With as many people as UWE have, we would not have seen the game by now had they gone with source. IMHO, that is.
What do you mean with this?
What I mean is that by putting the effort up front to develop spark, then layer on the game logic with lua, UWE were able to actually get the nuts and bolts to polishing work done a lot faster than had they gone ahead with Source. In my opinion. Sure, if they'd have changed their design so it would be possible on the source engine, it *might* have been quicker to make, but I'm not 100% convinced of that tbh.
Of course, we'll never know, because there is no control experiment
I'm prreeeeeettty sure you are the only one sharing that opinion. It does cry out anti-logical when you say that a making both the game AND the engine would be faster than just implementing a game in a ready-made engine.
It has that je ne sais quoi TF2 also has for pubbing. Jump in, slap some stuff around without thinking about it and also for instant gratification, jump out when done.
Believe it or not, but CoD is one of the highest quality couchFPS's there is :P
--> Too bad, because of that it needs all the aids like aim assist, hud "ENEMY THERE indicators, super low FoV, low quality graphics so it can run, and of course super powered listen servers ) And of course as little depth as possible so you don't get invested beyond shooting stuff and getting kill streaks to shoot more stuff...
The irony is you can't argue with sales figures and player base. COD year after year attains the highest sales for a video game, it has been that way for at least 5 years. The multiplayer is one of the longest played, look at steam stats to see multiple variations of the game being played.
Whatever your definition of quality is, whether you like COD or not, you can't deny NS2 is not in that league and is likely not to be in that league until, as Kouji says, you can make something that you can 'jump in, slap stuff around without thinking about it'. I appreciate the trying to take games to a new depth, but NS2 is very niche, aside the fact the performance is horrible, the constant moving of goal-posts in terms of gameplay variants puts an audience off compared to 'jump in' games; which are the most successful on all fronts.
I firmly believe you'd have something niche and more accessible if strong leadership and motivation was pushed forward from a playtesting and business leadership role. As someone has said, the engine was the real tipping point, as for at least 2 years, until the engine is stable, you won't see true gameplay and the posts will continue to move.
It allows people of all skill levels to feel as tho they've achieved something through showering players in positive reinforcement or feedback, you can talk all the shit you want about cheevos and kill streaks and 420noscopes but if you sit in NS2 and get stacked on for 2-3 hours you just spent 2-3 hours getting your chest shit on, if you spent 2-3 hours getting crapped on in CoD you probably still unlocked 2-3 levels, gained new skills, got 2-3000 different achievements and probably had a lot more fun regardless of match outcome.
Designing games that are only fun for the winning team isn't an achievement, some might even call it bad game design.
The multiplayer is one of the longest played, look at steam stats to see multiple variations of the game being played.
Not to nit pick but:
Current Peak
12,044 30,429 Counter-Strike: Global Offensive
8,729 33,892 Counter-Strike
7,657 28,653 Counter-Strike: Source
5,563 21,755 Call of Duty: Black Ops II - Multiplayer
1,843 11,606 Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 - Multiplayer
984 7,480 Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 - Multiplayer
760 2,638 Call of Duty: Black Ops - Multiplayer
750 2,799 Call of Duty: Black Ops II - Zombies
CoD definitely kills it in sales but to me CS has and always will be the king of player retention/numbers on PC and is the GOAT FPS, does none of the things CoD has to do to keep them either, well, CS GO blurs the line a little but I guess VALVe gotta enter that console market one day.
A man goes to the doctor and says, "Doctor, wherever I touch, it hurts."
The doctor asks, "What do you mean?"
The man says, "When I touch my shoulder, it really hurts.When I touch my knee - OUCH! When I touch my forehead, it really, really hurts."
The doctor says, "I know what's wrong with you. You've broken your finger!"
It allows people of all skill levels to feel as tho they've achieved something through showering players in positive reinforcement or feedback,
That description ceases to properly address why i feel COD games lack quality in gameplay - not that i even consider such mechanics to be quality gameplay.
The randomness of perks and crate drops are basically the fundamental reason why i stopped playing MW2 back in the day (besides the amazingly horrible matchmaking P2P)..
