DUST Search - Open World or Battle Arena?

Buzzin Fr0g wrote:

Bones McGavins wrote:

... Despite all the claims of persistance, your actions ultimately feel 100 times LESS important then a match of Halo, because you see no real results... But it will never, nor should it ever, be a persistant open world FPS.

I disagree with you here. The grand vision many are describing is, granted, probably not going to be fully realized... yet. The genre is advancing and will get their someday. We are trying to help CCP push the ball as far as they can. I totally support 100 times LESS importance per individual player. Unreal Tournament/Quake Arena, COD/BF, etc. can continue the small scope style of isolated conflict that give rise to leaderboards and inflated egos. My brother and I, since we were young (10 years old or so), have desired to see a game break the mold and go for something different. Even if it sucked, you'd still have to applaud the attempt and ingenuity. WWII online is awesome in that no one player or their 1337 skills achieve anything. You need the concerted effort of an army to succeed. It's the difference between a virtual conflict and "corp battles." How about going even further? Remove kill attribution entirely. If you and your squadmates are shooting at a guy and he is incapacitated or killed, what difference in a large-scale conflict does it make who's bullet was responsible? All that matters is that he is no longer a threat. I do realize this kind of a game wouldn't appeal to everyone as many seek the individual glory and want the more immediate rewards offered in contemporary FPS games, but it would be cool to have a variety of options in the genre.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Bones McGavins TacoCat Industries 28	Posted - 2013.03.01 16:24:00 - [1] - Quote It's not going to be open world. Look at the game we are currently playing, is that remotely open world? You dont release a beta to a game that is nothing like the final product. The "open world' meta game will involve contracts and PERHAPS moving war barges and the like in EVE space to prepare for attacks. But the actual DUST gameplay will be 100% like we are seeing now with two teams figthing an arena style match. There wont be a mode where I walk around a planet exploring and randomly run into other DUST players. If you want that experience, i guess, go play planetside? But trust me, most FPS players will get bored of that experience cause it seems pointless. DUST has a chance to shine because of how its implementing individual matches (with wins and losses so the player feels their experience had a point, and a goal) with a bigger meta game to drive the importance of those results. The lack of an open world design is what allows that to work. Open world FPS is a really cool theory, but from WWII Online, to Planetside, to Planetside 2, it just isnt all that much fun once you get passed the novelty.
Bones McGavins TacoCat Industries 28	Posted - 2013.03.01 18:31:00 - [2] - Quote Again, I think you guys are seriously mis-judging what this game is if you think it could become an open world MMO. It is 100% an arena shooter built ontop of a persistant universe to give each match meaning and have your characters persist in an impactful way. It is COD/HALO + consequences. Thats it. If you are playing this game, thinking it will become more, you are going to be massively let down. You will not see the day that bases and players exist persistantly together in DUST. Players will interact in individual matches and that is about it. It can still be amazingly cool, with the economic factors and conquest of districts/planets. But all of this will occur within the format we have now of individual matches. That may grow, to eventually having to fly warbridges to the planet in order to drop more resources for players on the ground, etc. But it will always be "a round of DUST is being played" similar to "a round of Halo, or COD" Honestly, its for the best. Try to play Planetside or WWIIOnline. Despite all the claims of persistance, your actions ultimately feel 100 times LESS important then a match of Halo, because you see no real results. Sure, maybe the enemy just decides the fight was boring and logs off or goes somewhere else, but it doesnt feel like a victory. And as soon as you go to bed, guess what? Everything you did is gone. DUST has the potential to capture the FUN of arena shooters and give it a persistant, epic backbone that drives those matches. But it will never, nor should it ever, be a persistant open world FPS.
Bones McGavins TacoCat Industries 29	Posted - 2013.03.01 19:01:00 - [3] - Quote OOOK. Keep dreaming. A game doesnt get this far into beta, for this long and go PUBLIC if what we are seeing is a small fraction of the core gameplay. Could there potentially be some "open" game modes, with a larger map, no teams and just the ability to walk around and fight NPCs? Perhaps. But it would be more like a game of GTA or red dead redemption multiplayer, and not WOW or Planetside. Quote: then you know nothing about dust 514. Because it IS coming and its coming soon. Really? Where can I read up on this supposed open world gameplay coming? I have never once heard anything about this, and I watched many videos detailing the promise of interaction between EVE and DUST. But it has always been about individual matches taking place, not an open world persistant environment for your merc to walk around in.
