Reply
First Son
Registered: 02/22/2010
Offline
25 posts
 

Re: An outlook on this game after 1.05

Feb 25, 2010
agreed the spawns were terrible in this game sometimes but now people spawn while im shooting at some1 else i have spawned and my screen was gray i was getting shot in less then 2 seconds after i spawn. before this update it was no where near this bad and thhe laggy games, the party seperations the 4 on 4s 3 on 3s even 1 on 1s which happened to my party once. this game is just going downwards. even though i still love the game and im still gonna buy thedlc. it needs alot of fixing and if u dont understand this problem then u probably didnt get used to the game the way it used to be or ur a camping call of duty fan.
Message 21 of 186 (154 Views)
Treasure Hunter
Registered: 01/29/2009
Offline
9167 posts
 

Re: An outlook on this game after 1.05

Feb 25, 2010

arne wrote:

Any perception that we made any changes to cater to any audience or emulate any other game is DEAD WRONG.  When we started working on these changes it was because we alone felt the multiplayer game would be better served by it, through the collective discussion of our game designers and many other people in the studio. That's where we started before there was any experimental weekend, before there was any poll, before any of our community was aware of these potential adjustments.

 

There's plenty of things we can debate about regarding how you feel regarding the balance and damage adjustments, but to think we're doing this for any other reason than to make the game more fun/satisfying is wrong. Sorry.

 

Strike that one off your list.

 


I don't think anyone's really accusing ND of making the changes to piss everyone off, in more than a  joking way. It's just kind of a humorous stance to take, considering how frustrating a lot of people find 1.05.

 

The thing I simply can't figure out is why you guys changed everything so dramatically, so far into UC2's life. The Half Health weekend was experimental; I get that. That specific aspect was tweaked, and we voted on that scenario alone. I don't understand why/how you decided to interpret that as adjusting the weapons/hitbox damage. It wasn't a problem before, and unless I'm quite mistaken, I never really saw people complaining about the game prior. It seems that post-patch, now is where everyone is kicking back and going, "Yeah, the weapons totally needed that adjustment. It's what we've wanted all along."

 

I really appreciate your taking the time to reply to all these threads, but I'm not seeing much indication as to how you guys actually plan on dealing with the response. Yes, there are plenty of people who like 1.05. But there are also a lot of us who don't; and with sound, logical reasoning for that. Giving us some sort of hint; whether positive or negative, would alleviate a lot of the stress/confusion. 

Message 22 of 186 (154 Views)
Hekseville Citizen
Registered: 02/05/2009
Offline
297 posts
 

Re: An outlook on this game after 1.05

Feb 25, 2010

Eugenides wrote:

arne wrote:

Any perception that we made any changes to cater to any audience or emulate any other game is DEAD WRONG.  When we started working on these changes it was because we alone felt the multiplayer game would be better served by it, through the collective discussion of our game designers and many other people in the studio. That's where we started before there was any experimental weekend, before there was any poll, before any of our community was aware of these potential adjustments.

 

There's plenty of things we can debate about regarding how you feel regarding the balance and damage adjustments, but to think we're doing this for any other reason than to make the game more fun/satisfying is wrong. Sorry.

 

Strike that one off your list.

 


I don't think anyone's really accusing ND of making the changes to piss everyone off, in more than a  joking way. It's just kind of a humorous stance to take, considering how frustrating a lot of people find 1.05.

 

The thing I simply can't figure out is why you guys changed everything so dramatically, so far into UC2's life. The Half Health weekend was experimental; I get that. That specific aspect was tweaked, and we voted on that scenario alone. I don't understand why/how you decided to interpret that as adjusting the weapons/hitbox damage. It wasn't a problem before, and unless I'm quite mistaken, I never really saw people complaining about the game prior. It seems that post-patch, now is where everyone is kicking back and going, "Yeah, the weapons totally needed that adjustment. It's what we've wanted all along."

 

I really appreciate your taking the time to reply to all these threads, but I'm not seeing much indication as to how you guys actually plan on dealing with the response. Yes, there are plenty of people who like 1.05. But there are also a lot of us who don't; and with sound, logical reasoning for that. Giving us some sort of hint; whether positive or negative, would alleviate a lot of the stress/confusion. 


