|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
dday3six
Intrepidus XI Omega Commission
1
|
Posted - 2013.06.10 08:02:00 -
[1] - Quote
Unless the game is given a complete overall, no matter much gameplay wise it's made like Call of Duty, Battlefield, Modern Warfare, Killzone or pick your own modern FPS equivalent. The MMO, RPG leveling/grinding elements of Dust are still going to be a major turn-off to most of the core-base for those sort of games. In that respect CCP, in my opinion, is better off trying to harsh out a place in the middle of the FPS and RPG/MMO markets, rather then trying to fit directly into either. Competeing head-to-head with other, well known FPS titles would be a no-win situation, similarly for RPGs. However there is a market with playes who like both. That's what I believe Dust in aiming for.
I'm not saying there aren't flaws in the gameplay, and admittedly I didn't play during either closed or open beta. I'm just stating I see a reason why CCP wouldn't want to walk the same gameplay style path as other first person shooters.
|
dday3six
Intrepidus XI Omega Commission
1
|
Posted - 2013.06.10 08:57:00 -
[2] - Quote
Stew360 wrote:dday3six wrote:Unless the game is given a complete overall, no matter much gameplay wise it's made like Call of Duty, Battlefield, Modern Warfare, Killzone or pick your own modern FPS equivalent. The MMO, RPG leveling/grinding elements of Dust are still going to be a major turn-off to most of the core-base for those sort of games. In that respect CCP, in my opinion, is better off trying to harsh out a place in the middle of the FPS and RPG/MMO markets, rather then trying to fit directly into either. Competeing head-to-head with other, well known FPS titles would be a no-win situation, similarly for RPGs. However there is a market with playes who like both. That's what I believe Dust in aiming for.
I'm not saying there aren't flaws in the gameplay, and admittedly I didn't play during either closed or open beta. I'm just stating I see a reason why CCP wouldn't want to walk the same gameplay style path as other first person shooters.
No matters how deep the game is and how awesome the link is between dust and eve , IF the gunplay and gameplay feel wrong and suck , sorry but no ones would ever play this game especially on consoles but also on PC The gunplay and caracter moovement feel wrong in every single aspect , everyones i know feel the same and even those who desperatly want to love the game cant get into it because of the awefull gameplay/gunplay mechanics iam sorry
Increasing sensitivity mitigates the clunky feeling for gunplay to a degree. I personally put mine at 100 and never looked back.
When I look at the gameplay of Dust, I always remember how this game is geared heavily toward teamwork and not multiple instances of player vs player combat occurring randomly across the battlefield. Holding down one position, using the combined efforts of a squad and your other teammates rather then roaming solo, from place to place, looking for the next kill is most often, though not always, the better approach to combat.
I see several people complaining about the gameplay of Dust, and to an extent I agree. There are many improvements which could be made. However, I can't help but wonder if some of those people are really complaining about how it's hard or even next to impossible (depending on how deep in SP a player is) to run around Rambo style in Dust. The game is simply not intended to be played that way, at least not from the start. |
dday3six
Intrepidus XI Omega Commission
1
|
Posted - 2013.06.10 22:06:00 -
[3] - Quote
Th3rdSun wrote:dday3six wrote:
When I look at the gameplay of Dust, I always remember how this game is geared heavily toward teamwork and not multiple instances of player vs player combat occurring randomly across the battlefield. Holding down one position, using the combined efforts of a squad and your other teammates rather then roaming solo, from place to place, looking for the next kill is most often, though not always, the better approach to combat.
The problem with this is that the game modes for holding down one position only exist in Domination.The other game modes,and low player count,makes for a roving squad type of gameplay. This game needs the old Skirmish back,where there was only one MCC in the sky,and one team attacked and the other defended.Once we get this back,we will see better tactics across the board. The game also needs more players per map.Sorry,but anything under 32v32 is just too small,especially for maps this large.
In both versions of Ambush and then of course Skirmish taking then holding a position can often be better tactically when aiming to win. In Ambush it depends a lot on the map, but with Skirmish taking points and holding them is often the better course of action considering NULL cannons continue to fire on your MCC until the virus is done uploading to retake them. However because winning the match doesn't give more rewards, and staying alive is only part of the equation for calculating rewards. Holding a position, when looked at from a ISK gain prospective, is going to be less rewarding if the action is not close to your position. Given such, and the high cost of top end gear vs the low or even negative return on ISK without a high kill count, or in the case of support roles like Logisitics, players to support. It's easy to see why moving position, especially in PUGs is more rewarding.
Keep in mind I never played during the Beta, open or closed. However I can see how a Skirmish mode with only one MCC could also be viewed in a negative light. If they only way for the group controlling the MCC to win is to deplete the clones of the other side, but said other side has the option of destorying the MCC and depleting clones the field is not even from the start.
I think the player count should be increased, to support larger battles, though I feel it needs to be a number divisible by 6, because that is the max players in a squad. However I personally think the number of players should be different depending on the game mode. Ambush (which I also think should have smaller maps) would be fine with 18 vs 18. The other modes could be 24 or 30, because they are both modes which better support having a larger map to play on. Though I can also see downsides to having the player limit being larger. In the instance of PC, it means that more players are needed, and well we all have a life of some sort outside of Dust and/or Eve. |
|
|
|