|
Ruggington posted:I think it should be down to earth, but totally off the wall You posters don't know what you want. That's why you're still goons, ' cause you're stupid! Just tell me what's wrong with the freakin' game!
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 01:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 21:40 |
|
Questioner86 posted:Anyway, the cost in development time to implement "easy" fixes is not trivial and we only do what we can given the available time Questioner86 posted:...minor changes can be very easy to predict and design around... 
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 01:12
|
|
|
Questioner86 posted:I don't have a lot of time to dedicate to discussing this feedback tonight, but first let me say thanks for posting it. And we appreciate actually getting a response to our feedback! Is it possible, though, to slip in a temporary "easy fix" for demo in the upcoming patch just to make it worth using at all, or is the changelog Yoshiro posted pretty much set in stone to keep things from getting confusing? Even something like reducing the M79 weight by a point or two so demos can carry that and the RPG at the same time would go a long way to having fun with the class until you're ready to roll out all the planned demo changes (at which point the weight change or whatever can be reverted).
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 01:12
|
|
|
even if it's only a day or two of work, how does that affect a team that is already clearly pushing the envelope on their available effort to produce the next thing out there? what must go in a standard work week in order to assign effort to satisfying your armchair whims? 'easy' does not mean 'without cost', and when you're talking about the work of technical professionals, even an 'easy' fix can cost 'more than you make in a month, kiddo,' and will also necessarily impact the next thing they want to work on just because they're spending time working on 'something else.' when you take on a task, the time to do that task does not magically come from nowhere. are you willing to accept that the next major content update will be a week late due to taking on a fistful of these rebalance suggestions? if you are, are you willing to speak for the community at-large on that note? and how are you going to ensure that you're not talking directly from your rear end in a top hat with these assurances? should the developer refer every complaint about a missed deadline to this thread, or you specifically? this sort of headache-inducingly naive feedback is part of the reason most developers don't even THINK about posting on forums. it will inevitably breed some bad blood because a lot of people, even ones that use computers regularly and are 'tech savvy', consider their computers magic boxes and the programmers are the wizards that make them go. when the wizard tells you something takes time, folks will, sooner or later, absolutely fail to understand that. and in the worst case, they'll think they DO understand and know better than the person who spends no less than half of their waking lives thinking about and working on these problems. hell, i have been a computer programmer for 10 years and i'm quite sure even i have no loving clue how long it takes to do something 'easy' in their environment, because 'easy' is relative, i'm not familiar with the tools they're using, and i have no clue what the definition of done is at TWI. i don't link that article to be condescending or elitist, i link that article to show that there is an entire loving professional organization that paid a technical professional to write 750+ words, a few of which are 'orthogonal' and 'criteria', to talk about what the word 'done' means, and his answer is, explicitly, 'THAT loving DEPENDS ON YOUR SHOP, HOMBRE.' really the above is the long form of "internet denizens do not understand how software development works, top story tonight at 1am. because it's so loving old it's not even worth putting on at 11." but i'm in a good mood today so i'm being a little less flippant than usual. Coolguye fucked around with this message at 01:42 on Dec 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 01:34
|
|
|
Propaganda Hour posted:You posters don't know what you want. That's why you're still goons, ' cause you're stupid! Just tell me what's wrong with the freakin' game! Nah, I know what I want and it's not in the patch sadly. Questioner, I missed your time for tonight but I hope you get this tomorrow or whenever: FIX HANS PLEASE! While I'm a tad frustrated that the Demo got nothing but his high level skill nerfed (which I don't have unlocked yet anyways) and a mild ammo buff to the RPG-7 it's not what's keeping me from playing this game. There are several other classes, and all of them are rather fun. The issue is Hans and his ability to straight up ratfuck a player from full health to dead in about two to three seconds. Unless you have a zerker or two who're on the ball games either end in an anticlimatic whimper when Hans goes through the players like a chainsaw through butter, or it ends up drawn out for 30 minutes as one player runs around in circles, kiting Hans until the round ends (likely with the player's loss). This kills the entire fun of the game, and it's not something the player can control. Please, please, please prioritize working on Hans, or just simply revert him to his old state with high damaging guns and mediocre melee. Introducing the Patriarch will alleviate this a bit even if the Patriarch is perfectly tuned from the get-go, that's still a 50% chance that no matter what the final boss will suck and retroactively remove all of the fun from the round. Hans's bullshit is why I, and many of my friends put this game down despite how much fun we had everywhere else. Please try to do something about Hans ASAP.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 02:02