Bones McGavins TacoCat Industries 29	Posted - 2013.03.01 19:05:00 - [4] - Quote John Xulu wrote: Bones McGavins wrote: OOOK. Keep dreaming. A game doesnt get this far into beta, for this long and go PUBLIC if what we are seeing is a small fraction of the core gameplay. Could there potentially be some "open" game modes, with a larger map, no teams and just the ability to walk around and fight NPCs? Perhaps. But it would be more like a game of GTA or red dead redemption multiplayer, and not WOW or Planetside. Quote: then you know nothing about dust 514. Because it IS coming and its coming soon. Really? Where can I read up on this supposed open world gameplay coming? I have never once heard anything about this, and I watched many videos detailing the promise of interaction between EVE and DUST. But it has always been about individual matches taking place, not an open world persistant environment for your merc to walk around in. Well...We're supposed to have FW and district/planet conquering along with their economy...So that's pretty persistent... Yes, a persistant meta game that drives the meaning of individual matches. Thats what makes DUST cool and unique. But it isnt the same as a persistant universe that allows you to run around on a planet, hop on a space ship, join up with 200 other mercs and launch a massive invasion of another planet. Instead, those fights for FW and districts will be driven by the same, arena style "16v16, 24v24" etc matches we see now.
Bones McGavins TacoCat Industries 29	Posted - 2013.03.01 19:10:00 - [5] - Quote Buzzin Fr0g wrote: Bones McGavins wrote: ... Despite all the claims of persistance, your actions ultimately feel 100 times LESS important then a match of Halo, because you see no real results... But it will never, nor should it ever, be a persistant open world FPS. I disagree with you here. The grand vision many are describing is, granted, probably not going to be fully realized... yet. The genre is advancing and will get their someday. We are trying to help CCP push the ball as far as they can. I totally support 100 times LESS importance per individual player. Unreal Tournament/Quake Arena, COD/BF, etc. can continue the small scope style of isolated conflict that give rise to leaderboards and inflated egos. My brother and I, since we were young (10 years old or so), have desired to see a game break the mold and go for something different. Even if it sucked, you'd still have to applaud the attempt and ingenuity. WWII online is awesome in that no one player or their 1337 skills achieve anything. You need the concerted effort of an army to succeed. It's the difference between a virtual conflict and "corp battles." How about going even further? Remove kill attribution entirely. If you and your squadmates are shooting at a guy and he is incapacitated or killed, what difference in a large-scale conflict does it make who's bullet was responsible? All that matters is that he is no longer a threat. I do realize this kind of a game wouldn't appeal to everyone as many seek the individual glory and want the more immediate rewards offered in contemporary FPS games, but it would be cool to have a variety of options in the genre. I dunno, you already have planetside for that. And what that game devolves into is a big zerg of one team running around capping bases, fighting small groups and rolling over them, while a big zerg of another team does the same, and the zergs never clash. Its boring. The problem with a "virtual battlefield" is that war isnt fun. Its not fun to sit around at a base for hours waiting for a potential attack that never comes. And winning is always the path of least resistance, so fair, even, fun fights will mainly be avoided while massive, lopsided, boring slaughters will happen left and right. DUST will mantain the fun of knowing you helped take that base, or helped shift that war effort, or took out that 20 million ISK tank and turned the tied of the battle, but will funnel it into fun, even matches where teams actually fight instead of taking bases where nobody is defending.
Bones McGavins TacoCat Industries 29	Posted - 2013.03.01 20:31:00 - [6] - Quote Hagintora wrote: Again, no one is disagreeing with how FW and Corp Matches, and such, should dealt with in the game. What we're asking for is a more Open World Experience in addition to the the standard PVP that we see today. As in, I don't want to go take over a planet today, I just want to explore it. And yes, they've already said that the topography of the maps will match the topography of each individual planet that they are on. It will be the same topography that EVE players see when they look at a planet from space. So there are going to be thousands of of maps. I'll try to find where exactly this was said so you can see. If someone wants to pitch in on this effort that'd be great. That may be reasonable. However, I would suspect that if they are serious about their "thousands of maps" (which i personally always thought seemed a little too ambitious and unrealistic, but we will see), and those maps are big enough, and filled out enough to be worth exploring, they could implement a mode where each planet is its own little open world experience similar to the multiplayer on red dead dedemption and gta. However, with so much space to explore, what would be the odds of finding other players? What would be the point in all this exploring? Do you think they will populate 1000 different planets with enough content to make them worth anything? The most realistic possibility is this: Every planet does have a number of unique maps procedurely developed based on various stats of the planet. A map for every district. Every planet will have a "open world" instance that allows players to just hang out, explore, fight NPC stuff, maybe player kill. These instances will consist of the pvp maps, strung together with some rather useless, boring environment connecting them. To make the world feel connected, players will be kicked off the planet when a pvp match is scheduled, and players can not re-enter until its over. That is probably as close to a truly open world experience as youll get in this game. And even that is a bit of a long shot.