Does it? NS2 with modified scripts to make it behave more like NS1 is still NS2. I guess when you say NS2 I'm thinking Spark, not the Lua-scripts that contain the game-logic.
Your interpretation does not match mine, or many others' for that matter I'm sure.
I mean, that's very much like saying that CryEngine3 is Crysis 2. "Spark is NS2". Or saying that Source is Portal 2. Except that Source was the engine designed for Half-Life 2, so: Half-Life 2 is Portal 2. After all: "NS2 means Spark, so NS1 on Spark is still NS2"; therefore: Half-Life 2 means Source, so Portal 2 on Source is still Half-Life 2. Yeah... that's not at all how I'd put it.
I think it would be interesting. I'm not sure which would be the better game as I haven't played either as a finished article. Although I don't like the direction of NS2 gameplay so I'd be very keen to try it.
That's not negative I don't think, if anything, it's extending the franchise.
<!--quoteo(post=1892232:date=Dec 31 2011, 05:01 PM:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Harimau @ Dec 31 2011, 05:01 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1892232"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Your interpretation does not match mine, or many others' for that matter I'm sure.
I mean, that's very much like saying that CryEngine3 is Crysis 2. "Spark is NS2". Or saying that Source is Portal 2. Except that Source was the engine designed for Half-Life 2, so: Half-Life 2 is Portal 2. After all: "NS2 means Spark, so NS1 on Spark is still NS2"; therefore: Half-Life 2 means Source, so Portal 2 on Source is still Half-Life 2. Yeah... that's not at all how I'd put it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> It's the engine primarily, that I identify with. The models, sounds, textures, animations and technology in general. There isn't even an NS2 to speak of at the moment really, the gameplay is constantly shifting, and everything is subject to change. If someone were to make changes into the scripts that made things more like NS1's gameplay, it wouldn't by any means constitute an NS1-port in my view. And seeing as modding has become so important to NS2, I think most if not all mods strictly speaking are still some form NS2. And in terms of player-base that is all that matters. Whether people will play UWE's vision of NS2, or some random modder's, at the end of the day it is NS2 that benefits (in terms of popularity and accessibility as a whole).
I do not view disputes over NS2 and propositions to mod it into a different direction any kind of negativity.
To konata, the "negative" bit that I was talking about was the attitude that led to this even being discussed. I think it was fair for ironhorse to accuse some of negativity, because that's what it was.
To player, it is commonly understood that the game (NS2) is built on top of the engine (Spark) - yes, the game is not complete (actually, neither is the engine) - both of which are subsets of the "product". Our discussion is focused not around the engine, and not around the product, but around the game. Also, the discussion also involved porting (though enhancing) textures, models and maps; so it would be an NS1 port in truth. Other than that, you know, you seem to be under the impression that I disagree with you. And in part, perhaps I do: Mods should not be a <b>substitute</b> for the vanilla game. However, I do agree with you on the value of mods, especially with regards to new content, and diversifying the playing experience. I look forward to playing Classic and Combat, as alternative game modes, none of which I would play exclusively. I look forward to playing total conversions (with the hope that the community, particularly the modding community, becomes healthy enough to support such endeavours). But only a minority of people will purchase NS2 just to play (or make) the mods, so Natural Selection 2 must be able to stand on its own.
But negativity doesn't have to be destructive, it can be constructive. Unfortunately, that negativity is focused on Natural Selection 2, so we end up with constant re-working of the concepts before they have even been fully fleshed-out or tried out* (it's partially a "The Man, the Boy and the Donkey" situation). *It's really encouraging to see people like Schimmel, xVizions, Yuuki et al actually putting their money where their mouths are and trying out these alternative ideas about balance and features - not necessarily trying to create substitutes to the game, but creating, testing and iterating proofs of concepts (whether these make it into the game, serve as inspiration for the game, remain standalone or join another mod, is irrelevant).
