FrozenNew York, NYJoin Date: 2010-07-02Member: 72228Members, Constellation
Yea exactly my point. I know for fact I do things differently than others.
Frankly I would take some classes to polish some of my play depending who's offering a lesson. I recognize that my styles fail in certain areas of certain maps and try to adapt, but don't quite have the patience in some cases. Different perspectives can help anyone.
For example I ambush just before a marine reaches a doorway, but struggle to position correctly for waiting for them to get through, so some one on one time trading ideas with people might even be fun, not just helpful.
Spinning around targets in circles of continuously varying radii 341 (Single Targets)
Spinning around targets in circles of continuously varying radii 342 (Multiple Targets)
I've legit put many hours of practice and thought into this and the correlation with shotgun fire rate rhythm. Wouldn't mind showing people interested in adding tools to their skulk and fade repertoire.
I like that example because it's useless to a rookie, but soooo useful in higher level play.
Everyone should be doing this without the need for a mentor badge or "official" status because it improves your teammates so you have a better chance to win, and it makes your opponents stronger to give you a better challenge.
If only.. then we wouldn't have these 400 hr commanders making poor decisions as mentioned in this thread.
I don't think it has anything to do with ego or even bad habits. The mentor group that used to exist never exuded any ego whatsoever and were quite helpful with the basics.
The basics. Where it's pretty hard to learn bad habits from - not that they won't pick up on bad habits from playing regardless of a mentor..
We should all assist in training, of course, but having a direct help line sometimes (especially when requested) is hugely helpful.
To avoid the inevitable controversy about what tactic or strategy is best or who is more apt to train, it's better - and really only necessary - to teach the very basics that they fail to grasp and that can create confusion and frustration.
Frustration that leads to uninstalling.
Anything more can be done by promoting newcomer tournaments and gathers, and maybe even the occasional person like yourself who takes the time and knows his stuff.
Everyone should be doing this without the need for a mentor badge or "official" status because it improves your teammates so you have a better chance to win, and it makes your opponents stronger to give you a better challenge.
If only.. then we wouldn't have these 400 hr commanders making poor decisions as mentioned in this thread.
It's pathetic that people need a mentor badge to be encouraged to help. I don't think that should be added.
To avoid the inevitable controversy about what tactic or strategy is best or who is more apt to train, it's better - and really only necessary - to teach the very basics that they fail to grasp and that can create confusion and frustration.
Anything more can be done by promoting newcomer tournaments and gathers, and maybe even the occasional person like yourself who takes the time and knows his stuff.
We already have people doing this stuff and tbh I think they should be given a squad 5 badge for their efforts because they're doing it for the game instead of asking for the badge before hand.
It's pathetic that people need a mentor badge to be encouraged to help. I don't think that should be added.
(...)
We already have people doing this stuff and tbh I think they should be given a squad 5 badge for their efforts because they're doing it for the game instead of asking for the badge before hand.
I can only agree. I don't want a badge no one knows what it is, but I'm forced to say it's a good idea anyway in the way incentives are quite powerful. It's basically dumb, but it works. ... kids...
If it is providing along the way the tools "mentors" (or teacher ... whatever) need to get new people to play with a decent knowledge and behavior not to ruin every game: It's better than nothing.
I'm hoping it's not only a badge that will come up. I have a sentence in mind that includes "shove" and other words about one time only badges. It should describe the real activity and not a number of hour doing this (like commander badge).
Converting the match making system into a teacher/classroom management tool would be nice. But if it is only a badge... once they get it... it's over.
where was the thread to nominate people for a squad 5 badge?
You can nominate individuals in our Hall of Fame thread in the Squad 5 sub forums.. Here are the last round of recipients (posted in the same thread that they are nominated)
A new free badge being introduced to help gameplay/game quality will end the same way as the last time it was done, ie. the comm badge.
People will farm (basically pretending to help those with questions) the required number of "mentor" hours to get the badge, then will stop even pretending to help anyone once they get the badge.
A new free badge being introduced to help gameplay/game quality will end the same way as the last time it was done, ie. the comm badge.
