 28 2011, 12:56 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1864020"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I and most other people aren't very knowledgeable about technical issues<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So let us stop you right there. Stick to what you know.
<!--quoteo(post=1864022:date=Jul 28 2011, 01:07 AM:name=dux)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (dux @ Jul 28 2011, 01:07 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1864022"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So let us stop you right there. Stick to what you know.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I don't think you will get very far yelling at the world to stop being stupid. I certainly haven't.
<!--quoteo(post=1864025:date=Jul 28 2011, 01:09 AM:name=Koruyo)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Koruyo @ Jul 28 2011, 01:09 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1864025"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Chris, how does your wall of crap (in which you assume most ppl here are idiots) change any of this? - If you are not one of those only fleshystuff-seer stupids you should understand that there are other tasks that need to be done first. And QQing about this wont magically fix those things.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I do, while I can't see the work they do I can assume they aren't sitting around the office twiddling their thumbs and that some things do just take a long time and require a lot of groundwork, but I also know that not everyone is going to think that. You are going to get people (not entirely irrationally) thinking that because they don't see progress, progress isn't being made. Especially if they have useful and productive things to do with their lives (unlike me) and don't read the forums very much. Pointing to past progress isn't going to help because the whole reason they are unhappy is because they don't see much progress.
It's just something you're going to have to deal with.
<!--quoteo(post=1864027:date=Jul 28 2011, 01:11 AM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Jul 28 2011, 01:11 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1864027"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I do, while I can't see the work they do I can assume they aren't sitting around the office twiddling their thumbs and that some things do just take a long time and require a lot of groundwork, but I also know that not everyone is going to think that. You are going to get people (not entirely irrationally) thinking that because they don't see progress, progress isn't being made. Especially if they have useful and productive things to do with their lives (unlike me) and don't read the forums very much. Pointing to past progress isn't going to help because the whole reason they are unhappy is because they don't see much progress.
It's just something you're going to have to deal with.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why don't you let those people fight their own battles then, since you're just the messenger after all.
I can see why you're frustrated, but other people would just think you're being a massive baby, not me though.
<!--quoteo(post=1864031:date=Jul 28 2011, 01:26 AM:name=Wilson)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Wilson @ Jul 28 2011, 01:26 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1864031"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Why don't you let those people fight their own battles then, since you're just the messenger after all.
I can see why you're frustrated, but other people would just think you're being a massive baby, not me though.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Force of habit. Like I said I don't think it's <i>wrong</i> to believe that, it's not a terrible unforgivable mistake, just a minor change in logic that leads to a very different conclusion, I don't really think people should be demonised for believing it. 'I can't see an improvement therefore there isn't one' isn't that unreasonable, it's pretty logical in a lot of ways, and it annoys me when people get jumped on for complaining about it. You can't expect everyone to be familiar with the complexities of developing a game, or any really big task.
<!--quoteo(post=1864044:date=Jul 27 2011, 09:10 PM:name=hate)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (hate @ Jul 27 2011, 09:10 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1864044"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I can't see oxygen so therefore there isn't any.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> should get your eyes checked.
<!--quoteo(post=1864035:date=Jul 28 2011, 02:36 AM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Jul 28 2011, 02:36 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1864035"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->...You can't expect everyone to be familiar with the complexities of developing a game, or any really big task.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Of course not, but if you want to make arguments based on game development, the least you could do, is either ask for information, go look for information and in some way educate yourself about the processes involved. If you don't want to do this, either because you don't have the time or you feel you shouldn't have to, then your arguments are by default going to became extremely flawed or rather ..how shall we say..unhelpful, and therefor not conducive to anyone's mood or current lack of headache. This is something you have to accept if you want to remain ignorant/uninformed. I'm not forcing you one way or the other, just saying what the conditions are for either case, and that you have to accept your choices.
<!--quoteo(post=1864004:date=Jul 27 2011, 05:37 PM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Jul 27 2011, 05:37 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1864004"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It has improved yes, but it's still not very good, it's gone from unusable to bad, which is a significant improvement, but it has far more to go I think than it has already gone.
So like I said, 'maybe ok' is not a bad estimate for a year's time.
