FORUMS


Dev Talk #2: A Deep Dive into the Shipyard Update



Posted: //
Dec. 6, 2016, 5:49 p.m.


Updated //
Dec. 6, 2016, 5:50 p.m.

Fyce#8190 posted (#post-75746)

OctopusViolinus#8286 posted (#post-75731)
Y'know... the rock,paper,scissors metaphor would be more meaningful & true if it weren't for the fact that: "Everything Is A Nail. All You Need Is A Hammer."

It's not only that. Players will always strive for "their best ship" no matter what, simply because this is a multiplayer team game.
If your group needs a healer, then why "I, the average player," should make the effort to grind for ages in order to be able to fulfil that role when anyone on the team may already have grinded for that.
With that logic, everyone will just go for their favourite ship and hope that they are put in a team where other people will have different stuff in order to make a somewhat balanced team.

"Why should I take the burden and the chore to grind and play with ships I don't like just to have a decent fleet, when everyone else will just grind for the only one or two ships they want to play?"

There's a reason why, in Overwatch, there's always that average Windowmaker in your Attack team that does absolutly not contribute to anything meaningful, but still keeps this character because that's the one this player wants to play.
The difference is that the rest of the team didn't had to grind anything to unlock the rest of the character's cast if they want to switch for a better team composition. And that difference is all it takes for people not to... basically grind their a*se off in order to be "credit to team" when the rest of the team didn't for very understandable reasons.

If the Dreadnought team really wanted to put the focus on your fleet and not only individual ships, they should've given the proper tools to do it, instead of doing the complete opposite.

People will never play this "fleet" thing if it's linked to the most unbearable thing in the game: grinding a tree of ships that you absolutly don't care about... multiple times.
That's probably the elephant in the room the devs completly missed. Somehow.

I agree with "everyone will just go for their favourite ship" sentence. Anyone who played WT/WoT know this feeling. In WT player has to have certain amount of on tier tanks(I played GF only, soo), so it forces players to research other things but game allows player to play one tank and research whatever player wants for small penalties/bonuses to exp. But ultimately, in WoT and WT most of people go for favorite tanks, or "best" ones. As you said, WoT-like grind-tier progression is totally against idea of having a fleet.

About WoT/WT like progression, as it was said many times before, historical tanks has to be separated by something so there was no choice. Progression like that in these games was implemented to solve that problem. There was no reason to implement progression like that in DN, it even created more problems. After reading your post I just realized that WoT or WT system allows for that grind-tier progression also because no one cares about team composition. In WoT people can't change tanks in battle so matchmaking tries to distribute tank types. In WT:GF it's just "use whatever you want". These games don't have most effective class compositions or anything like that because tank is a tank. In DN however we have classes that are very different and bad team composition often leads to defeat. As you said, if devs want players to have fleets, implementing 2.0 shipyard is completely opposite thing. Locking player to one ship like in WoT is against their "fleet" idea. Forcing people to unlock many ships of current tier before going to next like in WT:GF and forcing players to play ships they hate is equally bad idea. Even if people could research any position on manufacturer tree with one ship like in WT:GF, it also wouldn't fix everything because stock modules can be terrible and having bad module combination is just... bad. DN wasn't made for WoT grind-tier progression, devs will have to redesign entire game if they want to keep it and get rid of all problems 2.0 shipyard brought. Otherwise it will be a "meh" game for WoT or WT players. Devs want to change their target audience.


Posted: //
Dec. 6, 2016, 9:08 p.m.



I don't agree with any of you just thought I would pop in and tell you that. smile .


Posted: //
Dec. 6, 2016, 11:05 p.m.



lethal61#8149 posted (#post-75786)

I don't agree with any of you just thought I would pop in and tell you that. smile .

Thanks


Posted: //
Dec. 7, 2016, 2:14 a.m.



So sad this game had amazing potential pre 2.0 the game was a blast

2.0 ruined it

  • ship loadout customization is basically non existant now
  • your forced to play ships you dont like to unlock ships you want
  • low tiers are missing 3/4 of the games content no secondaries no breifings no modules missing ship classes etc
    -obscene grind coupled with tiny player base and splitting up your playerbase by tiers means the game is virtually unplayable right now

i could go on and on but its become clear to anyone following the forums DN isnt listening to tester feedback anymore
when 2.0 was announced testers warned them about tiers and look what happened...


