patch?

[shadow]

Originally Posted by mervaka

well hey, this isnt tfc.

...which doesn't make an SG doing a 180 turn and begin firing at me without an audio indication any less annoying.

[FADE-EE]

Originally Posted by mervaka

well hey, this isnt tfc.

exactly why id rather play tfc then ff, lol

[schtoofa]

Originally Posted by v3rtigo

True, if FF is trying to be so new and refreshing, they should just drop the whole TFC theme. Seriously, not everything has to an exact replica but if you're not intentionally changing it, why be so stuck up about it?

Psssht. The dev team is actively working on updates/patches/etc. so it should continue to get better regardless of whether that means more or less like TFC.

Several hard core TFC dev team members and beta testers had [what I considered to be] an awkward time evaluating what's "good" when it was different than what's in TFC. It got frustrating to me to watch some of that, so I can understand merv's frustration I don't think he's being stuck up, but I can see how it might come off that way. FF is what it is. TFC is what it is, and it's not going to constrain FF. *shrug*

[Nuk3m]

Originally Posted by schtoofa

Psssht. The dev team is actively working on updates/patches/etc. so it should continue to get better regardless of whether that means more or less like TFC.

Several hard core TFC dev team members and beta testers had [what I considered to be] an awkward time evaluating what's "good" when it was different than what's in TFC. It got frustrating to me to watch some of that, so I can understand merv's frustration I don't think he's being stuck up, but I can see how it might come off that way. FF is what it is. TFC is what it is, and it's not going to constrain FF. *shrug*

is there a way to make the conc grenades work more similar to TFC? i know its a touchy question, but it is so hard to conc in conc servers because of the physics. you cant juggle any more!

[v3rtigo]

Thanks for the clarification, do be careful though, or else FF might become some sort of 'different, but in a bad way'-mod that can't decide between being new/different and oldschool/nostalgic. Obviously, some things are going to be changed, but I think TFC did a pretty good job on balancing things when it came to the SGs and the HWguy. Since technically nothing has changed, I was wondering why'd you change it?

From your post, I get the impression that some of you just left it this way because it was different and figured it'd be 'original' this way. Like when the coder is trying to get it like TFC, but during beta tests it turns out be a bit different but the testers think "who cares, this isn't tfc anyway". Though this isn't necessarily a bad thing, changing these rather sensitive settings can upset gameplay quite a bit, especially outside of the testing grounds.

What I'm trying to say is, don't change the little stuff too much. Chances are you're annoying more people with it than you'd think. Instead, try to either completely revamp some aspect of the game (a class or weapon for instance) or add entirely new elements of gameplay (like the fortress points or cloaking). This way it becomes far more distinctive from TFC without being annoying.

[schtoofa]

Originally Posted by v3rtigo

Obviously, some things are going to be changed, but I think TFC did a pretty good job on balancing things when it came to the SGs and the HWguy. Since technically nothing has changed, I was wondering why'd you change it?

What do you mean?

Originally Posted by v3rtigo

From your post, I get the impression that some of you just left it this way because it was different and figured it'd be 'original' this way. Like when the coder is trying to get it like TFC, but during beta tests it turns out be a bit different but the testers think "who cares, this isn't tfc anyway". Though this isn't necessarily a bad thing, changing these rather sensitive settings can upset gameplay quite a bit, especially outside of the testing grounds.

Hmm... the goal was never to be original, but instead to be smart & fun. If feature X was in TFC and we thought X was good, we borrowed X for FF. We also had plenty of new or different ideas that caught on. But trust me - a lot of original / new ideas were shot down because overall people thought they were stupid

Originally Posted by v3rtigo

What I'm trying to say is, don't change the little stuff too much. Chances are you're annoying more people with it than you'd think. Instead, try to either completely revamp some aspect of the game (a class or weapon for instance) or add entirely new elements of gameplay (like the fortress points or cloaking). This way it becomes far more distinctive from TFC without being annoying.