People will farm (basically pretending to help those with questions) the required number of "mentor" hours to get the badge, then will stop even pretending to help anyone once they get the badge.
did people do that? i just played normally, and disabled the badge when it finally appeared in front of my name.
I say bad idea only because it's another thing added to the game that's not needed, just like Derelict was. Would a mentor system be a nice addition to the game? Yes, I could see how in some ways it would be beneficial. Are there far more glaring problems that still remain in the game? Yes, undoubtedly.
All these "superfluous add-ons" as I like to mentally refer to them - maps that no one play, a matchmaking system, a mentor system, rookie tutorials - make me think of someone putting a nice hat on their 98 year old dying grandma while she lies in the hospital bed and then saying, "Look! Doesn't she look so much better!?"
Grandma's death is imminent, and all the hats in the world won't fix that. Either cure her cancer, or just let her RIP.
I say bad idea only because it's another thing added to the game that's not needed, just like Derelict was. Would a mentor system be a nice addition to the game? Yes, I could see how in some ways it would be beneficial. Are there far more glaring problems that still remain in the game? Yes, undoubtedly.
A new map is cool and all, but there are still a lot of fundamental things that should have been fixed before adding a new map. Let's see...
Flamethrowers not removing bile from structures
Flamethrowers "shooting" only like a few times a second, allowing fast aliens to move directly through the flames without getting burned
Whips not reflecting grenades from grenade launchers
The gun jam bug
Fade's stab ability being worthless
Hallucinations' A.I. still bad. Watch a hallucinated lerk. It literally just glides at around 1mph for the entire duration. I'll admit hallucinated gorges have an awesome A.I. though.
Shade's ink being useless against anything but arcs. The ink effect should actually disorient marines, not just make 3 tiles in the room slightly darker.
There's probably more, but these are the main things I can think of now.
Ns2's biggest problem is player retention. I do not know if a mentor system could be a reality. It sounds too complex, hard to implement, and questionable if it will be used. I still think it is a good idea because it is aimed at fixing the biggest problem ns2 has, player retention.
I don't think a mentor badge system will do anything useful.
If you wanted to implement a mentor system it would need to involve some way of communicating with rookies outside of game chat, possibly including the ability to review their actions and offer them advice afterwards. I don't really think anything like that is feasible in NS2, but that would be the minimum for an effective tool.
DC_DarklingJoin Date: 2003-07-10Member: 18068Members, Constellation, Squad Five Blue, Squad Five Silver
Rather then debate on all the options, and what ifs, what if I indeed tell about my own experience with the previous unofficial, sort of still running, mentor program?
A good while back the OP in the topic in my signature (note not me), came up with the idea to put something like [mentor] or [ns2mentor] in your name while playing. (I shoved it at the back.)
In the earlier days of the program the amount of rookies coming into the game was actually worth it, running around with the tag. I would often run around it while in pubs, and then swap the tag for any comp matches.
While you had a big percentage of rookies who did not bother to listen or flat out refused advice, the surplus was glad with the advice. Mainly if it was given in a 'answer this' form.
So while giving them advice was usually accepted, most simply preferred to only have a answer if they asked it in the first place.
At later dates running around with the mentor tag was only doable/needed while we had big sales which gave huge rookie waves. This not only includes the rookies asking questions, it also keeps in mind the non-rookies (not experts perse but at least not green), not giving you crap. It became quite common to have non-rookies comment on it all, joking or 'joking' about any skill to mentor anyone. (because after all, surely noone but prem div can truly mentor right?)
To not get into pointless debates, id usually just take the mentor tag out when the surplus of rookies is gone.
fast forward to the present, and there are simply not enough rookies around in general to bother with any mentor tag. I have not put it in my name for months. Sometimes, I consider to do so on new rookie waves, but in general the (special) badges I already have work just as fine in showing in not a rookie myself.
The rookies we do get seem to be a different crowd also. There are still many rookies who appreciate advice, but the percentage which belongs to the 'get lost I do not need help' seems to be a lot bigger these days.
So these days I just give small pieces of advice, and depending on reaction decide if I comment more.
As for out of game communication or anything special to mentor rookies, its not needed.
