I'm just curious, why do you care about posting here if nobody actually formulates intelligent responses to your arguments? I mean aside from your own personal amusement, wouldn't you just be better off forgetting the game and the community completely, and just moving on to do something else?
I personally can't really find that much amusement in proving people wrong I will never see or talk to in person.
The only reason I've posted any criticism was in hopes the devs would see it. I see Temp doing the same thing. There are a lot of people who agree with us as well. We could just +1 eachothers ideas, but that's no fun is it? :p
I see lots of complaints over the past years. I see forum posts removed - edited - people banned because they did not like how bad the game is. I guess, Temphage will be banned soon too. Shame :( I agree with him.
You know, I came to the forums after my initial playtime curious about how many other people echoed my concerns, particularly about the alien team. The more I learned, the bigger a problem I saw. This may be presumptuous, but watching the ESL stream today was kind of worrying in how often marines won compared to aliens. No doubt there was simply a skill disparity there, but it's something to consider.
That's beside the point, though. Like with all games, there are problems here. The problems generally lie within the alien team, and I think most people can agree to that. The degree to which these problems go vary with individual opinion, as well as their specificity. And it's great people are not only voicing their concerns, but are also explaining, specifically, what the problems are.
Even in this thread, I'm seeing rock-solid logic. Points I just can't argue with, and provide a damning perspective on the state of balance in Natural Selection 2.
What else I'm seeing? An awful attitude. Negativity to the point of <i>insults,</i> on both sides of the argument. This is counter-intuitive to balance discussion and it's quite disappointing to see.
This is a thread about disappointment; a very subjective thing, of course. But I'd like to plead to people, be a little more objective about it. Some are disappointed, some are not. That's okay. It's just a shame to see people insisting others be as disappointed or content as they.
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
edited November 2012
<!--quoteo(post=2018970:date=Nov 10 2012, 04:19 PM:name=freddie_stuter)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (freddie_stuter @ Nov 10 2012, 04:19 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2018970"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I see lots of complaints over the past years. I see forum posts removed - edited - people banned because they did not like how bad the game is. I guess, Temphage will be banned soon too. Shame :( I agree with him.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Nobody gets banned or edited for having an opinion or argument. They get banned or edited for being rude, insulting, irate, flame baiting, and for generally causing issues
There's having a civil dicussion.. and then there's expressing how you feel, which can't really be argued with or contribute to much of any discussion.. people tend to either say "uh.. ok" or respond back about how they feel and then begins the flaming and anger.
Here's an example of a civil argument: <i>"GL player damage should be lowered i believe, because 1) the weapon is meant to be anti structure 2) you hardly have to aim 3) usually its one to two grenades only to kill you 4) you hardly ever see them coming before its too late 5) the splash radius is huge 6)they are spammed because there's no friendly fire. Please adjust this, as it feels unfair"</i> See how i included an argument, reasons, and i even am able to include how i <i>feel</i>.
Here's an example of what gets people edited: <i>"GL player damage is ***** stupid , idk what dumb ###### thought that this was a good idea?? Did anyone seriously give this any thought? To all those who defend it you obviously dont play this game and need to go back to your COD bs!" </i>
The only forum guideline you'll find posted: "Please behave <b>politely </b>at all times. That means refraining from swearing and disrespectful comments (racist, homophobic, religious, etc.). That's it. If you can't say something nice, say nothing at all!" Hope that illustrates the difference and clears things up for you.
<!--quoteo(post=2019127:date=Nov 10 2012, 08:47 PM:name=OnosFactory)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (OnosFactory @ Nov 10 2012, 08:47 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2019127"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Joined yesterday but has info on the past?
Don't we call those Trolls these days?
"I don't own the bridge, but you still cannot cross it. Mwaha. Ha. Ha. Ha. Hahaaa"<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You didn't need a forum account to play the beta. Or to play NS1.
Temphage pretty much said what I think.. <!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->What I feel like I got with NS2 was a steak dinner that had a great picture on the front of the menu, and I got a piece of meat cooked well, without any potatoes or vegetables along with it. It's the bare minimum of what was needed to be considered a steak dinner.
The only question is, is it too late to send it back to the kitchen to get them to do it right?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I gave this some thought and noticed some people point back to that design dock quite frequently. I took a look at it, and I am simply enthralled by the inconsistency between the final product and this playbook of sorts.
There is one point out of the first four that really strikes me...
