IronHorseDeveloper, QA Manager, Technical Support & contributorJoin Date: 2010-05-08Member: 71669Members, Super Administrators, Forum Admins, Forum Moderators, NS2 Developer, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Subnautica Playtester, Subnautica PT Lead, Pistachionauts
So you're suggesting that development has had the focus of prioritizing training rookies and improving accessibility with a paid staff for the past 3 years?.....
This new team has just started and as you can plainly see from that trello are hard at work and intend on pushing experimental changes out in fast order, but the backend must be completed beforehand.
I don't know when that will be, but you can ask someone from this new staff or maybe wasabi if you need an ETA.
I can see the Trello and I'll be honest......I don't know squat about what they're doing. Most if it is about fixing codes and such,I don't know code and stuff like that
So you're suggesting that development has had the focus of prioritizing training rookies and improving accessibility with a paid staff for the past 3 years?.....
This new team has just started and as you can plainly see from that trello are hard at work and intend on pushing experimental changes out in fast order, but the backend must be completed beforehand.
I don't know when that will be, but you can ask someone from this new staff or maybe wasabi if you need an ETA.
I'm suggesting the dev teams have always promised better things for rookies and the game in general and never done it, many fixes and changes are being awaited still. It's the same again people promising things in the forum and no work being shown for it.
The trello shows me:
Tutorial <- only thing on there with anything to do remotely with helping rookies.
Rookie only servers <- a place where bad people can't get better or learn
some other stuff that has nothing to do with player retention
I Understand that people working on some of this are not hired for coding things (rantology) or incapable of doing useful things (hugh). However nothing on here is about the problems players have discussed in this thread, or in the "simplifying ns2 thread" not one word of it, not one small change.
You have a 6 page document and nothing in it is on the trello yet.
Don't claim this to be what you're working on, it's a document put together by golden and rant consolidating the ideas, neither he nor rant will implement them into the game because they don't code.
The biggest issue that turned people off to the game, IMO, is the very high learning curve, with almost zero effort into teaching a new player how the game works. Combine that with no place for any meaningful practice and you have new players getting destroyed in multiplayer and then quitting forever.
best part being, nothing in that matter is in the works.
What are you backing that up with outside of a tutorial that has been planned for years? Nothing else on the trello is player retention. If people are thinking about working on it or doing it part-time. PUT IT ON THE TRELLO.
This is not "transparent" if stuff is being worked on behind closed doors, these "fast" patches and "rapid iteration changes" don't come out of nothing, you're currently promising things without showing anyone work or even the concept or plans for that work.
So yes, people will keep asking you "where are these improvements", "why isnt this being done", "why do we have a 20page thread of ideas that no one has begun to implement".
Then you come back and say "we're doing it in the background" people go 'ok so that's not going to happen', because that is how it has always been for 3 years plus.
So maybe I should ask @WasabiOne where are these changes and improvements, when will they be rapidly developed and released. Because a month in with one re-released 'CDT' patch I don't see anything that was promised or anything that will help.
I'm suggesting the dev teams have always promised better things for rookies and the game in general and never done it, many fixes and changes are being awaited still.
The CDT's priority was never specifically to improve things for rookies, but rather the game in general, and by that metric I think we did pretty good for an all volunteer team. (Though I would have personally liked to have seen more gameplay changes)
The new team has new priorities.
[*] Rookie only servers <- a place where bad people can't get better or learn
Disagree.
You're assuming a 0 hr rookie will somehow learn or get better by getting stomped in a pub. That's like learning how to swim in white water rapids.
They need to crawl before walking, and not crawl over a pit of snakes.
First of all, NS3 isn't going to happen any time soon. So put that idea right out of your mind, it wouldn't be a smart move for UWE who simply can't say with confidence that there's demand for a sequel right now. There's not enough room for growth above NS2 to make it worth the investment, without dramatically increasing the scope of the game which isn't feasible.
Supposing that they do decide to make another multiplayer FPS though, I'm skeptical of the value they would gain by changing engines. The game engine doesn't contribute as much to the quality of a game as people typically imagine. Yes Spark was more work than UWE expected and it had its rough spots, but that's largely in the past now. When you have a perfectly functional engine and an entire team of people with established work flows on it, you don't just up and drop it for the new hotness without a really good reason. In fact I think they already made their stance on that clear when they started work on Future Perfect. Getting to this point is the whole reason why they spent all that time making the Spark engine in the first place.
