The imminent death of natural selection 2

the_tickthe_tick Netherlands Join Date: 2014-01-20 Member: 193352Members
Well looking at this there is a steady decline in the community, with the playerbase at an all time low,


http://steamcharts.com/app/4920#1m


There are many reasons why this has happened, but to be honest, there were just a lot of wrong choices made that crushed the game.

- The long development time (6+ years?)
- The steep learning curve,
- The changes made to NS2 in comparison
- The lack of multiple game types, combat, siege maps
- The choice of the engine, visuals > gameplay (always ends up in game death) (guess you haven't learned from this one yet, See subnautica) and it the main reason why this game turned to shit
- The implementation of the alien commander, ( sorry but I have to include this, instead of 1 commander there are now 2 (and a lot of games get destroyed because of this)
- The fixed tech points, making the maps inflexible, rather they should have gone for making alien hive placement more flexible, instead of removing the cc flexibility of the marines
- The vantage point that this game is designed for a 6 vs 6, ( I mean what the hell was that, well we fucked up the game engine, let's use 6 vs 6 as a point to test balance so we don't have to deal with the other problems?)
- The inflexibility of the dev team, (example, see the above)
- The new abilities added to ns2 ( made the game even harder to understand)
- The many other minor frustrations, ( game breaking bugs, balance issues, Pre release game testing,


As a person who has played from the age of 4 playing commodore games I tell you this,

Develop a game that is fun to play from the first minute you touch it. It is a rookie mistake that visuals are more important, I still play the legend of zelda on a emulator, why? because of the gameplay! and not because of it's visuals!

And honestly, I don't care how insensitive I am right now, this is a wake up call for UWE, because they developed a great game I spend many hours on called Natural Selection, (the first, not the 2nd one) If they wish to ignore this, and with the path they are currently taking with subnautica, I fear the worst for this developer...
«13

Comments

  • d0ped0gd0ped0g Join Date: 2003-05-25 Member: 16679Members
    edited June 2014
    Oh great. It's time for the monthly "is ns2 dead/dying" discussion. I bet this is going to be heavily intellectual. /s

    the_tick wrote: »
    - The changes made to NS2 in comparison
    In comparison to what? huh.
    the_tick wrote: »
    - The vantage point that this game is designed for a 6 vs 6, ( I mean what the hell was that, well we fucked up the game engine, let's use 6 vs 6 as a point to test balance so we don't have to deal with the other problems?)
    Wut. What the hell does vantage point mean in this context?
    the_tick wrote: »
    - The new abilities added to ns2 ( made the game even harder to understand)
    I don't even...

    You don't need a degree in theoretical physics to understand what bonewall does, or vortex, or whatever other abilities have been added.
  • meatmachinemeatmachine South England Join Date: 2013-01-06 Member: 177858Members, NS2 Playtester, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Supporter
    - the tick's server


    LOL ;)
  • VetinariVetinari Join Date: 2013-07-23 Member: 186325Members, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Silver
    edited June 2014
    d0ped0g wrote: »
    the_tick wrote: »
    - The vantage point that this game is designed for a 6 vs 6, ( I mean what the hell was that, well we fucked up the game engine, let's use 6 vs 6 as a point to test balance so we don't have to deal with the other problems?)
    Wut. What the hell does vantage point mean in this context?

    Well I've been playing some Sniper Elite V2 recently and I think he means the point from which you can optimally give NS2 it's
    coup de grace
    and disappear unseen, although I'm not entirely sure.
  • BeigeAlertBeigeAlert Texas Join Date: 2013-08-08 Member: 186657Members, Super Administrators, Forum Admins, NS2 Developer, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Squad Five Silver, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Diamond, Reinforced - Shadow, Subnautica Playtester, Pistachionauts
    the_tick wrote: »
    - The steep learning curve
    - The choice of the engine, visuals > gameplay (always ends up in game death) (guess you haven't learned from this one yet, See subnautica) and it the main reason why this game turned to shit

    Develop a game that is fun to play from the first minute you touch it. It is a rookie mistake that visuals are more important, I still play the legend of zelda on a emulator, why? because of the gameplay! and not because of it's visuals!

    I completely agree that the steep learning curve of the game hurts its player retention. I don't think anybody is going to argue with you there. And yes, the game engine isn't the greatest, but they built it themselves, and it works, just not as well as some AAA title's multi million dollar game engine, and that's to be expected. However, it has been improved many, many times during the life of NS2, and I just don't think this is a valid point anymore.