<ul><li> Strategy and shooter gameplay requires lots of delicate decisions and tradeoffs. Often what makes one game type fun, makes the other less fun. When the two can’t be balanced, give precedence to the shooter. NS1 was a real-time strategy game with a shooter interface, NS2 is a shooter first, and RTS second (more people experience it as a shooter than an RTS). <i><!--coloro:#48D1CC--><span style="color:#48D1CC"><!--/coloro-->Wait wait wait! wait!! maybe this is the problem? As long as you have players in first person playing against each other to the death, it's a FPS.. don't complicate this. the RTS is only COMPLIMENTARY........ what you did was mix COMBAT in with your core gameplay mechanics.<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc--></i></li><li> Knowing that a team is executing a strategy should give an advantage to an equally skilled team <i><!--coloro:#48D1CC--><span style="color:#48D1CC"><!--/coloro-->That makes sense. Lots of map specific strategies made NS1 very very fun.<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc--></i></li><li> The marine team is organized from “top-down†(Command & Control). The alien team is organized from “bottom-up†(no high-level orders, the best information comes from the senses). <i><!--coloro:#48D1CC--><span style="color:#48D1CC"><!--/coloro-->THIS is not happening. If anything, Alien team works in the same way as the marines MOST LIKELY due to Charlie's two-part res model(pres/tres). The alien commander is the reason for this, and you no longer make decision as a team carried out as a team(with gorges).<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc--></i></li><li> Commanders shouldn’t be able to do direct damage (violates perceived fairness in shooter).</li></ul>
People talk about this game being asymmetrical, and I passionately disagree. Sure, you have one team with jaws and sharp things versus a team with technological shooting things, but it kinda ends there. NS1 was a little more asymmetrical because you had two very different paradigms: - Marines' top down order. The commander had control over the equipment and where the resources were spent. - Aliens' community based order. Every one had to be on the same page. Since everyone had the potential to DO THE SAME FOR THE TEAM, it was a democracy of sorts as to who would drop the 2nd, who would cap res nodes, what chamber order do we use.
Whether it is marines or aliens, you spawn in and run around and someone else is responsible for structures...
I will end it at this: I hope NS2 hits a point where some serious changes are made to turn things around.
<!--quoteo(post=2019276:date=Nov 10 2012, 11:02 PM:name=MrRadicalEd)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MrRadicalEd @ Nov 10 2012, 11:02 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2019276"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Temphage pretty much said what I think..
I gave this some thought and noticed some people point back to that design dock quite frequently. I took a look at it, and I am simply enthralled by the inconsistency between the final product and this playbook of sorts.
There is one point out of the first four that really strikes me...
<ul><li> Strategy and shooter gameplay requires lots of delicate decisions and tradeoffs. Often what makes one game type fun, makes the other less fun. When the two can’t be balanced, give precedence to the shooter. NS1 was a real-time strategy game with a shooter interface, NS2 is a shooter first, and RTS second (more people experience it as a shooter than an RTS). <i><!--coloro:#48D1CC--><span style="color:#48D1CC"><!--/coloro-->Wait wait wait! wait!! maybe this is the problem? As long as you have players in first person playing against each other to the death, it's a FPS.. don't complicate this. the RTS is only COMPLIMENTARY........ what you did was mix COMBAT in with your core gameplay mechanics.<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc--></i></li><li> Knowing that a team is executing a strategy should give an advantage to an equally skilled team <i><!--coloro:#48D1CC--><span style="color:#48D1CC"><!--/coloro-->That makes sense. Lots of map specific strategies made NS1 very very fun.<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc--></i></li><li> The marine team is organized from “top-down†(Command & Control). The alien team is organized from “bottom-up†(no high-level orders, the best information comes from the senses). <i><!--coloro:#48D1CC--><span style="color:#48D1CC"><!--/coloro-->THIS is not happening. If anything, Alien team works in the same way as the marines MOST LIKELY due to Charlie's two-part res model(pres/tres). The alien commander is the reason for this, and you no longer make decision as a team carried out as a team(with gorges).<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc--></i></li><li> Commanders shouldn’t be able to do direct damage (violates perceived fairness in shooter).</li></ul>
People talk about this game being asymmetrical, and I passionately disagree. Sure, you have one team with jaws and sharp things versus a team with technological shooting things, but it kinda ends there. NS1 was a little more asymmetrical because you had two very different paradigms: - Marines' top down order. The commander had control over the equipment and where the resources were spent. - Aliens' community based order. Every one had to be on the same page. Since everyone had the potential to DO THE SAME FOR THE TEAM, it was a democracy of sorts as to who would drop the 2nd, who would cap res nodes, what chamber order do we use.
Whether it is marines or aliens, you spawn in and run around and someone else is responsible for structures...
I will end it at this: I hope NS2 hits a point where some serious changes are made to turn things around.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This Is 100% right, Though a lot of great idea's where added too ns2 to make it better. It sacrificed the Risk Reward feeling that makes RTS games what they are today..... Though there is a lot of asymmetrical gameplay, its not quite the same as ns1, Im not sure if this is a bad thing but I dont think it was quite the right way to go.
<!--quoteo(post=2019121:date=Nov 10 2012, 06:40 PM:name=souldaTTT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (souldaTTT @ Nov 10 2012, 06:40 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2019121"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The game cost $25 best bang for buck I have ever paid for a game IMHO<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
the game is the best $25 laggy piece of ###### I ever paid for
<!--quoteo(post=2016275:date=Nov 9 2012, 04:39 AM:name=antacid)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (antacid @ Nov 9 2012, 04:39 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2016275"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->There is a certain group of people who cling onto NS1 and consider anything that is a deviation to that to be a step backwards.
