Nah, I appreciated that. It’s a first look at what’s going on. It not being polished makes me trust them way more as a developer than if everything looked absolutely perfect. I’m EXTREMELY hyped
That’s my logic behind it anyway. If I see something that is supposed to be a first look but it’s HYPER polished I get really wary. Makes me think that this one section of the game was hella focused on enough for the representation but I start wondering about whether the rest of the game got the same attention. If a game demo actually has errors and bugs and fuck ups then it shows to me that they’re working on it across the board. They’re not heavily focusing on this specific demo or anything and willing to show the faults that you should see looking at a first look. I guess it just boils down to honesty for me. If the demo is hyper polished then it feels dishonest. If it’s rough around the edges then it feels more real and genuine.
Besides, these are the same people who made the Hitman series for decades and the WOA trilogy which is a powerhouse of gaming for me. Taking on my #2 hyperfixation, right behind Star Trek? They’re probably the only dev that I instantly trusted to do a good job or at least try their best.
Probably just dumb kids who don’t understand how to play but heard friends in school talk about it. Or people like me who are caught up in life and even though I want to play I never really have the time that the games require.
I’ve been a computer gamer since 1980 and, apart from a really excellent few years playing Unreal Tournament in a clan in the early 2000s, have entirely played solo.
Like others, I have a life. People don’t get upset online if I get called away from the PC for a while. Or upset IRL if I’m focusing on a team game instead of them.
I’m not waiting around until we’ve got a group together. I’m not getting angry at a team-mate for accidentally fragging me. I’m not apologising for accidentally fragging someone else. I don’t have to put up with someone else’s childish taunting, or racist/offensive views. I don’t have an over-sugared twelve year old screaming into my ears because they found the fire button.
I would like more big open-world games that have a decent solo-first experience, but otherwise this way fits me nicely and your message only reinforces that for me.
Totally understandable, and I don’t mean to drive people away from online games or put their skill set through a purity test. My point is: Hey if you don’t like sweaty games, don’t play sweaty games (or their sweaty game modes like ranked in most games) and if you do try to meet the game halfway. If I play Outward the way I play Fallout I’m going to have a bad time. That goes double for online games.
Hmm… I read your edit, and I think you're kinda overlooking the hard truth here: you can come up with a list of 1,000 things players "have to" do, but if the game doesn't enforce them, they're not gonna happen.
You can rant out of frustration all you want, but you have no control over anyone except yourself, and trying to tell people what to do will only piss them off.
You're also making a lot of baseless assumptions. How do you know how much they enjoy the game? Maybe they choose to engage with the parts they like and leave the rest out, they're happy this way, and the game lets them. Who are you to tell them what to do?
Again, ranting is fine, but you gotta have self-awareness, otherwise you're gonna get nothing but negative reactions.
To combat the ramble-y-ness of your posts you should try to add more paragraphs. That makes it easier for your readers to take a short pause while reading.
For the topic at hand, I basically don’t play any multiplayer games precisely because it is too much work to keep up with the current meta. It seems to me that often enough what the game teaches you in the tutorial is not what you have to do in the real thing to succeed.
Add to that that many people don’t even pay attention to the good things of tutorials and you get a horde of brainless people just doing the bare minimum to pass by.
As to why they play ranked, at least to me ranked play comes with the promise of match making. That you get paired up with players of a similar skill. In theory that should give you a 50% win rate. I’d play ranked exactly so that I get lumped in with players who are as bad as me.
This mindset from people is what makes online multiplayer games unplayable for me.
I don’t get a lot of time to play games as an adult. When I do, I don’t particularly want people telling me how I should be having fun. There is this weird competition that happens where you need to know everything about a game before you are allowed to partake in the game. It sucks to have missed out on so many experiences, but i guess my not playing sub-optimally made someone else’s experience better, so it’s all good.
No man, by all means you bought the game enjoy it however you want. But be real, if you play Ranked in a competitive online game then are expected to at least understand the games mechanics. If not, why not stick to standard? That’s what irritates me.
