| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
Aeon Amadi
13842
   |
Posted - 2016.04.24 03:23:00 -
[151] - Quote
Mina Longstrike wrote:Aeon Amadi wrote:Mina Longstrike wrote:Mobius Wyvern wrote:Mina Longstrike wrote:Welp, if vehicles are only being added as an 'afterthought' I'm not interested.
Unless the game is designed around them being present and fully functioning as a role to begin with, they're going to experience all the same problems that we have in dust with them - No role, no ability to meaningfully participate in the majority of matches, people crying about them being too OP or too UP.
I'm not mad about the dust514 shutdown, or the move to PC. I'm am upset that they're taking a lot of the things that I loved about dust - things that provided a lot of nuance, complexity and all sorts of things that were interesting - and nixing them, and that what could be an opportunity to meaningfully fix some of the core problems of dust from the ground up, is not being taken. You have an opportunity here, don't squander it.
Don't make this a generic boring lobby shooter - you *can* make lobbies interesting when done right, **** even psuedo-moving around space in warbarges (or warbarge fleets) makes "lobbies" a bit more interesting. Given their vision is to evolve this new project far beyond what Dust could ever have been, and Rattati personally confirmed that planetary conquest gameplay will be returning in some form with large open maps and vehicles, I doubt they'll just be "an afterthought". Maybe someday PC will return, IF this game ends up not being vaporware, and maybe vehicles will be re-added, and hopefully they'll be balanced. You're operating something like seven layers deep on hypotheticals and wishful thinking. Oh no, totally. The game will just be a 6v6 lobby shooter with six preset classes and one map. It's gonna be great. Cute snark aeon, unfortunately I said none of those things. Didn't you have me blocked because you get butthurt way too easily?
The irony is over-fuckin'-whelming here.
Skype: Nomistrav
"Bastard at Heart"
|
Heimdallr69
Negative-Feedback.
7135
|
Posted - 2016.04.24 03:24:00 -
[152] - Quote
I sense much butthurt in this one..you don't like what you see? Go away and come back when it's to your liking..for now CCP will make everything smooth and we'll help them get it right..you can wait till the final product is ready |
james selim brownstein
NECROM0NGERS
344
|
Posted - 2016.04.24 03:24:00 -
[153] - Quote
Mina Longstrike wrote:Aeon Amadi wrote:Mina Longstrike wrote:Mobius Wyvern wrote:Mina Longstrike wrote:Welp, if vehicles are only being added as an 'afterthought' I'm not interested.
Unless the game is designed around them being present and fully functioning as a role to begin with, they're going to experience all the same problems that we have in dust with them - No role, no ability to meaningfully participate in the majority of matches, people crying about them being too OP or too UP.
I'm not mad about the dust514 shutdown, or the move to PC. I'm am upset that they're taking a lot of the things that I loved about dust - things that provided a lot of nuance, complexity and all sorts of things that were interesting - and nixing them, and that what could be an opportunity to meaningfully fix some of the core problems of dust from the ground up, is not being taken. You have an opportunity here, don't squander it.
Don't make this a generic boring lobby shooter - you *can* make lobbies interesting when done right, **** even psuedo-moving around space in warbarges (or warbarge fleets) makes "lobbies" a bit more interesting. Given their vision is to evolve this new project far beyond what Dust could ever have been, and Rattati personally confirmed that planetary conquest gameplay will be returning in some form with large open maps and vehicles, I doubt they'll just be "an afterthought". Maybe someday PC will return, IF this game ends up not being vaporware, and maybe vehicles will be re-added, and hopefully they'll be balanced. You're operating something like seven layers deep on hypotheticals and wishful thinking. Oh no, totally. The game will just be a 6v6 lobby shooter with six preset classes and one map. It's gonna be great. Cute snark aeon, unfortunately I said none of those things. Didn't you have me blocked because you get butthurt way too easily?