These people can play NS2C. But the rest of us are going to be playing NS2.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> You're assuming that "your" group has higher count.
I find it funny that most of the "bile bombers" are silently assuming that they speak for ALL NS1 players. I've played both, I don't share your opinion and a look in my Steam library tells me that I've spent more hours with NS2 than L4D2 already.
Do I see every change UWE implements as a gift from heaven? Surely not. I don't need to like every detail to enjoy the game with my friends. I'd like to see better performance. Considering the radical progress they made over the last few builds I'm quite optimistic that this aspect of the game will mature. And that's exactly how I think about the rest. I don't see NS2 as a done deal that won't ever change. I see it as something that's growing and improving.
It doesn't mean that I've never encountered problems. It's just how I chose to respond to that. Last weekend, my game froze while I was in the comm chair. Do I take to the forums to spew bile like Temphage and tell everyone who dares to like the game that he/she is a sycophant, UWE are lazy morons and the game is all turd, no fun? Nope.
You know what I did? I rechecked the file consistency and so far I didn't encounter that error again. Problem solved. In other cases I made screenshots and posted them on this forum and saw them fixed a few builds down the road. Each new build I'm using Fraps and very often I see improvements in framerates. I also like to read changelogs to keep up with the changes and learn about new stuff in the game.
<!--quoteo(post=2019407:date=Nov 11 2012, 11:23 AM:name=MOOtant)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MOOtant @ Nov 11 2012, 11:23 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2019407"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You're assuming that "your" group has higher count.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> NS2 is not fun, i hope in NS:C but ( probably ) we are 200 players.. ( number based on steam group ) no sg rush, no gorges, no gorge rush, no ocs rush, no ragequitting, no fun ninja players.. nothing, only a slow pace conquest mode ( i prefere a turtle game in ns1 is better, im serious ). and the stupidity of electricity ? rotfl, this ruins all possibility of fast rush.
ragequitting - as much as a problem as it was in NS1, same as stacking
"fun ninja players" - there's alot of ninjaing going on in NS2. Just not ninja PGs.
Turtling in NS1 was completely stupid. Electrifying a bunch of turret factories placed next to each other to block entry points from Onos + 5 billion turrets in the same room + HMGs + res for kill + waiting for 10 years to build up a HA train? Is this your idea of fun? seriously?
And the clincher is your preference for Co. Co was popular because classic NS had so many problems with it. If you'd prefer Co, and the fun of NS1 for you basically amounts to turtling and rushing, then I can only assume that you don't actually like the idea of NS.
I think it's worth noting that if anything, this thread could just serve as a vent for people frustrated with the game in its current place. So, I'm not sure there's a point in getting upset at someone for trashing the game, since again, it's just their opinion. I certainly feel they could use an outlet for their aggression.
On another note, yes, NS2 is markedly more symmetrical than NS1. I didn't like this, personally, but eh. The game's still fun. I never really expected NS2 to be as fun as NS1 simply because of <a href="http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/NostalgiaFilter" target="_blank">nostalgia bias</a>, and I have no doubt that, given enough time, NS2 will reach the same refinement that took NS1 so many years to reach.
I think the biggest disappointment is that people expected all of that refinement in NS1 to carry over, and now we're seemingly back to square one, and have a ton of refinement to go, even though NS2, while a different game, is fundamentally the same as its predecessor.
The fade is weak, the lerk needs attention, 6 minute onos has to go. These are all things Charlie agreed with on the ESL stream. But there are priorities. First, stability fixes. These affect everyone, so sure. Then, he wants to work on fostering the competitive scene via first person spectator, demo recording and replays. I'm not a comp player, and neither are most people, so this seems like an unfair prioritization to the average Joe gamer who wants to play as a fade without people urging him to pick a better lifeform. But, it is what it is.
All these fanboys complaining that there are whinners.... know what? the real whinners are you! Stop baby-crying at the Original poster and others because they are telling some true things that hurt your fat backs. While i love UWE and this game concept (Excepting some minor things, the game is balanced and pretty interesting/fun in theory) i cant play it because of the bad performance. I would just throw it away (even it not being a free game) if my computer was scrap, but it isnt. I see people here with i5s and im on a i7 and have 80% less performance than those with the i5s.
And if people dont like the game, are they forbidden to tell what didnt work? i guess this forum isnt some kind of dictatorship thingy. Customers have the right and the reason. If they are not satisfied, then they are on their right to make that known.
I agree with Temphage. NS2 is close to being an amazing game, but is limited by a lack of strategic options. In fact, it's a step back from NS1 in this area, where it was already a weak point for NS1.