A rookie is a green, fresh and new. A rookie is either going to listen or not. How you voice info, and language barriers itself, will help or not in that regard. Time is no real issue.
Show a rookie how to position as a marine once, and they will sort of remember. You need to be in game anyway, and the time needed is far far less then endless deaths and respawns.
Telling a rookie to not run on the ground right after you put bullets into their skulk killing them, is far more effective then just telling them when you start the game.
You do not tell a rookie every detail, they do not remember, they do not care. You tell them utter basics to efficiently do their roles.
* Show them walljump. Tell them how. I often use the example of hitting the wall with your shoulder while you press jump.
* Tell them to get of the bloody floor.
* Tell them how to position as marines. Show it.
* Tell them something simple as 'do not hold blink nonstop'.
* If the whole team is rookie, talk some through commanding. (in such a situation the other team is equally green.)
Losing? PERFECT. Shove a rookie in the chair/hive and let that rookie do whatever. You already lost. Let them explore the interface.
A badge will add nothing. It may draw in more mentors, but truly.. the folk who already care enough are probably already doing it.
So why did I vote yes? Well.... I may be wrong on the part of them already being a mentor. I support mentor the mentor program(s).
I am sure not all mentors out there currently have something like squad5 badges.
Everyone is getting way too deep into this. Turning this game, its various flaws, and various problems into some kind of thesis or dissertation about life, human nature, and educational methods.
But you are all missing the point.
The point is that this is a game which is very complicated and hard to learn.
On top of that, it was -- and is -- terribly optimized, leading to terrible performance on most peoples' machines. In CSGO you can turn everything down and at least get a smooth gameplay experience if your PC is old, but there is no such scalability with this game. Plus the server dependency adds another variable which most of the time damages the experience.
The main issue isn't really a problem. UWE made this game to be complicated, and that is why us veterans still play it. But the issue regarding optimization is a failing on the part of the developer. They clearly didn't make the game correctly to allow it to run smoothly and provide the wonderful gameplay experiences it could and should have delivered.
Basically, the average gamer, the rookie, the noob, the steam sale green guy, all of them are simply just not that into NS2.
Accept it, get over it, stop chasing after them like stalkers, and don't expect anything different to happen in a future NS3.
* Show them walljump. Tell them how. I often use the example of hitting the wall with your shoulder while you press jump.
* Tell them to get of the bloody floor.
* Tell them how to position as marines. Show it.
* Tell them something simple as 'do not hold blink nonstop'.
DC_DarklingJoin Date: 2003-07-10Member: 18068Members, Constellation, Squad Five Blue, Squad Five Silver
Aye.. they do not care for advanced stuff.
But in my, fairly long experience on mentoring ns2, would say that most rookies do like to know utter basics. To you know, not get killed within the first 15 seconds of life, continuously.
I still think NS2 needs a dynamic, interactive tutorial experience in order for rookies to have a better learning curve however finding someone with the know how and time to create a highly intuitive tutorial level / map is another question entirely.
The only people I have seen who advocate for a tutorial, are people who basically already are veterans of the game. I would like to hear from a rookie who honestly thinks that he would put more time in the game if he could play a comprehensive tutorial. I won't believe they exist until I see one.
I don't know anyone who actually takes tutorials seriously - most of the people I know, will begin the forced tutorials in certain games, and delete the game immediately after.
I think a campaign type thing is something entirely different. Give them a piece of lore, while slowly incorporating the basics. I'd certainly play that. But of course, that's much more work to do right.
If you described a single player mode; i already suggested that. The big problem is the lack of entities ( more precisely : trigger entities like in other FPS). If there was this kind of entities available i would have done something already. It just require mapping skills which is reachable for a lot of people. Then if eventually it would need some additional code for truly specific things, i guess it's not impossible either. But right now i don't know if it's under consideration.
The only people I have seen who advocate for a tutorial, are people who basically already are veterans of the game. I would like to hear from a rookie who honestly thinks that he would put more time in the game if he could play a comprehensive tutorial. I won't believe they exist until I see one.