OH DAMNNNNNNNNN SON! $hits getting hot in here!
n++Gòª¦¦¦¦-ç¦+¦+¦+¦+ WAITING FOR PROJECT NOVAGòñGöÇGöÇGöÇ
Gò¡Gê¬Gò«n+ên+¦n++n+¦n+ë
|
Aeon Amadi
13842
|
Posted - 2016.04.24 03:28:00 -
[154] - Quote
Useful **** I'mma leave in here before I go to bed. In Iceland. Where Nova was. And stuff.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/2d/05/f7/2d05f7387a0ea1c14eaeebce09402891.jpg
Skype: Nomistrav
"Bastard at Heart"
|
MINA Longstrike
Kirjuun Heiian
4022
|
Posted - 2016.04.24 03:35:00 -
[155] - Quote
Aeon Amadi wrote:
The irony is over-fuckin'-whelming here.
No, it really isn't. You've entered a conversation just to snark about things unrelated to what I actually said and ridicule me, because apparently acting like an ass is easier than addressing the original point about vehicles being an afterthought and them maybe being included after several nested layers of "ifs", instead of being incorporated as a part of core design.
It never fails to surprise me how small and petty of an individual you can be aeon.
I'm fully expecting more snark back on this, because well, that's all you do. Oh wait, no that's not entirely truthful, you do also try to turn it around and make it out like I was attacking you to begin with, because you have a giant persecution complex - and people cant disagree with you or your method without you feeling attacked.
Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian.
I have a few alts.
|
james selim brownstein
NECROM0NGERS
344
|
Posted - 2016.04.24 03:37:00 -
[156] - Quote
IGNNNNNNNNNN
n++Gòª¦¦¦¦-ç¦+¦+¦+¦+ WAITING FOR PROJECT NOVAGòñGöÇGöÇGöÇ
Gò¡Gê¬Gò«n+ên+¦n++n+¦n+ë
|
Aeon Amadi
13851
|
Posted - 2016.04.24 03:41:00 -
[157] - Quote
Mina Longstrike wrote:Aeon Amadi wrote:
The irony is over-fuckin'-whelming here.
No, it really isn't. You've entered a conversation just to snark about things unrelated to what I actually said and ridicule me, because apparently acting like an ass is easier than addressing the original point about vehicles being an afterthought and them maybe being included after several nested layers of "ifs", instead of being incorporated as a part of core design. It never fails to surprise me how small and petty of an individual you can be aeon. I'm fully expecting more snark back on this, because well, that's all you do. Oh wait, no that's not entirely truthful, you do also try to turn it around and make it out like I was attacking you to begin with, because you have a giant persecution complex - and people cant disagree with you or your method without you feeling attacked.
See you in Alpha, Mina 
Skype: Nomistrav
"Bastard at Heart"
|
james selim brownstein
NECROM0NGERS
346
|
Posted - 2016.04.24 03:42:00 -
[158] - Quote
Aeon Amadi wrote:Mina Longstrike wrote:Aeon Amadi wrote:
The irony is over-fuckin'-whelming here.
No, it really isn't. You've entered a conversation just to snark about things unrelated to what I actually said and ridicule me, because apparently acting like an ass is easier than addressing the original point about vehicles being an afterthought and them maybe being included after several nested layers of "ifs", instead of being incorporated as a part of core design. It never fails to surprise me how small and petty of an individual you can be aeon. I'm fully expecting more snark back on this, because well, that's all you do. Oh wait, no that's not entirely truthful, you do also try to turn it around and make it out like I was attacking you to begin with, because you have a giant persecution complex - and people cant disagree with you or your method without you feeling attacked. See you in Alpha, Mina
Can i have a ticket to the Alpha Daddy Aeon!?
n++Gòª¦¦¦¦-ç¦+¦+¦+¦+ WAITING FOR PROJECT NOVAGòñGöÇGöÇGöÇ
Gò¡Gê¬Gò«n+ên+¦n++n+¦n+ë
|
Marston VC
SVER True Blood
RUST415
1742
|
Posted - 2016.04.24 03:45:00 -
[159] - Quote
Mina Longstrike wrote:Mobius Wyvern wrote:Mina Longstrike wrote:Welp, if vehicles are only being added as an 'afterthought' I'm not interested.
Unless the game is designed around them being present and fully functioning as a role to begin with, they're going to experience all the same problems that we have in dust with them - No role, no ability to meaningfully participate in the majority of matches, people crying about them being too OP or too UP.