Worst part is all the extreme fanboys in this thread defending this game with their beaks and claws. I mean what happened to people having different opinions? Also it's funny as soon as you bring up some constructive criticism they just get mad as hell and have to insult you. Way to go people...
Sorry but NS1 was just way superior to me than this game
I have lerked these forums long enough to tell you people such as temphage, meb, thaldarin, c4ke, player, all at one point or another in the past 3 years cared enough to make a concerted effort to oppose all the problems temphage has made today and they were ignored. As much as I agree temphage, save your time and effort Nd use it on something that will be more worth while.
<!--quoteo(post=2019637:date=Nov 11 2012, 06:16 AM:name=Cane)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Cane @ Nov 11 2012, 06:16 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2019637"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Worst part is all the extreme fanboys in this thread defending this game with their beaks and claws. I mean what happened to people having different opinions? Also it's funny as soon as you bring up some constructive criticism they just get mad as hell and have to insult you. Way to go people...
Sorry but NS1 was just way superior to me than this game<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> "<i>Wtf is your problem OP? Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. If i had never played NS1 I might have given this a higher score but after having played NS1 for hundreds of hour I wouldn't give this game more than 65/100
Also I call BS on your "5 year old" computer running this perfectly. Perfect = 60 fps and I doubt you even have 30 consistently"</i>
This is a post from your post history. It took me 10 seconds to find a post that I'm sure reflects the tone of your criticisms.
I know there are people that love circle jerking around the game, and people who circle jerk against it. But usually the "fanboys" aren't unreasonable: You just add a lot of fluff to your criticism. By fluff, I mean you start to sound incredibly negative and belligerent. As if everything you type MUST be read, and repeated a thousand times over, each time with more doom and gloom.
You can apply this criticism to a couple of notorious forum posters.
<!--quoteo(post=2019669:date=Nov 11 2012, 07:02 AM:name=freddie_stuter)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (freddie_stuter @ Nov 11 2012, 07:02 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2019669"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I have lerked these forums long enough to tell you people such as temphage, meb, thaldarin, c4ke, player, all at one point or another in the past 3 years cared enough to make a concerted effort to oppose all the problems temphage has made today and they were ignored. As much as I agree temphage, save your time and effort Nd use it on something that will be more worth while.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> The problem with those people is that they think adding negativity helps. Like they expect a developer to read their advice, who'll promptly start to sweat at the thought of people not buying the game because they're not working fast enough/or making the changes that are deemed necessary.
This is not the why to go about things. This is good old fashioned attention whoring. You post your feedback, and you get out. You're not special, stop screaming in everyone's ear.
I'm also of the impression that some posters simply have an ego issue with their ideas: if the Dev team chooses not to implement their ideas(whether because the ideas aren't actually good or well thought out or the team hasn't got the resources) somehow the Dev team is automatically at fault and failing them and the game is automatically disappointing to them and must suck for everyone.
It sounds like you're upset that it isn't NS1. It's not. Maybe you don't like how it is not, which is fine, but it doesn't mean it's a bad game.
As for performance, yeah, they need to improve that. The next patch is going to have several performance improving changes (they talked about it in the dev q/a on twitch a few days ago).
<!--quoteo(post=2019701:date=Nov 11 2012, 09:28 AM:name=AceAces)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (AceAces @ Nov 11 2012, 09:28 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2019701"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It sounds like you're upset that it isn't NS1. It's not. Maybe you don't like how it is not, which is fine, but it doesn't mean it's a bad game.
As for performance, yeah, they need to improve that. The next patch is going to have several performance improving changes (they talked about it in the dev q/a on twitch a few days ago).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> That's a red herring: The main problem is that NS2 regressed on parts of NS1 that were already weak, without adding much otherwise.
<!--quoteo(post=2019669:date=Nov 11 2012, 11:02 AM:name=freddie_stuter)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (freddie_stuter @ Nov 11 2012, 11:02 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2019669"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I have lerked these forums long enough to tell you people such as temphage, meb, thaldarin, c4ke, player, all at one point or another in the past 3 years cared enough to make a concerted effort to oppose all the problems temphage has made today and they were ignored. As much as I agree temphage, save your time and effort Nd use it on something that will be more worth while.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> They're all just the newest incarnation of Forlorn to me. Having posts on a forums or hours sunk into the game never makes that game actually belong to you. I've had as much if not more disappointments in terms of suggestions being ignored, ideological battles being fought and lost, changes being made I didn't like, and general forum garbage pretty much.
In the end of the day, it's Flayra and the NS team actually sitting down to code the changes. The development of the game belongs to them, or any modder who chooses to just ignore the BS and do it themselves. Most of the suggestion posts here are very reactive, and they suggest changes that basically either "forget the new stuff and regress to NS1 again" or "Here's a completely inelegant solution that breaks 5 things I don't care about to fix the one thing that's annoying me right now". This is extremely obvious in pysmples posts for example... Temphage is more along the line of defending a destructive ideology ("###### competitive players, they ruin the game rofl")... I made versions of both these same mistakes myself in the past.