I don't know anyone who actually takes tutorials seriously - most of the people I know, will begin the forced tutorials in certain games, and delete the game immediately after.
I think a campaign type thing is something entirely different. Give them a piece of lore, while slowly incorporating the basics. I'd certainly play that. But of course, that's much more work to do right.
So then am I the oddball for playing through tutorials in games??
What about the thousands and thousands that played the forced tutorials in games like Nosgoth and kept playing after?
The only people I have seen who advocate for a tutorial, are people who basically already are veterans of the game. I would like to hear from a rookie who honestly thinks that he would put more time in the game if he could play a comprehensive tutorial. I won't believe they exist until I see one.
I don't know anyone who actually takes tutorials seriously - most of the people I know, will begin the forced tutorials in certain games, and delete the game immediately after.
I think a campaign type thing is something entirely different. Give them a piece of lore, while slowly incorporating the basics. I'd certainly play that. But of course, that's much more work to do right.
So then am I the oddball for playing through tutorials in games??
What about the thousands and thousands that played the forced tutorials in games like Nosgoth and kept playing after?
I'd still like to discuss with you, your tutorial doc!
Over the weekend I saw lots of rookies. I don't understand why there are so many rookies right now, but there are. Out of the maybe 15-30 rookies I saw throughout the weekend, about 5 asked "How do I get better?"
I did not respond because I don't know of an easy way to answer that. Should I say "Play 100 hours, and then maybe you will be good? One veteran recommended super effective's videos, which are a bit dated but still good. I don't think the videos help too much. They are not interactive, and it can be hard to see an action done and then do it.
So what do we tell these players? What about the ones not willing to ask? I don't think there is one solution. A mentor/training system is probably the hardest thing to do well. A better tutorial, maybe not comprehensive, but actually teach the basics.
DC_DarklingJoin Date: 2003-07-10Member: 18068Members, Constellation, Squad Five Blue, Squad Five Silver
@Nordic actually like I said.. start with utter utter basics.
Show them where to stand with a fellow marine so they do not both get bitten.
Show them walljump.
So show them movement and where to stand. Survival goes a long way.
The only people I have seen who advocate for a tutorial, are people who basically already are veterans of the game. I would like to hear from a rookie who honestly thinks that he would put more time in the game if he could play a comprehensive tutorial. I won't believe they exist until I see one.
I don't know anyone who actually takes tutorials seriously - most of the people I know, will begin the forced tutorials in certain games, and delete the game immediately after.
I think a campaign type thing is something entirely different. Give them a piece of lore, while slowly incorporating the basics. I'd certainly play that. But of course, that's much more work to do right.
In every new game I try, I always play the tutorial and every other type of possible learning mode (offline vs. bots, AI mode, etc) before I attempt multiplayer and join a live server. I would be encouraged even more so if I was getting stomped and killed every 15 sec without understanding why and how.
But yeah, the bigger issue is and always has been matchmaking options. I really enjoy how Dirty Bomb does it. Server browser complemented by a party system with competitive matchmaking options, complete with elo badges. Gives me a sense of progression with both casual and competitive options for whatever I am in the mood for.
The fact that UWE launched with only the archaic HL1 method of joining public servers was disappointing. The fact that we sit here over 2 years later with hardly an improvement is worse (The skill system was a step in the right direction, just poorly implemented, and could have eventually lead to a meaningful rookie gating system). And finally, the fact that the misleading and awful "rookie-friendly" server tag still exists is a slap in the face to anyone who ever wanted this game to succeed. Honestly, for shame CDT for not removing/renaming that in your first patch, for shame.
Also, low/med/high graphics presets (like every other game in the universe has) could have been added patch #1 by the CDT, with possible medium or lower defaults if UWE would have allowed it to immediately help player retention. Sure I like bug fixes as much as the next guy, but if it's not going to potentially increase the amount of players, then I would argue even 5 minutes spent on it is too much. Especially when it's all volunteer work. Nobody is quitting this game because there is no music during loading (https://trello.com/c/NSWqlEYS/491-add-music-during-loading) or because we can't double tap F4 after yet another awful stacked or imbalanced game (https://trello.com/c/ESTohudr/762-double-tap-f4-for-ready-room). The majority of you have a talent for coding, but it seems like there needs to be a few more game developer hats being worn for something bigger to happen.