|
|
Coolguye posted:even if it's only a day or two of work, how does that affect a team that is already clearly pushing the envelope on their available effort to produce the next thing out there? what must go in a standard work week in order to assign effort to satisfying your armchair whims? 'easy' does not mean 'without cost', and when you're talking about the work of technical professionals, even an 'easy' fix can cost 'more than you make in a month, kiddo,' and will also necessarily impact the next thing they want to work on just because they're spending time working on 'something else.' when you take on a task, the time to do that task does not magically come from nowhere. I'm not making claims about how long these things ought to take. I'm simply taking Questioner at his word when he makes a statement. Thus, when he makes conflicting statements, as occurred in the post you're quoting, I fail to see how it is unreasonable for me to express confusion. All of this is admittedly relative in measure, but given that none of us are there in the studio, we can only draw conclusions based on the information Questioner is kindly sharing with us. I do appreciate, however, your attempt to put words into my mouth. quote:are you willing to accept that the next major content update will be a week late due to taking on a fistful of these rebalance suggestions? if you are, are you willing to speak for the community at-large on that note? and how are you going to ensure that you're not talking directly from your rear end in a top hat with these assurances? should the developer refer every complaint about a missed deadline to this thread, or you specifically? At no point in this conversation have I, nor anyone else as far as I can see, argued that Tripwire ought to immediately adopt our recommendations. We are simply having a conversation about Tripwire's present approach to turning an EA game into a full release, and the pros and cons associated with each approach. I imagine this has the potential to be an enlightening process for everyone, since a) individuals not in game design have some insight into how at least one studio is approaching the issue, b) other game designers are getting a chance to see how a studio might approach the issue in a way that differs from their own, and c) perhaps even Tripwire developers are getting an opportunity to consider their approach and fine-tune it. I'm sorry that the prospect of civil discussion and learning seems to bother you so deeply. quote:this sort of headache-inducingly naive feedback is part of the reason most developers don't even THINK about posting on forums. it will inevitably breed some bad blood because a lot of people, even ones that use computers regularly and are 'tech savvy', consider their computers magic boxes and the programmers are the wizards that make them go. when the wizard tells you something takes time, folks will, sooner or later, absolutely fail to understand that. and in the worst case, they'll think they DO understand and know better than the person who spends no less than half of their waking lives thinking about and working on these problems. hell, i have been a computer programmer for 10 years and i'm quite sure even i have no loving clue how long it takes to do something 'easy' in their environment, because 'easy' is relative, i'm not familiar with the tools they're using, and i have no clue what the definition of done is at TWI. i don't link that article to be condescending or elitist, i link that article to show that there is an entire loving professional organization that paid a technical professional to write 750+ words, a few of which are 'orthogonal' and 'criteria', to talk about what the word 'done' means, and his answer is, explicitly, 'THAT loving DEPENDS ON YOUR SHOP, HOMBRE.' So because people do not understand the intricacies of how a studio works, we should just not ever discuss it. Surely that will help everyone to better understand and appreciate the things with which they are involved. I might be inclined to agree that such a discussion would be inadvisable if it were liable to generate bad blood, as you say, but I'm not under the impression that Questioner is upset with us, or vice-versa. quote:really the above is the long form of "internet denizens do not understand how software development works, top story tonight at 1am. because it's so loving old it's not even worth putting on at 11." but i'm in a good mood today so i'm being a little less flippant than usual. Out of curiosity, if it were to be the case that some of the individuals in this discussion were involved in software development (or perhaps even a similar endeavor), what would your position be? E: Oh, you could also address, if you feel so inclined, why players of a game should refrain from discussing approaches to balance, given that they may have unique insights as to the outcomes of various approaches to balancing.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 02:09