Skilled play is almost removed entirely through constant UAVs (wallhacks, basically), constant Air support (typically am uncounter-able and skill-less kill) and Crates...
oh god the randomness of supply crates.. if you dont want to pull your hair out everytime a friendly runs to your supply crate and steals it first because you were doing what you were supposed to be.. then i guess you never minded when Bowser slapped you and took all of your stars in mario party, despite you being the hard earned lead, all because you rolled a 4 instead of a 3 or 5. Ugh.
Any remote amount of skill that could be displayed or utilized in COD is entirely shadowed and destroyed by random elements that were designed to level the playing field in skill.
Noob at the bottom of the scoreboard? Don't worry he just stole his teammate's Gunship crate.. and because of that just unlocked himself a shiny new weapon/kit!..
UGH... no thanks.
Skilled play is almost removed entirely through constant UAVs (wallhacks, basically), constant Air support (typically am uncounter-able and skill-less kill) and Crates...
[/quote]
Motion tracking, Parasites, Spore.
NS1 and 2 has that 'skill-less' kill too. Maybe IronHorse should get off his high horse?
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 June 2013
Ok, i'll bite.
If you've ever played it, you'd know the frequency of UAVs in COD are multitudes greater than scans in NS2, plus scans show only a room out of a gigantic map for a cost on your team's economy.
Landing a parasite is far easier now, but still requires above noob level skill with evasive dodging and tracking - as opposed to any of those skill-less items i listed above. Scouting and marking is not often considered a "skill-less" mechanic in most game designs??
Again there's the frequency factor that could be considered with lerk spores, but really its such a stretch for you to pick such a thing since its more like smoke grenades - something i did not mention above and something i find to be somewhat tactical in other games like BC2 and CS etc. Unless you find lerk spores to be similar to gunships, air raids, predator missiles, supply creates, UAVs, weapon kits, and nukes somehow??.... lol
Skilled play is almost removed entirely through constant UAVs (wallhacks, basically), constant Air support (typically am uncounter-able and skill-less kill) and Crates...
Motion tracking, Parasites, Spore.
NS1 and 2 has that 'skill-less' kill too. Maybe IronHorse should get off his high horse?[/quote]
scans and parasite remove the element of surprise for map awareness. tradeoff, also res cost. spores are support. by the time you have spores out, you should have to be wary of flying in on marines. also, you rarely get spore kills without other lifeforms.
if I see a lerk sporing, I.usually scan to mitigate the visibility aspect.
"It allows people of all skill levels to feel as tho they've achieved something through showering players in positive reinforcement or feedback, you can talk all the **** you want about cheevos and kill streaks and 420noscopes but if you sit in NS2 and get stacked on for 2-3 hours you just spent 2-3 hours getting your chest **** on, if you spent 2-3 hours getting crapped on in CoD you probably still unlocked 2-3 levels, gained new skills, got 2-3000 different achievements and probably had a lot more fun regardless of match outcome."
Oh dear I agree with Xao, *instant uninstall.* - but good point - you can 'lose' at COD whilst beating shit up with a strike fighter, 'losing' with a 105mm howitzer in an AC-130 is a VERY subjective suggestion, a lot wouldn't even notice they are losing team wise, as they are *having fun with a super powerful modern weapons platform - from the safety of their couch*.
The equivalent in NS2 would be saving for Exo and getting eaten by the first skulk. The difference is of course in NS2 that exo can win the game for a team, a strike package in COD when your team is 20 kills down might not have such a gameplay impact.
Reason CoD is popular is that most people play games for fun, not as some sort of sport or serious project. They have their lives to invest time and effort in.
Of course if ns2 was more accessible and featured some sort of tutorial, or at least a ui that doesn't assume you already know how the game works...
well the newb-friendly games are always more popular, and for good reason
the matchmaking in games is always far from perfect
CoD isn't about the perks and random drops -- it's about the game being so skill-less that everyone will gets some frags...
yes the better team will win, but it'll be 30 to 15 instead of 50 to -5 like a round of Quake
it's the same reason why moba is more popular than RTS games
Why does a game in beta still get voted onto the list of games that was released years ago?
How does ns2 a unoptimized beta game get listed along with the like of TF2, BF3, CS:GO etc, all, despite being computer hungry resource hogs that perform 100 times better fps wise?
Why does a game in beta still get voted onto the list of games that was released years ago?
How does ns2 a unoptimized beta game get listed along with the like of TF2, BF3, CS:GO etc, all, despite being computer hungry resource hogs that perform 100 times better fps wise?