The only people I have seen who advocate for a tutorial, are people who basically already are veterans of the game. I would like to hear from a rookie who honestly thinks that he would put more time in the game if he could play a comprehensive tutorial. I won't believe they exist until I see one.
I don't know anyone who actually takes tutorials seriously - most of the people I know, will begin the forced tutorials in certain games, and delete the game immediately after.
I think a campaign type thing is something entirely different. Give them a piece of lore, while slowly incorporating the basics. I'd certainly play that. But of course, that's much more work to do right.
So then am I the oddball for playing through tutorials in games??
What about the thousands and thousands that played the forced tutorials in games like Nosgoth and kept playing after?
I think I've already established that, not only do I play/watch tutorials, but I'm also typically very afraid to jump into a multiplayer game without knowing what I'm doing first. Not afraid that I'll lose, but that I'll do something humiliatingly stupid. Almost didn't try NS2 at all, but it did have the tutorial vids and such, and it didn't look THAT complicated...
Basically, the average gamer, the rookie, the noob, the steam sale green guy, all of them are simply just not that into NS2.
It's a poor excuse to justify doing nothing. Ok there are some who won't keep playing. But at least breaking the circle would be better than nothing. And mentors can get some results. At least better than "rookie connects, get used as toilet paper, and he uninstall the game".
Comments
Frankly I would take some classes to polish some of my play depending who's offering a lesson. I recognize that my styles fail in certain areas of certain maps and try to adapt, but don't quite have the patience in some cases. Different perspectives can help anyone.
For example I ambush just before a marine reaches a doorway, but struggle to position correctly for waiting for them to get through, so some one on one time trading ideas with people might even be fun, not just helpful.
Spinning around targets in circles of continuously varying radii 341 (Single Targets)
Spinning around targets in circles of continuously varying radii 342 (Multiple Targets)
I've legit put many hours of practice and thought into this and the correlation with shotgun fire rate rhythm. Wouldn't mind showing people interested in adding tools to their skulk and fade repertoire.
I like that example because it's useless to a rookie, but soooo useful in higher level play.
I don't think it has anything to do with ego or even bad habits. The mentor group that used to exist never exuded any ego whatsoever and were quite helpful with the basics.
The basics. Where it's pretty hard to learn bad habits from - not that they won't pick up on bad habits from playing regardless of a mentor..
We should all assist in training, of course, but having a direct help line sometimes (especially when requested) is hugely helpful.
To avoid the inevitable controversy about what tactic or strategy is best or who is more apt to train, it's better - and really only necessary - to teach the very basics that they fail to grasp and that can create confusion and frustration.
Frustration that leads to uninstalling.
Anything more can be done by promoting newcomer tournaments and gathers, and maybe even the occasional person like yourself who takes the time and knows his stuff.
It's pathetic that people need a mentor badge to be encouraged to help. I don't think that should be added.
I can agree with that.
We already have people doing this stuff and tbh I think they should be given a squad 5 badge for their efforts because they're doing it for the game instead of asking for the badge before hand.
I can only agree. I don't want a badge no one knows what it is, but I'm forced to say it's a good idea anyway in the way incentives are quite powerful. It's basically dumb, but it works. ... kids...
If it is providing along the way the tools "mentors" (or teacher ... whatever) need to get new people to play with a decent knowledge and behavior not to ruin every game: It's better than nothing.
I'm hoping it's not only a badge that will come up. I have a sentence in mind that includes "shove" and other words about one time only badges. It should describe the real activity and not a number of hour doing this (like commander badge).
Converting the match making system into a teacher/classroom management tool would be nice. But if it is only a badge... once they get it... it's over.
In the squad 5 sub forum wasteland
ding ding ding!
You can nominate individuals in our Hall of Fame thread in the Squad 5 sub forums.. Here are the last round of recipients (posted in the same thread that they are nominated)
People will farm (basically pretending to help those with questions) the required number of "mentor" hours to get the badge, then will stop even pretending to help anyone once they get the badge.
did people do that? i just played normally, and disabled the badge when it finally appeared in front of my name.
