CELESTA AUNGM
Kang Lo Directorate
Gallente Federation
94
   |
Posted - 2014.01.02 18:01:00 -
[1] - Quote
Talos:
If some of the posts here are harsh... just ignore those. I'm sure a social game like EVE Online has its minor population of unwelcomed one-fingered salute players, so I guess EVE Dust 514 will have to put up with them for now too.
But some of the posts here make a point I agree with: Dust is (or before Patch 1.7, it WAS, and hopefully will stay as) a Feet-pounding-on-the-Ground shooting game, with the individually-created and individually-named players as the feature stars of the show.
I THINK vehicles in this game were supposed to be just tactically-powerful SUPPORT for the players on foot, and not individual achievers on their own. But just like my fav vehicle the Dropship, if the devs do something excessive to a vehicle (ANYTHING, could be excessive custom controls, excessive speed/strength, excessive dazzling artwork options, whatever...) that vehicle could easily become the all-attention-consuming, story-driving star of the show, and doesn't need to fulfill its duty to support foot-players at all.
Imagine Ginger taking over front stage in "Gilligan's Island"...soon you're forced to change the name to "Ginger and Friends", and wonder why Ginger can't just stay in her support role or else scram and go get her own show.
In our current state, the HAVs may need to go find their own game title, because, (much as I agree with you Talos, that those tank fights are wild fun) they're not being very supportive to the core foot-game anymore...they're more becoming an interference to it  , much in the same way as PC lag, or rendering bugs, or screen freezes are interferences to the core foot-game. |
CELESTA AUNGM
Kang Lo Directorate
Gallente Federation
95
|
Posted - 2014.01.02 20:53:00 -
[2] - Quote
Talos Vagheitan wrote:
What gave you the idea this was strictly an infantry based FPS? Vehicles are a big part of Dust and should be. They are supposed to be front and center, alongside the infantry, not something that exists in the background and you don't really see.
And please tell me what tank can 'sit in plain view taking fire from 3 proto swarm launchers without worrying'. Fitting? Shields? Armor?
HeeHee, Talos... yes you are sort of right about the tank taking that much fire. There's a provoking argument out there that, the answer to the question "what tank that can sit in plain view taking fire from 3 proto swarm launchers without worrying", IS... a tank being proto-swarmer-ed by Porky Pig, Wiley Coyote, and Bullwinkle.
But the concept that Dust was to be decisively an infantry-based FPS came from the devs themselves. EVE Online was for 10 years decisively (and proudly) "a game about spaceships"--decisively a vehicle-based game. CCP touted Dust to be a game that emphasizes footsteps on soil, and tries to celebrate it by giving players dropsuits and a myriad of hand-gear as the core and the reason for them to play THIS game (a version of EVE that's NOT the vehicle-driven game that EVE Online is).
Make no mistake, that's NOT an easy thing to do.
EVE Online is SERIOUSLY cerebral, like the roots of personal-computer games originally were, from what I'm told... Console games are visceral, and tend to lose approval if they try to be cerebral). Watching a youtube battle from EVE Online makes you THINK it's a rollicking run-n-gun space shooter, but really the amount of planning and tactics and strategy the coop players put ahead of and behind each of those engagements would blow your mind (I learned that to my surprise, without ever playing the game myself).
If they want Dust to be a similar "think/plan ahead-of and behind-the fight" game that EVE often is, the devs have got to keep TIGHT, intricate restraints or limits on its vehicles--OR give up and watch us players slide back into the customary "blow stuff up--rack up loot---just have fun beatin' the score" console play.
There's nothing WRONG with that ole' gameplay style.... but I just thought Dust was trying to be, well, different for a change.
Before 1.7 I DID see some amazing cerebral planning with HAVs: On a few matches I saw some players adapt to "the HAV slow speed limit" by calling in 3 tanks together and rolling in single-file CONVOY (1 railgun in front instantly covered by 1 railgun behind him, 3rd tank mounting missiles to suppress red infantry from flanking them)--stay together and branch off only at each objective, E. B, A. regroup as you see your infantry hacking the null point, the probe on to the next null---infantry just intuitively ran parallel to the convoy....that kind of thinking was so freakin glorious, that wa TACTICAL to be proud of. I never figured out who they were (if I'm describing somebody out there, raise speak out and take a bow!!)
...But that sort of stuff takes planning, and since after 1.7, I'm not seeing any encouragement toward that level of cleverness anymore. I almost don't see the "howitzer on the ridge" tactic much anymore,... seems most of the HAV drivers are all down gang-biking the town streets, throwing dynamite through windows, not alongside infantry, not thinking,...just trippin' 'til they die.
I agree with you that it's fun Talos, but it just takes us back to CoD titles on PS2. I stopped being satisfied with THAT fun a while ago.  |