PDA

View Full Version : [PART II] CHANGES/IDEAS FOR UPCOMING SEQUEL/EXPANSION thread


Smood
01-29-2003, 01:55 PM
Well my previous thread was closed because of the volume of the thread, so I will start part to of this thread. If you wish to check the original thread just click below:

OLD THREAD (http://www.lucasforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=90599)

Now I will just continue the discussion leaving off with a post from the well known SPIDER AL...

Like all fanboys before you, you persist in separating the JK world into two camps: "Jedi" and "Mercenaries." The JK games however, are about Jedi who also use guns. Get that through your head.

NO! I completely disagree with this statment. It may have ended up that players use guns and the saber becuase it is strategically more sound, but this is not the intended dynamic (jedi vs. merc mode). I sincerely doubt RAVEN, and LUCAS specifically intended to have this type of gameplay predominant in the outcast world. Althrough they probablly did not detest it.

I'am getting tired of this fanboy crap of yours. All I'am interested in making a better game, and I feel doing this will involve making the game more unique and pulling design further away from standard fp shooters, and bringing gameplay closer to the movie. All this talk of fanboys is pure bullsh@t.

Vagabond
01-29-2003, 05:43 PM
Okay, Smood, here's an official warning, and anyone else out there who may wish to post in these forums - chill out. If you're going to debate a topic, which I encourage by the way, then do it with respect and a cool head. If you continue with the insults and personal attacks, then I'm going to lock down the thread.

Name-calling in general is a provocative gesture, so everyone please, refrain from referring to others as "fanboys" or "newbies", etc. True, some people are fans, and some people are new, but using a label in the context of an insult is the first step toward turning an otherwise interesting debate into a flame-war, and will not be tolerated.

I haven't moderated here for a while, but those of you who remember me already know that I am quite tolerant of just about any discussion imaginable, so long as it is conducted with respect and maturity. So again, if feel you need to call people names in order to argue your point, then you may end up finding yourself in the timeout corner :cool:

happydan
01-29-2003, 06:20 PM
erm... i dont see him calling anyone names in that post. hes simply retorting what was said to him...

but, IMO, the MP game should be expanded upon, not changed (except for the combat system, which should be less random, like promod...)

Jeff 42
01-29-2003, 07:28 PM
NO! I completely disagree with this statment. It may have ended up that players use guns and the saber becuase it is strategically more sound, but this is not the intended dynamic (jedi vs. merc mode). I sincerely doubt RAVEN, and LUCAS specifically intended to have this type of gameplay predominant in the outcast world.

LOL! Have you ever played the single player modes of Jedi Knight and Jedi Outcast? The main character, Kyle Katarn, is a mercenary who becomes a Jedi, and then utilizes his skills with guns in addition to his lightsaber and Force powers to overcome his enemies. Naturally, in multiplayer this model is followed. Everyone can be like Kyle, a Force-using mercenary/Jedi. Jedi vs. Merc play can be a good gametype, but to force it on players would be stupid and take away a large portion of the game's fun.

Also, I doubt "LUCAS" cares the least bit about how people play this game. :p

Another funny thing is the fact that the previous thread was locked. In fact, I find that quite hilarious. The reasons for locking it were completely pathetic. But oh well...

Spider AL
01-29-2003, 07:39 PM
Quite, happydan. Although Smood's style of debating is immature, it hardly warrants official intervention. Is it me, or are the LF admins becoming more "active" all of a sudden? Strange...

And now my response to the...

Er... SMOOD:

Originally posted by Smood:
NO! I completely disagree with this statment. It may have ended up that players use guns and the saber becuase it is strategically more sound, but this is not the intended dynamic

Aha. You of course are in NO way qualified to declare what the intended dynamic of the game was.

Originally posted by Smood:
I sincerely doubt RAVEN, and LUCAS specifically intended to have this type of gameplay predominant in the outcast world.

Nor would it be prudent for you to form "sincere" opinions on subjects which you know nothing about.