|
|
|
Alkydere posted:Nah, I know what I want and it's not in the patch sadly. Hans has two callouts for the melee "Remove player" attack - READY TO DIE and EMBRACE YOUR DEATH (not certain about this one). That's your que to whip out your melee weapon and pray to God you remember how to block/parry attacks. Any full HP class can survive even without armor, but you have to block the initial strike - it deals the most damage. After that you have to get to cover and heal up, while screaming profanities at your medic for not healing you quick enough even if you got 8 med darts up your rear end. Of course, if Hans decides to do that attack twice and focus the same person twice there is no way you're gonna survive. But that's when the RNG screws you over, not when he attacks for the first time. EDIT: Oh yeah and thanks for clarifying these aren't the final changes to Demo, Questioner. He needs some more love and I'm glad you hear us the players. The Medic nerfs hurt, especially since it seemed that exactly those perks you change were balanced and it really felt like the Medic tree was in a perfect place, numbers-wise. Now? Armament giving 1% armor is a goddamn joke, especially since damage bleeds through armor to HP. It does feel like you take away our numbers out of spite or something 
Kikas fucked around with this message at 02:38 on Dec 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 02:32
|
|
|
quote:Armament 25% less effective heal and will heal 1% armor (down from 10% less effective and 2% armor) Nope nope nope nope nope You want to increase the heal penalty as a trade-off for fixing armor, not saying I'm happy about it but fine, but suggesting that AND nerfing the amount of armor you fix? Heck no. Also lol at all those Zerker nerfs. Sometimes it's hard to know exactly how bad/good a change is unless you see it in action, so I'm pretty sure everyone's going to say "every nerf = poo poo" for this change log but until we play it we won't know for sure how noticeable it is, like the Nuke radius; is it a lot? A little? Edit: To put more thought into my nopes, as a Medic main those changes seem to be aimed at Level 20-25 Medics with Armament and Vaccination which, I will readily admit, is a little overpowered. But we need to keep in mind that not everyone is level 20-25 so it ends up hurting lower-level players more. Honestly I would PREFER that no changes are made but having admitted that at high levels it's a bit OP just make it so it's 15-20% less healing for Armament with the regular 2% armor and maybe 3% armor for Vaccination instead of 4. Abandoned Toaster fucked around with this message at 03:29 on Dec 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 03:22
|
|
|
I want skins for the enemies. They could go under shared content so anyone in the server can see them. ryan davis skin for the bloat please!
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 03:32
|
|
|
Liquid Penguins posted:I want skins for the enemies. They could go under shared content so anyone in the server can see them. does phone-number mod have any power here so he can ban you
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 03:35
|
|
|
Questioner86 posted:I had a really long answer written up and it was stupid and wordy so I'll keep it short: And you guys STILL don't know the loving difference between nerfing and making it worthless poo poo that nobody will ever use. The zwei wasn't simply nerfed, its worthless now just like the scythe became after it got nerfed, its never just a few small adjustments its always one HUGE loving change that makes the weapon type worthless garbage, its like you guys just play on normal or some poo poo. Nerfing Nuke, yea ok, lets nerf an ENTIRELY situational ability that procs at random because reasons. I'm glad my PC is hosed right now so I can take a pass on this poo poo update.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 03:38
|
|
|
Alteisen posted:Nerfing Nuke, yea ok, lets nerf an ENTIRELY situational ability that procs at random because reasons. This one doesn't bother me as much because it does the same amount of damage and just has a smaller radius which 1) It's still going to affect whatever you hit 2) Several people I've see use it in doorways and hallways as a trash-clearing hazard anyways. 3) As you said it's a Zed-time skill so unlike the other nerfs it doesn't affect everything all the time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 03:46
|
|
|
"Armament 25% less effective heal and will heal 1% armor (down from 10% less effective and 2% armor)" This is also a huge overnerf. It's fine as it is, I don't think medic is OP at all. I also think the medic grenades should stack slightly, as opposed to not at all as they currently do.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 03:56
|
|
|
the important thing is that splash damage survived
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 03:59
|
|
|