Just a feeling here. But maybe it's not just about framerate. Maybe NS2 is in fact, a fun game. You may disagree and that is your right but it seems the majority are in disagreement with your opinions.
NS2 was out of beta months ago. I don't think you know what beta means in software development.
Fun games are the most popular. That's why DOTA 2 is more or less 99% the top of the steam list.
Its just the moba craze. Supposedly, LoL has achieved a 5 million concurrent playercount. To put that in perspective, LoL probably matches or exceeds the total number of people playing steam games.
well the newb-friendly games are always more popular, and for good reason
the matchmaking in games is always far from perfect
CoD isn't about the perks and random drops -- it's about the game being so skill-less that everyone will gets some frags...
yes the better team will win, but it'll be 30 to 15 instead of 50 to -5 like a round of Quake
it's the same reason why moba is more popular than RTS games
you call 50-5 a skill difference, I was by no means bad at quake, and I've noncomp players I'd thank my lucky stars to get 5 kills on. high tier to low tier in q3 would be 50 - 1, and that one would be from a botched gauntlet attempt.
well the newb-friendly games are always more popular, and for good reason
the matchmaking in games is always far from perfect
CoD isn't about the perks and random drops -- it's about the game being so skill-less that everyone will gets some frags...
yes the better team will win, but it'll be 30 to 15 instead of 50 to -5 like a round of Quake
it's the same reason why moba is more popular than RTS games
you call 50-5 a skill difference, I was by no means bad at quake, and I've noncomp players I'd thank my lucky stars to get 5 kills on. high tier to low tier in q3 would be 50 - 1, and that one would be from a botched gauntlet attempt.
I said 50 to negative 5
it's common even with slight skill differences in a typical mode like TDM
well the newb-friendly games are always more popular, and for good reason
the matchmaking in games is always far from perfect
CoD isn't about the perks and random drops -- it's about the game being so skill-less that everyone will gets some frags...
yes the better team will win, but it'll be 30 to 15 instead of 50 to -5 like a round of Quake
it's the same reason why moba is more popular than RTS games
you call 50-5 a skill difference, I was by no means bad at quake, and I've noncomp players I'd thank my lucky stars to get 5 kills on. high tier to low tier in q3 would be 50 - 1, and that one would be from a botched gauntlet attempt.
I said 50 to negative 5
it's common even with slight skill differences in a typical mode like TDM
Comments
I'm prreeeeeettty sure you are the only one sharing that opinion. It does cry out anti-logical when you say that a making both the game AND the engine would be faster than just implementing a game in a ready-made engine.
The irony is you can't argue with sales figures and player base. COD year after year attains the highest sales for a video game, it has been that way for at least 5 years. The multiplayer is one of the longest played, look at steam stats to see multiple variations of the game being played.
Whatever your definition of quality is, whether you like COD or not, you can't deny NS2 is not in that league and is likely not to be in that league until, as Kouji says, you can make something that you can 'jump in, slap stuff around without thinking about it'. I appreciate the trying to take games to a new depth, but NS2 is very niche, aside the fact the performance is horrible, the constant moving of goal-posts in terms of gameplay variants puts an audience off compared to 'jump in' games; which are the most successful on all fronts.
I firmly believe you'd have something niche and more accessible if strong leadership and motivation was pushed forward from a playtesting and business leadership role. As someone has said, the engine was the real tipping point, as for at least 2 years, until the engine is stable, you won't see true gameplay and the posts will continue to move.
It allows people of all skill levels to feel as tho they've achieved something through showering players in positive reinforcement or feedback, you can talk all the shit you want about cheevos and kill streaks and 420noscopes but if you sit in NS2 and get stacked on for 2-3 hours you just spent 2-3 hours getting your chest shit on, if you spent 2-3 hours getting crapped on in CoD you probably still unlocked 2-3 levels, gained new skills, got 2-3000 different achievements and probably had a lot more fun regardless of match outcome.
Designing games that are only fun for the winning team isn't an achievement, some might even call it bad game design.