Flayra is the one who's right here. Good design takes a HUGE amount of time and effort. There's a hundred vaugly viable solutions to any given problem, and any one of them has certain significant upsides and certain significant downsides. Hughe was talking about exactly this thing in one of the Q&A's and he's COMPLETELY and TOTALLY right. NS2 would be ###### in a month if they tried to develop it entirely reactively. They need to react to problems, but slowly, deliberately, and in a well thought out way is ideal.
I don't trust Flayra to not make mistakes, I don't trust him to never do stupid things, I don't trust him to listen to all my crappy ideas. I trust him to be smart, to consider options, and I trust the community to filter out crap well enough that the really good stuff eventually gets to the power that be.
Anyone who chooses to be entitled, anyone who chooses to be bitter... Well, they've already lost. In the end of the day, if you're not having fun with NS2, you're not having fun here, you're doing the wrong thing. This is gaming, we're not talking about feeding starving orphans here. Go somewhere you find more rewarding.
first of all I love this game secondly some of the points the OP makes are fair enough but with regards to the game design you have been a member of the forums for years and every part of the game design is in there so you know what you where buying into ,, I have paid £60 for games and not liked them, its your choses no 1 dragged you into buying it.
<!--quoteo(post=2019670:date=Nov 11 2012, 04:04 PM:name=Fappuchino)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Fappuchino @ Nov 11 2012, 04:04 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2019670"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->"<i>Wtf is your problem OP? Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. If i had never played NS1 I might have given this a higher score but after having played NS1 for hundreds of hour I wouldn't give this game more than 65/100
Also I call BS on your "5 year old" computer running this perfectly. Perfect = 60 fps and I doubt you even have 30 consistently"</i>
This is a post from your post history. It took me 10 seconds to find a post that I'm sure reflects the tone of your criticisms.
I know there are people that love circle jerking around the game, and people who circle jerk against it. But usually the "fanboys" aren't unreasonable: You just add a lot of fluff to your criticism. By fluff, I mean you start to sound incredibly negative and belligerent. As if everything you type MUST be read, and repeated a thousand times over, each time with more doom and gloom.
You can apply this criticism to a couple of notorious forum posters.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I called out a poster for being completely out of touch with reality. First he denies people the right to have subjective opinions which in itself is a disgusting thing to do and next the claims that the game runs perfectly fine on his 5 year old PC which we all know is pure BS not even the biggest fanboys can deny that.
Also it's funny how you neglect all my other posts where I don't throw a fit because someone is acting outrageous but I guess that's the fanboy way to do it...
<!--quoteo(post=2019637:date=Nov 11 2012, 07:16 AM:name=Cane)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Cane @ Nov 11 2012, 07:16 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2019637"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Worst part is all the extreme fanboys in this thread defending this game with their beaks and claws. I mean what happened to people having different opinions? Also it's funny as soon as you bring up some constructive criticism they just get mad as hell and have to insult you. Way to go people...
Sorry but NS1 was just way superior to me than this game<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Don't know how they can call themselves such big fans if they don't want NS2 to be better than it is. They'd rather throw around language like "entitled" as if people who played NS1 for a decade want something other than for NS2 to be the best game it can possibly be. They are protecting it from "negativity" the way an overly possessive parent protects their child from the real world, and see all the good that does
Comments
I personally can't really find that much amusement in proving people wrong I will never see or talk to in person.
That's beside the point, though. Like with all games, there are problems here. The problems generally lie within the alien team, and I think most people can agree to that. The degree to which these problems go vary with individual opinion, as well as their specificity. And it's great people are not only voicing their concerns, but are also explaining, specifically, what the problems are.
Even in this thread, I'm seeing rock-solid logic. Points I just can't argue with, and provide a damning perspective on the state of balance in Natural Selection 2.
What else I'm seeing? An awful attitude. Negativity to the point of <i>insults,</i> on both sides of the argument. This is counter-intuitive to balance discussion and it's quite disappointing to see.
This is a thread about disappointment; a very subjective thing, of course. But I'd like to plead to people, be a little more objective about it. Some are disappointed, some are not. That's okay. It's just a shame to see people insisting others be as disappointed or content as they.
Nobody gets banned or edited for having an opinion or argument.
They get banned or edited for being rude, insulting, irate, flame baiting, and for generally causing issues
There's having a civil dicussion.. and then there's expressing how you feel, which can't really be argued with or contribute to much of any discussion.. people tend to either say "uh.. ok" or respond back about how they feel and then begins the flaming and anger.
Here's an example of a civil argument: <i>"GL player damage should be lowered i believe, because 1) the weapon is meant to be anti structure 2) you hardly have to aim 3) usually its one to two grenades only to kill you 4) you hardly ever see them coming before its too late 5) the splash radius is huge 6)they are spammed because there's no friendly fire. Please adjust this, as it feels unfair"</i>
See how i included an argument, reasons, and i even am able to include how i <i>feel</i>.
