Eloquent. On 30/10/2012 7:58 AM, "doc" <[email protected]> wrote:
> You seem to be upset with TF2 for requiring a certain amount of people to > take on certain tasks. You want to be able to experience 100% of the > content regardless of it's intention, delivery, or challenge. This seems > like you just want more free stuff for your free game, this is good, it's a > sign that you really like this game and you're frustrated you cannot > experience everything about it because you must rely on the public to help > you. I can understand that's... sometimes unfortunate, but at the same time > you cannot hold this against Valve/TF2. > > I'm not sure what exactly you're expecting for TF2 anymore. I mean think > about what you've gotten and how it stacks up to any other multiplayer game > you've ever played: > > - TF2 came out in 2007 (you cite Borderlands 2, when the first Borderlands > came out in 2009) > In this time there have been: a lot of -free- updates. Over 5 years of > constant support, new game modes, new maps, new voice actor lines, new > models, new weapons, new hats (hooray??), more features, different entire > game modes. All of these things have been provided for free, because some > people really like those $100 rings. > > - TF2 is now -free-, 100% free > THERE ARE STILL CONTENT UPDATES. This is what really blows me away. This > game is 100% free, this entire event was 100% free. Sure you can say the > event sucks but why have any events... ever really? CoD doesn't have > Halloween events and it seems to be quite fine without them. I'm not sure > Halo has any kind of achievements unlocking new weapons, or new maps coming > out (for free). > > - Not everyone wants to play by themselves. > I think the fact that you need at least x players to do something is kind > of neat - it's not something you see in a lot of other video games, and I > mean.... is this really a big deal? It's ONE map during ONE week of TF2, > and unless you've been sucked into the trading meta-game (that is > cheapening TF2) there isn't anything you 'get' out of this. Then again when > I started playing TF2 5 years ago, there wasn't anything to get at anytime. > You say that 32 man servers show you can take an idea too far, but what is > to stop that argument from being flipped on it's head. Why does VALVE get > to tell me how many players I should max out on? If one can say 32+ is too > many, I'm comfortable in saying you need 6 to do MvM, unless you regularly > are able to 1-man MMORPG bosses or L4D runs I don't see why this is such a > strange restraint. > (Also side note: what is the challenge in hitting the tank? The challenge > comes in splitting your attention, the tank itself is easy but it REQUIRES > time, REQUIRES damage. If you have to concentrate on stopping a tank or > stopping bomb progress what do you do? That question is the reason tanks > exist. They are not difficult on normal, but then again the Normal > difficulties are pretty easy.) > > - Perhaps TF2 is reaching the end of it's idea threshold > So MvM isn't some perfect MAN VERSUS MACHINE SHOWDOWN, it's more of a > really fancy set of maps and AI logic and hacked up missions. I explain MvM > as a super polished SourceMod plugin - and that's a blast. It's a shame it > takes up a literal 32 man server, but expecting them to completely change > bots/AI behavior within their game at this point in it's lifetime just > doesn't many any sense - there is no financial motive unless they plan on > re-releasing it as some paid addition. You can't just edit SoldierBot.cs > and set useRocketJumps = true. > After 5 years perhaps TF2 should just be enjoyed for what it is, instead of > being reliant on every holiday update bringing with it more fun. Remember > how fun cp_dustbowl was on launch day? It's still that fun, you've just > come to expect more, a lot more. > > > My advice is: don't cater to quickplayer. They are users that just mashed > "PLAY NOW" and most times have no loyalty to the place they show up at. > Take your server off quickplay - get a community of players together that > still like TF2 for what it is. If you cannot get those people together, > then perhaps your community has moved on from TF2 and Quickplay users were > just the band-aid hiding this wound. > > TF2 is a bunch of fun but it has become a very different game over its > lifetime. I agree with your sentiment that the updates now don't feel as > "fun" as they used to, but I also see that I have around 2,000 hours of > game time in TF2, and I think that's just a lot of time to spend on one > thing in general. > > On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 1:43 AM, dan <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 28/10/2012 07:38, Maavrik wrote: > > > >> I always felt that TF2 was meant to be silly. For instance, the Scout > >> knows he's in a video game, not very serious if you ask me > >> > > > > It doesn't follow that in order for the content of the game "not to be > > serious" that it doesn't > > matter what that content of the game is or how the mechanics of it work. > > > > If any old crap worked because "It's not serious" then Splash Damage > could > > be successful PC game developers :) > > > > As I said, I think it would be more fun had this particular update > > considered what happens when you play the map, rather than them (after > > finally realising that the random boxes appearing > > somewhere on the map was a crap idea) having to sit and think of ways of > > making this suck because otherwise their "customers" won't value the > items > > they've farmed. > > > > They even make it suck if you don't have the right number of people? Why? > > Why can borderlands 2 manage to work with 1 player or 4 players, but > Valve > > can > > only write a game that needs 6 people otherwise they switch off half the > > mechanics or it doesn't scale? There doesn't seem to be any shortage of > > people willing to pay > > for Borderlands 2. Worse are these stupid ideas now that you can't leave > a > > game, even if your house catches fire "Our game sucks with less than 6 > > players and our solution to this is > > to get rid of players from our community who have to leave the server" - > > err, doesn't that just make it even /less/ likely to get 6 players? Why > not > > just design your game to work with > > however many players there are? The TF2 community manages to do that, as > > the 6v6, highlander, 12v12 and 32 man servers show (well ok > > the 32 man servers show you can only go so far with an idea) But why > can't > > I play single player MvM or 2 or 3 player Halloween maps and have it all > > work? > > > > I'm willing to pay for the 3 copies of the game (I thought I'd already > > paid for 2 of the effing copies you're now telling me every year I can't > > play this mode or that mode > > because there aren't enough people. Evidently I didn't pay enough) > > > > If the answer to all the questions ultimately ends with some nod to the > > idea that items have to be valuable, then those answers suck and it's a > huge > > mistake to take your games down these gaming dead ends imo. Sure, you'll > > make lots of money. I can look at how many halfwits are buying rings on > > sale and > > see that, but it makes the games themselves suck. > > > > Valuing the game, especially playing it, seems to be no longer an option. > > If it ever generated revenue, it doesn't > > now (except, I suppose, for the ticket idea in MvM which you could argue > > is about paying to play towards the objective to get items. Not > > a bad idea but it's MvM where they've taken everything developers could > do > > with AI in 2003 and made it worse. Where's the challenge in hitting the > > tank for example? > > TF2 has all these wonderful game mechanics, projectile weapons - the 2 > > nade firing guns, for example, are fantastic and really rewarding to get > > hits with (I would > > argue they are the best weapons in any multiplayer game) and mechanics > > like sticky and rocket jumping. All of this rich content was ignored to > > instead fight a bunch of AI that just walk in straight lines - so > > not only do they not use any of these mechanics but you don't need to use > > any of them against them either. My grandmother would probably struggle > to > > miss them and she's been dead for over a decade. > > > > Unfortunately, MvM removed all of the good work they did, since F2P, in > > getting lots of vanilla servers full of people playing TF2 multiplayer. > Now > > I find myself > > scrabbling around a bunch of badly configured 3rd party servers with half > > the server trading or sitting somewhere on the map having "meetings" > where > > hardly anyone actually plays once again. > > The irony here, of course (as we can see from the other thread with folk > > noticing their quickplay servers filling instantly) as the Halloween > update > > brings in a ton of people to play, they are given something that's barely > > worth playing > > and you say "it's not supposed to be serious", but I don't want it to be > > serious, I want it to be fun. > > > > Yes, some aspects of the map are fun, like the changing health packs, the > > exploding pumpkins, the pit you fall down if you miss the jump for the > > health and so on, but the first of these have been used for several years > > now and most of the new ideas are just content that has been taken from > > roll the dice and frog mods and so on - except there is actually a > modicum > > of sense behind how the RTD servers implemented it. > > > > -- > > Dan. > > > > > > ______________________________**_________________ > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > > please visit: > > https://list.valvesoftware.**com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/**hlds_linux< > https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux> > > > _______________________________________________ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