Posted: //
Dec. 7, 2016, 1:28 p.m.



I'm someone who signed up for the PS4 beta after seeing coverage of this at Gamescom last year and following news about it ever since; I don't have a gaming rig anymore, just a console, and I was super excited to see this come to PS4. The ships are just beautiful, the gameplay looks delicious - balancing weapon, shield, and engine power takes me right back to LucasArts' amazing X-Wing series, and balancing classes off against one another, figuring out in real time how best to respond to what the other team is doing? It all looks great.

Then I read this thread and the 1.3.1 patch notes, and now my enthusiasm is drained, to say the least. I have World of Tanks, and I never play it because I no longer have time to gut out a EvE-level-V-skill style progression grind. Same with Warframe - it looks pretty, the art design and concept are top-notch, the mechanics and gunplay are at least solid, but I just don't ...have ...the time. I'm a grown dude with lots of stuff to do every day, and my few precious hours of vidya gaem time have to be, well, fun.

You know what I do play a lot of? Titanfall 2, Destiny, Overwatch, and on my phone, Vainglory. What do all these titles have in common? Low-to-nonexistent "unlock grind" (Titanfall 2 is the "worst" offender here, and at maybe 10 hours played I have all the Titan frames unlocked and enough credits to nab 2-3 boosts or primary weapon unlocks if I don't feel like waiting for one), cash shop for cosmetics with reasonable prices, and a vibrant, low-queue community ready to provide opponents for a few rounds of excellent, engaging gameplay whenever I happen to have the time. The other thing they have in common is that between the retail price and the cash shop, I've probably spent $300 across those titles over the last two years - because I never stopped playing the games and so there was always a sense that, sure, that Winston skin or that Ion camo pack is worth the money. World of Tanks and Warframe have each gotten zero dollars from me, because, again, I don't have time to play them like a second job, and so I don't see the point in spending money on marginally shortening the grind.

I'm sure that Greybox and Six Foot have some market-research reason to think the Wo*/Warframe model is going to work for them, and should they continue to pursue this path I guess I hope they're right for their sake, but for me I'll just have another ~10GB of hard drive space taken up with a pretty game that I won't invest in because I can't enjoy it with the time I have to spare.


Posted: //
Dec. 9, 2016, 1:23 a.m.



Lincrono#9039 posted (#post-75745)

It's called From The Depths by brilliant skies. It's an Alpha game for about $20 on steam. However, inspite of being alpha it's been around for about 3 years now, has a friendly, dedicated community, and the dev team remains extremely involved (my first forum post there was actually answered by the lead developer, this is not uncommon). It is however, not for the feint of heart. The mechanics are loosely based on real physics and engineering principals and you really do have to build all your ships, aircraft, and other vehicles block by block from scratch. It took me roughly 100 hours of forums, tutorials, and youtube vids and trial-and-error gameplay to build my first working vessels, but once I had that core down progression to bigger, cooler stuff was more limited by how much time I could play rather than an inability to grasp the game or slow content progression. some other things to note:
-it's a bit rough around the edges optimization wise, it runs fairly well on most computers, but larger battles will lag, it's coded in Unity 4 so it has weak multi-core support
-graphics are a few steps above minecraft, there are quite a few aesthetic mods and the quality of the components has gotten steadily better and more detailed but it's not an HD game.
-balance is a work in progress, massive content updates are still getting pushed every few months. a couple weeks back I had to go in and redo all the engines on all my ships because a new patch had changed the mechanic, got a nice boost to efficiency for my work though!
-lots of community posted designs up for grabs including a fair number of really detailed historical replicas. It's fun to play with other people's stuff if i'm not in a building mood
-very supportive community, it's pretty easy as a new player to find people willing to explain stuff or directly assist in completing a design
-several game modes: solo adventure, the stock RTS-ish campaign, (limited) multiplayer similar to minecraft's, in addition to story missions and the vehicle designer sandboxes. Players also host tournaments that you can submit designs to and then watch the fights uploaded to youtube.

hit me up on the from the depths forum! my screen name's the same there as here, i'd love to chat!

For a less realistic, but not much easier to pick up and play, alternative, Starmade is probably worth a look. It's also FREE while in alpha - the demo on Steam is the full game. The devs have said that won't be the case forever, but it's a comprehensive try before you buy option which you don't get as easily in a lot of other games.

