TFC Source v. FF poll
 

It's been said that the community is divided about what it wants, so I wanted to set up a poll to see how true that is. Given the choice between the two, which would you rather see? Here's some clarification:

TFC Source: Make the gameplay as close as possible to TFC. This means bringing back caltrops, gas grenades, slower sg builds, more sg push, etc. This also means keeping all the visual changes and GUI updates. For sake or argument, I'll exclude the pyro, since I think we can all agree the TFC pyro sucked.

Fortress Forever's current direction: Keep doing what FF has been doing. This means jump pads, skim caps, slowing hits, faster sg builds, etc.


My guess is most people would like a combination of the two, but I'm curious what people would say if they had to choose.

Polls seem to mean everything in these parts. :)

I want a combination of the two, but I would rather Fortress Forever become it's own game. If I wanted to play Team Fortress Classic, I would go play it. I think adding a new Team Fortress game to the series is better than recreating one.

I think what may be a better question/poll is whether people would support scraping Fortress Forever and finding a staff of willing and able bodies to develop a new mod. No matter what you do with this mod, its reputation alone among FPS mods damages more than an SG tweak or skim cap ever could. New name, new PR push BEFORE release, re-release. You already have a fantastic blue print in Fortress Forever in what to do and what not to do. You won't find long term success in Fortress Forever anymore.

Bridget: Given FF and its current state and TFC mechanics, I'd take TFC any day. However I feel like if many more changes were added to balance things out, FF could be just as good if not better. I have no idea what's planned for 2.5, but up to date I think the mod has gone downhill quite a bit in terms of gameplay.

Rutabeggar: I really don't know the full story here, though I'm a little more optimistic. I think the thing to find out (or maybe it's well known and I'm just ignorant) is to find out why so many players left FF. The next thing is to look for common trends and make a massive overhaul that addressed as many as possible. In other words, target the game for the people who gave up on it for clear reasons. If XYZ changes were made, then a big PR campaign was launched to woo back players, I think it could turn things around.

What I think would NOT work would be to add more changes that don't address the reasons players left, have a new patch release, get a lot of press, then have a wave of people give FF a try again, only to find their concerns still unresolved, then they leave again.

The problem still lies in the name of the mod. No, it's not because it's a terrible name and is nonsensical. The title of the mod itself turns people away for the simple fact that it's related to the earlier failures FF endured. People won't come back to the mod for the same reason people didn't want to go back to Jack in the Box after their salmonella problems. The food was fine, even good, but they associated Jack in the Box with salmonella and it was an instant turn off. Of course, Jack in the Box recovered, but time was something they could afford I suppose. The gaming industry develops so rapidly that this mod is already dated in comparison to other FPS on the market. You can't repair the damage the name has ingrained in the minds of those who tried it and disliked it.

can't compare, havent played tfc :( so i choose FF

Well companies have rebranding and new directions all the time. Your Jack In The Box example is a good one. It had a salmonella outbreak which no doubt tarnished its reputation. Since then it's doing strong as ever and is expanding into more areas and has had a fanastic marketing campaign (I actually find their commercials funny and like the mascot).

So even if the FF name is tarnished, I'd say it's recoverable, but only if it has BIG changes that address the people who gave up on it, and it advertises that as such. While people certainly hold grudges, they also have short memories and generally like new things. Look to the L4D2 or MW2 boycott results as evidence of how resolute people are as far as shunning something forever.

no chance of getting a hybrid? keep jump pads for example? Make Pyro useful?

ye hibrid ofcurse some features in ff are great like the railgun, double jump, etc

Well besides being able to not edit the poll, the problem with the hybrid option is that it clashes with a statement squeek made in another thread about the community not being able to make up its mind with what it wants. My ideal hybrid is likely to be different from your ideal hybrid. For example, I think jump pads are fun, but they need a counter to be balanced. Also pyros can be the best flag runners there are on AvD maps with vertical obstacles (avanti, cornfield, etc.). I think they need a counter as well, but at the same time, for CTF they probably could use a boost.

