104 replies to this topic

[Noth]

HRRxStormBringer, on 02 February 2013 - 11:11 PM, said:

This still needs addressing. Sad that none have done so.

They have already addressed this. There are 2 new maps coming out in the next two months and have stated that it can take up to 4 month to make a good new map.

[Volthorne]

Noth, on 02 February 2013 - 11:36 PM, said:

They have already addressed this. There are 2 new maps coming out in the next two months and have stated that it can take up to 4 month to make a good new map.

Check the Dev Tracker if you don't believe this guy.

Also, Community-made maps take MUCH longer than 4 months to make. Some maps in TF2 that I've played on STILL get updates, and they're over a year old by now (whether it be for balance, performance, polish, whatever, they still get updated). The only maps that DON'T get updates are the ones that lump everyone into a single room (such as Achivement maps, Dodgeball maps, etc.).

[HRRxStormBringer]

Who cares. 2 new maps in 6 months isn't enough. Many are bored of this game for the lack of maps - which in turn, prevents new tatics and strategies. This game is stagnant for lack of maps, and will ultimately be it's downfall.

And if it takes 4 months to design a new, good map, then they need to re-evaluate their map-creation process.

and read through the whole thread re: Community created content...

Edited by HRRxStormBringer, 03 February 2013 - 09:23 AM.

[Noth]

HRRxStormBringer, on 03 February 2013 - 09:21 AM, said:

Who cares. 2 new maps in 6 months isn't enough. Many are bored of this game for the lack of maps - which in turn, prevents new tatics and strategies. This game is stagnant for lack of maps, and will ultimately be it's downfall.

And if it takes 4 months to design a new, good map, then they need to re-evaluate their map-creation process.

and read through the whole thread re: Community created content...

Believe it or not 4 months is pretty good for maps with the level of detail these have and the lack of man power the devs have. As pointed out above user created maps that are seeking any type of quality are can take years to get good. Most of the user created maps from people that claim they could make one so quick wouldn't pass the testing and have to go through a stupid amount of revisions.

[CancR]

No. give us better maps.

In fact, just remake MW 4 maps. kthnx

[Volthorne]

CancR, on 03 February 2013 - 09:58 AM, said:

No. give us better maps.

In fact, just remake MW 4 maps. kthnx

Ohdeargodno. Those maps were just about as creative as Forest Gump's dictionary. I'd also argue that a "special needs" class could have designed better maps.

[DeadlyNerd]

focuspark, on 22 January 2013 - 09:30 PM, said:

Player created content killed CoH. This isn't TF2 and we're not making ***** hats here. Player created content doesn't work well when you're talking about something that HAS to be top quality, optimized, and fair.

Oh untwist your panties... You're obviously subjectively against this as every reason you've given is just a rephrase of "players don't make optimized maps".
How do you think devs check the optimization on their maps? By hand? You think they play the map and check fps on each coordinate separately?
There are benchmarks every company develops for the sole purpose of testing optimization and fps levels.
Caustic is 1 huge volcano inside a valley. I'm sure a great amount of brainstorming was needed to develop that map.

Testing maps usually just boils down to checking whether each side has equal number of advantageous points.

Allow for player created maps, set a criteria for benchmark results and only test the maps that pass the criteria.
Also, only testing a map is much less time consuming than creating one.

[HRRxStormBringer]

Volthorne, on 03 February 2013 - 10:22 AM, said:

Ohdeargodno. Those maps were just about as creative as Forest Gump's dictionary. I'd also argue that a "special needs" class could have designed better maps.

I don't care if they're creative or whatever. As long as there's more maps. They can improve them over time, if they elect to do so - like they did with the current maps.

4 maps does not a game make - not even in beta. And not to be repetitive, but they justified going open beta because of "player fatigue". Well, if they were so concerned about fatigue, we'd have more freakin maps by now. It's so completely ludicrous at this point. I know countless players who have stopped playing because they're bored. Lack of maps inhibits new tactics, strategies, game play, whatever - and the current maps, despite all the effort they've supposedly put in to them, are largely monotone - I'm not sure what the justification or reasoning for that would be.

We. Need. More. Maps.

And not just 2 more. 10 more. Before it's too late. Or release a map editor. I don't care. Just do something before it's too late.

Edited by HRRxStormBringer, 03 February 2013 - 11:04 AM.

[Volthorne]

HRRxStormBringer, on 03 February 2013 - 11:00 AM, said:

I don't care if they're creative or whatever. As long as there's more maps. They can improve them over time, if they elect to do so - like they did with the current maps.