LuciferMorningstar posted:I'm not making claims about how long these things ought to take. I'm simply taking Questioner at his word when he makes a statement. Thus, when he makes conflicting statements, as occurred in the post you're quoting, I fail to see how it is unreasonable for me to express confusion. All of this is admittedly relative in measure, but given that none of us are there in the studio, we can only draw conclusions based on the information Questioner is kindly sharing with us. I do appreciate, however, your attempt to put words into my mouth. i'm not even remotely going to bother doing a line by line here because this is basically the payday thread redux in that you're conflating a ton of terms and playing semantics at what you've done/implied/whatever. in the end you've already made up your mind that you're right and there's no reasoning with you. so this is my last post on the subject. anyway: you're absolutely making claims at how long it should take in the posts you quoted, because you directly conflate what is 'easy' with their current development path forward. if that wasn't your intention then that's fine, but own up to that lovely wording rather than playing games. you're absolutely passing judgement on development priorities. i put no words whatsoever in your mouth, you've given multiple ideas of poo poo you want done and then took exception to explanations as to why it was non-trivial. i explained precisely why that's the case, and precisely why your reaction discourages developers from trying to explain why it's the case. it is hilariously lacking in self awareness to spit out "because people do not understand the intricacies of how a studio works, we should just not ever discuss it"; yes, as a matter of fact, it is much more common to shut the gently caress up about your process to the outside than it is to discuss it. in fact it's the industry norm. developer commentary on games is so hard to get precisely because most studios control it heavily. the general public doesn't understand the process and generally don't react well when technical people attempt to include them. feedback from the game players on played games is fine, and can be super valuable. it's when people start trying to comment on poo poo like priorities and process that they cause problems and look like assholes. it's exactly the same sort of problem this rear end in a top hat has talking on camera:  he talks about ancient history and it's fine, he's very learned and competent when it comes to that. it's when he starts talking about explanations for that history (which, if you're not familiar, is unironically  ) that he looks like a complete rear end in a top hat. similarly, when game players give feedback on the games they play, that's fine. but when you start dissecting developer statements about process and priorities, you look like a complete rear end in a top hat.which, by the way, is all i ever commented on, so i'm not even going to bother answering your snide edit directly because it's bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 04:47
|
|
Coolguye posted:i'm not even remotely going to bother doing a line by line here because this is basically the payday thread redux in that you're conflating a ton of terms and playing semantics at what you've done/implied/whatever. in the end you've already made up your mind that you're right and there's no reasoning with you. so this is my last post on the subject. See, you say this, but since you can't actually specifically make a case here, I really have a difficult time accepting your conclusion, given that you provide no reasoning for your conclusion. I can make the same claim about you: you've decided that my posts amount of something specific, and no amount of reasoning and evidence from me will change your mind. I do at least make the effort to clearly quote relevant portions of posts and attempt to draw logical conclusions. quote:anyway: you're absolutely making claims at how long it should take in the posts you quoted, because you directly conflate what is 'easy' with their current development path forward. As far as I can tell, you're focusing on the post of mine you quoted where I quoted two of Questioner's posts that I felt were in conflict. At no point do I specifically state how long something should take, only that some changes should be easier than others, and Questioner seemed to agree. My confusion is why something like "change the weight of a weapon" is somehow a particularly time-consuming undertaking, when one would expect it to involve changing a value. More over, I'm not the only one making this argument. A substantial number of people who have posted recently seem to agree with me to some extent. quote:yes, as a matter of fact, it is much more common to shut the gently caress up about your process to the outside than it is to discuss it. in fact it's the industry norm. Early access generally implies a great degree of interaction between the community and the developers. I don't think giving advice on how making changes more accessible and testable to the people who paid to do just that is somehow unreasonable.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 06:16
|
|
|