I think your options are too restrictive. All along the way, taking decision-making to a higher level, we ask the question: Does this make sense and contribute to FF being more fun / long-lasting / more attractive to more players? Not surprisingly, what ended up in FF was a hodgepodge from all the camps you mentioned. This will continue to be the case for features large and small! Sometimes we'll make bad choices, but hopefully we'll make more "collectively" good ones

[Dospac]

So long as we don't let Schtoofa make his Gazelle Fortress side project..

[Boogieman117]

Originally Posted by Dospac

So long as we don't let Schtoofa make his Gazelle Fortress side project..

Amen...

[v3rtigo]

Originally Posted by schtoofa

What do you mean?

I meant that if it worked in TFC, why change it in FF? I mean, the difference is minimal and people are already complaining and not without reason.

Hmm... the goal was never to be original, but instead to be smart & fun. If feature X was in TFC and we thought X was good, we borrowed X for FF. We also had plenty of new or different ideas that caught on. But trust me - a lot of original / new ideas were shot down because overall people thought they were stupid

Features being ported over is nice, but some things seem to have changed in the process. While this can be for the better of the game, to me, there don't always seem to be advantages to it. It could simply be that the implementation requires some tweaking but it could also be because you thought it was smart and fun as you say it. My point is, did you change feature X because you saw a reason for it or just because it was a refreshing change to you?

Take the SG for instance, it's obvious that it works differently (different ROF/health/lockon time, distance) but was there any reason for this? Was it because in TFC, it was too easy to destroy/evade/whatever? If you ask me, the SG in TFC was fine so I'd see no reason to change it. If I did, chances are I'd have to change class dynamics as well.

Especially in the first release, where everything already is a bit different, I wouldn't risk changing this. I'd rather tweak the SG at a later stage when the main gripes, features and problems of the game are already known so that when I do change it, I already know which classes or gameplay elements are going to be affected by it most, so I can pay extra attention to this during the beta testing.

I think your options are too restrictive. All along the way, taking decision-making to a higher level, we ask the question: Does this make sense and contribute to FF being more fun / long-lasting / more attractive to more players? Not surprisingly, what ended up in FF was a hodgepodge from all the camps you mentioned. This will continue to be the case for features large and small! Sometimes we'll make bad choices, but hopefully we'll make more "collectively" good ones

Of course, details are important, but I'm saying don't fix what isn't broken. The SG and HWguy were fine in TFC as many will probably agree. Sure, you can tweak them a little bit but why does the HW's gun work so differently all of a sudden when, in the end, it serves the same purpose. It's possible that it will be an improvement, but the chance you're overlooking something or it will unbalance gameplay is far greater as is proven by the current need to rebalance him.

I mean, do you guys really care that the HWGuy has a different functionality for his gun? Does it affect anything that is typical to FF? I'm guessing it doesn't so it looks like you changed it just to be different from TFC (emphasis on "looks"). That's why I'm saying that if you're going to change something, do it on a larger scale, so you can influence more aspects of the game, thus making it more original and different from TFC, without making it look like a crappy remake* of something. Chances are you'll also have much more control over gameplay and balancing issues, thus increasing the chance of it being a success.

* Just to be clear, FF's AC is not a crappy remake, but I think you get my point

[Dospac]

With the FF SG, ideally it would work exactly like in TFC. The balance was superb and I don't see any advantage to how it is currently setup. Unfortunately it just didn't work out due to some subtle engine differences and obviously different code from the ground up.

[mervaka]

wooooooooah, wheres the fire?

Originally Posted by schtoofa

FF is what it is. TFC is what it is, and it's not going to constrain FF. *shrug*

thats all i was trying to say.

[schtoofa]

Originally Posted by Dospac

So long as we don't let Schtoofa make his Gazelle Fortress side project..

You bastard!

[v3rtigo]

Originally Posted by Dospac

With the FF SG, ideally it would work exactly like in TFC. The balance was superb and I don't see any advantage to how it is currently setup. Unfortunately it just didn't work out due to some subtle engine differences and obviously different code from the ground up.

My thoughts exactly, if it is because of the porting itself (due to differences in the engine and code, like you mentioned) then there isn't much you can do about it but if you use the excuse that FF isn't TFC, then I doubt it's going to be for the better. Sure it's different, but some stuff just shouldn't be changed without good reason. That's all I am trying to say.