Natural Selection was a great game - a better game, even (than Natural Selection 2) - but it was not a perfect game. It had issues. Natural Selection 2 is based on Natural Selection, right? So, rather than focus on what we perceive as the "good" parts of Natural Selection (frankly, people don't 'know' what they want) and the bad parts of Natural Selection 2 (which changes with every build), let's take off our rose-tinted glasses and instead focus on those things that were less than satisfactory with Natural Selection, so that we can improve on them in Natural Selection 2. (This is not, however, an invitation to bash Combat and the "splitting of the community" again. God. Haven't we beaten THAT dead horse enough?) In this way, if Natural Selection 2 truly uses Natural Selection as a base, then it should, ostensibly, be the better game. I'll start. - NS had a high barrier to entry (caused by a myriad of issues). - NS was only really balanced for a certain game size (6v6), ergo it was not balanced for other game sizes. - NS's resource system did not scale well. - NS did not make every part of the game reasonably accessible to every player, outside of Combat with server mods. - NS had player disables.
<!--quoteo(post=1892280:date=Jan 1 2012, 03:37 AM:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Harimau @ Jan 1 2012, 03:37 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1892280"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->To player, it is commonly understood that the game (NS2) is built on top of the engine (Spark) - yes, the game is not complete (actually, neither is the engine) - both of which are subsets of the "product". Our discussion is focused not around the engine, and not around the product, but around the game.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> The thing is, we're not talking about an ordinary game like HL2\Portal 2, where the both the engine and game are set in stone. When Lua Server-Client sync is implemented, a comparison to Garry's Mod is much more in order, and as such terms like NS2, vanilla & mods become incredibly ambigious. Come release-time I don't think there will be a single server that is truly completely vanilla, as it stands there is already a bit of modding going on on the few popular servers out there, and I see this only increasing. The Garry's Mod comparison stands, in that there will be an almost infinite amount of gameplay-permutations out there. Whether or not that is a good thing for the community as a whole, remains to be seen, but for UWE's pocket-book I guess it is.
Anyway, it is true that NS1 is being looked back on very favorably while it doesn't always deserve the praise. The public-servers very often were quite agonizingly bad (if the first thing the comm dropped was a tfac, you knew you where in for a long haul), the game had serious balance issues on numerous maps (cargo-hive was immense favourable in early versions of ns_nothing), and it was very obscure for newcomers. So yeah we need to take the good, leave the bad, and even the good can be further improved upon (it's almost an obligation to for a sequel), but leaving the good and putting in place something which sounds half-decent (to some people) on paper, but plays out rubbish is just bad move. Multiple-commanders, for one, I cannot understand how anyone who just thought for a moment could reach the conclusion that this was a good idea. It could be 'fun' for huge servers, or maybe on fun-maps or fun-modes, but otherwise it was an abject failure. The macs is another such an example, people are still looking for things it can do without detracting from the human-game, it just seems like it was put in for the coolness-factor but wasn't thought about for any length of time.
There comes a time when you just have to accept that the previous iteration did certain things better, and it's best to leave it as it was. On that subject, can we please unlock the lifeforms from the hives again? It didn't work for NS1 1.0 - 1.04, and it doesn't seem to work now.
NS2 is just as obscure for new comers. If you haven't played NS1, you're going to struggle to get the basics of NS2 too.
EDIT: And as an NS1 player, I'm still confused as to some of the functions of the chambers and how they work, particularly with the shade/cloak bugs all over. That's extremely confused to me right now as I'm not 100% sure how it is intended to be.
Is there a webpage somewhere with a realtime server listing? Or maybe an app like <a href="http://tremulous.net/forum/index.php?topic=15960.0" target="_blank">Apelsin</a> for Tremulous? That might boost the player count a bit, knowing that people are online.
<!--quoteo(post=1892306:date=Jan 1 2012, 07:05 PM:name=Aldhissla)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Aldhissla @ Jan 1 2012, 07:05 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1892306"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Is there a webpage somewhere with a realtime server listing? Or maybe an app like <a href="http://tremulous.net/forum/index.php?topic=15960.0" target="_blank">Apelsin</a> for Tremulous? That might boost the player count a bit, knowing that people are online.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
EDIT: Once the servers are implemented in the steam server-browser it should work the same way.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Eeexcellent. And once again, those freakin' Germans have all the players. Is it just a time-of-day thing? I saw a few people on a US server last night.