To any experienced veteran of the Dark Forces series, it is plain that Jedi Outcast has a similar dynamic to the excellent Jedi Knight, which staunchly lasted for almost five years as an online multiplayer community. It's a great dynamic, and there are a range of servers available for all styles of play. For those that can't find a server specifically tailored to their needs, they can make one. For those that can't support a server, they have the Zone.

What YOU want, and let's get straight to the heart of the matter here, is for YOUR idea of "what the game should be like", to become the reality. YOU want to impose your unworkable and dubious ideas onto the people who have stuck with the Dark Forces series through thick and thin. You, yes you, want to make the game into a "let's pretend we're real Jedi" RPG. You want to slow the game down, you want to make the game into a beat-em-up duel-only parody of the movies.

It's an FPS. It always has been, and if you want an RPG, wait for Galaxies.

Originally posted by Smood:
I'am getting tired of this fanboy crap of yours. All I'am interested in making a better game, and I feel doing this will involve making the game more unique and pulling design further away from standard fp shooters, and bringing gameplay closer to the movie.

See, I was right. You're not interested in improving JO. You want to CHANGE JO. You want to change it from being a fast-paced FPS into a slow-paced recreation of a film. You want it to be a playground for those who pretend to be REAL Jedi. And, naturally, whatever you're getting tired of is of little import to me.

DeTRiTiC-iQ
01-29-2003, 08:10 PM
*mutters something about "harsh but true"*

Reborn Outcast
01-29-2003, 10:58 PM
Ok the game has guns for a reason... to shoot people. Not everyone wants to play with just lightsabers. I enjoy the challenge of killing someone with my BlasTech pistol or sniping them while they're running. I also don't mind fighting a good gunsmen. That is the way the game was meant to be played, not all saber.

Unnamed Jed1
01-30-2003, 02:50 AM
Well as far as "game speed" goes JK2 is VERY slow.

I pretty much dropped all FPS games since this game came out and the other day when I went back to Quake 3 (haven't played it in almost a year) I was literally fighting to keep my movements under control due to the speed difference between the two games.

Slowing the pace of Jedi Outcast even more would make this game into a crappy PC version of console ports like "Jedi Power Battles".

Don't get me wrong, I like the complex saber and Force stuff, but something needs to be done to attract the "casual gamer" and not just the Star Wars fans if anyone hopes to keep the franchise strong.

Throw in the ability to operate vehicles, add some "one hit kill Spam" options in the way of powerful new guns, saber moves and Force powers.
The "average Joe" FPS player is quickly turned off from this game in its current form because unlike other FPS games, you really have to know what you are doing to succeed.

Sure in all games the "elite" will always win, but even a "newbie" in Counter-Strike can rack up a decent score if he buys the right guns.

The motion to make this into an "rpg" is a very bad idea. Look how many players dropped off the map as the games saber combat was weakened with each patch.
Sure some of you will say "Good, they were noobs who Spammed, I'm glad they are gone".
Yeah well, enjoy your empty servers; you got what you wished for.

Keep the game fast and the moves/weapons deadly and you will keep players interested.
Turn it into a /amsit "let's bow" game and you will simply drive more people away.

N3mesis
01-30-2003, 04:04 PM
One thing that i think it wold really skill up the game is if some how the force powes wold have to be charge up before they could be used Ex. if you wold spend more time charging push than our adversay your push wold be stronger, same thing with jump, you wold jump higher/lower depending on the time you wold charge jump, another improvement in the game was the possibility of some kind of dodging moves like in UT. What do you guys think about this?

Red_Flame5000
01-30-2003, 04:22 PM
I think that is a good idea and u should tell the creaters of the gasme abought that idea.:c3po: :c3po:

happydan
01-30-2003, 06:25 PM
i would say the singleplayer is there to attract the casual gamer...

Unnamed Jed1
01-30-2003, 07:31 PM
Originally posted by happydan
i would say the singleplayer is there to attract the casual gamer...

True but single player games do not keep the franchise alive. Look no further than Half-Life for a perfect example. It is the multiplayer content that keeps a community alive and makes people into “fans” rather than just someone who will play it once and toss it away.