    It's impossible to develop a game that's fun from the minute you touch it. Sorry, but that's the way it is. If dev textures and buggy movement was "fun" then why bother "finishing" the game? Ever wondered why some games just plain suck? It's not that the developers have a different idea of what "fun" is, they just thought their finished product would be more "fun" than it ended up being. What a bunch of idiots -- you might say to yourself, how could they not know if their game was fun or not? Well -- and I don't have a source for this, it's just something I've heard repeated many many times, but -- games aren't fun until the last 10% of development. At that point, it's usually too late to add major gameplay changes.

    True, visuals don't make a game fun, but unfortunately in the world we live in today, visuals are what sells the game. Gameplay is what keeps the players, true, but without that initial punch of the cool visuals, players might not take it seriously. Ok, ok, I'm weasel-wording a little bit here, so I'll just use myself as an example: Say I have a choice between game A and game B. Game A and B both seem to be pretty solid games, but game A doesn't seem to have really put the effort into its visuals that game B has. Without spending the hundreds of hours necessary to learn all the nuances of every game and make a decision on which game is the best choice -- an odd decision seeing as how you've apparently put 100's of hours into it -- what more does one have to go off of than reviews and gameplay videos? At the moment, there's really only one reviewer I trust (zero punctuation, and he rarely does multiplayer-only games like ns2), and gameplay videos often are staged or show on the funnest parts of a game. So, without much else to go on, I often look at the visuals to judge -- NOT how "good" a game is, but how badly the developers wanted the game to be good! Example: Orcs Must Die has some great visuals, a nice art style, and I was pulled in by the gameplay, but had my doubts as to whether or not it would live up to what I saw in the videos. In the end, I find out I bought a great game, and had no regrets. Another example: Alone in the Dark (the newest version) I picked this one up from a store on a whim because it was so cheap (first warning sign ignored... AAA title offered for so cheap). One of the first things I noticed was how bad the graphics were. The second thing I noticed was how much I wanted to NOT be playing that game anymore when I was being attacked by monsters shorter than my knees, and my character refused to do anything but punch the air ABOVE them.

    TLDR: Visuals don't make a game exciting, but they're a good indication of the developer's level of attention to detail.
  • dragonmithdragonmith Join Date: 2013-02-04 Member: 182817Members, Reinforced - Diamond
    How do you know what Subnautica looks like? There has only really been concept art and alpha stuff.

    If you say the procedural generator they made favors graphics over game-play, well maybe you have a point...
  • Ren26Ren26 Join Date: 2013-06-30 Member: 185811Members
    And when it dies we will all die along with it.
  • PelargirPelargir Join Date: 2013-07-02 Member: 185857Members, Forum Moderators, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Squad Five Silver, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Supporter, Reinforced - Silver, WC 2013 - Silver, Forum staff
    edited June 2014
    the_tick wrote:
    - The implementation of the alien commander, ( sorry but I have to include this, instead of 1 commander there are now 2 (and a lot of games get destroyed because of this)

    This is NS2, not NS1. Fortunately, the purpose of UWE isn't to develop the same game twice but with graphical improvements. And in my opinion, adding the Alien Commander was definitely one of the best choices they did.
    alnair wrote:
    I think that visuals is a non-issue these days, the game looks quite decent.

    Steep learning curve? Sure it may takes some hours to not be a "floor" skulk... BUT before someone can be able to play the game and be that idiot shooting the harvester and not the gorge tunnel ppl must know that there is a game called Natural Selection!

    I would say the problem is spelled Marketing.

    Solution? Talk to your friends, post on facebook (or similar) and let ppl know about the game, guide rookies to learn the flow of things and more will follow.

    +1
  • meatmachinemeatmachine South England Join Date: 2013-01-06 Member: 177858Members, NS2 Playtester, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Supporter
    alnair wrote: »
    I think that visuals is a non-issue these days, the game looks quite decent.

    Steep learning curve? Sure it may takes some hours to not be a "floor" skulk... BUT before someone can be able to play the game and be that idiot shooting the harvester and not the gorge tunnel ppl must know that there is a game called Natural Selection!

    I would say the problem is spelled Marketing.

    Solution? Talk to your friends, post on facebook (or similar) and let ppl know about the game, guide rookies to learn the flow of things and more will follow.

    I agree, but I think plain_old_exposure now will not save it.

    Marketing drives have got a lot of sales due to marketing the game around the action-packed aspect of the game. Perhaps we sold to the wrong people though. I think many of the concepts in this game are much more closely tied to MOBA style games (team-based single player RTS - basically everything NS2 is, except NS2 gives an FPS POV).