<!--quoteo(post=1892311:date=Jan 1 2012, 07:41 PM:name=Aldhissla)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Aldhissla @ Jan 1 2012, 07:41 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1892311"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Eeexcellent. And once again, those freakin' Germans have all the players. Is it just a time-of-day thing? I saw a few people on a US server last night.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
HBZ is one of the fastest EU-Servers. German servers usually have a good amount of players, yes.
To the time: In germany now it's Sunday 8.30 in the evening, a good time for playing. In LA it's Sunday 11.30 on new year's eve...;)
<!--quoteo(post=1892316:date=Jan 1 2012, 02:34 PM:name=countbasie)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (countbasie @ Jan 1 2012, 02:34 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1892316"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->To the time: In germany now it's Sunday 8.30 in the evening, a good time for playing. In LA it's Sunday 11.30 on new year's eve...;)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> In LA, it's just another Sunday afternoon (that happens to also be the first day of the year). But yeah, that's why I asked about that- time zones. Everyone on the west coast is probably still sleeping off their mega-hangovers.
<!--quoteo(post=1892293:date=Jan 1 2012, 05:54 PM:name=player)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (player @ Jan 1 2012, 05:54 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1892293"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The thing is, we're not talking about an ordinary game like HL2\Portal 2, where the both the engine and game are set in stone. When Lua Server-Client sync is implemented, a comparison to Garry's Mod is much more in order, and as such terms like NS2, vanilla & mods become incredibly ambigious. Come release-time I don't think there will be a single server that is truly completely vanilla, as it stands there is already a bit of modding going on on the few popular servers out there, and I see this only increasing. The Garry's Mod comparison stands, in that there will be an almost infinite amount of gameplay-permutations out there. Whether or not that is a good thing for the community as a whole, remains to be seen, but for UWE's pocket-book I guess it is.
Anyway, it is true that NS1 is being looked back on very favorably while it doesn't always deserve the praise. The public-servers very often were quite agonizingly bad (if the first thing the comm dropped was a tfac, you knew you where in for a long haul), the game had serious balance issues on numerous maps (cargo-hive was immense favourable in early versions of ns_nothing), and it was very obscure for newcomers. So yeah we need to take the good, leave the bad, and even the good can be further improved upon (it's almost an obligation to for a sequel), but leaving the good and putting in place something which sounds half-decent (to some people) on paper, but plays out rubbish is just bad move. Multiple-commanders, for one, I cannot understand how anyone who just thought for a moment could reach the conclusion that this was a good idea. It could be 'fun' for huge servers, or maybe on fun-maps or fun-modes, but otherwise it was an abject failure. The macs is another such an example, people are still looking for things it can do without detracting from the human-game, it just seems like it was put in for the coolness-factor but wasn't thought about for any length of time.
There comes a time when you just have to accept that the previous iteration did certain things better, and it's best to leave it as it was. On that subject, can we please unlock the lifeforms from the hives again? It didn't work for NS1 1.0 - 1.04, and it doesn't seem to work now.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I fail to see what your point is, regarding product/game/engine/mods. Is it the potential ubiquity of gameplay mods, since Spark is very conducive to Server-only (potentially invisible to the Client) mods, and the fact that the game code is editable at runtime? I see that as irrelevant, since the goal of the developers should be to create the "game" (vanilla NS2) that everyone wants to play. Mods should not be a replacement for the core, vanilla game (though they are well in their rights to aspire to be); but they will work well as alternatives (Classic, Combat) when one wants more varied, or more niche, gameplay. Also, it has been said that in the future the server browser will likely distinguish between vanilla servers and modified servers, with the vanilla servers being displayed by default. In fact, most gameplay mods (like the Classic/Combat modes) would have to be played on different maps - maps that will have to be built differently, so there may already be a distinction. The only difference lies in stuff like Schimmel's Balance Mod (that aspire to be "the way the game is meant to be played"), which don't change the core of the gameplay, only the details - however, if UWE are doing things right (creating the game that most people want to play), then those mods will be on niche servers. Regarding the ability to edit the code at run-time, I think that when a code change is made, it should probably broadcast it to the clients playing on the server, though that is not very important at this stage in development and testing.