Go back and read the reviews of this game when it was first released.
The multiplayer is what got the most attention and best reviews.
It was something totally new, flying around with lightsabers blasting people with lightning. All in a visually impressive graphics engine.

Do you think the average player cared about the notion that the ability to pivot in the air while doing a DFA was considered “cheap” by some players?
No of course not.

All of the “lets do this to make saber combat better” comments people are making are from their own personal preferences of what the game should be like and not suggestions on making the franchise successful and popular.

The developers should go back to the basics Raven used when they first developed the game. Throw in all kinds of fancy looking and deadly options to kill other players with.
Is that cheap/Spam/lame?
Sure, but it will sell a Hell of a lot more copies than the crap that was presented to us in the way of the “Here you damn baby, here is your patch now stfu and stop e-mailing us” patches that were released.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying things should not be tweaked in regards to combat, but that is what mods are for.

Spider AL
01-30-2003, 08:22 PM
Precisely correct in all respects, Unnamed Jed1.

N3mesis, I personally think your idea is good, and have suggested something of this type myself, several times over the past few months. Merely increasing the minimum wait time before one can re-use a power, like push, would be sufficient however. But as Unnamed said, such tweaks are best left to mods... The abysmal v.1.03 was an example of what happens when gameplay is drastically altered in a patch.

DeTRiTiC-iQ
01-30-2003, 09:22 PM
(Spider, get your arachnid behind into #massassi)

ryudom
01-30-2003, 11:33 PM
hmm, i wouldn't want them to increase the wait time for push, because then pushing projectiles would suck. pushing maybe could be weaker if you didn't let it charge long enough, but you could still push projectiles, or at least stop them maybe

AJL
01-31-2003, 05:45 AM
I think that in next game or expansion you shouldn't be able
to be strong jedi/sith master and use guns...

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Players should be able to be:

1. Pure Jedi/Sith (only weapon is saber) but they "could" be
very strong with force

2. "Merc" Jedi/Sith (they would have saber and maybe some
blaster pistol and they could pickup and use some smaller
blaster rifles, explosives, ...) and they could use also force
but their force abilities should be clearly limited... (only basic
powers like push, pull, jump, ... and saber skills shouldn't
be able to be extremely high...)

3. Merc (no sabers or force powers) but "many" light/medium
guns (=blaster pistols and small rifles like E11... maybe some
dart guns and...) and some special gadgets like jetpack...
(same kind of stuff what Jango/Boba Fett had...)
--- But these guys play with what they have... i mean
no extra weapon pickups for these guys...

4. Soldier (no force and saber and any of those special
gadgets) but biger blaster cannons, armor which protects
agains blasters, ...

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

And i think guys who can use and pick up guns still shouldn't
be able to pick up all of them at the same time (there should
be clear limits what you can carry...) = blaster pistol(s),
couple smaller rifles or one big rifle, some explosives..

And of course you should also be able to drop stuff...

Reborn Outcast
01-31-2003, 07:39 AM
Originally posted by AJL
I think that in next game or expansion you shouldn't be able
to be strong jedi/sith master and use guns...

Why not? That makes no sense. Everyone should be able to use guns whether Jedi or Sith.

AJL
01-31-2003, 09:24 AM
Originally posted by Reborn Outcast
Why not? That makes no sense. Everyone should be able to use guns whether Jedi or Sith.

Because in my opinion guns are not their weapons...

Because jedi / sith with guns is not cool...

Because it would balance things...

Because... i don't like...

It doesn't matter if you are sith or jedi... (both can
have guns if they are not "force masters" like in
that four class idea above...)

Jeff 42
01-31-2003, 10:47 AM
I think that in next game or expansion you shouldn't be able
to be strong jedi/sith master and use guns...

Yes, let's make the game less fun to appease the "fans". :rolleyes:

From Vagabond: Watch yourself, Jeff 42 - you won't be warned again - I've edited out your name-calling. If you can't post without hurling insults, then don't post at all. And if you can't control yourself, the staff here will.

