DUST Search - Five Initial Thoughts after four hours of game play.

Seeker of Cheese wrote:

Dylan Yarbrough wrote:

Except this is a video game and it doesn't require rocket science or LOADS of equations to make a general impression. Keep it real.

What exactly do you think programing and weapon stat balancing is if it isn't LOADS of equations? I mean, CCP has a full time economist on staff to do LOADS of equations related to the marketplace. See this right here, you have an opinion, but it's not a valid opinion because you have no idea what you're talking about.

Aiden Angel wrote:

I think a person's initial thoughts within the first hour of playing will change after playing for several more hours and so on.

See, that's my point. You agree with me, but you're arguing just because you have to feel right and feel like you've won something here. If your so called "valid" opinion is so likely to change with just a few more hours of experience, then obviously the original wasn't worth anything. You're readily admitting this, you're just not connecting the dots.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Dylan Yarbrough Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 25	Posted - 2012.07.03 03:31:00 - [1] - Quote Seeker of Cheese wrote: Aiden Angel wrote: Also-4 hours is definitely long enough to get an initial opinion. Also, this is HIS opinion. He isn't saying this is truth or fact, just that it's his opinion so yes, his opinion is valid. I may not agree with everything he says, and neither will everyone but that's fine. So, I should walk into NASA and tell them everything I think they're doing wrong with the space program because I've watched a few shuttle launches on TV? According to you, that's valid. According to reality, that's insane. Except this is a video game and it doesn't require rocket science or LOADS of equations to make a general impression. Keep it real. As for me, I like that there is no auto aim, but I don't think he is talking about that. I believe what he is saying is that the aiming just needs to be tightened up a bit. I agree. Sometimes the controls, when aiming seem either clunky, or too smooth, and it's hard to position well. Sound could use work as well, I agree there. Also, with the terrain when climbing up hills, yeah, that needs to be fixed.
Dylan Yarbrough Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 25	Posted - 2012.07.03 18:23:00 - [2] - Quote Seeker of Cheese wrote: Dylan Yarbrough wrote: Except this is a video game and it doesn't require rocket science or LOADS of equations to make a general impression. Keep it real. What exactly do you think programing and weapon stat balancing is if it isn't LOADS of equations? I mean, CCP has a full time economist on staff to do LOADS of equations related to the marketplace. See this right here, you have an opinion, but it's not a valid opinion because you have no idea what you're talking about. Aiden Angel wrote: I think a person's initial thoughts within the first hour of playing will change after playing for several more hours and so on. See, that's my point. You agree with me, but you're arguing just because you have to feel right and feel like you've won something here. If your so called "valid" opinion is so likely to change with just a few more hours of experience, then obviously the original wasn't worth anything. You're readily admitting this, you're just not connecting the dots. I do know what I'm talking about. Sending someone into space is in NO WAY similar to BETA testing a video game. If they have an economist on board then good for them, they aren't the first in the industry to have one. But do they need a rocket scientist? Do they need an engineer to help dictate realistic placements to have efficient rocket thrusts at certain intervals? No, it's WAY easier to code a video game than plan a one month space mission. You don't need life support systems, you don't need an economist to tell you how to spend money in space, you don't need anything but a bunch of happy coders who do it for a living. Again, keep it real. It's not hard to place stats on a weapon in a video game. You don't need trajectory equations to fling yourself around an orbiting moon. You simply place in the amount of damage you want the weapon to do. That's hardly an equation. Please, if you're not willing to justify yourself in a realistic manner then don't bother doing it at all... Now on to adult conversation. If CCP didn't want help in finding issues then they wouldn't have opened up a BETA for people to help. If they didn't want opinions and bug reports they would be doing it themselves. Anyone's opinion after 4 hours of gameplay is good enough, granted more experience never hurt. Hell, most games now days can be won within 4 hours, so I wouldn't worry about anyone trying to deflect your opinion on a game that is in testing stages. If anything report anything small and large you see fit. The more the merrier, that's what makes a great game. Good fun and a polished product.
