8e28dc No.14806427
Let's talk games like nuDoom, DESYNC, and Devil Daggers, where you get locked up in a small room with enemies spawning all around you. Not to be confused with the other arena shooters like Q3A and UT, or horde shooters like Serious Sam and Painkiller where huge amounts of enemies charge at you from the front rather than spawn all around you, or any other kind of shooter about moving forward along a certain path.
The usual implication is that arena level design sux, though this usually stems from the mindset that since Doom levels are good and Doom levels are about exploration, anything that doesn't have exploration sux, even though that's a ridiculously arbitrary standard to judge shooters by, rather than examining how the levels work within the goals a game is trying to achieve (even though the games in question do suck in this regard as well). However, there's nothing preventing from arena level design to not be good. For example, take a look at this game called Nex Machina, where you kill all enemies in an arena and get immediately teleported to the next one, and all the arenas themselves feature plenty of bonuses, environmental hazards, and all kinds of spawning patterns. Of course, it's a twin-stick shooter, but a different perspective should imply that this is doable at the very least, it's not like Doom didn't often get compared to Robotron.
After all, level design in games like Streets of Rage and DMC is less about complex level geometry but more about combining particular enemy types and enemy placement to challenge your crowd control abilities. What prevents first-person shooters to do the same? Is there a particular approach to enemies these games need to take for arena level design to work, or to the gameplay systems themselves?
8e28dc No.14806429
Additionally:
Exploration can't really occur in locked-off arenas by design, trying to separate combat from exploration like nuDoom did instead of balancing the two like the original just results in a massive pacebreaker. So the better solution would be to drop exploration entirely in favor of combat, and tie potential resource management to combat mechanics instead of manual item placement. For example, you'd gain bonus health if you overkilled enemies in DESYNC, and sequence killing enemies in DESYNC drops ammo, instead of having health drops be tied to chance or something. Also Glory Kills.
For what separates a FPS from being a twin-stick shooter, you only need to look at Devil Daggers. Since it has replays which can be viewed in a top-down perspective, you might be wondering why it isn't a top-down game to begin with. For starters, enemies bounce up and down, have weakpoints at different Z-axis levels, and can move quickly. Your weapon is projectile-based, so you need to know how to aim to actually hit your target (can you really say for Doom and the Build-engine games and their slow-ass enemies that they challenge your ability to aim?). From a first-person viewpoint you can't see all the enemies swarming around you, which is why the positional sound design in Devil Daggers is incredibly essential to the gameplay. Your ears make up for not being able to see around you. Twin-stick shooters are usually 2D in terms of gameplay, and can't easily replicate this.
However, because you are constantly surrounded, none of the enemies are projectile-based and especially not hitscan in DD (even in DESYNC most of the enemies are melee), because getting hit by something you didn't see sucks. This is also why positional sound design is so important in these kind of games, if you got killed by something you didn't even see spawn, you should at least have been able to hear it in order to make things feel fair. The sound design for DESYNC and nuDoom is particularly abhorrent because you can't hear shit going on around you. In games like Doom and Serious Sam positional sound design was never that much of a requirement, because all the enemies would be presented in your field of vision, save for the occasional ambush. When you start spawning enemies all around the player, you don't have the luxury those games had.
If you have more ranged attack enemies in an arena shooter, upping the enemy count of ranged enemies is more likely to have negative consequences, because most people can't dodge bullets they can't see, and even if you could hear incoming attacks, the sounds would be hard to parse if multiple of them happened behind you or to your flanks, which is why I don't believe a low enemy count is such a problem in nuDoom.
Since arena shooters are more about shooting than melee unlike DMC and its like, there's usually more reason to keep your distance from enemies, which places a larger emphasis on movement and positioning rather than giving you an omnidirectional dodge of some sorts. In turn, arenas can be designed around these skills to challenge them, be it through environmental hazards, multiple vertical levels, tricks and traps, and things which make it harder for you to senselessly move around enemies indefinitely (f.e. levels in Doom are usually restrictive enough to prevent you from circlestrafing everything to death). Enemies could be particularly threatening from a particular vantage point, or have their weakspot be visible from above or beneath. You should also be moving around the whole arena, else it should be shrunk to reduce wasted space. DESYNC got around this by having power-ups spawn in at fixed positions in the arena once your sidearm bar was filled up. Nex Machina would encourage you to move all around by populating the arenas with humans you had to touch to rescue for score.
6f3833 No.14806452
>>14806427
>Let's talk games like nuDoom, DESYNC, and Devil Daggers,
Shit genre.
f83f78 No.14806465
Source?
Reverse image searching with 4 different tools gets me nothing and trying to find this certain artist when there are 3000 images of this boatslut will be a pain in the ass.
e60176 No.14806472
How can you improve the arena shooter beyond the precedent set by Quake 3? You can't.
4d4417 No.14806480
>>14806472
by adding your fetishes to it :^)
b12a3a No.14806495
>>14806427
>The usual implication is that arena level design sux, though this usually stems from the mindset that since Doom levels are good and Doom levels are about exploration, anything that doesn't have exploration sux, even though that's a ridiculously arbitrary standard to judge shooters by, rather than examining how the levels work within the goals a game is trying to achieve
You're painfully over-generalizing on classic Doom's level set. Doom is a nice setting to test level designs in because Doom is a very basic game with only fundamental mechanics, without bells and whistles that make the game seem more interesting than it really is, for example the setpieces in Call of Duty games. In other words if you're not having fun in Doom, 99% of the time it's because the level sucks and no other reason. Look no further than the numerous levels in official Doom titles and expansion packs which actually suck for proof of this. Coincidentally many of these levels are not about exploration, for example "Gotcha" in Doom 2 or "Fortress of Mystery" in Doom 1. "Exploration" is not just a game mechanic that you can choose to have or not have, it's a thing the player does because your level is interesting. You can't force a player to explore levels just like you can't force someone playing Mario Bros. to enter a pipe for the extra coins. In short, if your level doesn't "have exploration," it's just boring. There really isn't any other way to phrase it.
Now, there may be games which are more forgiving of simplistic level design, but Doom is not one of them due to the relatively simplistic nature of the game itself. It's like a good way to train your level design skills.
b12a3a No.14806505
>>14806465
Just search tags on a booru site you casual.
2c9f50 No.14806512
>>14806465
That's funny, I found it on my first attempt using the first reverse search anyone should use. Just how the hell did you fuck this up?
f83f78 No.14806513
>>14806504
>>14806505
Thanks, I'll try Pawoo then
8e28dc No.14806618
>>14806495
>In short, if your level doesn't "have exploration," it's just boring. There really isn't any other way to phrase it
Meanwhile there's several other action-heavy genres, especially in the arcade sphere, which don't rely on exploration at all. It's not a necessary requirement for games in general, nor is there any reason for it to be for first-person shooters, even if Doom is the grand dad, to the point where many are inclined to treat Doom as the golden standard. Doom is simply more reliant on level geometry/enemy placement in order to compensate for incredibly simple enemy behavior, that's why it's level design appears so strong by comparison. Moreover, exploration exists because you need those items as well. See how looking for health and ammo became useless in nuDoom because of Glory Kills and chainsaws, so they had to replace items in secrets with upgrade points.
Doom has the advantage in that its levels are very apparently varied and different, not just visually, because of the level design style which heavily relies on level geometry and tricky enemy placement. You can obviously tell how this level is different from the others. However, Doom also comes with its own restrictions. Its enemies are slow by design so they don't immediately leave their posts to rush you in the face and make the thought that went into enemy placement completely useless. Enemy AI can't play much of a part in Doom because levels are designed around predictable enemy behavior, whereas more responsive enemy behavior would break the intended enemy placement and level geometry as well. Enemy AI also can't really be demonstrated well if most enemies die in one or two shots, which in turn is compensated for by increasing the number of enemies so the games won't become too easy from enemies dying too fast. And there's your aim not being a focal point of challenge when enemies move so slowly.
In Doom the levels are usually always working against your favor to begin with, in games where AI plays a larger factor the levels are more equal in terms of the opportunities both player and enemies get against eachother. (There's Descent, but the 6DoF type of gameplay lends itself to a greater amount of space to move around in, and is more or less an exception)
Level design should suit the gameplay first and foremost. Because the style of level design in Doom allows for tons of unique encounters, you could make a statement based on the potential and flexibility of the level design of Doom and its ilk and that it is the best because of that. But to prioritize level design flexibility would stifle other potential level design philosophies which are less flexible and rely more on enemy design, AI, and gameplay systems to work, as it does in other genres. You'd end up with infinite Doom clones because everyone keeps treating Doom as the one and only, whereas other genres can have their nonlinear Metroidvanias and their platformers.
e6c62b No.14806674
148f50 No.14806905
>>14806618
You can have a game which is good in spite of its boring level design, vertical scrolling shooters might be a good example of this. But that doesn't mean not having exploration is a good thing. I don't know why you wouldn't want to play a game that is interesting enough that you are inclined to explore it of your own volition.
320a26 No.14806914
>>14806504
My nipples tingle when looking at this image
148f50 No.14806918
>>14806618
Also, the stuff about enemy movement in Doom can easily be alleviated by a few tricks. For example a motion sensor like in Aliens vs. Predator could make more varied encounters possible.
95670f No.14807131
>>14806914
That's your body's natural alarm system warning you to seek help for the homogay that you recently caught from you dad.
8e28dc No.14809012
>>14806905
>in spite of its boring level design, vertical scrolling shooters
By what standard are you even judging shmup level design to be boring?
> I don't know why you wouldn't want to play a game that is interesting enough that you are inclined to explore it of your own volition.
Because like shmups, some genres and style of gameplay just don't allow for exploration to begin with.
>>14806918
The motion sensor in AvP only works because the level are shit dark, the aliens super fast, and the sound design not being incredibly reliable in terms of gauging where the enemy is, so you have no choice but to rely on it if you want to survive. But in any other you don't want to be constantly looking at your radar instead of the screen unless you can't help it, else you might as well go with another camera perspective if you're expected to see where everything around you is
908075 No.14809054
>Devil Daggers.
>FPS Arena.
How fucking dumb you are, anon?
908075 No.14809067
>>14806480
You just reminded me of the furry vore arena FPS.
289fca No.14809080
File: a459e0e3da6769d⋯.png (Spoiler Image, 247.94 KB, 424x600, 53:75, 2777edd471bbd5a6a15aa232ac….png)
>>14806504
I just took your image, cropped it, and painted over the writing and icon in mspaint.
Thanks loser.
eed9a2 No.14809088
File: c0c0edef4e4b219⋯.jpg (Spoiler Image, 163.62 KB, 848x1200, 53:75, 9264686ec32a8df587ee1ecca2….jpg)
>>14809080
And I made it bigger,
209b5c No.14810491
>>14809012
>By what standard are you even judging shmup level design to be boring?
By the standards of levels being interesting? I mean, games which are on rails can be fun if the challenge they throw at you is engaging enough, but they're eschewing an entire discipline of game design to focus on that in particular. I'm trying to say that games can be good in spite of shitty level design, you seem to think that shitty levels magically become good if the other parts of the game are good enough, which is not how it works.
>>14809012
>But in any other you don't want to be constantly looking at your radar instead of the screen unless you can't help it
Just make it transparent.
9ca3ac No.14810597
>>14809067
>furry vore arena FPS.
Wait what
035838 No.14810671
>>14810491
Your problem is that you're trying to judge level design across all genres by an intangible universal standard, which simply isn't sensible. You can't say that Contra is inferior to Doom level design-wise, because they're not comparable to begin with for obvious reasons. While Doom's level design is clearly more complex, it simply cannot be translated to 2D. To then blast Contra for being worse is to make a pointless comparison which says nothing about the quality of the actual level design itself or the actual execution of the game.
As a developer, how helpful do you think it would be if someone told you your RPG could be better since it ain't got the levels of Doom?
Depending on the style of gameplay you'll need a suitable style of level design, each with its own trade-offs. There's no one-size-fits-all style of level design. Isn't it a better idea to examine how well the levels manage to execute the gameplay concepts to keep things interesting over the course of the game?
0b7983 No.14810673
>>14806427
>cropped porn
damn my palemoon browser. There are no good 8chan ad ons.
209b5c No.14810715
>>14810671
Two things. First you still aren't reading my fucking posts and this is really getting old, I don't enjoy repeating myself. In the example you used, I wouldn't say Contra is "worse," just that its levels are less interesting, as I've mentioned twice already. Second, I am actually a developer and that statement would tell me a lot in relation to my hypthetical RPG, namely that the person in question wants to see less linear areas to traverse, and possibly more dynamic designs in terms of height. Dark Souls is a decent example of an RPG with "Doom-like" level design, although I'd say it barely qualifies as an RPG, as it leans very heavily towards the action side. It's much easier to understand what someone wants if they give you another game as an example, although leaning too heavily on this might make your game overly derivative.
209b5c No.14810727
>>14810671
Another thing, there is indeed a universal standard to judge games by and that's what the player does when he plays your game. Enjoyment is obviously what you want, but not all players have the same criteria for enjoyment, so that's frequently a useless standard. For example a guy who enjoys JRPGs finds JRPGs fun for different reasons than a guy who enjoys FPSes, and even amongst people who play both of those genres there is substantial disagreement on how they should be designed. So if you can distill what people want, very specifically, i.e. "I want levels like Doom," it goes a much longer way towards making a game that other people enjoy (which may not be your motivation for making games to begin with).
19ebf0 No.14810832
HookTube embed. Click on thumbnail to play.
>>14810597
It's a thing that exists. Author is still developing it.
8e28dc No.14811433
>>14810715
>I wouldn't say Contra is "worse," just that its levels are less interesting
Again, by what standard? Are your qualms ones which can be fixed and reasonably implemented, or merely ones of personal taste you're masquerading as something objective?
>there is indeed a universal standard to judge games by
There is, but even then games are to be judged on a case-to-case basis where expectations should be reasonable. For example, Devil Daggers takes place on an entirely flat arena, one which gets smaller over time. The most obvious thing to remark here is that its level design is therefore shit or practically non-existent. However, for tl;dr reasons, the game would be worse off on anything but an entirely flat arena. If anything, for DD the level design could be best described as being "perfectly suitable", because the gameplay requires it.
To then call it shit or worse in comparison says nothing about the quality of the game other than that if you like X that this game doesn't have X, and to enact any potential changes to make the level design "good" again would either ruin the game or change it so much to the point where it's no longer even the same game, but merely something people are more familiar with. When looked at individually, clearly Doom's levels would be more "interesting" in comparison, but if Devil Daggers' gameplay were to be transplanted into Doom levels or vice versa, you'd get something that plays rather terribly. Looking at it this way, level design is largely relative in quality, and depends on heavily on the base gameplay. Of course there are some universal standards (not having the player get lost, not having unnecessary backtracking, etc.), but my point still stands.
>it goes a much longer way towards making a game that other people enjoy (which may not be your motivation for making games to begin with)
Like you said, leaning too heavily on that nets you something derivative. Most people want more of stuff they are already familiar with. Yet the most interesting things come from people who make something they personally enjoy, often resulting in something niche, though usually that does resonate with people. Devil Daggers is very fucking niche and there's nothing quite like it out there, yet it somehow managed to sit at an Overwhelmingly Positive rating on Steam. Obviously there's potential to be had here. Yet these kind of arena shooters often get undeserved/partly deserved criticism for not being "good" like Doom or Quake, for a whole heap of reasons, so now the most anticipated FPS releases on the horizons are even more retro throwback Doom clones. Just look at the sheer variety side-scrolling action games, there's potentially a whole lot more you could do with the first-person shooter genre, but nobody really has the insight on how to do it right.
9ca3ac No.14811509
fde379 No.14811525
>>14811433
>Again, by what standard? Are your qualms ones which can be fixed and reasonably implemented, or merely ones of personal taste you're masquerading as something objective?
It's an objective assessment of the game. Contra doesn't have strong exploration, so it's not something the game offers. It would ordinarily be dumb, or at least a highly subjective assessment, to say that "Contra sucks because it has no exploration," but given the context of the discussion we're talking about it.
My point earlier could have been expressed slightly better, I suppose what I meant to say was if a game like Contra could have more interesting levels, why shouldn't it? Not that all games which have levels unlike Doom are shit. It's true that some games still work despite having uninteresting levels, but there's always room for improvement.
Consider also the example of Metroid Fusion, which was a highly linear game compared to Super Metroid and therefore gets kind of a bad rap. I still enjoyed it; the fact that Samus was characterised in a non-shitty way helped; but I still wish it would have had more interesting levels.
9caa62 No.14811617
>>14810832
>It turns out to be GOTY
>/v/ has to play it because the gameplay turns out to be perfect and it's the only Arena shooter around
7ddf44 No.14811709
Have any of you played Gunz 2?
It seems like a cool hybrid between 3rd person melee and shooter with massive movement ability. The maps look to be centered around arena fighting.
fde379 No.14811840
>>14811709
I remembered playing the first one for a while when I was much younger. It was alright, if a little janky. I heard it got worse later on. I have no idea how the second one plays.
39e763 No.14811865
>>14811617
>goty
Apparently it's just a Xonotic mod. gamenight when
39e763 No.14811866
7c97e9 No.14811915
>>14811709
Yes but they didn't develop on the combat. Gunz2 is a totally different game and because of that it's hated.
c275e6 No.14811944
>>14811509
>>14811617
>>14811865
>Apparently it's just a Xonotic mod.
Yeah no shit. Zoophile sodomites can't make anything original.
9ca3ac No.14811962
c997c8 No.14812055
>>14810832
Oh shit, I remember finding that in a list of Linux games and posting it in a random thread here. Please tell me I'm not the one that introduced /v/ to this game.
ecbf63 No.14813236
>>14811944
but i thought from doom 4 and quake champions originality was bad, we all just wanted doom 2 and quake 3 again with better gwafix what happened?
c997c8 No.14813266
>>14813236
Nice try *HepatitisBiscuit**
8e28dc No.14813267
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>>14811525
>I suppose what I meant to say was if a game like Contra could have more interesting levels, why shouldn't it?
I don't disagree here. Levels can have their own gimmicks, themes and special obstacles, which Contra does make use of, even though I don't like the Cabal stages, or the top-down stages in III. Genre shifts for the sake of variety are a bit too much.
>>14812055
That mod has been known in the many ancient autism threads. That mod author made several videos of him getting devoured by Krystal as well.
c997c8 No.14813320
>>14813267
>That mod has been known in the many ancient autism threads. That mod author made several videos of him getting devoured by Krystal as well.
I'm not quite sure whether or not that's better or worse. the lol threads were really great for autism like that.
ecbf63 No.14813326
>>14813266
i have never heard a complaint for either games other than "its different". i think character additions to quake was a bad thing ultimately but it is a small complaint blown out as this huge thing. it does make the game more interesting, and im saying that as an outside perspective i cannot even fucking run the game but wish i could. you know what quake champions improved over quake live? the removal of clan arena and other nonquake gametypes like instagib. you never hear about that but there is a far bigger emphasis on item control than the second biggest "arena shooter" on the market.
8e28dc No.14813368
>>14813236
>>14813266
DyingBiscuit isn't wrong that the (multiplayer) arena shoooter genre is the most incestuous gaming subgenre to ever exist. It's remarkable how many of these arena shooters barely deviate from the core Quake 3 Arena formula. Most of the difference are different kind of weapons which don't change up all the game that much, or different movement techs which only have any merit for high-level players anyways. But the core ideas of item control, weapon archetypes, movement and the thinking process involved remain too identical. You then end up with a zillion Quake clones which nobody plays because everyone's going to play Quake anyways since it's the most refined and most populated to begin with. Dressing up your clone in more game modes and maps isn't going to alleviate this.
There's a whole lot more you can do and innovate with arena shooters. Quake is a golden standard and should be learned from, sure, but a multiplayer game will live longer by carving out its own niche than trying to imitate a 10/10 but only ending up a 9/10.
>>14813326
I don't believe that different player characters in Quake are inherently bad. If fighting games can have fuckhueg rosters of characters and remain competitively viable despite tier lists, why can't arena shooters? Now, there's a ton of genuine qualms to be had with the way the different player characters are implemented in Quake and how too many abilities are cheap trump cards rather than additional catalysts for mind games, and unlike what DeadBiscuit says, you're under no obligation to gobble up shit just because it's "innovative". A core gameplay rework of QC is unlikely to happen anyways, but I'd be more interested in yet another arena shooter which does take another spin at the inclusion of player characters.
>the removal of clan arena and other nonquake gametypes like instagib
Unfortunately they added instagib back in
c997c8 No.14813670
>>14813326
>>14813368
There were tons of ways they could have changed it up without going full MOBA autism on the characters The thing is, character abilities are something inherently "not Quake". It'd be more forgivable if they called it something else, but as it stands that didn't happen.
fde379 No.14813683
>>14813326
Quake Champions isn't terrible because of the game itself, although I'd call it lazy because it could easily be recreated as a Quake 3 mod with minimal effort. It's terrible because you have to use matchmaking and it takes way too much time waiting for menu animations and matchmaking between games. You can't even stay in the same lobby to continue playing maps as long as you like. Even Quake Live has this process very fast and streamlined, if you don't choose a dedicated server and use matchmaking. They essentially made the game like Overwatch in terms of the menu. Also, it runs way worse than it should considering the rather lackluster graphics. It just pissed me off too much knowing I could boot up Q3A or QL and have at least 20% more time playing in matches.
fde379 No.14813727
>>14813368
There's also the problem mentioned here, which is that champion abilities are laughably all over the place. Ranger's ability, while cool as fuck, is just incredible compared to the majority of them. He throws an orb that he can use to teleport to and it can be used to telefrag people, a reference to the end boss fight in Quake. I appreciate the thematically appropriate choice but it still makes most other abilities look like a joke. And then there's the bitch that turns into an invulnerable ghost which is annoying at best and bullshit at worst depending on the skill of the player.
6b6bf8 No.14813876
File: 5726cc3319b752f⋯.png (Spoiler Image, 304.32 KB, 636x900, 53:75, ecaf11e3eba0b92dda7b6473d5….png)
a16c06 No.14813896
>>14811865
>>14811933
>>14811866
>the only arena shooter left
>is furry vore
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
ecbf63 No.14813924
>>14813670
what were some ways they could have done that then? your unoffensive ideas wouldn't generate enough interest from fans who are already tired of quake 3, aka most of them, as evidenced by all of the failing quake clones (but with a tweest!). when your game offers nothing new to learn its just unremarkable and boring, theres a reason aerowalk is remade in every single one of them. they at least tried with quake champions, more than any other arena shooter in recent years, just like the older quake games tried something new with every iteration (and im sure character stats even crossed their minds back then when they were making all these characters and programming their specific ais/weapon preferences for singleplayer)
>>14813683
>because it could easily be recreated as a Quake 3 mod with minimal effort
this wouldn't generate as much population as a new quake game being announced, nor as much free advertising (controversy) as being different. i think that is a bad point because of that, maybe they actually wanted to revive the genre because they wanted something similar and the only way to do so was to do something interesting. as for matchmaking ive never understood the hate, there is a wait time but for people who actually enjoy vanilla gamemodes it seems like the only option. for example i have tried cs1.6 recently and there were zero vanilla servers. the closest was a dust2 server with infinite money and sniper/flash locked to "donators" filled with 200 ping people (why not just populate a native server?). or quake live something more relevant, every single server clan arena on either overkill or campgrounds. great maps sure but they never get tired of it, having no matchmaking allowed these people who don't even like quake to populate a quake game with a twitch shooter gametype and thats all they play. i have personally seen team fortress 2 improved by matchmaking, even though everyone seems to hate it i have even gotten games of hydro going while community servers remain 24/7 instarespawn 2fort at best. that said i think most people have shit taste and matchmaking forces players to play a different map occasionally
c997c8 No.14814401
>>14813924
>what were some ways they could have done that then?
Add some new weapons, powerups, or maps while making some minor changes to gameplay. It worked out well enough for Unreal Tournament and Tribes. That and make an actual godamn sequel to Quake 1. Amp up all the lovecraft shit and have some interesting enemies and levels.
>they at least tried with quake champions
lol no, thye made a shitty pay to win game when they could have had a full-featured Quake title
ecbf63 No.14814534
>>14814401
sounds an awful lot like xonotic and warsow, and people dont even want to play that for free
>It worked out well enough for Unreal Tournament and Tribes
both less popular than quake 3, which wasn't even very popular, have you considered that games in 1990 had a different market than games in 2010? lets look at games that fit your criteria in even those same series. unreal 4 is a slower unreal 99 with some 2k4 abilities and extremely small changes that add nothing like biorifle walls (using link gun on biorifle blobs, i think this was actually even removed, LOL), fucking dead. tribes ascend never had more than 2000 concurrent players and thats "success", also not even an arena shooter by neither your standards (there are classes) or mine (there is no item control). this genre is completely dead in the water unless you accept a compromise. it seems like everyone shitting on quake champions all just want the next tortanic and weren't ever fans of quake
9caa62 No.14814863
>>14814534
> you considered that games in 1990 had a different market than games in 2010?
Yet CRPGs and Platformers came back and sell millions.
9caa62 No.14814867
>>14814863
>>14814534
Oh and Tribes Ascend had millions of players.
c997c8 No.14814888
>>14814534
>You're not a fan of Quake if you don't defend a shitty pay to win game
Starting to reach shill territory here.
>>14814867
And trhen Hi-Rez abandoned it for muh MOBAwatch.
ecbf63 No.14814965
>>14814863
arena shooters are more comparable to fighting games or realtimestrategies, aka skill based multiplyaer games.
>>14814867
>had
you are wrong but so was i so pic related. it was actually 3000 concurrent players, in an actual pay to win game
>>14814888
>Starting to reach shill territory here
and who the fuck cares? i am an actual fan of quake, i have played since quake 2 and became a fan of the first game. i have played 700 hours of quake live after the steam transition even, obviously not including the free to play client. what im saying is, i dont think anything quake champions does is all that bad but people who dont like quake as much as me or even downright hate quake want it to fail because they overblow so many small things
c2509a No.14814967
>>14814534
>Tribes Ascend never had more than 2000 concurrent players
False faggot. The game even on steam had 3.5k and this is after the game was already killed and abandoned. The game had 10s of thousands of players on at a time.
c2509a No.14814970
>>14814965
>using steam charts for a game that was only released on steam after it was killed
So you admit that you didn't even fucking play the game when it was alive. You stupid fucking newfag just outed yourself to everyone in the thread.
9caa62 No.14814972
>>14814965
Fighting games sell millions anon so if anything that makes your argument even worse.
fa9c18 No.14814982
>>14814965
>I don't think anything Quake Champions does is all that bad
Ruining the core gameplay theme with abilities and classes
Taking out the most popular modes like Capture the Flag and Freeze Tag so they can focus on making said shitty abilities
Having the game run like ass and not do anything to optimize it
The game still doesn't run on multiple peoples computers with no fix in site
Few Maps
Ugly aesthetics and skins
Have to pay money in order to get into the beta and on top of that have to pay $30 just to play on custom modes
ecbf63 No.14814985
>>14814967
>>14814970
its a game from 2012, newfag is the wrong word but maybe i was wrong. provide proof to me that tribes ascend had more than 3000 players? i have actual proof providing my claims, an actual stat clock.
>>14814972
pic related. and for quake champions that is the paid client alone, most people aren't going to spend 30 dollars for a free to play game which bethesda distributed for free in their own client.
ecbf63 No.14815014
>>14814982
>ruining the core gameplay
i didn't know they big items and weapons. capture the flag was not an official gamemode until quake 3 team arena, freeze tag wasn't an official gamemode until quake live, they are both not quake gamemodes. anything else i would agree
fa9c18 No.14815049
>>14814985
>I have proof for my claim
>Even though it's not actually proof because the game was released on steam after it was already dead
fa9c18 No.14815052
>>14815014
>I totally play quake even though I can't see how giving people free abilities that you get without having to get pick ups in game and are far less predictable and take far less skill effect the core gameplay
ecbf63 No.14815079
>>14815049
>i have no objective numbers to backup my claim it was just 30000 times more popular than overwatch and call of duty combined!
ok
>>14815052
i cannot see how that would change very much that is correct
95670f No.14815099
>>14809080
> Babby can't into image search for his porn
>>14813876
> Spoon-feeding, probably seeking praise or notice from their help
I don't know which is sadder but you're both pathetic
fa9c18 No.14815136
>>14815079
>I cannot see how a game would have less players after it is dead
ecbf63 No.14815172
>>14815136
i admit that i didn't experience it until after it went on steam, what killed it before then? the jump to steam?
9caa62 No.14815205
>>14815172
No, it died to the dev team abandoning to make a MOBA after the player base got pissed at them for
>Making the game near P2W with it's shit balance
>Ruining maps and later removing them from the game when people complained
>Not listening at all ever to the community
000b59 No.14815412
>>14811709
They "refined" the controls so it plays like a slightly faster S4 League without the fun touchdown mode.
fde379 No.14816023
>>14813924
>matchmaking improves the game even though you spend 3 minutes in a menu per 15 minute match
>surprise surprise, people playing a 20 year old game don't feel like playing vanilla
Come the fuck on, if they allowed people to host dedicated servers for Quake Champions they would be populated Instead of paying for bullshit matchmaking servers, just host a few official vanilla dedicated servers like literally every other good shooter in existence. They all had plenty of people playing vanilla for years and you are taking them completely out of context
fde379 No.14816028
>>14815014
Capture the Flag was added in an official patch for Quake 2. You are painfully ignorant.
8ff9b5 No.14816043
>>14813326
>Being against instagib and clan arena.
f6ec9f No.14816646
>>14813683
Here's my thing, I don't mind matchmaking as long as you have a server browser as well. Sometimes it's nice to just roll the dice, but most of the time I want to select precisely where I'm going.
8e28dc No.14817985
>>14816646
IMO the most ideal solution is to have matchmaking only for 1v1 matches so scrubs can find a (((fair and balanced match))) but dedicated servers/a server browser only for team modes (and Duel servers) so communities don't die out entirely.