If you want to figure out how good you are and enjoy a challenge you play ranked. If the ranked system is good you should rarely or never play with teammates less knowledgeable and less skilled than you.
I don’t think we need a higher barrier of entry for ranked. Just accept that the skill variance happens on both sides and focus on your own game. If you can mentor that is nice and helpful if done right.
I agree 100% and for the record I’m decent at my best days on most online FPS games that I play. It’s not the outcome that irritates me it’s the “why” behind it. In R6S for example “I’m not opening rotation holes because I don’t know where to open them/forgot about them” and “I don’t care about rotation holes because I’m here for my K/D” both have the same outcome. One is an honest play style while the other actively ignores a core part of the game. This I why I’m left wondering if some players like the game itself or they’re just jumping in to jump in. Despite everything it’s still an online game and other players are players not NPCs.
I get it man, you’re playing competitive online games and not want to be stuck with randoms, but that’s just the way it is.
But I don’t suppose I have to tell you that you really shouldn’t feel obligued to tell people what should and shouldn’t be fun for them in games that they spent their hard earned money on?
School and job is exhaustive my man, add it to it how stressful and hard to learn online games are and it should be easy to understand that most people may not be willing to put extra effort into being competitive in them, but they still want and deserve to have fun in them on their own rules.
Like I’ve said it the post it’s not the “playing bad” that makes irritates me, everyone has a different skill level. What I’m trying to say is that people that run head first into the safe room in L4D and abandon their team, or people that play games like HD2 on the hardest difficulty and just run off from their team and spam stratagems. Clearly these types of players don’t want to engage in cooperating with other players yet choose co-op games. They end up not having fun as solo diving enemies ends up in death while the rest of the team has to cover for a +1 .
Every example you just mentioned is a demonstration of “playing bad” in my book. What would you descibe as “playing bad”? Just aiming issues? Or reaction times? Surely that would be to reductive.
Using competitive online games as an example in my post was a mistake. Think D&D. You can’t really play the game 100% how you want. You need to keep the other players (+DM) in mind. If your rolls suck or your plans don’t work out in the end doesn’t annoy me at all -its just a game after all. What I do find annoying is a player treating D&D as a single player RPG, running around on their own, trying to make the story resolve around themselves and not cooperating with the party. If that’s how a player wants to play the game maybe they should stick to living room D&D or Roll20. If said player joins a table at a local hobby shop some form of etiquette and understanding of the game is required. If they decide to play as a murderhobo that constantly ruins the experience of the other players they will be reprimanded or even kicked out. Instead they should either choose to join murderhobo games, stick to aforementioned living room D&D or start up a videogame. Play the game how you want by all means I don’t mean to take it away from anyone. Just know the when and how is my point. Just because you bought siege doesn’t mean you HAVE to play ranked. You like the game casually or play off work/college then join unranked or quick-play. Gamers today feel like they have to fit tightly in their respective communities instead of playing the games how they want to and that ends up ruining their teammates and ,most importantly, the player themselves.
Ok, thank you for clarifying, I get what you mean now. As I understand it you’re mad at players playing egotistically and treating others as NPCs. I would say that that is a more general social issue, that isn’t limited to gaming. Sadly, you’ll have to just deal with it.
I mentionee this elsewhere hours ago, but I used to have a mouse that served me so long, by the time it finally fully died, there was a BB sized hole worn through the plastic of the left button from my finger.
There’s not many objects that you use with the same regularity and intimacy as a mouse other than footwear and furniture. If they’re a bit off you get used to them to the point their flaws become part of their charm. I got my Microsoft Sculpt Mouse when they were brand new. It’s still going strong and I’ll be heartbroken when it eventually dies but, at the risk of jinxing it, it’s showing no signs.
I recently switched to a G502 hero, myself, after I had a Steelseries Rival 500 for the longest time. I miss the unique side-button layout on the Rival, but c’est la vie. Maybe I’ll find a similar, more ergonomic MMO mouse one day.
bin.pol.social
Najnowsze