|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Shion Typhon
Intara Direct Action
Caldari State
1
   |
Posted - 2013.05.24 15:32:00 -
[1] - Quote
Arramakaian Eka wrote:CCP's stated objective for Dust is to be a AAA shooter. I believe most of us agree that we are not there, yet - but many of us feel we can get there, me included. This thread is a community-driven effort to prioritize Dust development from the players' perspective to elevate Dust to AAA-titlehood.
I've only recently started playing but that is a pretty accurate list of everything that grinds my gears when I play.
The matchmaking/afking (sort of the same issue), lag and the terrain glitching/sticking are my three biggest gripes of the ones you have listed.
Yes this is a CCP game (ie HTFU) but FPS isn't quite the same as EVE, you need to have balanced teams and matches in the non-corporate matches if you want anyone to play it or join the Dust/EVE community. Corporate matches can be as brutally one sided as you want, put on your big-boy pants for war but if the other "tiers?" of matches aren't more balanced you won't get any traditional FPS players joining then graduating up the chain.
My other grip off that list is the range/damage mechanics which you already addressed in another thread but the hard clip on damage needs to be fixed. Its just sooooooooooo unnatural. |
Shion Typhon
Intara Direct Action
Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 16:05:00 -
[2] - Quote
The Planetside 2 comment reminded me.
Like PS2, Dust is a combined arms game and they both suffer from the same problem, that is, a clear balancing philosophy between Air/Land/Infantry.
I haven't seen enough Air in action to comment rationally but the existing state of Land vs Infantry is a bit messed. They don't seem to have a balanced firepower/toughness/maneuverability/scarcity paradigm well thought out.
PS2 has the same problem, vehicles are too spammable and therefore you don't have to take care in their use. You need to get to that point where your vehicle gives you battlefield power but also needs to be carefully applied and shepherded.
At the moment LAVs are too easy to use and aren't really threatened by infantry on the battlefield (way too much armour and maneuverability and too little damage from small arms fire = murder taxi/infantry mower impunity). Tanks seem to have the opposite problem, too easy to destroy.
I do, however, like Dust's vehicles' weapons, they are much better balanced than PS2. They are dangerous but slow, turret turning speeds and reloads act as a choke on spammability I find them much more sensible.
Anyway, regardless of opinions on the current situation I think they need to reconsider the firepower/toughness/maneuverability/scarcity mix. |
Shion Typhon
Intara Direct Action
Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.25 15:45:00 -
[3] - Quote
There is also the issue as to whether Dust is catering to EVE players branching out or FPS players coming in.
The current setup with dropsuit fittings mirroring EVE fits is that the available modules are TOTALLY foreign to an FPS player. People who play CoD, Battlefield, Planetside are used to upgrade modules focused around the gun. EG: Sights, grips, magazines etc.
The fact that every gun is a single unit with set stats and iron sights is just bizarre and very off-putting. Jimmy likes a red-dot sight, Johnny likes a chevron sight. Jacky likes an extended magazine, Joey prefers a stabiliser grip.
Surely it would be possible to add module slots to the dropsuits that create these add-ons that are expected as no-brainers by FPS players. |
|
|
| |
|