LuciferMorningstar posted:See, you say this, but since you can't actually specifically make a case here, I really have a difficult time accepting your conclusion, given that you provide no reasoning for your conclusion. I can make the same claim about you: you've decided that my posts amount of something specific, and no amount of reasoning and evidence from me will change your mind. I do at least make the effort to clearly quote relevant portions of posts and attempt to draw logical conclusions. that is not only specifically what i'm talking about here, it's what i specifically called you out on in the payday thread like a thousand times and it's specifically what half of THAT thread ALSO called you out on a thousand times. i mean like LuciferMorningstar posted:As far as I can tell, you're focusing on the post of mine you quoted where I quoted two of Questioner's posts that I felt were in conflict. At no point do I specifically state how long something should take, what the gently caress even do you honestly not see how this EXACTLY WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT with how you're making a ton of judgments? how you contradicted yourself in adjoining sentences here? you are directly making a comment on what 'easy' means and what 'effort' implies when it's blatantly loving obvious you have no clue what those words mean in this context? i'm not even talking about the whole commentary thing anymore i honestly do not loving get how you can have such a huge disconnection with this poo poo. i honestly can't make up my mind if you're just belligerent on the internet or if you honestly have no perception that the words you say are not the words of a person honestly asking a rational question
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 06:47
|
|
|
ClonedPickle posted:And we appreciate actually getting a response to our feedback! Is it possible, though, to slip in a temporary "easy fix" for demo in the upcoming patch just to make it worth using at all, or is the changelog Yoshiro posted pretty much set in stone to keep things from getting confusing? Even something like reducing the M79 weight by a point or two so demos can carry that and the RPG at the same time would go a long way to having fun with the class until you're ready to roll out all the planned demo changes (at which point the weight change or whatever can be reverted). quoting this because I agree
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 06:55
|
|
|
Psion posted:quoting this because I agree I also agree. Also, if you're not going to fix the HX25, at least increase it's sell value, so you can sell that piece of poo poo trash and buy a usable weapon after the first wave.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 07:00
|
|
Coolguye posted:do you honestly not see how this EXACTLY WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT with how you're making a ton of judgments? how you contradicted yourself in adjoining sentences here? you are directly making a comment on what 'easy' means and what 'effort' implies when it's blatantly loving obvious you have no clue what those words mean in this context? I'm not understanding your position. Are you asserting that it is improper to make judgments? Or that my judgments are unreasonable? I'll admit that I do often act like an rear end in a top hat on the Internet for the sake of doing so, but at this point in our conversation, I am being genuine. If you want to hash this out with me, I will really try to understand your position, assuming that we don't have core assumptions that are so distinct that we can't effectively find any common ground. If that sounds reasonable... I admit that I'm making a judgment that some changes should be easier relative to others. That's something that basically everyone agrees is true, though. Do you agree, or disagree? If you do agree, then we move on to what "easy" means. The problem is that we're speaking in relative terms. Totally made-up example: approach A could be easy relative to approach B, but if approach B takes 5 months, and approach A "only" takes 1 month, then they're both fairly significant endeavors. If someone who doesn't get those details, and only knows that A is easier than B, they might become frustrated when things don't move along in the fashion they expect. Their frustration is unreasonable, though, because they're missing important contextual information. Are we still in agreement? If so, then I don't think we're actually disagreeing with each other. If my statements have led you to believe that I'm trying to argue that there is a timeline that Tripwire should be able to adhere to, let me be clear: that's not what I'm trying to say and I regret my lack of clarity. What I am attempting to discuss with Questioner (who, to my knowledge, isn't involved in setting things like timelines, so he's simply trying to help me wrap my head around the process) is whether or not Tripwire's approach could be improved by altering the scope of changes that are to be implemented. Maybe Tripwire is taking "approach B" for some reason, while I think "approach A" is better. Maybe there's a compelling reason for Tripwire taking their present approach. That's what we're basically trying to figure out, I think. Others involved in the discussion seem to be discussing along similar lines (right?), so I