I'm not mad about the dust514 shutdown, or the move to PC. I'm am upset that they're taking a lot of the things that I loved about dust - things that provided a lot of nuance, complexity and all sorts of things that were interesting - and nixing them, and that what could be an opportunity to meaningfully fix some of the core problems of dust from the ground up, is not being taken. You have an opportunity here, don't squander it.
Don't make this a generic boring lobby shooter - you *can* make lobbies interesting when done right, **** even psuedo-moving around space in warbarges (or warbarge fleets) makes "lobbies" a bit more interesting. Given their vision is to evolve this new project far beyond what Dust could ever have been, and Rattati personally confirmed that planetary conquest gameplay will be returning in some form with large open maps and vehicles, I doubt they'll just be "an afterthought". Maybe someday PC will return, IF this game ends up not being vaporware, and maybe vehicles will be re-added, and hopefully they'll be balanced. You're operating something like seven layers deep on hypotheticals and wishful thinking.
New interview with CCP dev
The only if here is weather or not the game gets green lit. If it does get green lit (which considering they let it demo at fanfest looks promising) then you'll almost certainly have all those other features added somewhere down the line.
People are so quick to forget things. Dust 514 in alpha had no vehicles, one map, one race of suits/weapons, even worse graphics, literally zero voice comms as a function, and believe it or not, felt worse in terms of controls. Compared to then and now the current dust is like heaven. The same will be true for project nova HOWEVER project nova's starting point is seemingly far better off then dusts starting point ever was.
while its true we shouldn't get our hopes up too much, you are in my opinion being far too pessimistic. This game is a bit more then "wishful thinking" at this point.
Marston VC, STB Director
|
Mina Longstrike
Kirjuun Heiian
4022
|
Posted - 2016.04.24 03:49:00 -
[160] - Quote
Aeon Amadi wrote:See you in Alpha, Mina
Probably not, unless the design heads in a drastically different direction I'm really not all that interested... and with "expert" individuals like yourself gathering feedback (lol) I'm pretty sure it'll never go in that direction.
Have fun with bland mediocrity Aeon.
Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian.
I have a few alts.
|
|
|
One Eyed King
Nos Nothi
15190
|
Posted - 2016.04.24 03:50:00 -
[161] - Quote
@ Mina
What would be the point of vehicles if you only got 3 FPS?
What would be the point of vehicles if v/av weren't balanced, and you got blown to bits in half a second by swarms instantly losing more than a full battle's worth of ISK, or conversely being so overpowered that people don't actually want to play in game modes with vehicles, or people just don't want to play at all because they don't want to deal with it?
This is a FPS first and foremost. They already have essentially 2 vehicle focused games in EVE and Valkyrie. If and when vehicles and AV are added, wouldn't it be best if they are added to an FPS game that isn't a power point, isn't broken by bugs and glitches (just look at the LAV glitch), and fits within the overall game play so that playing vehicles feels rewarding without being unfair?
Whether or not the game goes from project to product, it seems obvious they have their priorities straight.
Former CEO of the Land of the BIind.
Any double entendre is unintended I assure you.
|
byte modal
668
|
Posted - 2016.04.24 03:52:00 -
[162] - Quote
The irony is that you are assuming a series of your own hypotheticals where the end stage never evolves past your assumptions of that end. All the while, criticizing another of doing eactly what you are doing but concluding the opposite. It's a silly premise and means nothing more than an "i know you are but what am I?" equivalent. That you don't see it and contiue, is what encourages the snark.
kitten bacon taco (nom)
|
james selim brownstein
NECROM0NGERS
348
|
Posted - 2016.04.24 03:56:00 -
[163] - Quote
Lets stop bullying each other, and go to McDonald's 
n++Gòª¦¦¦¦-ç¦+¦+¦+¦+ WAITING FOR PROJECT NOVAGòñGöÇGöÇGöÇ
Gò¡Gê¬Gò«n+ên+¦n++n+¦n+ë
|
One Eyed King
Nos Nothi
15194
|
Posted - 2016.04.24 03:58:00 -
[164] - Quote
james selim brownstein wrote:Lets stop bullying each other, and go to McDonald's
Mass suicide via diabetes and heart disease?
Former CEO of the Land of the BIind.
