View Single Post
Captain
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 3,434
# 91
09-15-2013, 04:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by virusdancer View Post
I find that to be a curious statement.

Would it not be akin to saying that airplanes need X, and doubters should ride skateboards to see that?

Wouldn't it actually be a case of playing more MMOs?

After all, it's an MMO - it should play like a MMO...it shouldn't play like a FPS, RTS, boardgame, SPRPG, etc, etc, etc...no?
planetside 2 is an mmo

this game is using a bad cookie cutter, "hi, im paperclip, i see you are trying to make an rpg" set of bull **** mechanics from the 90s.

you want mmorpg mechanics to work in this game then get rid of kerrat, get rid if the exploration zones, get rid of all the pug queues anywhere.

why BECAUSE IT IS TRYING TO APPLY TABLE TOP RPG GAME MECHANICS to a game with;
guns
spaceships
pug queues,
random encounters
etc etc etc
to quote some issues i pointed out ages ago

""+ the amount of freely accessible content you can get without spending a digm. i dont know of another game that compares to this.
- that content seems to be designed around myth & magic rpg mechanics. which just dont work with guns.

+ its sci-fi, i like sci-fi.
- the sci-fi has taken the 'space magic' thing a bit far.

+ it has guns, guns are fun
- the guns seem to be re-skinned magic staffs/enchanted crossbows

+ it has space ship battles & big explosions
- the gfx for the explosions could be better along with the weapon strike effects

+ on higher difficulties levels can be challenging
- on higher difficulties you will often be instantly tpk'd

+ much of the available story content could be made into large multiplayer or even just squad challenges
- the clunky game mechanics, 1990s ai, unrefined fiddly ui, beta-esq animation locks & collision detection quickly become the limiting factor rather than the opposition. all detracting from enjoyment.
especially when you compare the game to the ufo, conflict, mass effect, flashpoint and xcom games all of which have elements that could have been used as inspiration for everything from gunplay & squad control and the gui.
""

this game IS mechanically done wrong,
it is mechanically a middling failure,
the pve goes from easy & stupid to broken and punnishing without difficulty entering the frame, and for pvp i load other games that actually work.

all because of the derpy rpg mechanics being not fit for perpose in any way sharp or form.

your analogy woulod work better if you said "cars need X, doubters should stop using flintstone-mobiles to see this".

Quote:
Originally Posted by adamkafei View Post
I don't know, I can see where he is coming from, games with different factions have different units in each faction that work differently and need balancing properly against one another (in a RTS setting) and they usually do it quite well so as an example of STO vs a properly balanced game I can see where a different game style would demonstrate this.

If that makes any sense... (it worked in my head)
pretty much.

there is also the issue of how games are split into generas is a haphazard way that doesnt really address the content in an accurate way.
theres an extra credits video on this if i can find it

sto isnt balanced against cost, it isnt balanced against cross class abilities, it isnt balanced against player abilities within the same class, teh ships are an utter mess both integrally to themselves and aganist a class system that was made up on the spot and makes no sense to the ships in question.

etc etc etc


Last edited by skollulfr; 09-15-2013 at 04:14 PM.