First of all, NS3 isn't going to happen any time soon. So put that idea right out of your mind, it wouldn't be a smart move for UWE who simply can't say with confidence that there's demand for a sequel right now. There's not enough room for growth above NS2 to make it worth the investment, without dramatically increasing the scope of the game which isn't feasible.
Supposing that they do decide to make another multiplayer FPS though, I'm skeptical of the value they would gain by changing engines. The game engine doesn't contribute as much to the quality of a game as people typically imagine. Yes Spark was more work than UWE expected and it had its rough spots, but that's largely in the past now. When you have a perfectly functional engine and an entire team of people with established work flows on it, you don't just up and drop it for the new hotness without a really good reason. In fact I think they already made their stance on that clear when they started work on Future Perfect. Getting to this point is the whole reason why they spent all that time making the Spark engine in the first place.
There are plenty of reasons to believe that NS3 done properly would have a good chance of being way more successful than NS2. Look at how CS has evolved from 1.6 to source to csgo - it hasn't exactly reinvented the wheel with each update. The gameplay essentially remains the same, with other areas of improvement being targeted instead. Why can't a future NS title do the same and build upon what's already there? Why does it have to dramatically increase the scope to become feasible?
Regarding your engine comments - Spark may have an established workflow that people are used to, but it can easily be replaced with a workflow in something like UE4 or Source2 etc if said workflow is easier to use in the long run. If the tools are better, and if there's already way more tutorials and guides than Spark on how to use them, then it's always going to be worth considering. Then there's also the fact that others will have engine knowledge from working on other games that use the same engine - the same can't be said for Spark. Also, any future NS game would have areas of code that would be rewritten anyway, so regardless if it's a new version of Spark or another engine, baseline code work will have to be done - so the transition to the next iteration of Spark would not be as easy as it seems.
You mention Future Perfect but also forget to mention subnautica, which is on Unity. If they considered not using Spark for subnautica, then there is a good chance the same process could take place for any future NS title. Your argument could easily be reapplied to the Source vs Spark debate that occurred when they were making NS2. Sometimes, change needs to happen, and it should be embraced not feared.
Except.. when you consider that the whole reason why they went with Unity was because they had originally intended on ONLY using it for prototyping their idea of SN.. but when they kept adding to it again and again, eventually they just said let's use it because additionally, Spark 2.0 was still very much in development, so this added to the decision AFAIK.
Unfortunately, Unity has some major drawbacks when it comes to the type of game they were making.. specifically in regards to memory utilization. The engine is locked down / non modifiable and has a very difficult time dealing with large open worlds. As a result Subnautica has absolutely horrid frame times and stutters... where there really isn't a good solution for as of right now, and Unity offers no remedy to the issue despite being contacted.
And given the progress that Spark 2.0 made during some of the FP development.. they would have ended up with a modifiable engine that did not have the same stuttering symptoms, had they have stuck with it instead. (nor the symptoms that plagued NS2 regarding LUA performance)
bonageJoin Date: 2012-10-13Member: 162230Members, Squad Five Blue, Squad Five Silver, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow
I only mentioned Unity because it shows that UWE were willing to try something other than Spark - I don't think Unity is appropriate for what is being discuss here, and other engines like UE4 or Source2 etc are far more powerful and flexible for FPS games.
As you say, lots of factors to consider - which is why ALL options need to be considered. I get that there was a necessity to go to Spark back when NS2 was being developed. Clearly stuff like dynamic lighting and other things weren't possible on Source, and an in-house engine opens up a lot of options. If Spark 2.0 can do everything UWE wants it to, and meet the expectations of the community, then I have no problem with that. But I think a lot has changed since NS2 started development, and I would hope any future efforts in the franchise do not automatically default to in-house efforts if there are potentially better options out there.
Speaking of other options - I'm very keen to see what valve have to offer with Source2 SDK, especially if the rumors of it having no royalties is true.
I'm suggesting the dev teams have always promised better things for rookies and the game in general and never done it, many fixes and changes are being awaited still.
The CDT's priority was never specifically to improve things for rookies, but rather the game in general, and by that metric I think we did pretty good for an all volunteer team. (Though I would have personally liked to have seen more gameplay changes)
The new team has new priorities.
[*] Rookie only servers <- a place where bad people can't get better or learn
Disagree.
You're assuming a 0 hr rookie will somehow learn or get better by getting stomped in a pub. That's like learning how to swim in white water rapids.
They need to crawl before walking, and not crawl over a pit of snakes.
Honestly this discussion is pointless as NS3 is YEARS away. When the time for NS3 concepts arrives, the states of the various engines mentioned here will be radically different, especially in Spark 2's case.