Here's an example of what gets people edited: <i>"GL player damage is ***** stupid , idk what dumb ###### thought that this was a good idea?? Did anyone seriously give this any thought? To all those who defend it you obviously dont play this game and need to go back to your COD bs!"
</i>
The only forum guideline you'll find posted: "Please behave <b>politely </b>at all times. That means refraining from swearing and disrespectful comments (racist, homophobic, religious, etc.). That's it. If you can't say something nice, say nothing at all!"
Hope that illustrates the difference and clears things up for you.
Don't we call those Trolls these days?
"I don't own the bridge, but you still cannot cross it. Mwaha. Ha. Ha. Ha. Hahaaa"
Don't we call those Trolls these days?
"I don't own the bridge, but you still cannot cross it. Mwaha. Ha. Ha. Ha. Hahaaa"<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You didn't need a forum account to play the beta. Or to play NS1.
For example, I started playing the beta in April.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->What I feel like I got with NS2 was a steak dinner that had a great picture on the front of the menu, and I got a piece of meat cooked well, without any potatoes or vegetables along with it. It's the bare minimum of what was needed to be considered a steak dinner.
The only question is, is it too late to send it back to the kitchen to get them to do it right?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I gave this some thought and noticed some people point back to that design dock quite frequently. I took a look at it, and I am simply enthralled by the inconsistency between the final product and this playbook of sorts.
There is one point out of the first four that really strikes me...
<ul><li> Strategy and shooter gameplay requires lots of delicate decisions and tradeoffs. Often what makes one game type fun, makes the other less fun. When the two can’t be balanced, give precedence to the shooter. NS1 was a real-time strategy game with a shooter interface, NS2 is a shooter first, and RTS second (more people experience it as a shooter than an RTS).
<i><!--coloro:#48D1CC--><span style="color:#48D1CC"><!--/coloro-->Wait wait wait! wait!! maybe this is the problem? As long as you have players in first person playing against each other to the death, it's a FPS.. don't complicate this. the RTS is only COMPLIMENTARY........ what you did was mix COMBAT in with your core gameplay mechanics.<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc--></i></li><li> Knowing that a team is executing a strategy should give an advantage to an equally skilled team
<i><!--coloro:#48D1CC--><span style="color:#48D1CC"><!--/coloro-->That makes sense. Lots of map specific strategies made NS1 very very fun.<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc--></i></li><li> The marine team is organized from “top-down†(Command & Control). The alien team is organized from “bottom-up†(no high-level orders, the best information comes from the senses).
<i><!--coloro:#48D1CC--><span style="color:#48D1CC"><!--/coloro-->THIS is not happening. If anything, Alien team works in the same way as the marines MOST LIKELY due to Charlie's two-part res model(pres/tres). The alien commander is the reason for this, and you no longer make decision as a team carried out as a team(with gorges).<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc--></i></li><li> Commanders shouldn’t be able to do direct damage (violates perceived fairness in shooter).</li></ul>
People talk about this game being asymmetrical, and I passionately disagree. Sure, you have one team with jaws and sharp things versus a team with technological shooting things, but it kinda ends there. NS1 was a little more asymmetrical because you had two very different paradigms:
- Marines' top down order. The commander had control over the equipment and where the resources were spent.
- Aliens' community based order. Every one had to be on the same page. Since everyone had the potential to DO THE SAME FOR THE TEAM, it was a democracy of sorts as to who would drop the 2nd, who would cap res nodes, what chamber order do we use.
Whether it is marines or aliens, you spawn in and run around and someone else is responsible for structures...
I will end it at this: I hope NS2 hits a point where some serious changes are made to turn things around.
I gave this some thought and noticed some people point back to that design dock quite frequently. I took a look at it, and I am simply enthralled by the inconsistency between the final product and this playbook of sorts.
There is one point out of the first four that really strikes me...
<ul><li> Strategy and shooter gameplay requires lots of delicate decisions and tradeoffs. Often what makes one game type fun, makes the other less fun. When the two can’t be balanced, give precedence to the shooter. NS1 was a real-time strategy game with a shooter interface, NS2 is a shooter first, and RTS second (more people experience it as a shooter than an RTS).
<i><!--coloro:#48D1CC--><span style="color:#48D1CC"><!--/coloro-->Wait wait wait! wait!! maybe this is the problem? As long as you have players in first person playing against each other to the death, it's a FPS.. don't complicate this. the RTS is only COMPLIMENTARY........ what you did was mix COMBAT in with your core gameplay mechanics.<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc--></i></li><li> Knowing that a team is executing a strategy should give an advantage to an equally skilled team
<i><!--coloro:#48D1CC--><span style="color:#48D1CC"><!--/coloro-->That makes sense. Lots of map specific strategies made NS1 very very fun.<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc--></i></li><li> The marine team is organized from “top-down†(Command & Control). The alien team is organized from “bottom-up†(no high-level orders, the best information comes from the senses).