4 maps does not a game make - not even in beta. And not to be repetitive, but they justified going open beta because of "player fatigue". Well, if they were so concerned about fatigue, we'd have more freakin maps by now. It's so completely ludicrous at this point. I know countless players who have stopped playing because they're bored. Lack of maps inhibits new tactics, strategies, game play, whatever - and the current maps, despite all the effort they've supposedly put in to them, are largely monotone - I'm not sure what the justification or reasoning for that would be.

-> Complains about lack of maps.
-> LoL only has 3 maps. And millions of players.

???

[HRRxStormBringer]

Volthorne, on 03 February 2013 - 11:03 AM, said:

-> Complains about lack of maps.
-> LoL only has 3 maps. And millions of players.

???

I don't understand your... english (?).

Edited by HRRxStormBringer, 03 February 2013 - 11:08 AM.

[DeadlyNerd]

Volthorne, on 03 February 2013 - 11:03 AM, said:

-> Complains about lack of maps.
-> LoL only has 3 maps. And millions of players.

???

DoTA has 1 map and more players. Your point? It's a completely different principle.

edit: since you obviously don't know why DoTA has so many players on only 1 map I'll give you a hint.
over 100 heroes, over 100 items.

Edited by DeadlyNerd, 03 February 2013 - 11:11 AM.

[HRRxStormBringer]

Ah. League of Legends. I can't speak for that game, or it's audience, demographics, or the size of their maps, or anything - I don't play it. Perhaps their players are mindless drones or children that farm and it's a point and click game like D3? Maybe they're satisfied with mediocrity, or perhaps, more likely, the game play is not as dependent as MWOnline is, in terms of maps dictacting strategy/tactics/variety.

There could be a million explanations - point being, LoL and MWO aren't the same game. The number of maps in LoL is irrelevant, as a comparison.

Edited by HRRxStormBringer, 03 February 2013 - 11:18 AM.

[Volthorne]

DeadlyNerd, on 03 February 2013 - 11:10 AM, said:

DoTA has 1 map and more players. Your point? It's a completely different principle.

edit: since you obviously don't know why DoTA has so many players on only 1 map I'll give you a hint.
over 100 heroes, over 100 items.

You clearly missed my point. There are games with LESS maps than MWO (albeit currently more content elsewhere, although that will change), and millions upon millions of people who are content to run the same strategy on the same map over and over, with minor variations each time. And the OP is complaining about a lack OF MAPS.

Show me some logic in that thinking and I'll show you an insane person.

[HRRxStormBringer]

I can't speak for that game, or it's audience, demographics, or the size of their maps, or anything - I don't play it. Perhaps their players are mindless drones or children that farm and it's a point and click game like D3? Maybe they're satisfied with mediocrity, or perhaps, more likely, the game play is not as dependent as MWOnline is, in terms of maps dictacting strategy/tactics/variety.

There could be a million explanations - point being, LoL and MWO aren't the same game. The number of maps in LoL is irrelevant, as a comparison.

Volthorne, on 03 February 2013 - 11:18 AM, said:

You clearly missed my point. There are games with LESS maps than MWO (albeit currently more content elsewhere, although that will change), and millions upon millions of people who are content to run the same strategy on the same map over and over, with minor variations each time. And the OP is complaining about a lack OF MAPS.

Show me some logic in that thinking and I'll show you an insane person.

[DeadlyNerd]

Volthorne, on 03 February 2013 - 11:18 AM, said:

You clearly missed my point. There are games with LESS maps than MWO (albeit currently more content elsewhere, although that will change), and millions upon millions of people who are content to run the same strategy on the same map over and over, with minor variations each time. And the OP is complaining about a lack OF MAPS.

Show me some logic in that thinking and I'll show you an insane person.

Do I need to hint again? over 100 heroes, over 100 items.
MWO isn't in that state, nor will it ever be in the near future. The only factor that could exponentially increase playtimes and playerbase is the amount of maps.

[Volthorne]

DeadlyNerd, on 03 February 2013 - 11:23 AM, said:

Do I need to hint again? over 100 heroes, over 100 items.
MWO isn't in that state, nor will it ever be in the near future. The only factor that could exponentially increase playtimes and playerbase is the amount of maps.

Those 100 heroes and 100 items are relegated to 5 different roles (wait, isn't there some other game with roughly 5 roles of its big stomps 'mechs?), so that factor is irrelevant. You'll still get teams running the same optimal composition, maybe with different heroes or slightly different item builds, and they'll still run the same optimal strategy.

Your point is actually a non-issue.