don't believe I'm totally out in left field. I've been speaking in abstract terms up to this point, so maybe that has aided in producing the current dispute. To take a concrete approach: many people believe that a good way to swiftly take a stab at fixing Demo (which is a perk widely-held to be less fun than the other perks) would be to, as has literally just been proposed again tonight, make it possible to carry the grenade launcher and RPG at the same time. This would involve the changing of no more than two weight values, and it could plausibly only involve one change. Most people probably believe that changing a single value is probably an easy undertaking. What I've seen of Payday 2 modding suggests that it can be very easy (but is not necessarily very easy in all contexts), which is why there is curiosity about whether or not such a change could be slipped into the next patch. Such a change is theoretically unlikely to really seriously upset the balance of the game or render it substantially less fun than it presently is, and in a best-case scenario, such a small change could maybe obsolete the perceived need for larger and more sweeping changes that tie up Tripwire's resources. The potential advantages seem very clear, then, right? Now, maybe we're all misunderstanding. It's plausible that such an "easy" change is more difficult than be assume. I don't think anyone is doubting that, but we'd like to understand why that's the case. It helps us adjust our expectations and might influence how we provide feedback to Tripwire. Is my position clear at this point? If not, what is unclear? If it is clear, on what counts do we disagree? In what respects do you believe I'm being irrational?
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 07:24
|
|
|
I for one am looking forward to this update! Medic nerfs suck! Why.? This was out of left field. Zwei nerfs? understandable! Never used it anyways, just prefer the Pulvirizer. Call me a noob. IDC Lack of Demo love? Coming soon! Thank you! new maps, character, perk and Patriarch! Thank you! also I love the direct feedback from one of the TWI team. Questioner! Thank you!
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 07:37
|
|
|
Ruggington posted:the important thing is that splash damage survived lol Microwave gun got a slight buff too with the increased ammo pickups
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 07:37
|
|
|
LuciferMorningstar posted:Is my position clear at this point? If not, what is unclear? If it is clear, on what counts do we disagree? In what respects do you believe I'm being irrational? It isn't that your points are unclear, it's that you don't know what you're talking about. We can very clearly see what you are saying, but you are not an expert. This is outside of your field. You have no idea what you're talking about, and trying to explain the things you don't understand to people who DO understand them is only digging yourself deeper into the hole you've made. It isn't that you're irrational, it's that you're completely ignorant of the development process and trying to act like you can still sit at the big boy table anyway just because you have also played a video game. Also that thing you do where you pretend to be the calm rational actor by asking lots of questions? It isn't cute or clever, it's really annoying. Asking a dozen leading questions like you do only makes you sound like you're baiting everyone around you into an unending pedantic argument for eternity. It's a really gross way to try to hold a discussion because it's very obvious from your responses you do not care about the answers you get unless they agree with you. You aren't actually reading or taking in what anyone else is saying, you're just picking piecemeal through their words for something you can argue with. The internet isn't a magic box full of numbers and words that you can poke until responses come back, and keep poking until you get a response you like. There are people on the other end of it. People who do work and deserve basic respect. If you want to hold a conversation about something, converse like a human being to another human being. Show respect, speak only when you have something to contribute, and don't be such a smug rear end in a top hat. Stop it with this passive aggressive "I'm just asking questions" charade, it's extremely tiresome and very obviously fake. You don't care what answers you get. You very obviously do not care. So don't pretend to. TL;DR: If you want to be taken seriously, talk about what you actually know about instead of what you assume you understand, stop being pedantic over every two words, and drop the 800+ word megaposts with the gross "do you agree or disagree" nonsense.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 10:51
|
|
|
dorkasaurus_rex posted:"Armament 25% less effective heal and will heal 1% armor (down from 10% less effective and 2% armor)" Maybe TWI thinks that medics break the game by allowing people to actually win? I look at these decisions and get increasingly more concerned that I might not be playing the game "right" in their eyes. And the whole playerbase is wrong as well.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 11:01
|
|
|