Any double entendre is unintended I assure you.
|
james selim brownstein
NECROM0NGERS
353
|
Posted - 2016.04.24 03:59:00 -
[165] - Quote
n++Gòª¦¦¦¦-ç¦+¦+¦+¦+ WAITING FOR PROJECT NOVAGòñGöÇGöÇGöÇ
Gò¡Gê¬Gò«n+ên+¦n++n+¦n+ë
|
james selim brownstein
NECROM0NGERS
353
|
Posted - 2016.04.24 04:00:00 -
[166] - Quote
One Eyed King wrote:james selim brownstein wrote:Lets stop bullying each other, and go to McDonald's Mass suicide via diabetes and heart disease?
ok ok calm down vegan 
n++Gòª¦¦¦¦-ç¦+¦+¦+¦+ WAITING FOR PROJECT NOVAGòñGöÇGöÇGöÇ
Gò¡Gê¬Gò«n+ên+¦n++n+¦n+ë
|
Mina Longstrike
Kirjuun Heiian
4022
|
Posted - 2016.04.24 04:01:00 -
[167] - Quote
One Eyed King wrote:@ Mina
What would be the point of vehicles if you only got 3 FPS?
What would be the point of vehicles if v/av weren't balanced, and you got blown to bits in half a second by swarms instantly losing more than a full battle's worth of ISK, or conversely being so overpowered that people don't actually want to play in game modes with vehicles, or people just don't want to play at all because they don't want to deal with it?
This is a FPS first and foremost. They already have essentially 2 vehicle focused games in EVE and Valkyrie. If and when vehicles and AV are added, wouldn't it be best if they are added to an FPS game that isn't a power point, isn't broken by bugs and glitches (just look at the LAV glitch), and fits within the overall game play so that playing vehicles feels rewarding without being unfair?
Whether or not the game goes from project to product, it seems obvious they have their priorities straight.
To me, vehicles were a large part of what made dust interesting, despite their overall poor implementation, lack of roles and general inability to do things - I have friends who saw casual dust gameplay of me flying a dropship and went "Holy ****, that's so different from other shooters - you can actually choose that as a role not a temporary powerup!". If they're integrated from the start all three of those can be addressed - they can be an important asset and intended feature. The later you add them the more you run the risk of them being overpowered or useless and without a meaningful role.
I find that claiming dust to be a "FPS first and foremost" is somewhat dishonest, they had a lot of things that they wanted to try - and a lot of them were they to be embraced could actually make a great game, with meaningful multi-level gameplay. Stating that Nova should be a "FPS first and foremost" is IMO a bad idea because while it should have good FPS gameplay, it also gets rid of things that made dust unique and enjoyable. If you start at square zero with the idea that "I want this to be in a game, and I want it to be something that always has the potential to be useful", you can start with balance in mind.
Neither eve nor valkyrie are what I'm looking in terms of "vehicle gameplay", because one is a glorified naval spreadsheet sim (that I have played since somewhere around 2007 and let my sub lapse multiple times), and the other is a fighter-jet game (with rather expensive peripherals requried). Dust provided combined arms (not well, but it did provide it).
Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian.
I have a few alts.
|
Heimdallr69
Negative-Feedback.
7136
|
Posted - 2016.04.24 04:02:00 -
[168] - Quote
Gross..lets not have God tanks again or God logi lav's..aight the lav's were fun but the tanks were so stupidly OP I never skilled back into them till we fought tank spammers in PC
My favorite thing is ADS but I'd rather wait for that to be balanced than hurried and poorly implemented, guess you feel differently..that's okay you're allowed to but don't drag the rest of us down with you |
One Eyed King
Nos Nothi
15194
|
Posted - 2016.04.24 04:02:00 -
[169] - Quote
james selim brownstein wrote:One Eyed King wrote:james selim brownstein wrote:Lets stop bullying each other, and go to McDonald's Mass suicide via diabetes and heart disease? ok ok calm down vegan
Please don't compare a McDonalds hamburger to Prime Rib or frankly anything that has any real meat content and was once part of a living thing.
Former CEO of the Land of the BIind.