[Volthorne]

HRRxStormBringer, on 03 February 2013 - 11:23 AM, said:

I can't speak for that game, or it's audience, demographics, or the size of their maps, or anything - I don't play it. Perhaps their players are mindless drones or children that farm and it's a point and click game like D3? Maybe they're satisfied with mediocrity, or perhaps, more likely, the game play is not as dependent as MWOnline is, in terms of maps dictacting strategy/tactics/variety.

There could be a million explanations - point being, LoL and MWO aren't the same game. The number of maps in LoL is irrelevant, as a comparison.

I can assure you, LoL/DotA and MWO are much more alike than you think. Some of the core mechanics may differ, but at the end of the day it's still two teams trying to murder the crap out of each other, using (however basic or nonexistent they may be) tactics, roles, and "items" (you just don't have to repurchase your equipment in MWO for every new match as would in LoL/DotA). In fact, you could *almost* say MWO is LoL/DotA, except in First Person, with big stompy robots, and... Oh yeah... MORE MAPS.

Edited by Volthorne, 03 February 2013 - 11:38 AM.

[HRRxStormBringer]

Volthorne, on 03 February 2013 - 11:37 AM, said:

I can assure you, LoL/DotA and MWO are much more alike than you think. Some of the core mechanics may differ, but at the end of the day it's still two teams trying to murder the crap out of each other, using (however basic or nonexistent they may be) tactics, roles, and "items" (you just don't have to repurchase your equipment in MWO for every new match as would in LoL/DotA). In fact, you could *almost* say MWO is LoL/DotA, except in First Person, with big stompy robots, and... Oh yeah... MORE MAPS.

MWO has 4 maps. LoL has 3. LoL has "millions" of active players, MWO has only a couple thousand (if that) active players.

See anything wrong with this picture?


/record scratch. Hold on.

You think this game:

http://competitive.n...GothOrianna.jpg

Is nearly the same as MWO?

I can see how the maps have little impact on the game itself. It's a point and click shooter, with a LOT more content.

Edited by HRRxStormBringer, 03 February 2013 - 11:45 AM.

[Volthorne]

HRRxStormBringer, on 03 February 2013 - 11:43 AM, said:

MWO has 4 maps. LoL has 3. LoL has "millions" of active players, MWO has only a couple thousand (if that) active players.

See anything wrong with this picture?


/record scratch. Hold on.

You think this game:

http://competitive.n...GothOrianna.jpg

Is nearly the same as MWO?

I can see how the maps have little impact on the game itself. It's a point and click shooter, with a LOT more content.

Hold the bus. I thought you'd said you couldn't speak on the topic of LoL because you hadn't played it? So now you're casting judgement based off of a single picture?

Did I *say* they were the same? No, I said they were *almost* the same. You've got a team of champions (mechs) with a specific role, fighting each other, and purchasing equipment. In fact, the only MAJOR differences are

A) how equipment is handled - MWO gives you persistent equipment because buying a MLas in the middle of a fight is ridiculous
B ) minions - MWO gives you zero lackeys to mindlessly Zerg the opposing team
C) "levels" and "spells" - there are none in MWO, although we'll soon have call-ins I guess?

In fact, I would argue that MWO has MORE depth than both LoL AND DotA, because each match brings you a fresh new scenario that requires you to think on your feet (as opposed to running the same ********* strategy each time on the same map over and over, which is to say, "Zerg at the enemy team until all their base belong to us"), on a randomly chosen battleground. This will only get better and better over the coming months, with the most noticeable being... OH LOOK, IT'S AT WORST TWO WEEKS, WHEN WE GET BOTH ALPINE AND THE TRENCHBUCKET.

Quit your bitching, hold your ******* equestrians, whatever you want to do. It's being worked on. If the development pace is too slow for you, then maybe you'd prefer a "real" game like.... I don't know.... CoD? Where they simply reskin the assets and call it a new game after 6 months.

Edited by Volthorne, 03 February 2013 - 04:08 PM.

[HRRxStormBringer]

In MWO, you're immersed in the graphics. It's a simulation, and you're driving a mech, wandering through terrain. It's not even close to being the same. That's clearly not a sim - so no, I expect the lack of maps would not have as great an impact on the game. And I suspect, that the "maps" are very large, and more like worlds, where you can potentially spawn on many different parts of the map - where the location is different.

Regardless, none of this is relevant. MWO has a distinct lack of maps and many players (like me) are bored of the game specifically because of this issue.

Edited by HRRxStormBringer, 04 February 2013 - 06:11 AM.