player, I made the suggestion to focus on the negatives of NS1, since the way to improve on a bad thing is generally a lot easier to discover (since we know what's wrong with it), while the way to improve on a good thing is generally a terrible idea (there's the saying: if it ain't broke, don't fix it; while I don't agree with it wholeheartedly, I see the wisdom).
I absolutely agree with you that multiple commanders are a bad thing - I think it is a prime example of a case where they tried to improve on a good thing, and failed miserably - in fact, no other game in existence has ever done multiple commanders, not even RTS: in a team-RTS (e.g. 2v2, 3v3 etc), the resources, units, researches etc. are not pooled, and the scale is generally much larger.
Regarding MACs... you know, I think I want them to work, but I probably have to admit that they're really not working as intended.
<!--quoteo(post=1892344:date=Jan 2 2012, 05:17 AM:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Harimau @ Jan 2 2012, 05:17 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1892344"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->however, if UWE are doing things right (creating the game that most people want to play), then those mods will be on niche servers.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Unfortunately, I haven't really the confidence UWE will succeed, many wretched gameplay-mechanics have been attempted up to this point.
Comments
I mean, that's very much like saying that CryEngine3 is Crysis 2. "Spark is NS2".
Or saying that Source is Portal 2. Except that Source was the engine designed for Half-Life 2, so: Half-Life 2 is Portal 2. After all: "NS2 means Spark, so NS1 on Spark is still NS2"; therefore: Half-Life 2 means Source, so Portal 2 on Source is still Half-Life 2.
Yeah... that's not at all how I'd put it.
That's not negative I don't think, if anything, it's extending the franchise.
I mean, that's very much like saying that CryEngine3 is Crysis 2. "Spark is NS2".
Or saying that Source is Portal 2. Except that Source was the engine designed for Half-Life 2, so: Half-Life 2 is Portal 2. After all: "NS2 means Spark, so NS1 on Spark is still NS2"; therefore: Half-Life 2 means Source, so Portal 2 on Source is still Half-Life 2.
Yeah... that's not at all how I'd put it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's the engine primarily, that I identify with. The models, sounds, textures, animations and technology in general. There isn't even an NS2 to speak of at the moment really, the gameplay is constantly shifting, and everything is subject to change. If someone were to make changes into the scripts that made things more like NS1's gameplay, it wouldn't by any means constitute an NS1-port in my view. And seeing as modding has become so important to NS2, I think most if not all mods strictly speaking are still some form NS2. And in terms of player-base that is all that matters. Whether people will play UWE's vision of NS2, or some random modder's, at the end of the day it is NS2 that benefits (in terms of popularity and accessibility as a whole).
I do not view disputes over NS2 and propositions to mod it into a different direction any kind of negativity.
To player, it is commonly understood that the game (NS2) is built on top of the engine (Spark) - yes, the game is not complete (actually, neither is the engine) - both of which are subsets of the "product". Our discussion is focused not around the engine, and not around the product, but around the game.
Also, the discussion also involved porting (though enhancing) textures, models and maps; so it would be an NS1 port in truth.
Other than that, you know, you seem to be under the impression that I disagree with you. And in part, perhaps I do: Mods should not be a <b>substitute</b> for the vanilla game. However, I do agree with you on the value of mods, especially with regards to new content, and diversifying the playing experience. I look forward to playing Classic and Combat, as alternative game modes, none of which I would play exclusively. I look forward to playing total conversions (with the hope that the community, particularly the modding community, becomes healthy enough to support such endeavours). But only a minority of people will purchase NS2 just to play (or make) the mods, so Natural Selection 2 must be able to stand on its own.
