Debriefing > Impressions & Feedback

UPDATE: What I think can be touched on, Invulnerability.

<< < (6/8) > >>

VC:

--- Quote ---You guys are worried that skilled players are going to get killed by newbies cause of the random headshot 1-2 hit kills.
--- End quote ---
Quaking in our boots.  If any of us dies once to a newbie, we slit our wrists in the bathtub.
--- Quote ---more manageable
--- End quote ---
You're assuming rate of fire affects accuracy, because you assume it affects recoil, because your idea of Goldeneye on PC is Counterstrike with player skins.

My statement does not imply that I am an artist.  I'm pretty much piss at art, music, and architecture, although I can handle a drafting machine.  My statement underscores the problem with a general election: very few of those polled are going to approach the question as a creative mind guiding another creative mind.

Flash2011:
None of what you have yet to say has convinced me that the invuln system makes any sense.

I'm arguing that it's a bad system and you should work on removing it and balancing it around that. All you've done is manage to make fun of me.

This is the impressions & feed back forum, I've left my feed back and impression as one of your players and all you've done is instead of saying to your self, "Maybe our players don't enjoy this system, I thought it would work and it hasn't." you've opted for arguing with me and making fun of me.

Here are a list of things you've said to either get at me or just don't make any sense.


--- Quote ---CS is full of egos who burst with pride because they've memorized Dust 2 to a reflexive level, or because they spammed AK in a room and got lucky.

--- End quote ---
Hardly. Just because there are some like that doesn't mean your game is going to have that.


--- Quote ---Because our weapons are highly accurate, random headshots are uncommon, while in CS, you game the recoil system to increase your random HS chance.
--- End quote ---
The guns in GE:Source are far more inaccurate than those in CS because in CS almost every time you fire or burst the initial burst is super accurate for most guns. The first bullet i would say 99% of the time goes to the center of the screen. Not so in GE:Source. Over the course of unloading your gun, yeah GE:Source is more accurate, but if your not meant to full auto then what's the point?


--- Quote ---Even your beloved Counterstrike has it
--- End quote ---
I don't love Counterstrike, I'm only using it as a comparison. I could just as easily say Left 4 Dead or Nexon FPS games. CS just happens to the one most people have probably played. Don't get mad at me for only using CS as an example.


--- Quote ---because you would have a d.p.s. of 75~100 with even the terrible SMGs you bemoan.
--- End quote ---

Your trying to make me sound like i'm a whiner when i'm merely stating feedback from my impression in the Impressions & Feedback forum. I think the SMG's are currently so unbalanced you may as well have left them out of the game. Pistols and Rifles do it better.

killermonkey:
Listen man I was cool with you presenting your opinion earlier, I even showed you ingame what was up. Please have the common decency to not pick a fight with VC, you won't win, he has no heart.

What is your goal in all this? We are not going to change the mechanic. If you don't like it after playing the game, I'm sorry but there are about 10,000 other games you can play that you might like. All games are not for everyone, and our game is certainly not a one-size-fits all affair.

So, unless you have some more feedback to give us BESIDES INVULNERABILITY, I want to see this discussion ended.

Flash2011:
I'm just at a loss for words.
I feel like I've presented you guy with a golden opportunity to take a classic game and elevate it to new heights (I'm not talking JUST about the invuln system).

What if other people felt the same way as I did about removing the system?
 
I've talked to numerous players and most if not all of them agreed that the invuln system was reallly funky.

I'm not a bad guy, I'm not a jerk. I'm just an experienced gamer and I've played many games and I'm aspiring designer. I try to take what doesn't make sense in video games and dissect it and improve upon it. An example of this would be the Grenades in CoD4, they were WAAAAY out of hand. What did I do? I played ProMod and talked the devs about it and they agreed that nades were out of hand so they toned down the radius and damage. That created a much more entertaining environment and attracted much more players.

When game sequels come out they typically take the original game and improve upon it. Also QA tests what works and doesn't work, if the title launches and the fans dislike it what QA thought worked, the devs rectify it through patches (typically that's how it goes).

I feel like you guys can take GE:64, see what really isn't fun or doesn't hold up in 2011 and fix it. If GE:64 had a few guns that ruined gameplay and players hated it would you just add those guns in and leave them as is and just say "Hey players, i know they suck, but the original had it...so deal with it."?

As a fan of GE:64 from back when it launched and someone who's been wanting a sequel since then I was excited to hear there was remake on steam. Hoping it was going to be something new and exciting I was immediately let down when I started playing it as I realized that, no matter how good you can be, because of how this is version is an exact replica of the original, you'll never be able to score a lot of kills based on skill. Its just like all the other old run and gun games.

That is odd to me to see that because I feel like "Why would anyone seriously want to go back to playing the way games use to be made when you can simply take a classic and make it super awesome."
Which is again why Duke Nukem Forever bombed and why GE:Source player base is so tiny.

My last example would be:  Your making a shooter, you think its going to be super awesome and you think to your self, Duke Nukem Forever is a game i'd like to remake. You remake it, word for word, page for page, scene for scene. You notice the small player base and all the complaints saying "Why would you want to remake an outdated game and not even improve upon. You know what's wrong with it and how to easily escalate it to super star status, but instead you simply say "I don't care, I remade it the exact same way and that's final, deal with it or don't play it". Why would you ever want that as a designer/developer, you want players to play your game right?

markpeterjameslegg:
I do know where your coming from Flash2011, I've been here before, but for us this is a mod, for them this is their baby, would you want to change any of the features on your baby, besides this is a remake and that's exactly what it does, it's original because of that fact. The mod has an awkward learning curve for sure and it does scare away a lot of players, but just stick with it cos this is as good a remake as your ever going to get, and the next release s going to be awesome.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page