|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
mikegunnz
Pink Fluffy Bounty Hunterz
RISE of LEGION
425
   |
Posted - 2012.08.28 16:23:00 -
[1] - Quote
Kinda have to agree with Regis.
If the only ppl (or majority) that play Dust, are EVE vets, Dust will die.
The population needs to be bigger. This topic has been discussed before, so I'll keep it short and sweet.
The "depth" in Dust is great. I like it. HOWEVER, Dust needs to be accessible to the casual gamer as well.
This DOES NOT mean it needs to totally cater to the casuals, but it needs to have good fps mechanics, so that it's at least playable for the casuals. Whether or not they care about the deeper RPGish elements is up to them.
Once you have the foundation to make Dust a fun shooter, then you can build upon it with all the other elements that Dust has/will have, because that will attract the crowd that wants something "more"
My point is that you need BOTH the "casual" gamer AND the "hardcore" player looking for something deeper, in order to have a gamer population large enough to sustain this game for many years.
Dust is on its way, it's made some good improvements, but still has a ways to go. |
mikegunnz
Pink Fluffy Bounty Hunterz
RISE of LEGION
425
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 21:01:00 -
[2] - Quote
EnglishSnake wrote:JonnyAugust wrote:Jedd Brown wrote:Guys when Dust starts there will be:
PVE (drone regions or/and probably wormhole exploration)- for those who likes some kinde of mobs or lone wolf play
PVP in high sec space / low sec space (factional warfare) for guys who wan't a pvp with meaning but not to deep ;)
PVP in null sec. Some kind of deepest gameplay for hadcore gamers. Close integration to EVE players
PVP like today in beta but with more customization /game mods / maps for casual players.
Some big events in EVE/DUST engaging a lot of players
IT'S FREE :)
Explain me how this model could fail? Ofcourse when all technical stuff will work well not like today. Dude, I don't want to play a sub par shooter to shoot ai all day. The shooter part of this game is just bad No worse than MAG tbh
I really LOL'd with this comment.
MAG's gungame/FPS mechanics were much better than Dust. Even 2.0s skill system was pretty good. My biggest criticism would have been that there were too many skill points, and that once you hit level 70 you could be a supersoldier who was skilled in almost everything worth skilling. Should have required a little more specialization, but FPS mechanics (other than RBS) were pretty good. |
mikegunnz
Pink Fluffy Bounty Hunterz
RISE of LEGION
425
|
Posted - 2012.08.29 15:02:00 -
[3] - Quote
Templar Two wrote:Anyone is free to enjoy anything but there are objective things in VG like performance & video quality that don't depend on personal taste.
Dust is weak in those aspects and those are the things that I can measure and comment and that are undeniable.
Most of my comments are about things that are purely technical!
Unresponsive controls = technical.
Poor animation = technical.
Weightless weapons = technical, because it'a matter of programming
Poor graphic = technical.
Poor net code = technical.
Poor, unclear, badly organized UI = technical.
Barren empty maps =tehcnical.
The only non technical thighs I disagree on are stats & lack of sandbox elements.
Those are design choice and I have explained many times why for me they are not right for a FPS like Dust.
^^^
Unresponsive controls... particularly with weapon switching. I totally agree.
Poor animation... yeah needs work...but not THAT bad.
Weightless weapons...meh. I'm ok with them. If anything, it's one of the last things that needs to be addressed. (if at all)
Poor graphics... I don't really agree. While the graphics aren't GREAT, they're not that bad. Tbh, if all other game mechanics are working well, I'm more than happy with the graphics how they are.
Poor net code...Do you mean with "invalid fit" bugs, problems loading matches, etc....yes it DEF needs to be fixed.
Poor UI... I don't think the UI is all that bad. Not my favorite, but I'm ok with it.
Barren maps... I think the smaller maps are ok, the medium sized maps are OK, but would be better with like 20v20 or 24v24. The large maps (which we now are playing 16v16) are DEFINITELY where the problem lies in regards to the "barren/empty" feeling. Those big maps NEED to be at least 24v24. 32v32 would be even better. |
|
|
| |
|