Spider AL
01-31-2003, 11:07 AM
Originally posted by DeTRiTiC-iQ
Spider, get your arachnid behind into #massassi

My behind is arachnoid! And I only pop in there when I'm very, very bored, these days. One has to be extremely bored to attempt to find amusement in an IRC channel...

Originally posted by AJL
Because jedi / sith with guns is not cool...

Because... i don't like...

Once again, we have someone popping up who wants to change, note: not improve, but CHANGE the game, to be a different game entirely. The Dark Forces series is about a mercenary who becomes a Jedi. He uses guns, explosives, mechanical tools AND the Force and a lightsabre.

It has been like this since 1997. It has established fans, and lots and lots of people love it.

WHAT in heaven's name makes you, and Smood, and people of your ilk, think that you have the right to CHANGE the series into a completely different game, just so that you can pretend to be REAL Jedi? Make a mod for Chewbacca's sake.

Prime
01-31-2003, 02:11 PM
I'm totally with Spider AL on this one. Now, I play JO because it's Star Wars, not because it is a FPS. I don't play to necessarily rack up kills (although winning is fun too!), but to be in the Star Wars world for a little while. I am a big fan of the movies, and the lightsaber combat therein. I like JO because for a couple of hours I can pretend to be a Jedi Knight, and that's fun. Whether this makes me a fanboy, I don't know, but I don't dress up or play with toys, although I still have them from when I was a kid :) But I realize that the visual movie style might not translate easily into the game world. Sort of like turning books into movies, there is always something you have to leave out. They are two different mediums. Some things are done solely for gameplay purposes.

Frankly, I think Raven has done a brilliant job at implementing saber combat in a manner that is fast-paced (like the movies, no?), yet easy to use. I don't understand why people would want to slow it down. Quick moves and reflex actions are what saber combat is all about, isn't it? Personally, I think slowing it down would take the essence of saber fighting away, don't you?

As for forcing players to either use guns or saber, why would you want to limit yourself like that? As has been pointed out at length, this game is about Kyle Katarn, merc/jedi, and throughout the SP game you can pick up any kind of weapon. So to say that saber+guns isn't the intended game type doesn't seem true at all. And really, that is a great aspect of the game. Look at all the options you have! If you feel that the Jedi in the PT movies don't use blasters, so you don't want to, that's okay too. The great thing about JO SP is that the lightsaber is probably the most powerful weapon, and you can use it exclusively if you choose. Or, if you like the Merc side of JO you can use guns all the time if you want. This game is great because it gives you the freedom to play how you want to play. SP is particularly good for this, and with some slight tweeks (increase saber damage?) MP would be this way as well. As long as the saber is just as effective as guns, people can play the way they want. The other nice thing that Raven did was have a sabers only game type. So those of you in the "Jedi only use sabers" camp can play that way if you choose. Perhaps there should be a guns-only game type along with the normal FFA? But don't go on a guns server and get upset that people are using guns and the saber. If you want sabers only, you already have it. I applaud Raven for giving me the freedom to play the way I want.

One last thing, to all you "Jedi don't use blasters" people, Luke sure used a blaster and a lightsaber, so what are you all worked up over? And since this game fits in the post ROTJ EU, and Luke has started training the new Jedi Order, doesn't it make sense that Jedi in this timeframe would use a combination of lightsaber and guns as well? IMO this game is probably an accurate portrayal of what a Jedi might be like in this era. Just a thought ;)

Cheers.

P.S. Won't it be great when Galaxies and KOTOR come out? Then people can play the type of game that suits them. RPGs for the RPGers, and JO for the FPSers. People trying to RPG on a JO server can often ruin the fun for the rest of us.

Smood
01-31-2003, 03:33 PM
HERE IS SOMETHING PEOPLE LIKE SPIDER AL ARE JUST NOT UNDERSTANDING!!!

I'am not saying slow the game down, I'am not saying make it into a RPG! I'am not saying make classes as default (although the class idea in general is good).

I'am saying ENHANCE SABER COMBAT! Make saber combat MANUAL, make it more strategic, make it take more skill and make the saber more DEADLY (i.e. if the saber slides through your body, you should be DISMEMBERED NOT DECAPITATED BUT DISMEMBERED at that part of your body in 1 slice, [imagine if windu ran up to jango and slashed him and sparks popped off him and jango continued to shoot at him]).