Yes there's been lots of redoing things, we've had several different iterations of lots of things, but all that says is that you need several iterations in order to get something useable out at the end, fade has only recently become anything approaching balanced and fun for both sides, so it took a year to get the fade in and sort of balanced, therefore it will presumably take a year to get the onos in and sort of balanced, just as it will take a year to get another major performance improvement which you're going to need and more in order to get a playable game all the way through, going by previous experience anyway.
Lots of progress made, far more progress needed. I would be genuinely surprised if the game is done by this time next year. Pleasantly so, but still surprised.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It probably will take at least another year to launch, though I bet it will be in much better state than now. You forget that as a game's engine is developed it generally gets easier and easier to code in it(slowly becoming more organized, memorizing your code much better, etc). Same goes with anything, practice makes perfect :P. Plus what's wrong with another year anyways? This is a very small dev team, and huge studios with hundreds of employee's still take around 5 years for a game to "release" and then after that is still sometimes riddled with issues. So I say good job so far UWE, these glitched patches are expected to happen.. but how well they are fixed is really all that matters.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I don't know what else to do about it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ignore them, simple enough. Though that's not going to help with UWE's reputation, so just actually explain what your doing in non-technical terms and how such and such is needed and has to be done. In my short time here one thing I have noticed is UW is bad about using the getsatisfaction tracker which is what most use to report issues.. when none of those are being responded to it shows no progress to most.
<!--quoteo(post=1864020:date=Jul 27 2011, 08:56 PM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Jul 27 2011, 08:56 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1864020"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->We don't actually see most of that though, if you spend weeks going through the game and rewriting half the engine, to do something that's neccesary for you to implement something else further down the line, we won't notice unless it has some 'flashy' effect on the game.
What matters to players is the end result, if you spend a tiny amount of work to put the fade in, yay that's awesome, we get a new class, it has a visible impact on the game, if you spend five months rewriting the rendering system for some reason but it looks more or less the same at the end, ok? Is it going to increase my fps? No? Well, good job I guess, when's the onos coming? Even if it does fix things, like the work that was done to fix the hitreg issues, it's still comparatively minor conceptually. To an outside observer you've spent a long time going from having guns that shoot at the aliens and do damage, to having guns that shoot at the aliens and do damage with slightly more reliability, despite the fact that it probably took a lot of going through the code and looking at why it's bugging out and trying fixes and retrying fixes until it was eventually fixed.
If we can't see it, it doesn't look like work, and it doesn't make the game better until it actually makes the game better, I and most other people aren't very knowledgeable about technical issues, so while someone working on the game might find a major rewrite very helpful, like with the new animation system you added, I'm sure that's marvellously helpful to all the people working with animations and will probably allow them to get their work done a lot faster, if all it does for a player at the moment is fix a few minor animation hitches, it isn't going to look like much progress, and people are going to feel as though you aren't working very hard or you don't know what you're doing or other things which I imagine you find very annoying.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I don't think you understand at all.
Those "under-the-hood" changes that don't have much of a visible impact on what players see are there because they are <i>necessary</i> for visible changes to happen. You can't have all the visible changes with none of the invisible ones. There <i>would be no game</i> without those invisible changes, no matter the level of ignorance from which you speak.
Speaking as a game programmer myself, professional game development is some of the most challenging non-physical work in the world. I know it's hard to grasp the amount of effort put into this stuff without being in the industry, but it saddens me when people think game developers are automatically "slacking off" when they don't see something particularly relevant to their interests at first glance. It's not too uncommon (unfortunately) for a game programmer to have 80- or 100-hour work weeks during high-intensity periods like closed beta (although this is often due to mismanagement from higher-ups in large companies).
<!--quoteo(post=1864015:date=Jul 27 2011, 07:39 PM:name=Squeal_Like_A_Pig)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Squeal_Like_A_Pig @ Jul 27 2011, 07:39 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1864015"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Maybe instead of "from memory" you should go back and read all the patch notes......
--Cory<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--quoteo(post=1864022:date=Jul 27 2011, 08:07 PM:name=dux)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (dux @ Jul 27 2011, 08:07 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1864022"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So let us stop you right there. Stick to what you know.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Guys stop feeding the trolls. I know it must be incredibly hard to not buy a ticket, fly to those nagger to and teach them some respect for all your hard work. People like chris always were like that and always will be. There is no point in offering them your attention. Just keep in mind those people are a minority. The majority (like me) is enjoying the game and understanding that the development will take some time, beta does not equal finished product and so on blablabla. Keep up your good attitude and of course the great work!