Back to the main topic though, this dev talk reads like its entire purpose is to shut down 90% of the feedback players have about Progression 2.0. Everyone wants EITHER a complete rework OR a rewind to what we had before. Insisting that you can make the trash heap miraculously not horrible by tweaking numbers is the height of both arrogance and ignorance at this point.

There is barely any positive feedback for the new state of the game, because there is nothing positive to say about it. People don't like it because it's based on a core idea that people don't like. The basis on which progression 2.0 is built is the biggest flaw in the game right now. I don't know whether another redesign or just going back to what worked is the best option, but something big needs to be done. Tweaking the current system is simply NOT an option.

There are a lot of ways to monetise the game effectively. This model does none of them. It actually squanders a lot of really effective monetisation options, for a variety of reasons. The players have been pretty good about explaining WHY the current system is flawed AND how to do things much, MUCH better. Now it's just on the developers to actually live up to their promises of listening to what we're telling them.


http://i.imgur.com/f5SVkIz.jpg
---V^^^V---
Step into your daydreams, and follow them home


Posted: //
Dec. 9, 2016, 8:52 a.m.



For a more fighter/action based game theres everspace. It uses the Unreal engine like DN but its a single player game with persistent progression.
https://everspace-game.com/game/


Posted: //
Dec. 9, 2016, 11:42 a.m.


Updated //
Dec. 9, 2016, 11:44 a.m.

obliviondoll#5677 posted (#post-76341)
(...)Back to the main topic though, this dev talk reads like its entire purpose is to shut down 90% of the feedback players have about Progression 2.0. Everyone wants EITHER a complete rework OR a rewind to what we had before. Insisting that you can make the trash heap miraculously not horrible by tweaking numbers is the height of both arrogance and ignorance at this point.

There is barely any positive feedback for the new state of the game, because there is nothing positive to say about it. People don't like it because it's based on a core idea that people don't like. The basis on which progression 2.0 is built is the biggest flaw in the game right now. I don't know whether another redesign or just going back to what worked is the best option, but something big needs to be done. Tweaking the current system is simply NOT an option.(...)

I have a feeling that devs are so eager to keep current system because they want to have this game heavy based on monetization by any means possible. OB p2w fiasco failed so now we have this. It's extremely weird what they do because game like that could hold with cosmetic item shop easily. They don't listen to any feedback because they are probably changing their target audience. They will either send many new CBT invitations or game will be Open Beta soon. Fresh player won't be able to tell that the old system was better because fresh player didn't play in it. That's maybe why they also push DN to PS4. However they may start doing DN for PS4 and even announcing PS4 exclusive content because they have no chance anymore in making this game successful on PC.

I have a feeling that it will end like Loadout ended. There was Camping-fail update that was however reverted(devs had a choice to either keep the update and lose all PvP players or revert it and keep playerbase). They also pushed into releasing their game for PlayStation, they also pushed PS-exclusive content. PC version of Loadout was forgotten and soon game died because Camping update took too much money and developing game on two different platforms needed huge resources because it was like making two separate games.


Posted: //
Dec. 9, 2016, 2:32 p.m.



Even if they attract fresh player, I doubt that they will keep them.
I mean, that new player are no less blind than the old one. They will realise that the grind wall is here, that they will take time to even get to T5 and even there, they will still need to grind more and more, that it's endless, not because it's a new feeling with each ship, but because they will never get the chance to get the feeling.

What you say would mean that the old player base got a problem that the new player base won't have. New comer may stay a bit longer, but once they get the problem of grinding, the audience will fall again.
Attracting new player is not a solution if they can't keep them. And as good as there game could be. I mean it's still a nice looking game, with a solid intuitive gameplay, with short game to enjoy for busy people and lot's of possibility and "build" to try for more hardcore players. But this last point is no more. So people are stuck with the actual version where none of them will ever get the chance to unlock everything and begin the real testing to find there most fitting ship, or discover new combinations of modules to enjoy us.

And there lie the problem. That and the fact that even with money (elite status) you are facing a grinding wall. (That last part maybe there greatest fail. But that wouldn't solve everything)


Best proposal to put 2.0 in the right way. Please hear this guy dev https://www.greybox.com/dreadnought/en/forum/topic/30780/?page=3#post-71653


Posted: //
Dec. 9, 2016, 5:38 p.m.



Greybox right now: http://e.lvme.me/u9vk1kx.jpg

This forum is restricted, posts cannot be made.