Any double entendre is unintended I assure you.
|
Marston VC
SVER True Blood
RUST415
1744
|
Posted - 2016.04.24 04:03:00 -
[170] - Quote
Mina Longstrike wrote:Aeon Amadi wrote:See you in Alpha, Mina Probably not, unless the design heads in a drastically different direction I'm really not all that interested... and with "expert" individuals like yourself gathering feedback (lol) I'm pretty sure it'll never go in that direction. Have fun with bland mediocrity Aeon.
I get where your coming from. But I really think you should be a little more optimistic. The new interviews coming out say that they fully intend for there to be planetary conquest with vehicles.
The only caveat is that before they get to the "grand" ideas they want to make sure the game has a solid "foundation" to work off of. Think about it. How many times did you call in a tank for the drop ship to clip into a building and have it blow up? Or maybe you got a tank called in but your game hard froze because of performance issues. Or maybe you just couldn't get a good shot off because of how low the FPS were or maybe the graphics were so bad that your eyes started bleeding and couldn't see things perfectly. These were all issues that plagued dust.
I think its good of CCP to say "lets get the core done right first then add on more complex things" The core being game stability, fluidity, and first person shooter mechanics. This is a FPS after all. Then naturally if they want the game to gain any sort of identity they will add vehicle combat, planetary conquest, capital ship sieges and eve/nova links. Its kind of a necessity for them to do that in order for the game to be successful.
I really believe the only thing CCP has done wrong with nova so far was how they went about announcing it. They bungled the announcement. But the interviews that have come out since then have really redeemed them in my opinion.
Marston VC, STB Director
|
|
|
james selim brownstein
NECROM0NGERS
353
|
Posted - 2016.04.24 04:04:00 -
[171] - Quote
One Eyed King wrote:james selim brownstein wrote:One Eyed King wrote:james selim brownstein wrote:Lets stop bullying each other, and go to McDonald's Mass suicide via diabetes and heart disease? ok ok calm down vegan Please don't compare a McDonalds hamburger to Prime Rib or frankly anything that has any real meat content and was once part of a living thing.
lol its just a joke bro
n++Gòª¦¦¦¦-ç¦+¦+¦+¦+ WAITING FOR PROJECT NOVAGòñGöÇGöÇGöÇ
Gò¡Gê¬Gò«n+ên+¦n++n+¦n+ë
|
Marston VC
SVER True Blood
RUST415
1744
|
Posted - 2016.04.24 04:08:00 -
[172] - Quote
Mina Longstrike wrote:One Eyed King wrote:@ Mina
What would be the point of vehicles if you only got 3 FPS?
What would be the point of vehicles if v/av weren't balanced, and you got blown to bits in half a second by swarms instantly losing more than a full battle's worth of ISK, or conversely being so overpowered that people don't actually want to play in game modes with vehicles, or people just don't want to play at all because they don't want to deal with it?
This is a FPS first and foremost. They already have essentially 2 vehicle focused games in EVE and Valkyrie. If and when vehicles and AV are added, wouldn't it be best if they are added to an FPS game that isn't a power point, isn't broken by bugs and glitches (just look at the LAV glitch), and fits within the overall game play so that playing vehicles feels rewarding without being unfair?
Whether or not the game goes from project to product, it seems obvious they have their priorities straight. To me, vehicles were a large part of what made dust interesting, despite their overall poor implementation, lack of roles and general inability to do things - I have friends who saw casual dust gameplay of me flying a dropship and went "Holy ****, that's so different from other shooters - you can actually choose that as a role not a temporary powerup!". If they're integrated from the start all three of those can be addressed - they can be an important asset and intended feature. The later you add them the more you run the risk of them being overpowered or useless and without a meaningful role. I find that claiming dust to be a "FPS first and foremost" is somewhat dishonest, they had a lot of things that they wanted to try - and a lot of them were they to be embraced could actually make a great game, with meaningful multi-level gameplay. Stating that Nova should be a "FPS first and foremost" is IMO a bad idea because while it should have good FPS gameplay, it also gets rid of things that made dust unique and enjoyable. If you start at square zero with the idea that "I want this to be in a game, and I want it to be something that always has the potential to be useful", you can start with balance in mind. Neither eve nor valkyrie are what I'm looking in terms of "vehicle gameplay", because one is a glorified naval spreadsheet sim, and the other is a fighter-jet game. Dust provided combined arms (not well, but it did provide it).