<!--sizeo:3--><span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo-->MOAR TURRETS!!<!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec--> <ul><li>How are people finding the new ammo limit on turrets?</li><li>How are people finding the new attacking-disrupts-aiming of turret?</li><li>Is turret spam over?</li><li>Are marines still turtling?</li></ul>
I still find some games where marines fill two+ rooms with turrets, slowing down alien win :(
The ammo fix is cool IMHO, but I would have liked to see a small radius around each turret which prevents another turret from being built close by (so no overlapping placement).
SewlekThe programmer previously known as SchimmelJoin Date: 2003-05-13Member: 16247Members, NS2 Developer, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Gold, Subnautica Developer
<!--quoteo(post=1864151:date=Jul 28 2011, 05:34 AM:name=autograder)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (autograder @ Jul 28 2011, 05:34 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1864151"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><!--sizeo:3--><span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo-->MOAR TURRETS!!<!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec--> <ul><li>How are people finding the new ammo limit on turrets?</li><li>How are people finding the new attacking-disrupts-aiming of turret?</li><li>Is turret spam over?</li><li>Are marines still turtling?</li></ul>
I still find some games where marines fill two+ rooms with turrets, slowing down alien win :(
The ammo fix is cool IMHO, but I would have liked to see a small radius around each turret which prevents another turret from being built close by (so no overlapping placement).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I dont like the implementation, but the idea "turrets need ammo" I do like very much. Elegant try to fix the stalemate / spam problem, although its was just a try in my opinion and it fixed it not completely (I still had bunch of stalemates, not able to break marine bases)
Yes, the approach is good, yet needs some tweaking (maybe increase the pres cost or decrease the max ammo or do something completely else so the comm has less pres left for that ...)
<!--quoteo(post=1864151:date=Jul 28 2011, 11:34 AM:name=autograder)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (autograder @ Jul 28 2011, 11:34 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1864151"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><!--sizeo:3--><span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo-->MOAR TURRETS!!<!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec--> <ul><li>How are people finding the new ammo limit on turrets?</li><li>How are people finding the new attacking-disrupts-aiming of turret?</li><li>Is turret spam over?</li><li>Are marines still turtling?</li></ul>
I still find some games where marines fill two+ rooms with turrets, slowing down alien win :(
The ammo fix is cool IMHO, but I would have liked to see a small radius around each turret which prevents another turret from being built close by (so no overlapping placement).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Honestly I don't even notice the change, other than having to refill turrets manually they don't seem to be functioning much different, if anything they actually seem to be stronger, although that could just be due to changes to the alien classes in recent patches.
The reloading mechanic isn't working I think, either it's going to be prohibitively expensive, or it's going to be used all the time and thus be useless, something like recharging energy would be better as you can't make that recharge faster and it requires less busy work, you also need a fairly major change to how they affect aliens, as the current 'do small amounts of damage over quite a long time' approach encourages you to spam them like mad.
I also think you need some sort of limiting factor on how many you can place in an area, to encourage spreading them out.
Comments
I just don't think saying 'look at what we've done so far' is really a good way to convince people it won't take a long time, because you kind of have to assume that it will speed up if you want to think it'll be done within the year.
Maybe instead of "from memory" you should go back and read all the patch notes. Yes, there have been plenty of other big features, such as the first pass at the Infestation and cysts, but also a million other fixes, optimizations, and features. I'm sorry, but you can't just measure development progress based solely on the addition of new player classes and maps, and it's frankly just flat out disrespectful to all the hard work that's been put in up to this point.
One of the big reasons why the "flashy" features like the Onos have not been put in yet, is due to all of the large and time consuming work going on under the hood, so to speak, on the basic architecture of the engine. A lot of large systems have been added or reworked, and the majority of that work is coming to completion.