Outstanding post couldnt have said it any better, they said they are listening, but should i even be wasting my time? Is the game going to be put back, or are you just going to take out the shoulder swap and say we listened to some of what you said. Because if so i may as well get good at rfom again or something, because quite frankely thats the only other arcade shooter out there and its over 3 years old

Message 23 of 186 (154 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Survivor
Registered: 09/23/2008
Offline
2740 posts
 

Re: An outlook on this game after 1.05

Feb 25, 2010
I highly doubt they'll roll back to 1.04 weapon damage exactly… if they thought that was the way they wanted the game, they wouldn't have put all the time into developing 1.05.  However, they have said that they're listening to the feedback, so I can only assume that yes, some changes will be made in the next update.  It could be reducing the hitboxes, changing the spawn rates, adding the red laser beam to the sniper when it's scoped in… we don't know.  But I assure you that Arne wouldn't bother posting or responding here if they didn't intend to make more adjustments in the next go-round.  Why tell your community you're listening if you plan to ignore them?  That'd be bad PR.
Message 24 of 186 (154 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Uncharted Territory
Registered: 01/23/2007
Offline
1802 posts
 

Re: An outlook on this game after 1.05

Feb 25, 2010

Eugenides wrote:

arne wrote:

Any perception that we made any changes to cater to any audience or emulate any other game is DEAD WRONG.  When we started working on these changes it was because we alone felt the multiplayer game would be better served by it, through the collective discussion of our game designers and many other people in the studio. That's where we started before there was any experimental weekend, before there was any poll, before any of our community was aware of these potential adjustments.

 

There's plenty of things we can debate about regarding how you feel regarding the balance and damage adjustments, but to think we're doing this for any other reason than to make the game more fun/satisfying is wrong. Sorry.

 

Strike that one off your list.

 


I don't think anyone's really accusing ND of making the changes to piss everyone off, in more than a  joking way. It's just kind of a humorous stance to take, considering how frustrating a lot of people find 1.05.

 

The thing I simply can't figure out is why you guys changed everything so dramatically, so far into UC2's life. The Half Health weekend was experimental; I get that. That specific aspect was tweaked, and we voted on that scenario alone. I don't understand why/how you decided to interpret that as adjusting the weapons/hitbox damage. It wasn't a problem before, and unless I'm quite mistaken, I never really saw people complaining about the game prior. It seems that post-patch, now is where everyone is kicking back and going, "Yeah, the weapons totally needed that adjustment. It's what we've wanted all along."

 

I really appreciate your taking the time to reply to all these threads, but I'm not seeing much indication as to how you guys actually plan on dealing with the response. Yes, there are plenty of people who like 1.05. But there are also a lot of us who don't; and with sound, logical reasoning for that. Giving us some sort of hint; whether positive or negative, would alleviate a lot of the stress/confusion. 


They've already said they're looking at things and taking it slow, trying to make sure they get it right. They've been pretty responsible to this point, despite what you might think about 1.05, so I don't expect them to just roll out a new update a week after the last one, or even to know exactly what they're going to do about it yet. They're listening to feedback and performing their own testing, and after all of that they'll decide what the best thing to do is. 

 

Telling us what they think they're going to do at this point would be pointless because (a) they probably don't know yet and (b) even if they do think they know, it could still change, so why cause more consternation among the "faithful" for something that doesn't even end up happening? You know, if Arne came on here and said, "we're thinking about doing this" you would get 100's of posts telling him the people love or hate it, and then if they changed their mind, he'd get 100's more either loving or hating the decision or railing on him for telling us in the first place - "why did you say that and get us all excited and then not do it?"

 

There's just no good reason, from their point of view, for them to say anything at this point other than "we hear your frustration and we're working to make it better," which is pretty much what he has said. Patience.

Message 25 of 186 (154 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Hekseville Citizen
Registered: 02/05/2009
Offline
297 posts
 

Re: An outlook on this game after 1.05

Feb 25, 2010
What i am saying is, if they say they are listening and hear all the frustrated people, then they make it out to seem like they are going to change some stuff. But i think they are just going to modify the 1.05 patch, which means the same weapon damage just oh lets scale the sniper and fal back then its fixed. WRONG. I have pointed to some legitimate reasons as to why this patch does not work. Naughty Dog as developers should of recognized these things when they "tested" the current patch. At the very least they should of recognized the jst plain AWFUL auto shoulder swap. I honestly dont thin this patch was tested much, and if so it was tested by people with an extremely low skill level.
Message 26 of 186 (154 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Uncharted Territory
Registered: 01/23/2007
Offline
1802 posts
 

Re: An outlook on this game after 1.05

Feb 25, 2010

Pdizzle_9 wrote:
What i am saying is, if they say they are listening and hear all the frustrated people, then they make it out to seem like they are going to change some stuff. But i think they are just going to modify the 1.05 patch, which means the same weapon damage just oh lets scale the sniper and fal back then its fixed. WRONG. I have pointed to some legitimate reasons as to why this patch does not work. Naughty Dog as developers should of recognized these things when they "tested" the current patch. At the very least they should of recognized the jst plain AWFUL auto shoulder swap. I honestly dont thin this patch was tested much, and if so it was tested by people with an extremely low skill level.