<i><!--coloro:#48D1CC--><span style="color:#48D1CC"><!--/coloro-->THIS is not happening. If anything, Alien team works in the same way as the marines MOST LIKELY due to Charlie's two-part res model(pres/tres). The alien commander is the reason for this, and you no longer make decision as a team carried out as a team(with gorges).<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc--></i></li><li> Commanders shouldn’t be able to do direct damage (violates perceived fairness in shooter).</li></ul>
People talk about this game being asymmetrical, and I passionately disagree. Sure, you have one team with jaws and sharp things versus a team with technological shooting things, but it kinda ends there. NS1 was a little more asymmetrical because you had two very different paradigms:
- Marines' top down order. The commander had control over the equipment and where the resources were spent.
- Aliens' community based order. Every one had to be on the same page. Since everyone had the potential to DO THE SAME FOR THE TEAM, it was a democracy of sorts as to who would drop the 2nd, who would cap res nodes, what chamber order do we use.
Whether it is marines or aliens, you spawn in and run around and someone else is responsible for structures...
I will end it at this: I hope NS2 hits a point where some serious changes are made to turn things around.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This Is 100% right, Though a lot of great idea's where added too ns2 to make it better. It sacrificed the Risk Reward feeling that makes RTS games what they are today..... Though there is a lot of asymmetrical gameplay, its not quite the same as ns1, Im not sure if this is a bad thing but I dont think it was quite the right way to go.
the game is the best $25 laggy piece of ###### I ever paid for
These people can play NS2C. But the rest of us are going to be playing NS2.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You're assuming that "your" group has higher count.
I've played both, I don't share your opinion and a look in my Steam library tells me that I've spent more hours with NS2 than L4D2 already.
Do I see every change UWE implements as a gift from heaven? Surely not. I don't need to like every detail to enjoy the game with my friends.
I'd like to see better performance. Considering the radical progress they made over the last few builds I'm quite optimistic that this aspect of the game will mature.
And that's exactly how I think about the rest. I don't see NS2 as a done deal that won't ever change. I see it as something that's growing and improving.
It doesn't mean that I've never encountered problems. It's just how I chose to respond to that.
Last weekend, my game froze while I was in the comm chair. Do I take to the forums to spew bile like Temphage and tell everyone who dares to like the game that he/she is a sycophant, UWE are lazy morons and the game is all turd, no fun? Nope.
You know what I did?
I rechecked the file consistency and so far I didn't encounter that error again. Problem solved.
In other cases I made screenshots and posted them on this forum and saw them fixed a few builds down the road.
Each new build I'm using Fraps and very often I see improvements in framerates. I also like to read changelogs to keep up with the changes and learn about new stuff in the game.
NS2 is not fun, i hope in NS:C but ( probably ) we are 200 players.. ( number based on steam group )
no sg rush, no gorges, no gorge rush, no ocs rush, no ragequitting, no fun ninja players.. nothing, only a slow pace conquest mode ( i prefere a turtle game in ns1 is better, im serious ).
and the stupidity of electricity ? rotfl, this ruins all possibility of fast rush.
final vote
3/10
gorges are strong in ns2
oc rush? are you serious?
ragequitting - as much as a problem as it was in NS1, same as stacking
"fun ninja players" - there's alot of ninjaing going on in NS2. Just not ninja PGs.
Turtling in NS1 was completely stupid. Electrifying a bunch of turret factories placed next to each other to block entry points from Onos + 5 billion turrets in the same room + HMGs + res for kill + waiting for 10 years to build up a HA train? Is this your idea of fun? seriously?
And the clincher is your preference for Co. Co was popular because classic NS had so many problems with it. If you'd prefer Co, and the fun of NS1 for you basically amounts to turtling and rushing, then I can only assume that you don't actually like the idea of NS.
On another note, yes, NS2 is markedly more symmetrical than NS1. I didn't like this, personally, but eh. The game's still fun. I never really expected NS2 to be as fun as NS1 simply because of <a href="http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/NostalgiaFilter" target="_blank">nostalgia bias</a>, and I have no doubt that, given enough time, NS2 will reach the same refinement that took NS1 so many years to reach.
I think the biggest disappointment is that people expected all of that refinement in NS1 to carry over, and now we're seemingly back to square one, and have a ton of refinement to go, even though NS2, while a different game, is fundamentally the same as its predecessor.
The fade is weak, the lerk needs attention, 6 minute onos has to go. These are all things Charlie agreed with on the ESL stream. But there are priorities. First, stability fixes. These affect everyone, so sure. Then, he wants to work on fostering the competitive scene via first person spectator, demo recording and replays. I'm not a comp player, and neither are most people, so this seems like an unfair prioritization to the average Joe gamer who wants to play as a fade without people urging him to pick a better lifeform. But, it is what it is.