I honestly don't see the point in making NS3,sure it sounds cool,but why? It would be YEARS away,and it probably wouldn't have that same NS2y feel to it anymore! My personal suggestion would be to take a step back,take in a deep breath......and start over.
Basically,i'm suggesting that they do a "Re-Boot" of the game. Not another game,one big gigantic "update" to the already existing NS2. It could even be renamed to something like "Natural Selection 2:Evolved" It would include all the fixes and changes and features we've all been wanting! Plus,there are MANY owners of NS2 who don't play it anymore,if they see NS2 just got another big update,they probably won't care.....but if they see that it got a re-boot and a new name,they might try it out again.
Again,this is a personal suggestion. I've seen other games do it and it can work! I welcome Disagrees if you have any,it gives me constructive feedback for my suggestions
This is not "transparent" if stuff is being worked on behind closed doors, these "fast" patches and "rapid iteration changes" don't come out of nothing, you're currently promising things without showing anyone work or even the concept or plans for that work.
So yes, people will keep asking you "where are these improvements", "why isnt this being done", "why do we have a 20page thread of ideas that no one has begun to implement".
Then you come back and say "we're doing it in the background" people go 'ok so that's not going to happen', because that is how it has always been for 3 years plus.
Hit the nail on the head.
I'd honestly prefer the charade just got dropped and UWE/CDT bowed out and said we are done supporting the game.
Instead, we got this constant dangling in front of our noses of some great unknown benefit/patch/optimization that never actually comes.
For pretty much the entirety of 2015, the refrain for why there hadn't been any patches was, "Oh, we just need to implement the Build Machine™ !! Once we have this made the patches will come out so fast it'll make your head spin!!" I thought, "Ok, let them do what needs to be done on the backend I guess, whatever."
Then the build machine FINALLY gets done and what happens? We get a patch with no content besides a map, a map that 95% of the playerbase strongly dislikes.
Now, UWE comes back, undoes what little work the CDT had already accomplished and makes an extremely nebulous and vague post saying "Things are planned!!" and expect us to get excited about it.
It's done. Just let the game go, guys. It was a fun ride while it lasted.
Comments
This new team has just started and as you can plainly see from that trello are hard at work and intend on pushing experimental changes out in fast order, but the backend must be completed beforehand.
I don't know when that will be, but you can ask someone from this new staff or maybe wasabi if you need an ETA.
But I can understand that they're hard at work!
I'm suggesting the dev teams have always promised better things for rookies and the game in general and never done it, many fixes and changes are being awaited still. It's the same again people promising things in the forum and no work being shown for it.
The trello shows me:
I Understand that people working on some of this are not hired for coding things (rantology) or incapable of doing useful things (hugh). However nothing on here is about the problems players have discussed in this thread, or in the "simplifying ns2 thread" not one word of it, not one small change.
You have a 6 page document and nothing in it is on the trello yet.
Don't claim this to be what you're working on, it's a document put together by golden and rant consolidating the ideas, neither he nor rant will implement them into the game because they don't code.
So when someone says:
What are you backing that up with outside of a tutorial that has been planned for years? Nothing else on the trello is player retention. If people are thinking about working on it or doing it part-time.
PUT IT ON THE TRELLO.
This is not "transparent" if stuff is being worked on behind closed doors, these "fast" patches and "rapid iteration changes" don't come out of nothing, you're currently promising things without showing anyone work or even the concept or plans for that work.
So yes, people will keep asking you "where are these improvements", "why isnt this being done", "why do we have a 20page thread of ideas that no one has begun to implement".
Then you come back and say "we're doing it in the background" people go 'ok so that's not going to happen', because that is how it has always been for 3 years plus.
So maybe I should ask @WasabiOne where are these changes and improvements, when will they be rapidly developed and released. Because a month in with one re-released 'CDT' patch I don't see anything that was promised or anything that will help.
The new team has new priorities.
Disagree.
You're assuming a 0 hr rookie will somehow learn or get better by getting stomped in a pub. That's like learning how to swim in white water rapids.
They need to crawl before walking, and not crawl over a pit of snakes. That's why I recommended that, as I cannot answer the "when", only the "what".
Might want to pick a different thread for it, too.
Supposing that they do decide to make another multiplayer FPS though, I'm skeptical of the value they would gain by changing engines. The game engine doesn't contribute as much to the quality of a game as people typically imagine. Yes Spark was more work than UWE expected and it had its rough spots, but that's largely in the past now. When you have a perfectly functional engine and an entire team of people with established work flows on it, you don't just up and drop it for the new hotness without a really good reason. In fact I think they already made their stance on that clear when they started work on Future Perfect. Getting to this point is the whole reason why they spent all that time making the Spark engine in the first place.