But negativity doesn't have to be destructive, it can be constructive. Unfortunately, that negativity is focused on Natural Selection 2, so we end up with constant re-working of the concepts before they have even been fully fleshed-out or tried out* (it's partially a "The Man, the Boy and the Donkey" situation).
*It's really encouraging to see people like Schimmel, xVizions, Yuuki et al actually putting their money where their mouths are and trying out these alternative ideas about balance and features - not necessarily trying to create substitutes to the game, but creating, testing and iterating proofs of concepts (whether these make it into the game, serve as inspiration for the game, remain standalone or join another mod, is irrelevant).
Natural Selection was a great game - a better game, even (than Natural Selection 2) - but it was not a perfect game. It had issues. Natural Selection 2 is based on Natural Selection, right? So, rather than focus on what we perceive as the "good" parts of Natural Selection (frankly, people don't 'know' what they want) and the bad parts of Natural Selection 2 (which changes with every build), let's take off our rose-tinted glasses and instead focus on those things that were less than satisfactory with Natural Selection, so that we can improve on them in Natural Selection 2. (This is not, however, an invitation to bash Combat and the "splitting of the community" again. God. Haven't we beaten THAT dead horse enough?) In this way, if Natural Selection 2 truly uses Natural Selection as a base, then it should, ostensibly, be the better game.
I'll start.
- NS had a high barrier to entry (caused by a myriad of issues).
- NS was only really balanced for a certain game size (6v6), ergo it was not balanced for other game sizes.
- NS's resource system did not scale well.
- NS did not make every part of the game reasonably accessible to every player, outside of Combat with server mods.
- NS had player disables.
The thing is, we're not talking about an ordinary game like HL2\Portal 2, where the both the engine and game are set in stone. When Lua Server-Client sync is implemented, a comparison to Garry's Mod is much more in order, and as such terms like NS2, vanilla & mods become incredibly ambigious. Come release-time I don't think there will be a single server that is truly completely vanilla, as it stands there is already a bit of modding going on on the few popular servers out there, and I see this only increasing. The Garry's Mod comparison stands, in that there will be an almost infinite amount of gameplay-permutations out there. Whether or not that is a good thing for the community as a whole, remains to be seen, but for UWE's pocket-book I guess it is.
Anyway, it is true that NS1 is being looked back on very favorably while it doesn't always deserve the praise. The public-servers very often were quite agonizingly bad (if the first thing the comm dropped was a tfac, you knew you where in for a long haul), the game had serious balance issues on numerous maps (cargo-hive was immense favourable in early versions of ns_nothing), and it was very obscure for newcomers. So yeah we need to take the good, leave the bad, and even the good can be further improved upon (it's almost an obligation to for a sequel), but leaving the good and putting in place something which sounds half-decent (to some people) on paper, but plays out rubbish is just bad move. Multiple-commanders, for one, I cannot understand how anyone who just thought for a moment could reach the conclusion that this was a good idea. It could be 'fun' for huge servers, or maybe on fun-maps or fun-modes, but otherwise it was an abject failure. The macs is another such an example, people are still looking for things it can do without detracting from the human-game, it just seems like it was put in for the coolness-factor but wasn't thought about for any length of time.
There comes a time when you just have to accept that the previous iteration did certain things better, and it's best to leave it as it was. On that subject, can we please unlock the lifeforms from the hives again? It didn't work for NS1 1.0 - 1.04, and it doesn't seem to work now.
EDIT: And as an NS1 player, I'm still confused as to some of the functions of the chambers and how they work, particularly with the shade/cloak bugs all over. That's extremely confused to me right now as I'm not 100% sure how it is intended to be.
You mean something like that?
<a href="http://www.play4dead.com/ns2/" target="_blank">http://www.play4dead.com/ns2/</a>
Click on the orange servers-link at the top.
EDIT: Once the servers are implemented in the steam server-browser it should work the same way.
