| Pages: 1 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
SuperMido
Osmon Surveillance
Caldari State
67
   |
Posted - 2012.08.18 03:55:00 -
[1] - Quote
I really don't understand why you guys decided to ditch the Battle-Finder, and make it all based on the Instant-Battle thing. But regardless, and option for selecting the mode you'd like to play when choosing Instant-Battle is REQUIRED.
I simply DISLIKE and HATE ambush. I'm not playing Dust 514 for TDM, I've CoD or Battlefield for that. I want those big open objective based maps/gameplay. |
Trinity Ashima
Sanmatar Kelkoons
Minmatar Republic
32
|
Posted - 2012.08.18 04:05:00 -
[2] - Quote
SuperMido wrote:I really don't understand why you guys decided to ditch the Battle-Finder, and make it all based on the Instant-Battle thing. But regardless, and option for selecting the mode you'd like to play when choosing Instant-Battle is REQUIRED.
I simply DISLIKE and HATE ambush. I'm not playing Dust 514 for TDM, I've CoD or Battlefield for that. I want those big open objective based maps/gameplay.
It hasn't been ditched. Battle Finder is still there. They're just forcing us to use it for testing purposes, but yes, it needs a filter option somewhere so I can set it up not to put me in ambush games... |
Talnos Nosslu
Osmon Surveillance
Caldari State
46
|
Posted - 2012.08.18 04:14:00 -
[3] - Quote
Objective-based gameplay is a novelty in itself. It's not a difficult task, quite easy one would suppose, to create unique missions and objectives central to the EVE Online franchise. For instance, rewarding teams of mercenaries and EVE pilots for salvaging the remains of an industrial mine for resources. Or having to neutralize, or control, hives of Rogue Drones on an infested planet.
I'm sure the team at CCP is well-seasoned in the genre of creating the scenario. My only wish is that this can be carried over to Dust 514 as Objective-oriented and/or mission-oriented gameplay. One request of mine would be for the game to focus on obtaining "key" objectives.
Another idea I just had, and promise this will be the last one, but now that the idea of objective-based gameplay has been proposed, would it not seem beneficial to have extremely long battle sessions, say at the length of some Battlefield matches or longer, as teams struggle to obtain as many key objectives and resources until that area is exhausted? I propose this would be the ultimate conveyance of victory for the player and corporations alike. |
Trinity Ashima
Sanmatar Kelkoons
Minmatar Republic
32
|
Posted - 2012.08.18 04:18:00 -
[4] - Quote
Talnos Nosslu wrote:Objective-based gameplay is a novelty in itself. It's not a difficult task, quite easy one would suppose, to create unique missions and objectives central to the EVE Online franchise. For instance, rewarding teams of mercenaries and EVE pilots for salvaging the remains of an industrial mine for resources. Or having to neutralize, or control, hives of Rogue Drones on an infested planet.
I'm sure the team at CCP is well-seasoned in the genre of creating the scenario. My only wish is that this can be carried over to Dust 514 as Objective-oriented and/or mission-oriented gameplay. One request of mine would be for the game to focus on obtaining "key" objectives.
Another idea I just had, and promise this will be the last one, but now that the idea of objective-based gameplay has been proposed, would it not seem beneficial to have extremely long battle sessions, say at the length of some Battlefield matches or longer, as teams struggle to obtain as many key objectives and resources until that area is exhausted? I propose this would be the ultimate conveyance of victory for the player and corporations alike.
I imagne this would be somewhat how the 64 vs 64 would behave |
theschizogenious
KILL-EM-QUICK
RISE of LEGION
167
|
Posted - 2012.08.18 04:21:00 -
[5] - Quote
they eliminated a filter so that players would test both gamemodes in order to find bugs within the two gamemodes. |
SuperMido
Osmon Surveillance
Caldari State
67
|
Posted - 2012.08.18 04:25:00 -
[6] - Quote
theschizogenious wrote:they eliminated a filter so that players would test both gamemodes in order to find bugs within the two gamemodes.
Well, guess what?? Whenever I get put in an Ambush match I just quit and join another battle hoping for Skirmish. I just won't play Ambush. To test something you gotta be happy doing it, and having fun. Ambush doesn't give me fun XD |
theschizogenious
KILL-EM-QUICK
RISE of LEGION
167
|
Posted - 2012.08.18 04:27:00 -
[7] - Quote
SuperMido wrote:theschizogenious wrote:they eliminated a filter so that players would test both gamemodes in order to find bugs within the two gamemodes. Well, guess what?? Whenever I get put in an Ambush match I just quit and join another battle hoping for Skirmish. I just won't play Ambush. To test something you gotta be happy doing it, and having fun. Ambush doesn't give me fun XD
then you havent found the right people to play with. |
Trinity Ashima
Sanmatar Kelkoons
Minmatar Republic
32
|
Posted - 2012.08.18 04:34:00 -
[8] - Quote
probelm is they're hurting themselves in the long run because people wont play if they don't enjoy themselves. We're testing for free they need to make it enjoyable or people will not feel the need to give up their time. |
Talnos Nosslu
Osmon Surveillance
Caldari State
46
|
Posted - 2012.08.18 04:35:00 -
[9] - Quote
Trinity Ashima wrote:Talnos Nosslu wrote:Objective-based gameplay is a novelty in itself. It's not a difficult task, quite easy one would suppose, to create unique missions and objectives central to the EVE Online franchise. For instance, rewarding teams of mercenaries and EVE pilots for salvaging the remains of an industrial mine for resources. Or having to neutralize, or control, hives of Rogue Drones on an infested planet.
I'm sure the team at CCP is well-seasoned in the genre of creating the scenario. My only wish is that this can be carried over to Dust 514 as Objective-oriented and/or mission-oriented gameplay. One request of mine would be for the game to focus on obtaining "key" objectives.
Another idea I just had, and promise this will be the last one, but now that the idea of objective-based gameplay has been proposed, would it not seem beneficial to have extremely long battle sessions, say at the length of some Battlefield matches or longer, as teams struggle to obtain as many key objectives and resources until that area is exhausted? I propose this would be the ultimate conveyance of victory for the player and corporations alike. I imagne this would be somewhat how the 64 vs 64 would behave
I would hope so. The battle maps are enormous and seem to brim with possibilities. I only hope that potential is maximized and taken advantage of. I also hope that, within certain battle modes such as Conquest (as in Battlefield), emphasis is placed on creating numerous objectives in the light that missions have a unique and customary feel with respect to each map.
Say that your team is going to play a familiar map, you already have a preset understanding of which objectives you need to take, or objectives you must defend. I know nothing is yet set in stone. But it is wishful. |
Ryan Martel
Sanmatar Kelkoons
Minmatar Republic
27
|
Posted - 2012.08.18 04:39:00 -
[10] - Quote
Well it's needed for now and I don't mind as much since we'll eventually have the choice in this regard. Besides, we can group up now if only in small doses so I see no real problem concerning this. Least we have the opportunity to pick and choose whom we play with now.
Incidentally I did get to play a new kind of Skrimish mode similar to the Escalation Mode in (gasp) MAG and my opinion is that it is done better here from what I have seen. There's more objectives to capture and more positions you have to control in order to stay effective in battle and control the map. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 :: [one page] |