Of course they're just going to modify it. There's no way in H-E-double-hockey-sticks they're rolling the whole thing back.

 

As for what exactly they're going to modify, we'll just have to wait and see. Getting upset about what you assume they will or won't change at this point makes no sense.

Message 27 of 186 (154 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Uncharted Territory
Registered: 11/28/2008
Offline
1801 posts
 

Re: An outlook on this game after 1.05

Feb 25, 2010

tripleWRECK wrote:

johns1000 wrote:
sorry i had to respond to u but it is not that big of a change though.  You guys are acting like they have taken all the characters away, have set new rules eg moves to the game or something. Remember it is one less bullet, the auto aim over shoulder left hand side and thats it.  So when u say you have gotten use to the game play over 5 months there have been only 2 changes that have happened really.  If you cant deal with that then maybe yeah you guys should just play another game.  i did not like 1.05 when it came out either but you get used to it.  Adapt to change people. 

 

Oh boy you must be new here johns. If you think that's the only reason people are upset you should do a little more research.

 

Horrid spawns and the downrigth AWFUL hitboxes are the two main reasons fans are angry.


 Oh God. The spawns have been really really bad recently. Haven't noticed anything about these hitboxes though.
 Spawns just need a total revamp. 

 The auto switching cost me some deaths today.

 

It switches for no reason at all. Please remove. 

Message Edited by Cloudburst-- on 02-25-2010 09:56 PM
Killzone 2 userbar
Message 28 of 186 (154 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Hekseville Citizen
Registered: 02/05/2009
Offline
297 posts
 

Re: An outlook on this game after 1.05

Feb 25, 2010
I think the spawns seem worse because you die so much quicker, so people spawning behind you or to your side get the kill on you more often, when other times they may not have because you could actually escape or even turn and kill them.
Message 29 of 186 (154 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Fender Bender
Registered: 09/09/2007
Offline
4319 posts
 

Re: An outlook on this game after 1.05

Feb 25, 2010

Cloudburst-- wrote:

tripleWRECK wrote:

johns1000 wrote:
sorry i had to respond to u but it is not that big of a change though.  You guys are acting like they have taken all the characters away, have set new rules eg moves to the game or something. Remember it is one less bullet, the auto aim over shoulder left hand side and thats it.  So when u say you have gotten use to the game play over 5 months there have been only 2 changes that have happened really.  If you cant deal with that then maybe yeah you guys should just play another game.  i did not like 1.05 when it came out either but you get used to it.  Adapt to change people. 

 

Oh boy you must be new here johns. If you think that's the only reason people are upset you should do a little more research.

 

Horrid spawns and the downrigth AWFUL hitboxes are the two main reasons fans are angry.


 Oh God. The spawns have been really really bad recently. Haven't noticed anything about these hitboxes though.
 Spawns just need a total revamp. 

 The auto switching cost me some deaths today.

 

It switches for no reason at all. Please remove. 

Message Edited by Cloudburst-- on 02-25-2010 09:56 PM

When the hitboxes are mentioned, people are talking about shooting someone in the legs doing the same amount of damage as shooting them in the chest.  So people can spam bullets from the legs on up and get a kill, in the same amount of time that used to require you hit them in the chest and/or head.

 

For example, I run into someone and they start blindfiring me.  I begin to shoot them in the chest.  Since they had the jump on me, we'll say they land one more shot than I do. All of mine are in their chest.  Half of their shots are in my legs, half are in my chest.  Before 1.05, I would've won the fight and been rewarded for using better aim.   After 1.05, I would've died and the player with no aim (if he's auto-locking) or lesser aim (spamming shots all over my body) gets rewarded.

 

That is one of the major gripes.  This has already been explained to you repeatedly, Cloud.  Hopefully others will read it though and catch on.

Message Edited by Vanthem on 02-25-2010 04:14 PM
----------------------
She's going to have to fall on her sword. Which means that we have to stick one in the ground, trip her onto it and get someone to jump up and down on her back for ten minutes. --

Malcolm Tucker. Modern day saint.
Message 30 of 186 (154 Views)