that's ok Eat U, I can handle it.. this is nothing compared to what Im used to
About the "why do u fh2 if u dontz like it"... My Answer: Because I am competent enough to differ game from game. FH2 and BF3 are not the same, period. End. Our players want certain things, a certain way, and we like to give certain things, a certain way to them. It's not like designers have one solid set of rules (a bible) they apply to everything and every game they encounter (ONE DESIGN, UNDER GOD, SO SAY WE ALL)
No no.. you need to be able to look at the game itself and what goal it has, what audience it has, what the design aims to deliver
for that game.
@Beaufort: We can make this in to a theory of fun discussion if you want, but it will probably get too complex for some, and instead turn ugly. Let me end it with; you also want, only
FUN. That is your goal when you press the power-button on the PC, log in to windows, and then log on to a game. How that
FUN materializes for you, can differ ofcourse, but there is no other goal here, no other desire than to be entertained. All games entertain (provide fun) in different ways, be it TF2, ArmA, BF3, FH2 or MineCraft, all delivers an experience, and if we like the game, we have "fun" playing it. Period, The end.
What is "fun" then? Well, I read somewhere what I picked as the so-far best definition. It is something that makes us feel good - gives us pleasure (neurological; makes our brains produce Adrenaline, and Dopamine) - but it cant be too repetitive or predictable, it needs an element of surprise, (or our brains will adapt too fast, thus not producing dopamine or Adrenaline, thus diminishing the "kick") to keep us interested - on our toes. So, Fun is
pleasure, with surprise.
"Many players find it cool and awesome" I said, and Kelmola edited me and pointed me to wiki "I think"... I pass the glowing hot charcoal piece back -
Many players find it cool and awesome, the end. They do, it is not what I think, it is not a theory. Not all do, but
many do. Period, the End.
Now we've reached the state in the discussion where the last and only argument from is "u wanna turn it in to a Cod clone?".... How could this be done? really?... Are we talking Modern Warfare 2 here?... How on earth could I or we, even if we wanted to, make FH2 in to a "CoD clone"?... what is that even? It's such an abstract and loosely defined term or phrase, it can't be anything but ignored... Please describe it to me, because to me -"Turn a BF2 ww2 mod in to a Call of Duty "clone"- is impossible to imagine, different engine, different game modes, weapons, maps, design.. everything is different. How could we even get close to
anything, that would resemble Call of Duty?
(Add to this.. why is this hypothesis relevant to a dicussion about BF3?... propose I do have this secret little agenda, to turn a bf2 mod in to another retail game... why do we chat about that in a BF3 thread?)
[back on topic]
Kelmola:
"How excatly would giving the choice of equipment from get-go prevent this? How do unlocks affect in any way or form how you use the map/environment?"It's obvious, if everyone has all the stuff from the beginning, you are less likely to run in to guys who hasn't got all the stuff, simple eh? If everyone on the server has access to 100% of the assets, every round will be more similar to the next round, compared to if there is a total mix of assets.
Unlocks/perks/skills are designed to be used in different situations, so ofcourse you'll see players adapting certain playstyles in certain areas to his equipped skills/gadgets etc. that's what they're there for in the first place - to create interesting combat situations.
Kelmola
"Also, destruction and inventory can never replace openness and size. Except for those who prefer COD over FH2." How do you know it can't? And what makes it sure only people who prefer "cod over fh2" can like this?
Look at your statement again - it kind of symbolizes interwebz logic and reason in one sentence:
"
Also!, Destruction and inventory (unlocks, gadgets etc) can
never replace openness and size. You mean for you, right? You, can never have more fun with destruction and unlocks, than the fun given to you by large open maps. "ok", let's go with that.. But here comes a funny addition - remember we are talking about BF3 still:
Except for those who prefer COD over FH2." ....
So.... designing BF3 with destruction and unlocks instead of large open maps, will never make the game more fun, except for those players who prefer another retail game (CoD) over a.. BF2 mod???....
I....totally....do not..see..the logic.....
Kelmola:
"If I know that a tank in real life has a coax MG, but in-game I will have to "unlock" this, it's not a game I want to play, ever.Well, then don't do it
I personally love the coax MG as unlock. It's in BFP4F and it's awesome, as you can never see on an enemy tank if he has it or not. It feeds in to that thing about -keeping you on your toe- the surprise, the less predictable game. Unlocked coax or not, stimulates the dopamine production more than if everyone has it. Which in turn, makes us more addicted to the game, because just face it. We are junkies who use the game as a distributor of body-drugs. Nothing more, nothing less. We enter the 3D world on our monitor + headphones so that it can stimulate our neural response system and our brains produces those drops of natural narcotics. That is the fun, and no matter if you get it from shooting Angry birds, building lego-castles, levelling up a wizard or fragging someone with a special forces assault rifles - it's all-in-all, biologically, the same stuff.
have a nice weekend all