One thing people are really confusing is fluidity and speed! The speed of the game is fine, I have no problem with fast fps's, I love UT2003. The movement in the game could definately be more seamless. Move from one animation to the next by blending and not jerking from this to that, or don't give the ability for someone to shift side to side 5 times in a second. Blend it into more realistic motion.

I fully endorse the saber combat system I suggested but only to the extent of jedi's. I do not want to slow game speed down!!! I don't want this to be a RPG, AND FOR GOD SAKES STOP WITH THE FANBOY STUFF. I'am not going to say anything bad since the moderator is getting angry, but I believe he is not very partial to this 'title' either.

Spider AL
01-31-2003, 04:25 PM
Smood, in your original post/thread you said this:

Originally posted by Smood:
During saber combat individuals are able to move left and right in a very short time, this leads to a cheap fps game/feel not suitable for a type of combat game like jedi outcast. Instead by the same change as above, making the stepping fluid and organic (have movement slower, and better blended) would bring a much greater feel of true saber battling

And this:

Originally posted by Smood:
One key here is making movement slower relative to the world and relative to other individuals.

And then you say this:

Originally posted by Smood:
I'am not saying slow the game down,

What are you on? Give me some of it, or at least tell me where to get some. :D

Seriously though, some rather huge contradictions going on there. Not only have you said that you want the game slowed down, but you've done so repeatedly.

You also said this in the original post:

Originally posted by Smood:
I understand this game is a fps, but it is unique in that it focuses a lot of its core gameplay against the saber and dueling. Why not elaborate on this unique aspect of this STAR WARS fps. Fast paced games are great, but making dueling a bit more true to the movies would increase the game's uniqueness and value.

And this:

Originally posted by Smood:
Let's face it, there are not that many players who hate star wars who are playing this game, so exemplify the highlights of this game that are unique and attract the audience which currently plays it!

And this, in this thread:

Originally posted by Smood:
I'am interested in making a better game, and I feel doing this will involve making the game more unique and pulling design further away from standard fp shooters, and bringing gameplay closer to the movie.

And then you say this:

Originally posted by Smood:
I'am not saying make it into a RPG!

Somewhat more dependant on interpretation this time, but still inconsistent. You want the game to recreate the movie, hence RPG.

As for your desire for animations that blend together seamlessly, sure. Fine. But that's a cosmetic change, not a gameplay change, and has little or nothing to do with your many sweeping, unworkable gameplay-altering suggestions from the original thread.

Actually, you've changed your tune a bit, haven't you. :naughty:

Vagabond
01-31-2003, 04:34 PM
Here's my take on all this...I'd like to see:

1. Class-based multiplay, similar to the "personalities" from Jedi Knight: Mysteries of the Sith. So you'd probably have Jedi/Sith, Bounty Hunter, Medic, Tech, Demolition, etc. classes. Each class could use the weapons from the other classes, but when they spawn in, they start with weapons, armor, and inventory items that make sense for that class. Also, different classes might have different max/min values for armor, shielding, health, and perhaps running speed.

2. Bring back the back-pack from Jedi Knight & Mysteries of the Sith - in those games, when you killed someone, they dropped a back-pack with all the weapons & ammo they were holding. If you picked up their back-pack, you got their weapons and ammo - after a a minute, if no one picked up the back-pack it would disappear, but it added an excellent strategic element to the game - and plus it added a fun touch of realism.

3. Allow force users (Jedi/Sith) to use both Light and Dark powers, if desired. Some of the most fun I've had in multiplayer is my "gray" Jedi from Mysteries of the Sith. And it really fit my personality (no pun intended) too. You try to be good and just, but in a tight spot you can unleash the fury of the Force. Not only was it fun, but it added lots of strategic value. Of course, you couldn't just pick all the best powers from the Light and Dark side - the game's interface grouped the force abilities by power-level, and you only had so many picks from each level - so you had to choose wisely. Anyway, it was fun.