    In the future, when we have got this game to the point where the game has the polish and tutorials etc that make it actually viable to retain new players, we should look at focusing on marketing this game for what it actually is, instead of letting people believe it's a brainless fragfest.
  • VetinariVetinari Join Date: 2013-07-23 Member: 186325Members, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Silver
    Maybe they should republish it.
  • BensonBenson Join Date: 2012-03-07 Member: 148303Members, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow
    There seem to be a few interesting improvements comming soon.

    This one excites me the most:
    "ENGINE: Multithreaded client physics update"

    https://trello.com/b/91ApENY6/ns2-cdt-development-tracker


    Many people I know LOVE this game, but wont play it due to the super high performance requirements. This should be a strong step in the right direction
  • HowserHowser UK Join Date: 2010-02-08 Member: 70488Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow, Subnautica Playtester, Retired Community Developer
    Any game that's been out for a year and a half is going to see a steady decline in player counts... and given NS2's open development its done well to maintain a player base as long as it has. I think regular updates and changes to the game actually helped maintain a lot of the interest players had. it certainly did for me. I just wish they had moved to community development sooner.

    They've probably shipped the best part of 2 million copies of ns2, but concurrent players have always been very low for a game with pretty visuals and appealing themes. I wouldn't say its dying as it never really took off in a way it deserved. I purchased gift copies for a lot of friends, most of them report the game just didn't feel right. Weak shooting/moving mechanics and the general 'clunkyness' of the game rather than poor netcode/performance and learning curve is what I suspect turns more players off.

    1500 hours in i still love the game and have a lot of faith that community dev team can bring some people back, its just going to require some balls to culling/fix some of the established poor mechanics that really hold the game back.
  • Cee Colon SlashCee Colon Slash Join Date: 2012-05-25 Member: 152581Members
    This game is not for everyone.
  • kmgkmg Join Date: 2008-02-28 Member: 63758Members
    Benson wrote: »
    There seem to be a few interesting improvements comming soon.

    This one excites me the most:
    "ENGINE: Multithreaded client physics update"

    https://trello.com/b/91ApENY6/ns2-cdt-development-tracker


    Many people I know LOVE this game, but wont play it due to the super high performance requirements. This should be a strong step in the right direction

    don't get too excited. this may improve performance in some scenarios, but it's not gonna just increase your overall fps generally speaking. obviously it's a step in the right direction for engine optimization work to be happening at all.
  • kmgkmg Join Date: 2008-02-28 Member: 63758Members
    the_tick wrote: »
    I don't care how insensitive I am right now, this is a wake up call for UWE, because they developed a great game I spend many hours on called Natural Selection, (the first, not the 2nd one) If they wish to ignore this, and with the path they are currently taking with subnautica, I fear the worst for this developer...

    you know, you're right. this game is dying. i guess the only consolation that we'll have is the knowledge that while the game dies, you're also a fucking idiot. yeah, the game is dying. everything else about your post is nonsense. the only points that matter are:

    -steep learning curve
    -performance

    those are the reasons the game is dying. it's not complicated. the rest of the shit in your post though, jesus.

    - The long development time (6+ years?)

    how is this relevant?

    - The changes made to NS2 in comparison

    to ns1? you seem to be thinking that retention of the ns1 community would somehow be critical for ns2 to succeed. while i'm sure it would help, that's just not the case. basically you're saying ns2 is too different from ns1 so people won't want to play it. that doesn't make sense.

    - The lack of multiple game types, combat, siege maps

    i guess? do you mean when the game was first released? combat has certainly been around for a while. very few people actually care about seige maps, in my experience (and it's kind of a dumb game mode tbh.)

    - The choice of the engine, visuals > gameplay (always ends up in game death) (guess you haven't learned from this one yet, See subnautica) and it the main reason why this game turned to ****

    what? the gameplay of ns2 is incredibly complex and nuanced compared to that of other modern shooters. it also has more stuff in it than ns1 did. so i mean, obviously more work was accomplished on gameplay than most other games. the choice of engine? the engine was chosen to support the gameplay style they wanted. ??????

    - The implementation of the alien commander, ( sorry but I have to include this, instead of 1 commander there are now 2 (and a lot of games get destroyed because of this)

    a lot of games get destroyed because both sides have rts-mode commanders? like what games? what other games have alien commanders? or do you mean games of ns2 get destroyed, like they're bad matches because there's an alien commander? because that's also nonsensical.

    - The fixed tech points, making the maps inflexible, rather they should have gone for making alien hive placement more flexible, instead of removing the cc flexibility of the marines

    ns2 is different from ns1. it's a different game. different isn't worse. if you wanted the same game you should have continued playing ns1. you can't argue that ns2 is just worse because the gameplay is different, you have to explain what about that makes it less fun.