<!--quoteo(post=1864004:date=Jul 27 2011, 10:37 PM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Jul 27 2011, 10:37 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1864004"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->fade has only recently become anything approaching balanced and fun for both sides, so it took a year to get the fade in and sort of balanced, therefore it will presumably take a year to get the onos in and sort of balanced, just as it will take a year to get another major performance improvement which you're going to need and more in order to get a playable game all the way through, going by previous experience anyway.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If we had all spent the last year only focused on getting the Fade in and working and balanced in the game, then maybe you'd have something about it taking another year to get the Onos in. However, the actual amount of work on the Fade was a small fraction of the past year, since we've also done an immeasurable amount of work on all the other alien player classes, marine weapons and tech, commander mode, etc. The Onos will be in the game and functioning this year, but as far as being fully balanced and polished, we plan on still tweaking balance and polish on most of the game even after NS2 1.0 is released, since its unlikely that everything will be perfect right away.
<!--quoteo(post=1864007:date=Jul 27 2011, 10:44 PM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Jul 27 2011, 10:44 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1864007"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'm just saying it does seem like it will take another year or so to get the game finished.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
While its debatable about whether or not its going to take another year before NS2 is finished, that is not even why I'm discussing this. Its not about whether we'll be finished in another year, its that people are saying ridiculous things like all that will be done on the game a year from now is being "near to the release of the Onos".
--Cory
<div align='center'>Introducing the Amazing Flying Kouji!
<center><object width="450" height="356"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/PgB1lya3xz8"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/PgB1lya3xz8" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="450" height="356"></embed></object></center>
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PgB1lya3xz8" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PgB1lya3xz8</a>
also I found a weird little bug with the server browser when running a listenserver, there are two instances in the server browser</div>
<div align='center'>Introducing the Amazing Flying Kouji!
<center><object width="450" height="356"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/PgB1lya3xz8"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/PgB1lya3xz8" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="450" height="356"></embed></object></center>
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PgB1lya3xz8" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PgB1lya3xz8</a>
also I found a weird little bug with the server browser when running a listenserver, there are two instances in the server browser</div><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You may wanna try twilightblue's lerk flight (if its working in 182) its very good.
That sounds about right. One instance comes from the Master-Server, and the other comes from a .255 LAN-scan.
One of the big reasons why the "flashy" features like the Onos have not been put in yet, is due to all of the large and time consuming work going on under the hood, so to speak, on the basic architecture of the engine. A lot of large systems have been added or reworked, and the majority of that work is coming to completion.
If we had all spent the last year only focused on getting the Fade in and working and balanced in the game, then maybe you'd have something about it taking another year to get the Onos in. However, the actual amount of work on the Fade was a small fraction of the past year, since we've also done an immeasurable amount of work on all the other alien player classes, marine weapons and tech, commander mode, etc. The Onos will be in the game and functioning this year, but as far as being fully balanced and polished, we plan on still tweaking balance and polish on most of the game even after NS2 1.0 is released, since its unlikely that everything will be perfect right away.
While its debatable about whether or not its going to take another year before NS2 is finished, that is not even why I'm discussing this. Its not about whether we'll be finished in another year, its that people are saying ridiculous things like all that will be done on the game a year from now is being "near to the release of the Onos".
--Cory<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
We don't actually see most of that though, if you spend weeks going through the game and rewriting half the engine, to do something that's neccesary for you to implement something else further down the line, we won't notice unless it has some 'flashy' effect on the game.
What matters to players is the end result, if you spend a tiny amount of work to put the fade in, yay that's awesome, we get a new class, it has a visible impact on the game, if you spend five months rewriting the rendering system for some reason but it looks more or less the same at the end, ok? Is it going to increase my fps? No? Well, good job I guess, when's the onos coming? Even if it does fix things, like the work that was done to fix the hitreg issues, it's still comparatively minor conceptually. To an outside observer you've spent a long time going from having guns that shoot at the aliens and do damage, to having guns that shoot at the aliens and do damage with slightly more reliability, despite the fact that it probably took a lot of going through the code and looking at why it's bugging out and trying fixes and retrying fixes until it was eventually fixed.
If we can't see it, it doesn't look like work, and it doesn't make the game better until it actually makes the game better, I and most other people aren't very knowledgeable about technical issues, so while someone working on the game might find a major rewrite very helpful, like with the new animation system you added, I'm sure that's marvellously helpful to all the people working with animations and will probably allow them to get their work done a lot faster, if all it does for a player at the moment is fix a few minor animation hitches, it isn't going to look like much progress, and people are going to feel as though you aren't working very hard or you don't know what you're doing or other things which I imagine you find very annoying.