4. Joystick support that works correctly (I'm not interested in debating the merits of the joystick -vs- the mouse). Jedi Knight & Mysteries of the Sith had excellent stick support, but Jedi Outcast's controller support was very buggy for non-mouse users. All I ask for is joystick support that actually works.

5. An obscene number of skins would be appreciated. Skins from the prequel, the original trilogy, the expanded universe - and even some new ones that we haven't heard of. Let's see all the skins that make everyone think Star Wars. Jedi Outcast really had a relatively limited selection of skins, which took away a lot of the fun for me. If class-based multiplay is introduced, than I'd like to see numerous skins available for each class - numerous means 15-20 skin choices, or more, available for each class. Aliens, such as Mon Calamari, Ithorian, Wookie, Rodian, Aqualish, Talz, Gran, Shivan, Human (obviously), Gamorean...even the stupid (in my opinion) Yuuzhan Vong, etc.; droids, such as Destroyer Droids, War Droids, Assasin Droids, Medic Droids, Astromech Drods, etc; And have more than one choice available for each Alien/Droid type. The more skins, the better.

...well, that's about it for now.

Spider AL
01-31-2003, 06:16 PM
Originally posted by Vagabond:
(I'm not interested in debating the merits of the joystick -vs- the mouse).

You are right not to want to debate the merits of the joystick, as any position other than "Mouse R LEET!!11" would be indefensible! :D

Seriously though, some interesting ideas... As for backpacks, I'm not sure it would "add" anything to the strategic game for one player to end up- as well as being at the top of the scoreboard- with a nigh-undepletable cache of firearms and ammo. Experienced NF games in JK consisted largely of obtaining the first kill, and then stalking all weapon spawns with your wodge of big guns... Kind of like winning the pistol round in CS.

Skins are always good, only Star Wars related skins however, we wouldn't want to annoy the fans. :)

A class-system is incredibly difficult to balance, so maybe for a team-game like CTF it might work, (as in TFC) but for straight deathmatch, you'd get everyone using whatever class was the strongest (and there's always a strongest) and that'd be quite tedious and would defeat the point of having a range of classes.

Originally posted by Vagabond:
Allow force users (Jedi/Sith) to use both Light and Dark powers, if desired.

Yes, this is a good idea, and Jedi and Sith never had disparate powers in the original trilogy anyway... Luke used Grip, and Vader absorbed blaster bolt energy etc...

However, as an expansion would probably repatch the exe, forcing all clients and servers to use whatever modifications it brought in, maybe changing the gameplay isn't a good idea at all.

Perhaps an expansion should be like MOTS, separate. They could write it as a mod. That'd be good.

Unnamed Jed1
01-31-2003, 10:10 PM
Well making saber combat "like the movies" would be boring as Hell.
Why?
99.9999999999999% of all the swings were blocked and every single time the saber contacted skin, the fight was over.

I'm not sure people would go for that instead of just picking up a gun and shooting you...

The TFC idea could be a great mod/game type idea though.
You could have different gunners like snipers and heavy weapons guys.
Different Jedi with class based powers for specific purposes.
TFC is actually one of the best games/mods ever created and due to the wide variety of powers and weapons in the SW universe it could really be great if ported over.

ryudom
02-01-2003, 12:43 AM
i also like the classes idea, you could have differant gametypes spawn from this as well, like the Saga gametype and other stuff would be cool. it'd be important though to have this as an option, you could have classes or no classes

Spider AL
02-01-2003, 12:45 AM
Good point ryudom! Options is the key word.

AJL
02-01-2003, 06:38 AM
I also think that anyone (with force powers) should
be able to select both light and dark side powers and
player shouldn't be just able to press one button and
choose if he in on dark or light side...

His force side should be selected as average value of
those force powers what he selected...

And also his strength with all force powers what he
have should be average value of those powers...

(I mean if he have about same amount of light and
dark powers then his powers are all bit unbalanced
and "weak" but when he is deeply in dark or light
side he is strong with that side powers and weak
with those opposite side powers...)

