Jump to content

TheDuke

Survivors
  • Content Count

    64
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by TheDuke

  1. I think I am fully understanding of what you're trying to say. Yet personally, in all brutal honesty, I would take Shattered Skies or Aftermath over Xera any day. And what sets those games apart? By your logic nothing much. But I'd say nothing more than personal preference. The fact that this is so subjective is key. Different people are drawn to different 'types' of games. It is true that when the market is saturated games have a far harder time to break through. But lets be honest, the full loot drop looter shooter genre isn't an 'overly saturated' market by any means. This and NewZ are literally the only games of their kind on the market right now. They do have things in common with rust, they do. But they're not the same at all. Following your way of thinking this game would be guarantied to improve if some form of advanced base building is implemented. And i tend to disagree. I tihnk this game doesn't need that at all. Also, PUBG is really nothing like this. I for one hate pubg. And comparing Rust to Xera is like comparing the COD franchise to the Battlefield games. Some people gravitate towards cod, some battlefield. Its not because both games allow you to grab or craft a gun and shoot it they're the same thing. As you say, you suggest a leveling system. But from a leveling system automatically flows that more time invested equals a 'better'. Thats fundemental to a leveling system. As i mentioned before I am only opposed to a skill tree (or anything, really) that makes you stronger in PvP. I have no problem with a skill tree that improves you in the PVE area of the game. But thats not what you were suggesting. You were very clearly suggesting PvP related improvements to your character. Its also true that you can camp a spot and level up quickly. That is part of the issue. Farming up would feel mandatory, some people just don't like farming. Obviously there could be other ways of gaining XP implemented. But whatever happens those who invest more time (specifically in the PVE aspect of the game), will have more gain and end up with a stronger character. And i think thats bad, i don't like that. But as i said, we can agree to disagree on that. Not everyone likes the same things. Despite all the effort this team is making I am not sure there is a way to fill this game with players again. The best thing now would be to finish their roadmap and hope for the best upon full release. Theres other things i would change like how the PvP works right now. Personally: - Being the passive player gives you a massive advantage atm => aggressive play is punished. - the gunplay is not really satisfying to me - the character movement is not satisfying in looks and feel. The idea of giving you this 'arcady' kind of freedom in your movement is good. But for some reason it puts me off. I feel like its hard to place what the reason for that is. Might be the animations. I did for example love the movement shattered skies had upon release. - The whole 'humanoid' thing is not really something i like. I think if we are going with blood crazed robots they don't necesserily have to be 'humanoids'. I am no creative mastermind by any means but im sure theres many different things that can be done with a robot uprising in terms of PVE. Limiting yourself to a human looking robot and then a slightly stronger human looking robot seems like a waste of possibility in an 'AI uprising'. -guns have no way of leaving the ingame economy (as of last i checked) making it so rare things stop being rare after time has passed -the events didn't feel very satisfying. Our group did them only because they were a PvP hotspot, but then again we felt like the PvP wasn't that great as whomever pushes the other squad puts themself at a massive advantage. This was later worked on by expanding the compounds. But all that really happened was the compound got bigger, still surrounded by a vast open area. It did improve the PvP inside the compound by a lot though. etc. Theres no one 'idea' that will save this game. It seems like a lot of things have to be improved on, new things implemented and if not for full release im pretty sure at this point the stars would have to align. Its sad because this seemed to me to be a really good team that really put the community first.
  2. Yes CS:GO is a competetive game with real life money involved for pro play or even just wagers between two people. But most people with a competetive mindset do not play with the goal of making money, they just want to be better than other players. Its what gives them that dopamine hit. It certainly does for me. All I'm saying is i want to avoid character progression in any way shape or form that benefits long time players in PvP. PVE is a different story. Also if one player is a 'speedy boy', the other a bullet sponge and one guy has the ability to rapidly heal were just playing a game of rock paper scissors for whomever gets the upper hand in the PvP. As that would essentially be the product of properly balancing such a system where every choice of 'talents' will make your character excel in a different area of the game. Ie its always a diceroll for who gets the upper hand depending on what talents the other player chose, or am i seeing that the wrong way?
  3. Some people learn slower than others, games have a skill ceiling, some people are naturally better at shooters while some might be even better at 3th person shooters. You cannot argue that right of the bat theres people who are far better and learn the game far faster than others at almost any game. To give a popular example CS has people whom have 3 thousand hours clocked and are still in the mg ranks while theres people with 500 hours who are global and faceit level 10. Any squad that would roll up on you would have had the ability to chose from the same skills as you would. Seeing the nature of the game i think its fair to assume most people would chose PvP perks. In the end whomever invested more time will get the upper hand.
  4. The game needs to excel in other areas, thats what should keep you playing. I just don't think the game needs a talent tree that offers advantages in PvP. It should be built around skill, not time invested. But as proven just now, opinions vary. And thats fine. Personally i just wouldnt be interested in a game that gives people an advantage for simply investing more time.