Dylan Yarbrough Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 25	Posted - 2012.07.03 22:18:00 - [3] - Quote Seeker of Cheese wrote: Sure, belittle an entire industry that you've demonstrated you know absolutely nothing about and call yourself the adult. But if you want to go talk trajectory, you can email the folks at Havok about their physics engine. Tell them what they did was easy. While you're at it, contact Steve Polge at Epic Game and tell him the Unreal Engine didn't take much effort over the past decade. Or... be a coward and do neither of those things and shoot your mouth off on a forum about your fantasies on how to run an industry you don't understand. Was I saying that building an engine over decades or years to make a physics engine was easy? Nope, not once, matter of fact I know it's not. I said that changing the damage output on a weapon is easy, and beta testing a game is easy, and that someones opinion after 4 hours is a legitimate opinion. ALL of those things can't be related, compared, or construed in any way, shape, or form to what NASA does. NASA is larger than this game, and is nothing like it. Again, back to the adult conversation and please put an end to your childish ranting. People are trying to help build a great game, and you shooting down someones opinion doesn't help one bit. Done feeding the Troll from here on out. Please, someone stimulate this conversation with rational thought and processes before I lose faith in Humanity.... more so....
Dylan Yarbrough Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 25	Posted - 2012.07.04 00:18:00 - [4] - Quote Billy Pinkerton wrote: Chunkiness might not have been the proper term. Perhaps it feels too light,with weight at the end of the movement. Next time I play im gonna try to mess with the sensitivity and see if I can correct it. If it does not correct it I would say that a heavy initial movement instead of too snappy would even things out a bit. Acceleration is most likely a better term for that. As for the lag it only happened twice,my guess is just a lil hicup,maybe a vehicle was destroyed and it cause a framerate drop. Hmm. Will need more time to discover the cause. I also think that the first four hours are going to matter when it comes to getting people hooked. Still,just an opinion. Billy. I agree on this. Simplest term comes down to weight. KillZone 2 and 3 had VERY good weaponry weight. Made the game a little believable. Maybe that's what's not needed for DUST, but still, some kind of acceleration enhancements or maybe gun weight? That would spruce the game up a bit me thinks.
Dylan Yarbrough Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 25	Posted - 2012.07.15 07:03:00 - [5] - Quote Seeker of Cheese wrote: Garl Dravon wrote: gave us some brochures with a survey so we could rate our experience. And if a few in your class had all written "you need to give us a gajillion dollars" on their surveys, do you think the museum would've done it? Do you think that would be valid feedback? Of course not. When you hand out surveys to children you expect to get a certain amount of useless nonsense back that you just ignore. The problem is, the last time I ignored a bunch of useless feedback demanding the heavy be nerfed into a teadybear, CCP actually did it because no one was giving a counterpoint. Not making that mistake again. Garl Dravon wrote: Please refrain from criticizing people giving FEEDBACK in the FEEDBACK forum. So you criticizing me for giving feedback on the feedback in the feedback forum would be.. what exactly? Useless feedback or not, feedback is feedback. Considering that this forum isn't a museum, and I would assume that MOST of the people on this forum are at least 16 years or older, maybe giving the first few impressions of a new player to the game is a good thing. If someone bought the game for $60 played it for 4 hours and hated it, they will most likely return it. No money for CCP. If someone has a bad opinion on the game because of something that could have been fixed or balanced within the first 4 hours of the game, CCP will lose more customers exactly like the hypothetical customer that returned it in 4 hours. Again, CCP wouldn't have a feedback forum if they didn't intend to read it the post, worthless or not. Something might come out of a worthless feedback post from people who are disagreeing with the OP. Don't limit people from putting in an initial opinion. It can only do harm. Man, people these days. Don't know how to beta test anymore.