I was discussing the matter with @DC_Darkling. I think you should ask him about that. The answer may not be as flattering as a flawless victory.
All these "superfluous add-ons" as I like to mentally refer to them - maps that no one play, a matchmaking system, a mentor system, rookie tutorials - make me think of someone putting a nice hat on their 98 year old dying grandma while she lies in the hospital bed and then saying, "Look! Doesn't she look so much better!?"
Grandma's death is imminent, and all the hats in the world won't fix that. Either cure her cancer, or just let her RIP.
Yes, more glaring probelms such as:
Ns2's biggest problem is player retention. I do not know if a mentor system could be a reality. It sounds too complex, hard to implement, and questionable if it will be used. I still think it is a good idea because it is aimed at fixing the biggest problem ns2 has, player retention.
If you wanted to implement a mentor system it would need to involve some way of communicating with rookies outside of game chat, possibly including the ability to review their actions and offer them advice afterwards. I don't really think anything like that is feasible in NS2, but that would be the minimum for an effective tool.
A good while back the OP in the topic in my signature (note not me), came up with the idea to put something like [mentor] or [ns2mentor] in your name while playing. (I shoved it at the back.)
In the earlier days of the program the amount of rookies coming into the game was actually worth it, running around with the tag. I would often run around it while in pubs, and then swap the tag for any comp matches.
While you had a big percentage of rookies who did not bother to listen or flat out refused advice, the surplus was glad with the advice. Mainly if it was given in a 'answer this' form.
So while giving them advice was usually accepted, most simply preferred to only have a answer if they asked it in the first place.
At later dates running around with the mentor tag was only doable/needed while we had big sales which gave huge rookie waves. This not only includes the rookies asking questions, it also keeps in mind the non-rookies (not experts perse but at least not green), not giving you crap. It became quite common to have non-rookies comment on it all, joking or 'joking' about any skill to mentor anyone. (because after all, surely noone but prem div can truly mentor right?)
To not get into pointless debates, id usually just take the mentor tag out when the surplus of rookies is gone.
fast forward to the present, and there are simply not enough rookies around in general to bother with any mentor tag. I have not put it in my name for months. Sometimes, I consider to do so on new rookie waves, but in general the (special) badges I already have work just as fine in showing in not a rookie myself.
The rookies we do get seem to be a different crowd also. There are still many rookies who appreciate advice, but the percentage which belongs to the 'get lost I do not need help' seems to be a lot bigger these days.
So these days I just give small pieces of advice, and depending on reaction decide if I comment more.
As for out of game communication or anything special to mentor rookies, its not needed.
A rookie is a green, fresh and new. A rookie is either going to listen or not. How you voice info, and language barriers itself, will help or not in that regard. Time is no real issue.
Show a rookie how to position as a marine once, and they will sort of remember. You need to be in game anyway, and the time needed is far far less then endless deaths and respawns.
Telling a rookie to not run on the ground right after you put bullets into their skulk killing them, is far more effective then just telling them when you start the game.
You do not tell a rookie every detail, they do not remember, they do not care. You tell them utter basics to efficiently do their roles.
* Show them walljump. Tell them how. I often use the example of hitting the wall with your shoulder while you press jump.
* Tell them to get of the bloody floor.
* Tell them how to position as marines. Show it.
* Tell them something simple as 'do not hold blink nonstop'.
* If the whole team is rookie, talk some through commanding. (in such a situation the other team is equally green.)
Losing? PERFECT. Shove a rookie in the chair/hive and let that rookie do whatever. You already lost. Let them explore the interface.
A badge will add nothing. It may draw in more mentors, but truly.. the folk who already care enough are probably already doing it.
So why did I vote yes? Well.... I may be wrong on the part of them already being a mentor. I support mentor the mentor program(s).
I am sure not all mentors out there currently have something like squad5 badges.
But you are all missing the point.
The point is that this is a game which is very complicated and hard to learn.