There are plenty of reasons to believe that NS3 done properly would have a good chance of being way more successful than NS2. Look at how CS has evolved from 1.6 to source to csgo - it hasn't exactly reinvented the wheel with each update. The gameplay essentially remains the same, with other areas of improvement being targeted instead. Why can't a future NS title do the same and build upon what's already there? Why does it have to dramatically increase the scope to become feasible?
Regarding your engine comments - Spark may have an established workflow that people are used to, but it can easily be replaced with a workflow in something like UE4 or Source2 etc if said workflow is easier to use in the long run. If the tools are better, and if there's already way more tutorials and guides than Spark on how to use them, then it's always going to be worth considering. Then there's also the fact that others will have engine knowledge from working on other games that use the same engine - the same can't be said for Spark. Also, any future NS game would have areas of code that would be rewritten anyway, so regardless if it's a new version of Spark or another engine, baseline code work will have to be done - so the transition to the next iteration of Spark would not be as easy as it seems.
You mention Future Perfect but also forget to mention subnautica, which is on Unity. If they considered not using Spark for subnautica, then there is a good chance the same process could take place for any future NS title. Your argument could easily be reapplied to the Source vs Spark debate that occurred when they were making NS2. Sometimes, change needs to happen, and it should be embraced not feared.
Except.. when you consider that the whole reason why they went with Unity was because they had originally intended on ONLY using it for prototyping their idea of SN.. but when they kept adding to it again and again, eventually they just said let's use it because additionally, Spark 2.0 was still very much in development, so this added to the decision AFAIK.
Unfortunately, Unity has some major drawbacks when it comes to the type of game they were making.. specifically in regards to memory utilization. The engine is locked down / non modifiable and has a very difficult time dealing with large open worlds. As a result Subnautica has absolutely horrid frame times and stutters... where there really isn't a good solution for as of right now, and Unity offers no remedy to the issue despite being contacted.
And given the progress that Spark 2.0 made during some of the FP development.. they would have ended up with a modifiable engine that did not have the same stuttering symptoms, had they have stuck with it instead. (nor the symptoms that plagued NS2 regarding LUA performance)
Lots of factors to consider...
As you say, lots of factors to consider - which is why ALL options need to be considered. I get that there was a necessity to go to Spark back when NS2 was being developed. Clearly stuff like dynamic lighting and other things weren't possible on Source, and an in-house engine opens up a lot of options. If Spark 2.0 can do everything UWE wants it to, and meet the expectations of the community, then I have no problem with that. But I think a lot has changed since NS2 started development, and I would hope any future efforts in the franchise do not automatically default to in-house efforts if there are potentially better options out there.
Speaking of other options - I'm very keen to see what valve have to offer with Source2 SDK, especially if the rumors of it having no royalties is true.
can you answer the rest of the post, the stuff that matters thx.
And you know who to ask instead, I've only said it twice already.
Basically,i'm suggesting that they do a "Re-Boot" of the game. Not another game,one big gigantic "update" to the already existing NS2. It could even be renamed to something like "Natural Selection 2:Evolved" It would include all the fixes and changes and features we've all been wanting! Plus,there are MANY owners of NS2 who don't play it anymore,if they see NS2 just got another big update,they probably won't care.....but if they see that it got a re-boot and a new name,they might try it out again.
Again,this is a personal suggestion. I've seen other games do it and it can work! I welcome Disagrees if you have any,it gives me constructive feedback for my suggestions
Hit the nail on the head.
I'd honestly prefer the charade just got dropped and UWE/CDT bowed out and said we are done supporting the game.
Instead, we got this constant dangling in front of our noses of some great unknown benefit/patch/optimization that never actually comes.
For pretty much the entirety of 2015, the refrain for why there hadn't been any patches was, "Oh, we just need to implement the Build Machine™ !! Once we have this made the patches will come out so fast it'll make your head spin!!" I thought, "Ok, let them do what needs to be done on the backend I guess, whatever."
Then the build machine FINALLY gets done and what happens? We get a patch with no content besides a map, a map that 95% of the playerbase strongly dislikes.
Now, UWE comes back, undoes what little work the CDT had already accomplished and makes an extremely nebulous and vague post saying "Things are planned!!" and expect us to get excited about it.
It's done. Just let the game go, guys. It was a fun ride while it lasted.