<a href="http://www.play4dead.com/ns2/" target="_blank">http://www.play4dead.com/ns2/</a>
Click on the orange servers-link at the top.
EDIT: Once the servers are implemented in the steam server-browser it should work the same way.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Eeexcellent. And once again, those freakin' Germans have all the players.
Is it just a time-of-day thing? I saw a few people on a US server last night.
Is it just a time-of-day thing? I saw a few people on a US server last night.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
HBZ is one of the fastest EU-Servers. German servers usually have a good amount of players, yes.
To the time: In germany now it's Sunday 8.30 in the evening, a good time for playing. In LA it's Sunday 11.30 on new year's eve...;)
In LA, it's just another Sunday afternoon (that happens to also be the first day of the year). But yeah, that's why I asked about that- time zones. Everyone on the west coast is probably still sleeping off their mega-hangovers.
Anyway, it is true that NS1 is being looked back on very favorably while it doesn't always deserve the praise. The public-servers very often were quite agonizingly bad (if the first thing the comm dropped was a tfac, you knew you where in for a long haul), the game had serious balance issues on numerous maps (cargo-hive was immense favourable in early versions of ns_nothing), and it was very obscure for newcomers. So yeah we need to take the good, leave the bad, and even the good can be further improved upon (it's almost an obligation to for a sequel), but leaving the good and putting in place something which sounds half-decent (to some people) on paper, but plays out rubbish is just bad move. Multiple-commanders, for one, I cannot understand how anyone who just thought for a moment could reach the conclusion that this was a good idea. It could be 'fun' for huge servers, or maybe on fun-maps or fun-modes, but otherwise it was an abject failure. The macs is another such an example, people are still looking for things it can do without detracting from the human-game, it just seems like it was put in for the coolness-factor but wasn't thought about for any length of time.
There comes a time when you just have to accept that the previous iteration did certain things better, and it's best to leave it as it was. On that subject, can we please unlock the lifeforms from the hives again? It didn't work for NS1 1.0 - 1.04, and it doesn't seem to work now.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I fail to see what your point is, regarding product/game/engine/mods. Is it the potential ubiquity of gameplay mods, since Spark is very conducive to Server-only (potentially invisible to the Client) mods, and the fact that the game code is editable at runtime? I see that as irrelevant, since the goal of the developers should be to create the "game" (vanilla NS2) that everyone wants to play. Mods should not be a replacement for the core, vanilla game (though they are well in their rights to aspire to be); but they will work well as alternatives (Classic, Combat) when one wants more varied, or more niche, gameplay. Also, it has been said that in the future the server browser will likely distinguish between vanilla servers and modified servers, with the vanilla servers being displayed by default. In fact, most gameplay mods (like the Classic/Combat modes) would have to be played on different maps - maps that will have to be built differently, so there may already be a distinction. The only difference lies in stuff like Schimmel's Balance Mod (that aspire to be "the way the game is meant to be played"), which don't change the core of the gameplay, only the details - however, if UWE are doing things right (creating the game that most people want to play), then those mods will be on niche servers. Regarding the ability to edit the code at run-time, I think that when a code change is made, it should probably broadcast it to the clients playing on the server, though that is not very important at this stage in development and testing.
player, I made the suggestion to focus on the negatives of NS1, since the way to improve on a bad thing is generally a lot easier to discover (since we know what's wrong with it), while the way to improve on a good thing is generally a terrible idea (there's the saying: if it ain't broke, don't fix it; while I don't agree with it wholeheartedly, I see the wisdom).
I absolutely agree with you that multiple commanders are a bad thing - I think it is a prime example of a case where they tried to improve on a good thing, and failed miserably - in fact, no other game in existence has ever done multiple commanders, not even RTS: in a team-RTS (e.g. 2v2, 3v3 etc), the resources, units, researches etc. are not pooled, and the scale is generally much larger.
Regarding MACs... you know, I think I want them to work, but I probably have to admit that they're really not working as intended.
Unfortunately, I haven't really the confidence UWE will succeed, many wretched gameplay-mechanics have been attempted up to this point.