  5. This is literally just the Shattered Skies map.
  6. This puts the focuss on PVE and creates an even greater barrier for entry for the new player. They would join a game where everyone in their party can run longer and faster than them and the people he fights tank more than he can simply because they have been playing for longer. He might be losing gunfights to worse players simply because hes new and to me thats unacceptable. Also, other looter shooters have had this system, the most recent example being Sergey's new disaster New Frontier. So to say that a skill tree would set this game apart from others in the genre is simply not true.
  7. Even though i agree grouping up is easy and something anyone can do it is also worth nothing some people prefer playing solo or duo. But then again yes, there were (since im not sure about the current situation) servers for that. Killing a full squad alone is very much doable if you decide to camp and play around a building. To say you have a chance getting caught of alone in a forest by 4 guys whom have decent aim and are hugging is a winable situation is just ridiculous. Obviously thats not going to happen all the time, but you get my point. Running into a full camping squad as a solo is not doable (unless they're just terrible players). The only option is to play passive yourself or wait for two groups to fight before engaging. Its also worth nothing that shields did increase the skillcap in these games. They add a whole new dimension to the PvP. I'm not saying i think we should each have a 50 stack and throw them all over the place. They would have to have enough rarity so the average amount a player takes out isn't obnoctious and the decision to use them effectively in combat needs to be a well considered decision. I believe the increased skillcap, among some other factors, could indeed put many people off. So thats why i understand the choice to not implement them from a development perspective. But to say shields have 'nothing to do with skill', thats simply not true.
  8. Joshua has invested quite a bit of time into this project already and is passionate about it. So no, I don't think he will drop it that fast. Even if it might be the best thing to do from a business perspective, which i am not even so sure it is for a single dev.
  9. Games can find new life upon full release. It all depends on how good it will be at that stage and whether or not we reach it. Most games don't leave early access all together.
  10. I quit mainly because of this. Loved the nostalgia i got from playing this , and I still love the concept as it is the same as it was in WarZ, Aftermath and Shattered Skies. But the massive advantage that goes to the passive players just destroys it for me. Sitting in the forest waiting for some people to walk by is almost a guarantied win (unless you're a massive potatoe) whilst running around in the forest or cities yourself is like rolling the dice. This then results in the game being extra hard on solo's who do not want to camp. It also makes it so whenever you push in a city the odds someone is camping something are high. Which means the chance you get 3th partied is also high. And again, theres no way to counterplay someone backstabbing you. Nothing you can really do about it.
  11. I don't think this game is meant to be realistic. Theres games out there that really go for realism like DayZ or SCUM, but not this one. Which is good.
  12. The game is rather campy due to the huge disatvantage you put yourself in when pushing. But there are people who really like that... While many ask for shields to help the agressive player theres also people who ask to remove the insta medding. There will always be two sides to this and in the end its up to Joshua to decide what is happening next.
  13. My gang? Because the majority of players agree with me they are 'my gang'? I'm flattered you think this way but that's not how it works buddy 😘 😘 I didn't abuse the recoil glitch either and think the SR reset was needed BTW. I also never argued against solo/duo servers if that's what you're trying to say. You're putting up strawmen again sugar 😘
  14. High pop is 2500 if i am not mistaken?
  15. If they were to implement a map like the one you suggested that would be a must, yes. But I'm personally happy with the current one, it just needs more cover here and there.
  16. He means that when you have two big cities like that the pvp will split between city A, city B, Airdrops and events. So you would have less PvP and more running.
  17. Loot on low pops is currently 72% of what it is on the highest pop. I agree looting gets really boring. But its not like you just stepped out of sz and were stacked within 30 minutes in the old system either.
  18. That has nothing to do with the drop rates on loot though :s
  19. About the compound change. I think the main difference right now lies in the fact the surface area a team needs to hold has increased and dropping into a compound from the heli is, I feel, much easier. I also think it's more fun this way with the more complex layout. But I agree, pushing from outside of it by foot hasn't changed a whole lot.
  20. I think OCE players will always have a difficult time in smaller games. I think the best thing you can do when OCE servers are low on population is play on Asian servers. If they're located in Hong Kong you should have about the same ping as a central-european playing on an american east coast server.
  21. Its not terrible. Its just that the AR-15 is now the go to gun on range and SMG's dominate short range. So in my experience from playing today mid-rarity bracket weapons are now least viable.
  22. Thats not exactly right. I feel like the AR-15 is now more viable on range than G36 or Scar-L while SMG's are more viable on shorter ranges. This means that weapons in the mid-rarity bracket are now least viable. Atleast thats what I'm making of it ATM. Don't see why i personally would take a Scar or G36 when i can just take an AR.
  23. Note how it says 'may be' and not 'will be'. This is what Joshua said in this very threat already.
×
×
  • Create New...