Not to nit pick but:
Current Peak
12,044 30,429 Counter-Strike: Global Offensive
8,729 33,892 Counter-Strike
7,657 28,653 Counter-Strike: Source
5,563 21,755 Call of Duty: Black Ops II - Multiplayer
1,843 11,606 Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 - Multiplayer
984 7,480 Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 - Multiplayer
760 2,638 Call of Duty: Black Ops - Multiplayer
750 2,799 Call of Duty: Black Ops II - Zombies
CoD definitely kills it in sales but to me CS has and always will be the king of player retention/numbers on PC and is the GOAT FPS, does none of the things CoD has to do to keep them either, well, CS GO blurs the line a little but I guess VALVe gotta enter that console market one day.
A man goes to the doctor and says, "Doctor, wherever I touch, it hurts."
The doctor asks, "What do you mean?"
The man says, "When I touch my shoulder, it really hurts.When I touch my knee - OUCH! When I touch my forehead, it really, really hurts."
The doctor says, "I know what's wrong with you. You've broken your finger!"
... you may just have IBS dude.
The randomness of perks and crate drops are basically the fundamental reason why i stopped playing MW2 back in the day (besides the amazingly horrible matchmaking P2P)..
Skilled play is almost removed entirely through constant UAVs (wallhacks, basically), constant Air support (typically am uncounter-able and skill-less kill) and Crates...
oh god the randomness of supply crates.. if you dont want to pull your hair out everytime a friendly runs to your supply crate and steals it first because you were doing what you were supposed to be.. then i guess you never minded when Bowser slapped you and took all of your stars in mario party, despite you being the hard earned lead, all because you rolled a 4 instead of a 3 or 5. Ugh.
Any remote amount of skill that could be displayed or utilized in COD is entirely shadowed and destroyed by random elements that were designed to level the playing field in skill.
Noob at the bottom of the scoreboard? Don't worry he just stole his teammate's Gunship crate.. and because of that just unlocked himself a shiny new weapon/kit!..
UGH... no thanks.
Motion tracking, Parasites, Spore.
NS1 and 2 has that 'skill-less' kill too. Maybe IronHorse should get off his high horse?
/Back on horse.
Motion tracking, Parasites, Spore.
NS1 and 2 has that 'skill-less' kill too. Maybe IronHorse should get off his high horse?[/quote]
scans and parasite remove the element of surprise for map awareness. tradeoff, also res cost. spores are support. by the time you have spores out, you should have to be wary of flying in on marines. also, you rarely get spore kills without other lifeforms.
if I see a lerk sporing, I.usually scan to mitigate the visibility aspect.
Oh dear I agree with Xao, *instant uninstall.* - but good point - you can 'lose' at COD whilst beating shit up with a strike fighter, 'losing' with a 105mm howitzer in an AC-130 is a VERY subjective suggestion, a lot wouldn't even notice they are losing team wise, as they are *having fun with a super powerful modern weapons platform - from the safety of their couch*.
The equivalent in NS2 would be saving for Exo and getting eaten by the first skulk. The difference is of course in NS2 that exo can win the game for a team, a strike package in COD when your team is 20 kills down might not have such a gameplay impact.
Of course if ns2 was more accessible and featured some sort of tutorial, or at least a ui that doesn't assume you already know how the game works...
CS is probably lower than it should be, look at the servers and player count for a game of its age!
Where is HL1 ffs!
some of these lists impose a one game per series rule. not sure if this one does. but that might be it.
the matchmaking in games is always far from perfect
CoD isn't about the perks and random drops -- it's about the game being so skill-less that everyone will gets some frags...
yes the better team will win, but it'll be 30 to 15 instead of 50 to -5 like a round of Quake
it's the same reason why moba is more popular than RTS games
How does ns2 a unoptimized beta game get listed along with the like of TF2, BF3, CS:GO etc, all, despite being computer hungry resource hogs that perform 100 times better fps wise?
Just a feeling here. But maybe it's not just about framerate. Maybe NS2 is in fact, a fun game. You may disagree and that is your right but it seems the majority are in disagreement with your opinions.
NS2 was out of beta months ago. I don't think you know what beta means in software development.
now i have seen everything. LOl
you call 50-5 a skill difference, I was by no means bad at quake, and I've noncomp players I'd thank my lucky stars to get 5 kills on. high tier to low tier in q3 would be 50 - 1, and that one would be from a botched gauntlet attempt.
If this is the first time you've seen video game elitism, I'd like to be the first to welcome you to the internet.
I said 50 to negative 5
it's common even with slight skill differences in a typical mode like TDM
misread that, sorry.