You have a good point. Having vehicles involved adds a level of complexity that really made the game different then other games with vehicles. But its also true that their roles were poorly implemented in Dust. Like LAV's for example. Whats the point? You can travel faster by A.) spawning closer to battle, or B.) 90% of the time just run there because the maps weren't big enough to warrent calling in an LAV and waiting the 30 seconds it took for it drop in. I think these are all things that will be greatly rectified in the new game.
Remember, Dust didn't have vehicles in the beginning. Neither will Nova. The difference is that Nova will have a much better start in comparison. I have faith that vehicles will be an integral part of the game when they do get added AND I bet they'll be even more fun to play in then in Dust.
Marston VC, STB Director
|
Mina Longstrike
Kirjuun Heiian
4022
|
Posted - 2016.04.24 04:23:00 -
[173] - Quote
Marston VC wrote:Remember, Dust didn't have vehicles in the beginning.
And that is exactly the point I have been making - look at how much of a nightmare vehicles have been to balance because they were not included from the start - most sockets and control points are on interior spots that can't be accessed be vehicles, they can't be shot at or anything like that. They are largely without a point. Vehicles exist either as taxi's or to blow up other vehicles. AV weapons exist because sometimes balance lets vehicles be good at killing infantry and that is *NOT OKAY BECAUSE THIS IS A FPS NOT WORLD OF TANKS* (and yes, that is an argument that I've heard before). Vehicles aren't an organic part of play, they're something that's crowbarred in, and poorly at that.
Marston VC wrote:Neither will Nova. The difference is that Nova will have a much better start in comparison. I have faith that vehicles will be an integral part of the game when they do get added AND I bet they'll be even more fun to play in then in Dust.
You believe that nova will have a much better start, which is a non-empirical opinion, you cant quantify it or prove it. You have "faith" that vehicles will be great if and when they arrive, which is an emotional appeal. Your argument isn't rooted in sound reasoning, it's all about how you feel which is irrelevant.
Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian.
I have a few alts.
|
Skihids
Zumari Force Projection
Caldari State
3648
|
Posted - 2016.04.24 04:26:00 -
[174] - Quote
As I've said so many times, vehicles need solid roles distinct from that of infantry. Those roles won't exist on the small maps CCP is starting out with. They will likely arrive when we see the large open maps and those look like they will come in when PC is added back.
The worst thing CCP could do is to throw in vehciles with nothing for them to do except compete with suits for infantry kills. That is what made them impossible to balance in DUST. Once game play gets more sophisticated those vehicle roles will emerge and CCP can build vehciles to match the those roles.
I suspect one of the first roles would be for a proper dropship to ferry troops across the large maps of planetary conquest. Troop transport was easily handled by running and drop uplinks in small DUST maps, killing the main role of the dropship right out of the gate. That's why CCPBlam created the ADS.
The need for a given vehicle MUST be in the game before the vehicle is implemented or we will repeat all the mistakes of DUST. |
Skihids
Zumari Force Projection
Caldari State
3648
|
Posted - 2016.04.24 04:28:00 -
[175] - Quote
As an aside, why do we even need to chose a race? We all inhabit generic clones that don't have racial characteristics after all. Yes we can choose racial tech, but we aren't bound by one of those either. |
james selim brownstein
NECROM0NGERS
353
|
Posted - 2016.04.24 04:28:00 -
[176] - Quote
We need Mechs.
n++Gòª¦¦¦¦-ç¦+¦+¦+¦+ WAITING FOR PROJECT NOVAGòñGöÇGöÇGöÇ
Gò¡Gê¬Gò«n+ên+¦n++n+¦n+ë
|
Heimdallr69
Negative-Feedback.
7137
|
Posted - 2016.04.24 04:35:00 -
[177] - Quote
james selim brownstein wrote:We need Mechs.
I need a drink |
Skihids
Zumari Force Projection
Caldari State
3648
|
Posted - 2016.04.24 04:41:00 -
[178] - Quote
james selim brownstein wrote:We need Mechs.