So let us stop you right there. Stick to what you know.
I don't think you will get very far yelling at the world to stop being stupid. I certainly haven't.
Slippery as an eel.
PS: No need for flashy, until everything else is right.
I do, while I can't see the work they do I can assume they aren't sitting around the office twiddling their thumbs and that some things do just take a long time and require a lot of groundwork, but I also know that not everyone is going to think that. You are going to get people (not entirely irrationally) thinking that because they don't see progress, progress isn't being made. Especially if they have useful and productive things to do with their lives (unlike me) and don't read the forums very much. Pointing to past progress isn't going to help because the whole reason they are unhappy is because they don't see much progress.
It's just something you're going to have to deal with.
I don't know what else to do about it.
It's just something you're going to have to deal with.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why don't you let those people fight their own battles then, since you're just the messenger after all.
I can see why you're frustrated, but other people would just think you're being a massive baby, not me though.
I can see why you're frustrated, but other people would just think you're being a massive baby, not me though.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Force of habit. Like I said I don't think it's <i>wrong</i> to believe that, it's not a terrible unforgivable mistake, just a minor change in logic that leads to a very different conclusion, I don't really think people should be demonised for believing it. 'I can't see an improvement therefore there isn't one' isn't that unreasonable, it's pretty logical in a lot of ways, and it annoys me when people get jumped on for complaining about it. You can't expect everyone to be familiar with the complexities of developing a game, or any really big task.
should get your eyes checked.
Of course not, but if you want to make arguments based on game development, the least you could do, is either ask for information, go look for information and in some way educate yourself about the processes involved.
If you don't want to do this, either because you don't have the time or you feel you shouldn't have to, then your arguments are by default going to became extremely flawed or rather ..how shall we say..unhelpful, and therefor not conducive to anyone's mood or current lack of headache. This is something you have to accept if you want to remain ignorant/uninformed. I'm not forcing you one way or the other, just saying what the conditions are for either case, and that you have to accept your choices.
So like I said, 'maybe ok' is not a bad estimate for a year's time.
Yes there's been lots of redoing things, we've had several different iterations of lots of things, but all that says is that you need several iterations in order to get something useable out at the end, fade has only recently become anything approaching balanced and fun for both sides, so it took a year to get the fade in and sort of balanced, therefore it will presumably take a year to get the onos in and sort of balanced, just as it will take a year to get another major performance improvement which you're going to need and more in order to get a playable game all the way through, going by previous experience anyway.
Lots of progress made, far more progress needed. I would be genuinely surprised if the game is done by this time next year. Pleasantly so, but still surprised.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It probably will take at least another year to launch, though I bet it will be in much better state than now. You forget that as a game's engine is developed it generally gets easier and easier to code in it(slowly becoming more organized, memorizing your code much better, etc). Same goes with anything, practice makes perfect :P. Plus what's wrong with another year anyways? This is a very small dev team, and huge studios with hundreds of employee's still take around 5 years for a game to "release" and then after that is still sometimes riddled with issues. So I say good job so far UWE, these glitched patches are expected to happen.. but how well they are fixed is really all that matters.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I don't know what else to do about it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ignore them, simple enough. Though that's not going to help with UWE's reputation, so just actually explain what your doing in non-technical terms and how such and such is needed and has to be done. In my short time here one thing I have noticed is UW is bad about using the getsatisfaction tracker which is what most use to report issues.. when none of those are being responded to it shows no progress to most.
What matters to players is the end result, if you spend a tiny amount of work to put the fade in, yay that's awesome, we get a new class, it has a visible impact on the game, if you spend five months rewriting the rendering system for some reason but it looks more or less the same at the end, ok? Is it going to increase my fps? No? Well, good job I guess, when's the onos coming? Even if it does fix things, like the work that was done to fix the hitreg issues, it's still comparatively minor conceptually. To an outside observer you've spent a long time going from having guns that shoot at the aliens and do damage, to having guns that shoot at the aliens and do damage with slightly more reliability, despite the fact that it probably took a lot of going through the code and looking at why it's bugging out and trying fixes and retrying fixes until it was eventually fixed.