By just having the two options, it kind of forces people to make a decision about what direction they'd rather development lean towards.

Like I said TFC is the best game I have ever played in my eyes. FF has the potential to become even better.

I think the FF devs made the right decision by adding some new features and allowed the game to have progressed further. I pretty much like the new ideas (scoutpads!!) and to me FF is some kind of a TFC: Source SE (Special Edition).

On the other hand I don't know what the new patch is gonna bring to us all and what the devs have in mind.

I wouldn't want FF to drift away any further from it's inspiration, from TFC.

Keeping all of TFC's shittiness is a stupid idea. What's the point? TFC still exists, you can go play TFC if you want TFC.

The problem is, TFC is so old it's very unlikely any new guys are gonna start playing it. it's time is over. Whereas FF is "the future", modern compared to TFC and still got the potential to turn into a big community with many years to come.

Well, there's gotta be a difference between TFC and FF.

Those players who I have talked to said they wouldn't bother switching to FF even if it was pretty much TFC2. They love TFC.

There are many considerations to be taken care of.

For example: to whom will this "new" FF cater?

IMHO: keep the stuff that makes sense in FF and combine it with the stuff that made sense in TFC.

I don't think anyone's arguing there's not room for improvement in TFC. The question is more if the downsides to straying from the TFC mechanics overshadow the improvements made. So on one hand, you have jump pads, which are fun, on the other hand, you have ksour rounds which are over in under 5 minutes, which is not fun.

Fantastic question. I don't think anyone knows. If they do, I'd love to hear who the past versions of FF have been catered to.

1.0 + 1.11 = TFC players, CTF and AvD alike
2.0 = ?
2.1 = ?
2.2 = ?
2.3 = ?
2.4 = ?

Feel free to fill in the blanks.

And FF needs changes to make it more fun and appealing to newer players.

I agree with that. Although FF doesn't need to many changes imo. just a few wee problems need to be sorted.

Solutions to problems often breed problems of their own.

I chose TFC source, but really I would like to see a better culmination of the two. I personally think the true strength of Fortress games is based on large(r)-scale team matches. Because of how fast paced FF is, it basically requires a small amount of players (I'm talking competitively) for it to actually be fun. Once you go beyond that 4 player threshold, the game quickly falls apart into either a turtle, or an o zerg, and it just isn't fun. The great thing, to me, about TFC was large-scale games. 8v8 CTF, or 9v9 AVD was infinitely more fun than a regular 'ole 4v4 or 3v3.

Further more, I think AvD is the most organic gameplay for a game with 9 unique classes. 4v4 CTF is the most homogenous and repetitive shit ever. Pickups never really come down to strat, but rather repetive regurgitation of the typical strats. Go medic, toss nades at SG, toss a few nails. Die. Conc back as fast as possible to kill engineer/gun. Kill demo. Kill t soldier. It's monotonous. Something like AvD doesn't prevent you from playing obscure classes like Sniper or Pyro. These are perfectly valid classes in AvD. In AvD people truly have to work together. I played CTF pickups for a while, and I deluded myself into thinking that it was teamwork based. Lol. What a joke. The people who can DM the best, clear a path and everyone follows his trail of destruction. Damn. Teamwork! On the other hand, AvD gives you an extremely wide range of options to tackle the defense. It's hard to effectively plan an offense or defense strat, since you have to predict the actions of 9 other people, and make judgments based on your 9 at the same time. And that is what makes AvD so much fun. It's kind of unpredictable (In a competitive environment) and seriously some of the most fun I've ever had was playing a serious game of AvD. CTF is really, really, really, really empty compared to AvD, and I think that's why I eventually lost interest in FF.

The direction the game has been moving is more towards really small, quick, and easy gameplay. I find long games of attrition with real tangible results being produced by teamwork, over a monotonous grind of moving the flag 15 yards 80 times over. Call me crazy.