Here's hoping they fixed that commando perk that's making everyone reload 10% SLOWER.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 13:44
|
|
|
gnome7 posted:TL;DR: If you want to be taken seriously, talk about what you actually know about instead of what you assume you understand, stop being pedantic over every two words, and drop the 800+ word megaposts with the gross "do you agree or disagree" nonsense. Thank god we have arbiters of knowledge in this thread like you who can decide who is or isn't qualified to comment on which topics. You're doing us a real service. But I hey, I get what you and Coolguye are saying. Game development is really hard and even tiny numbers changes are incredibly hard and expensive and that's why there'll never be any mods that change numbers for games really quickly after release or after patches. Because it's just way too expensive and hard to do even for the developers themselves. DatonKallandor fucked around with this message at 13:59 on Dec 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 13:55
|
|
|
I don't play Zerker enough to care about the Zweihander nerfs, but that nerf to Armament is ludicrous. I barely feel like it's helping most days as it is.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 14:12
|
|
|
Put back Commando recoil reduction passive, please and thank you.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 14:31
|
|
|
Require More Fire posted:I don't play Zerker enough to care about the Zweihander nerfs, but that nerf to Armament is ludicrous. I barely feel like it's helping most days as it is. I think the Zweihander nerf, while probably enough to make it de-facto useless is entirely okay. It makes a DLC weapon that is a generic two-handed sword bad and the thing it replaced, an awesome shotgun-hammer that is included in the base game the better option. There's worse things than that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 15:54
|
|
|
Skoll posted:Put back Commando recoil reduction passive, please and thank you.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 16:41
|
|
|
Skoll posted:Put back Commando recoil reduction passive, please and thank you. epic thisery
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 16:42
|
|
|
Skoll posted:Put back Commando recoil reduction passive, please and thank you. this guy he's onto something here...
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 16:42
|
|
|
give recoil reduction to commando, give zed time extension to gunslinger
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 16:53
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEuN_iYIcjY The KF 2 experience nobody asked for.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 20:10
|
|
|
Skoll posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEuN_iYIcjY What are you talking about, look at how visible those crawlers are at 1:25 That's a feature!
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 20:19
|
|
|
Skoll posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEuN_iYIcjY I would unironically play a game that looks like this. It's like an upgunned version of Perfect Dark. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 20:23
|
|
|
That looks like the best N64 game that never existed.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 20:23
|
|
|
it's like the n64 equivalent to black ops' ps1 style https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMtL9rAmo_s
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 20:28
|
|
|
Honestly, that looks exactly like how most people play Quake 3 or Quake Live these days. Can't let "detail" and "textures" get into the way of visibility!
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 20:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 21:40 |
|
gnome7 posted:It isn't that your points are unclear, it's that you don't know what you're talking about. We can very clearly see what you are saying, but you are not an expert. This is outside of your field. You have no idea what you're talking about, and trying to explain the things you don't understand to people who DO understand them is only digging yourself deeper into the hole you've made. It isn't that you're irrational, it's that you're completely ignorant of the development process and trying to act like you can still sit at the big boy table anyway just because you have also played a video game. I made it as simple as I possibly could for Coolguye to clearly point out his disagreements with me. Despite this, you manage to completely overlook everything so that you can inject your wholly-unsupported opinions, which is apparently that only people who are experts in a certain field should be able to discuss phenomena in that field. How far are you willing to extend that logic (which, again, you aren't defending in any capacity)? Most people aren't experts when it comes to politics, so I guess allowing everyone to vote is a bad idea. The best part is that there seems to be the assumption that I believe that my approach is necessarily the best, when at no point have I said that. I'm asking Questioner questions to understand how Tripwire approaches game design, and their motivations for that particular approach. I guess having discussions on the Internet is a bad thing?
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 20:53
|
|