If we can't see it, it doesn't look like work, and it doesn't make the game better until it actually makes the game better, I and most other people aren't very knowledgeable about technical issues, so while someone working on the game might find a major rewrite very helpful, like with the new animation system you added, I'm sure that's marvellously helpful to all the people working with animations and will probably allow them to get their work done a lot faster, if all it does for a player at the moment is fix a few minor animation hitches, it isn't going to look like much progress, and people are going to feel as though you aren't working very hard or you don't know what you're doing or other things which I imagine you find very annoying.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I don't think you understand at all.
Those "under-the-hood" changes that don't have much of a visible impact on what players see are there because they are <i>necessary</i> for visible changes to happen. You can't have all the visible changes with none of the invisible ones. There <i>would be no game</i> without those invisible changes, no matter the level of ignorance from which you speak.
Speaking as a game programmer myself, professional game development is some of the most challenging non-physical work in the world. I know it's hard to grasp the amount of effort put into this stuff without being in the industry, but it saddens me when people think game developers are automatically "slacking off" when they don't see something particularly relevant to their interests at first glance.
It's not too uncommon (unfortunately) for a game programmer to have 80- or 100-hour work weeks during high-intensity periods like closed beta (although this is often due to mismanagement from higher-ups in large companies).
--Cory<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--quoteo(post=1864022:date=Jul 27 2011, 08:07 PM:name=dux)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (dux @ Jul 27 2011, 08:07 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1864022"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So let us stop you right there. Stick to what you know.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Guys stop feeding the trolls. I know it must be incredibly hard to not buy a ticket, fly to those nagger to and teach them some respect for all your hard work.
People like chris always were like that and always will be. There is no point in offering them your attention.
Just keep in mind those people are a minority. The majority (like me) is enjoying the game and understanding that the development will take some time, beta does not equal finished product and so on blablabla.
Keep up your good attitude and of course the great work!
It's not only structures, I saw the fade model spammed just like that... 100 times in a line...
The bite exploit in 181 was fun - this isn't :(<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I would love to see a screenshot of this.
<ul><li>How are people finding the new ammo limit on turrets?</li><li>How are people finding the new attacking-disrupts-aiming of turret?</li><li>Is turret spam over?</li><li>Are marines still turtling?</li></ul>
I still find some games where marines fill two+ rooms with turrets, slowing down alien win :(
The ammo fix is cool IMHO, but I would have liked to see a small radius around each turret which prevents another turret from being built close by (so no overlapping placement).
<ul><li>How are people finding the new ammo limit on turrets?</li><li>How are people finding the new attacking-disrupts-aiming of turret?</li><li>Is turret spam over?</li><li>Are marines still turtling?</li></ul>
I still find some games where marines fill two+ rooms with turrets, slowing down alien win :(
The ammo fix is cool IMHO, but I would have liked to see a small radius around each turret which prevents another turret from being built close by (so no overlapping placement).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I dont like the implementation, but the idea "turrets need ammo" I do like very much. Elegant try to fix the stalemate / spam problem, although its was just a try in my opinion and it fixed it not completely (I still had bunch of stalemates, not able to break marine bases)
<ul><li>How are people finding the new ammo limit on turrets?</li><li>How are people finding the new attacking-disrupts-aiming of turret?</li><li>Is turret spam over?</li><li>Are marines still turtling?</li></ul>
I still find some games where marines fill two+ rooms with turrets, slowing down alien win :(
The ammo fix is cool IMHO, but I would have liked to see a small radius around each turret which prevents another turret from being built close by (so no overlapping placement).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Honestly I don't even notice the change, other than having to refill turrets manually they don't seem to be functioning much different, if anything they actually seem to be stronger, although that could just be due to changes to the alien classes in recent patches.
The reloading mechanic isn't working I think, either it's going to be prohibitively expensive, or it's going to be used all the time and thus be useless, something like recharging energy would be better as you can't make that recharge faster and it requires less busy work, you also need a fairly major change to how they affect aliens, as the current 'do small amounts of damage over quite a long time' approach encourages you to spam them like mad.
I also think you need some sort of limiting factor on how many you can place in an area, to encourage spreading them out.