What role does the mech fill that your powered suit and super weapons doesn't? |
Marston VC
SVER True Blood
RUST415
1748
|
Posted - 2016.04.24 04:51:00 -
[179] - Quote
Mina Longstrike wrote:Marston VC wrote:Remember, Dust didn't have vehicles in the beginning. And that is exactly the point I have been making - look at how much of a nightmare vehicles have been to balance because they were not included from the start - most sockets and control points are on interior spots that can't be accessed be vehicles, they can't be shot at or anything like that. They are largely without a point. Vehicles exist either as taxi's or to blow up other vehicles. AV weapons exist because sometimes balance lets vehicles be good at killing infantry and that is *NOT OKAY BECAUSE THIS IS A FPS NOT WORLD OF TANKS* (and yes, that is an argument that I've heard before). Vehicles aren't an organic part of play, they're something that's crowbarred in, and poorly at that. Marston VC wrote:Neither will Nova. The difference is that Nova will have a much better start in comparison. I have faith that vehicles will be an integral part of the game when they do get added AND I bet they'll be even more fun to play in then in Dust. You believe that nova will have a much better start, which is a non-empirical opinion, you cant quantify it or prove it. You have "faith" that vehicles will be great if and when they arrive, which is an emotional appeal. Your argument isn't rooted in sound reasoning, it's all about how you feel which is irrelevant.
I mean..... you equally cant prove that Nova will have poor vehicle balance just because it wont be part of the game right from the start. Your opinion is based just as much off of feelings as mine are.
The only difference is that im actually drawing comparisons here. The demo we saw video of at fanfest already has far more features then the alpha, hell, even the closed beta dust had. Proof of it having a better start is literally already out there. the tech demo looks and (according to the reviews of people there) feels better then Dusts closed alpha ever was. Better fluidity, silky smooth frame rates, racial variation, jump jets!
Now..... I'll admit that the roles of vehicles in dust were kind of blurred. well..... I already did say that. LAV's were taxis that hardly ever got used. Dropships were actually decent at being force multipliers if you put the Mobile CRU mod on it but beyond that they didn't have much use, and tanks were great at area suppression. But obviously, they couldn't fit into smaller nooks and crannys. But I mean to that end...... how do you fix a problem like that?
Vehicles by nature are designed to do better in large "open field" combat. They'll always be useless if they're being forced to play in a relatively small map. (like dusts). Which is why i think they aren't having them in the initial iterations of this game. Whats the point of having tanks in the game if the first maps are going to be small arena based maps?
Like you said, there would be literally zero role for them there. However, CCP said the next natural step they have on the roadmap is Planetary conquest and Vehicles. Dust, back in 2009 was envisioned as being a large "sandbox" environment similar to how planetside is. If you wanted to attack another district on your planet, you'd drive over to that district and have CRU's be deployed from your MCC or from orbit once you get there and establish uplinks. Hell, even the MCC's were supposed to eventually be piloted vehicles.
Now that CCP is moving to PC, they may actually be able to enable that old vision. Think of how much fun you would have had in tanks if the maps were actually all connected and your job was to combat enemy dropships and other such "initial landing" vehicles trying to head towards one of your facilities.
Honestly it sounds to me more like the maps weren't designed for the vehicles to truly flourish as far as their roles go. I know this because in planetside there are long stretches between compounds and I've seen truly wild vehicle fights inbetween them. Like, 6 v 6 tank battles on choke point roads. Truly epic stuff. And if you put down your negative lenses, and actually choose to hear what CCP is saying in various interviews, I feel like you'll become a lot more optimistic about this game.
Marston VC, STB Director
|
james selim brownstein
NECROM0NGERS
353
|
Posted - 2016.04.24 04:56:00 -
[180] - Quote
Skihids wrote:james selim brownstein wrote:We need Mechs. What role does the mech fill that your powered suit and super weapons doesn't? If you can't come up with one, then your mech has to be balanced 1v1 with any drop suit and it becomes just another expensive drop suit.
Great question... ask someone else.
n++Gòª¦¦¦¦-ç¦+¦+¦+¦+ WAITING FOR PROJECT NOVAGòñGöÇGöÇGöÇ
Gò¡Gê¬Gò«n+ên+¦n++n+¦n+ë
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |