/v/ - Video Games

>Static foliage

>Clunky animations

>Shitty enemies

>Abhorrent mechanics

>BattleRoyale

>Made by literal turk monkeys

Ahahahahahahahah faggot

>>14925991

>every open world pvp shooter is a battle royale now

The game equally focuses on both pvp and pve elements, that doesn't sound like a battle royale game to me especially since there is only 10 players at once on a server.

>>14925885

Incredibly aesthetically attractive setting.

Nice expansion of BR with PvE.

Most terrible optimization in the current year.

Progression and overall characters mechanics are wrong.

Wasted potential.

>>14925885

I liked the premise, but as the first Anon allured to in a derisive manner, the battle royale plague could infect any game.

One way I can see it working out is if:

>The focus is on the monster-hunting

>"Pairs" can choose to signal each other to team up when they meet in the wild instead of just blasting each other ala BR

>Absolutely no gamemode that promotes or encourages PvP

>An exclusive PvE gamemode where a single pair hunts monsters

>Better optimization

Not that I'll buy it anyway, but it's a thought.

>>14926131

>>"Pairs" can choose to signal each other to team up when they meet in the wild instead of just blasting each other ala BR

Signals will not do anything. Game theory says strangers should kill each other on sight. And they will. Didn't DayZ teach you?

Played it for one game and refunded it. Feels awful to play, I didn't see any other players, and the goal of the game didn't make much sense to me.

>>14926172

>Game theory says strangers should kill each other on sight. And they will. Didn't DayZ teach you?

I remember that, but there is also the even older Corrupted Blood incident studied on WoW a long time ago. It was found that in the presence of a bigger threat, strangers are still capable of helping each other in a game.

Personally, I'd try to make amends with stranger players, but the human mind is an unforeseeable thing. The threat of backstabbing is always present.

>>14926260

From what I read, Corrupted Blood put the whole playerbase in a state of emergency. It's not something that happens in regular gameplay very often, let alone be designed to happen. I can't name any other games where it's been done succesfully and consciously.

I sure as fuck would like it to, because cooperating with strangers in exceptional situations is fun. Rocket said DayZ is fundamentally flawed as a concept, yet that's what every game copied for a while.

>>14926368

>I sure as fuck would like it to, because cooperating with strangers in exceptional situations is fun

It is. In fact, it's one of the major factors that made BFBC2 as fun as it was. It made people work together without forcing it. Stick Arena and CS2D too. I managed to make countless alliances in free-for-alls in those games. It was fun as hell.

>>14926411

I'd love for something like STALKER with multiplayer to be made, where you have both an overarching goal and progression within your faction (like reaching the center of the zone as duty or defending the border as monolith) that kind of forces you to work with others due to your shared goal. But also have the potential for backstabbing and cooperation shenanigans between individual players.

However, that's a pipe dream and will probably never happen. I think the whole concept is too ambitious and unproven to ever be attempted seriously.

>>14926489

>STALKER with multiplayer

Look up Ray of Hope mang

It's never coming out

>>14926505

I lost hope when they insisted on hosting their own servers. There's gonna be a hook to the whole thing if it ever does come out.

>>14926260

WoW game-play enforces cooperation through raids.

Sure if HS boss can only be killed by large team, players woould cooperate, regardless of the availability in-game signals BTW, they will find ways. But if game has no hardcoded cooperation requirement every other player would be an enemy. Its not about signals its about rewards for cooperation in the set of game rules.