And if people dont like the game, are they forbidden to tell what didnt work? i guess this forum isnt some kind of dictatorship thingy. Customers have the right and the reason. If they are not satisfied, then they are on their right to make that known.
Sorry but NS1 was just way superior to me than this game
Sorry but NS1 was just way superior to me than this game<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
"<i>Wtf is your problem OP? Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. If i had never played NS1 I might have given this a higher score but after having played NS1 for hundreds of hour I wouldn't give this game more than 65/100
Also I call BS on your "5 year old" computer running this perfectly. Perfect = 60 fps and I doubt you even have 30 consistently"</i>
This is a post from your post history. It took me 10 seconds to find a post that I'm sure reflects the tone of your criticisms.
I know there are people that love circle jerking around the game, and people who circle jerk against it. But usually the "fanboys" aren't unreasonable: You just add a lot of fluff to your criticism. By fluff, I mean you start to sound incredibly negative and belligerent. As if everything you type MUST be read, and repeated a thousand times over, each time with more doom and gloom.
You can apply this criticism to a couple of notorious forum posters.
The problem with those people is that they think adding negativity helps. Like they expect a developer to read their advice, who'll promptly start to sweat at the thought of people not buying the game because they're not working fast enough/or making the changes that are deemed necessary.
This is not the why to go about things. This is good old fashioned attention whoring. You post your feedback, and you get out. You're not special, stop screaming in everyone's ear.
As for performance, yeah, they need to improve that. The next patch is going to have several performance improving changes (they talked about it in the dev q/a on twitch a few days ago).
As for performance, yeah, they need to improve that. The next patch is going to have several performance improving changes (they talked about it in the dev q/a on twitch a few days ago).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's a red herring: The main problem is that NS2 regressed on parts of NS1 that were already weak, without adding much otherwise.
They're all just the newest incarnation of Forlorn to me. Having posts on a forums or hours sunk into the game never makes that game actually belong to you. I've had as much if not more disappointments in terms of suggestions being ignored, ideological battles being fought and lost, changes being made I didn't like, and general forum garbage pretty much.
In the end of the day, it's Flayra and the NS team actually sitting down to code the changes. The development of the game belongs to them, or any modder who chooses to just ignore the BS and do it themselves. Most of the suggestion posts here are very reactive, and they suggest changes that basically either "forget the new stuff and regress to NS1 again" or "Here's a completely inelegant solution that breaks 5 things I don't care about to fix the one thing that's annoying me right now". This is extremely obvious in pysmples posts for example... Temphage is more along the line of defending a destructive ideology ("###### competitive players, they ruin the game rofl")... I made versions of both these same mistakes myself in the past.
Flayra is the one who's right here. Good design takes a HUGE amount of time and effort. There's a hundred vaugly viable solutions to any given problem, and any one of them has certain significant upsides and certain significant downsides. Hughe was talking about exactly this thing in one of the Q&A's and he's COMPLETELY and TOTALLY right. NS2 would be ###### in a month if they tried to develop it entirely reactively. They need to react to problems, but slowly, deliberately, and in a well thought out way is ideal.
I don't trust Flayra to not make mistakes, I don't trust him to never do stupid things, I don't trust him to listen to all my crappy ideas. I trust him to be smart, to consider options, and I trust the community to filter out crap well enough that the really good stuff eventually gets to the power that be.
Anyone who chooses to be entitled, anyone who chooses to be bitter... Well, they've already lost. In the end of the day, if you're not having fun with NS2, you're not having fun here, you're doing the wrong thing. This is gaming, we're not talking about feeding starving orphans here. Go somewhere you find more rewarding.
Also I call BS on your "5 year old" computer running this perfectly. Perfect = 60 fps and I doubt you even have 30 consistently"</i>
This is a post from your post history. It took me 10 seconds to find a post that I'm sure reflects the tone of your criticisms.
I know there are people that love circle jerking around the game, and people who circle jerk against it. But usually the "fanboys" aren't unreasonable: You just add a lot of fluff to your criticism. By fluff, I mean you start to sound incredibly negative and belligerent. As if everything you type MUST be read, and repeated a thousand times over, each time with more doom and gloom.
You can apply this criticism to a couple of notorious forum posters.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I called out a poster for being completely out of touch with reality. First he denies people the right to have subjective opinions which in itself is a disgusting thing to do and next the claims that the game runs perfectly fine on his 5 year old PC which we all know is pure BS not even the biggest fanboys can deny that.
Also it's funny how you neglect all my other posts where I don't throw a fit because someone is acting outrageous but I guess that's the fanboy way to do it...
Sorry but NS1 was just way superior to me than this game<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Don't know how they can call themselves such big fans if they don't want NS2 to be better than it is. They'd rather throw around language like "entitled" as if people who played NS1 for a decade want something other than for NS2 to be the best game it can possibly be. They are protecting it from "negativity" the way an overly possessive parent protects their child from the real world, and see all the good that does