On top of that, it was -- and is -- terribly optimized, leading to terrible performance on most peoples' machines. In CSGO you can turn everything down and at least get a smooth gameplay experience if your PC is old, but there is no such scalability with this game. Plus the server dependency adds another variable which most of the time damages the experience.
The main issue isn't really a problem. UWE made this game to be complicated, and that is why us veterans still play it. But the issue regarding optimization is a failing on the part of the developer. They clearly didn't make the game correctly to allow it to run smoothly and provide the wonderful gameplay experiences it could and should have delivered.
Basically, the average gamer, the rookie, the noob, the steam sale green guy, all of them are simply just not that into NS2.
Accept it, get over it, stop chasing after them like stalkers, and don't expect anything different to happen in a future NS3.
+1
+1
But in my, fairly long experience on mentoring ns2, would say that most rookies do like to know utter basics. To you know, not get killed within the first 15 seconds of life, continuously.
I don't know anyone who actually takes tutorials seriously - most of the people I know, will begin the forced tutorials in certain games, and delete the game immediately after.
I think a campaign type thing is something entirely different. Give them a piece of lore, while slowly incorporating the basics. I'd certainly play that. But of course, that's much more work to do right.
What about the thousands and thousands that played the forced tutorials in games like Nosgoth and kept playing after?
I'd still like to discuss with you, your tutorial doc!
I did not respond because I don't know of an easy way to answer that. Should I say "Play 100 hours, and then maybe you will be good? One veteran recommended super effective's videos, which are a bit dated but still good. I don't think the videos help too much. They are not interactive, and it can be hard to see an action done and then do it.
So what do we tell these players? What about the ones not willing to ask? I don't think there is one solution. A mentor/training system is probably the hardest thing to do well. A better tutorial, maybe not comprehensive, but actually teach the basics.
Show them where to stand with a fellow marine so they do not both get bitten.
Show them walljump.
So show them movement and where to stand. Survival goes a long way.
In every new game I try, I always play the tutorial and every other type of possible learning mode (offline vs. bots, AI mode, etc) before I attempt multiplayer and join a live server. I would be encouraged even more so if I was getting stomped and killed every 15 sec without understanding why and how.
But yeah, the bigger issue is and always has been matchmaking options. I really enjoy how Dirty Bomb does it. Server browser complemented by a party system with competitive matchmaking options, complete with elo badges. Gives me a sense of progression with both casual and competitive options for whatever I am in the mood for.
The fact that UWE launched with only the archaic HL1 method of joining public servers was disappointing. The fact that we sit here over 2 years later with hardly an improvement is worse (The skill system was a step in the right direction, just poorly implemented, and could have eventually lead to a meaningful rookie gating system). And finally, the fact that the misleading and awful "rookie-friendly" server tag still exists is a slap in the face to anyone who ever wanted this game to succeed. Honestly, for shame CDT for not removing/renaming that in your first patch, for shame.
Also, low/med/high graphics presets (like every other game in the universe has) could have been added patch #1 by the CDT, with possible medium or lower defaults if UWE would have allowed it to immediately help player retention. Sure I like bug fixes as much as the next guy, but if it's not going to potentially increase the amount of players, then I would argue even 5 minutes spent on it is too much. Especially when it's all volunteer work. Nobody is quitting this game because there is no music during loading (https://trello.com/c/NSWqlEYS/491-add-music-during-loading) or because we can't double tap F4 after yet another awful stacked or imbalanced game (https://trello.com/c/ESTohudr/762-double-tap-f4-for-ready-room). The majority of you have a talent for coding, but it seems like there needs to be a few more game developer hats being worn for something bigger to happen.
Edit: Here's a link of me saying basically the same thing in a nicer tone 15 months ago when it could have mattered more and WasabiOne's cordial response. It's worth a look: http://forums.unknownworlds.com/discussion/comment/2199963/#Comment_2199963
@IronHorse
yes, not the only reason, but yes.
It's a poor excuse to justify doing nothing. Ok there are some who won't keep playing. But at least breaking the circle would be better than nothing. And mentors can get some results. At least better than "rookie connects, get used as toilet paper, and he uninstall the game".