    - The vantage point that this game is designed for a 6 vs 6, ( I mean what the hell was that, well we **** up the game engine, let's use 6 vs 6 as a point to test balance so we don't have to deal with the other problems?)

    what? so, how is 6v6 used for balance? and what do you mean by balance? the game is pretty well balanced for pubs. i've brought this up elsewhere but i'm doing it again, according to ns2stats aliens win 57% of matches and marines win 43%.

    - The inflexibility of the dev team, (example, see the above)

    what example above? how is anything above an example of the inflexibility of the dev team?

    - The new abilities added to ns2 ( made the game even harder to understand)

    what? harder to understand for who? and it's worse because it's different?

    - The many other minor frustrations, ( game breaking bugs, balance issues, Pre release game testing,

    mmmm ns2 has minor frustrations, but I don't think these are good examples. game breaking bugs? I dunno, what's your definition of game breaking? there have been bugs that can indirectly cause one side to win or lose, like the beacon bug that was recently fixed. balance issues, again the game has usually been pretty balanced, and uwe has been pretty good about adjusting balance when necessary. what about pre-release game testing? there wasn't enough of it? i don't understand.


    i don't understand guys. somebody please help me understand.
  • dePARAdePARA Join Date: 2011-04-29 Member: 96321Members, Squad Five Blue
    As the admin of the oldest NS2 server, i understand the frustration of the OP a bit.
    To see your server empty most of the time while it was always full a few weeks ago is somewhat disappointing from an admin view.

    But there different reasons why the playercount is low:

    - >24 slot server giving players a wrong impression of the game. This clusterfuck is fun for a few rounds maybe but boring in the long term.
    Performance is horrible on this servers also. 30 ticks on an 28 slot server are not the same like 30ticks on an 18 slot clientside. You lose many fps on an 28 slot with same tickrate.
    - The typical pub stompers farming one rookie server after another.
    - NSL season is over and many clan-players having nothing todo. Most of them didnt play Pub btw.
    - A yellow shiny thing called sun.
    - Soccer WM (im sure many watching this)

    And I think its awesome that UWE didnt go with the trend of dumbed down games.
    If the CoD crowd dont want to learn new things, well, who cares.
  • xDragonxDragon Join Date: 2012-04-04 Member: 149948Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Gold, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Shadow
    LOL this thread and its posts win 'most amusing of the week' award.
  • VetinariVetinari Join Date: 2013-07-23 Member: 186325Members, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Silver
    edited June 2014
    dePARA wrote: »
    - A yellow shiny thing called sun.

    Never heard of it

    No, I won't contribute anything useful to the conversation, because
    cautionary_ghost.png

    edit: spoiler because this is not an imageboard, yes, i know..
  • RapGodRapGod Not entirely sure... Join Date: 2013-11-12 Member: 189322Members
    Thread that means ns2 will die turns to if people like the game/development. Op and posters fault.

    Only thing is, don't say "I agree with you, but its gotten better" when it comes to making excuses of bad game development (assuming you are arguing with someone who thinks it's had bad game development, such as tick). That doesn't change the original statement that you agreed to. Getting "better" is short of "fixed" (what's fixed? Another discussion).

    Still a dumb thread. And I'm dumb for posting. Just bored. Wtf is going on over there in the middle east and Ukraine, right?
  • ritualsacrificeritualsacrifice Join Date: 2012-11-14 Member: 171148Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    edited June 2014
    Clearly UWE is a little out of touch with the community, and I've given them a lot of shit over the past 3+ years... but all things considered, NS2 is probably the best money I've ever spent on entertainment. I don't really play anymore, I got sick of the constant balance changes and tweaks and shit. I still miss the old fade movement. But still.. I got ~1250 hours of entertainment for like $30. That's pretty legit.



    ^That's why I started playing, I bought the game right after i got the trailer. I think UWE delivered on what they were advertising.. for the most part. Except for that when I bought the game the website said it had the same min specs as hl2 xD
  • 2cough2cough Rocky Mountain High Join Date: 2013-03-14 Member: 183952Members, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Supporter
    lulz... just lulz...
  • kmgkmg Join Date: 2008-02-28 Member: 63758Members
    Clearly UWE is a little out of touch with the community

    how so?
  • ritualsacrificeritualsacrifice Join Date: 2012-11-14 Member: 171148Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    edited June 2014
    kmg wrote: »
    Clearly UWE is a little out of touch with the community

    how so?

    "kodiak was a failure"
Sign In or Register to comment.