Vagabond
02-01-2003, 09:05 AM
Actually, this leads into the whole discussion about what it means to be "Light" or "Dark". On one side you have the people that say if you have a power that can harm someone, then that means you're on the Dark Side. On the other side, you have the people that say it's how one uses that power that indicates whether one is Dark or Light.

Me? I fall in the later group. Just because a police officer has a gun, doesn't mean the officer is evil. They could use their gun for evil - they could shoot out peoples' windows, hold up a bank, or shoot someone's pet just for the heck of it. Or, the officer could use his/her gun to protect the public, to take down criminals that are about to harm someone.

So, I think it's how you use the power that makes one Dark or Light. As has already been pointed out, we have examples of that in the movies already. Plus, does anyone really think that a Darksider wouldn't heal themselves if they were injured? Pffft! Darksiders are all about the quest for power as quickly as possible - that's the very definition of being on the Dark Side. If they could learn "Force Heal", it would be a safe bet to assume they would.

So, how does that translate to multiplayer? I say, just toss the whole concept of Light, Dark, Somewhere-In-Between out the window, and select whatever powers you'd like (with some balancing restrictions), and get it on :cool:

Smood
02-01-2003, 12:27 PM
I actually have not problem with movement speed in JO. When I said slow down movement relative to the world I actually meant slowing down eratic or wild movements down, such as strafing from side to side quickly, and replacing it with a blended slower movement.

The actual forward running movement is fine. Hrm, ACCELERATION. Yes I think that is what I'am looking for. Starting movement out at a fair speed, but as a movement direction is maintained it increases to a point which is the limit (including fatigue might be an avenue you could down).

Furthermore, making something truer to the movies doesn't mean making it a RPG at all. You can just as easily have a UNIQUE saber battling FPS, which has combat much like movies.

SPIDER AL.... do you believe right now the saber is deadly, and can hold up to a gun? I didn't think so, this is what I want to change and my other host of suggestions come to support this one fundamental change. MAKE SABER WIELDING REQUIRE SKILL AND TIME TO GET GOOD, but allow it to have its own rewards.

DeTRiTiC-iQ
02-01-2003, 01:02 PM
Ooh lemme guess what Spider_AL's (correct) response will be:

"The saber has its place just as any other weapon, I use the saber when the situation demands it, I don't go prancing into a firefight with a sword (no matter how powerful) and expect to win, that would merely indicate stupidity"

I use the saber in CTF, when it is suitable to do so. You might notice that in the movie's the Jedi have only ever fought one person with extensive weaponry, ie Jango. So I don't see how people can argue precendent for Jedi "owning all".

ryudom
02-01-2003, 01:13 PM
hmm detritic i somewhat disagree i think, smood as some what of a point here.

i believe it should be like this: in a TFFA, IF one teams was using guns, and the other sabers, if skills are equal, they should be tied. obviously it would take differant tactics, but if a good saberer is close enough to a gunner, the gunner should be dead. cranking the saber damage would be a good start, other improvements could be made. probably your right though, in a FFA a gunner could probably rack up more kills then the average saberer, but not as bad as it is now.

Spider AL
02-01-2003, 01:17 PM
Originally posted by Smood:
I actually meant slowing down eratic or wild movements down, such as strafing from side to side quickly,

Yeah, I remember you said that in the original thread. I refer you to Phayyde's Book of Honor (http://www.lucasforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=44054) rule No. 10 and rule No. 11. THAT's what you want.

If you slow the game down, which IS what you're talking about, and would be the effect of your suggestions, it will ruin it. Only someone who knows nothing about the gameplay dynamic of an FPS would suggest such nonsense.

Originally posted by Smood:
making something truer to the movies doesn't mean making it a RPG at all.

Yes, it really does. JO is an FPS. JK was an FPS. DF,.. you guessed it, was an FPS. FPS games have a particular dynamic, and have done since Wolfenstein 3D. If your unworkable and nonsensical suggestions were followed, such as "infinite sabre moves" and slowing the game down, IT WON'T BE AN FPS ANYMORE. It'd be some wierd beat-em-up or RPG hybrid, not a "unique fps" but a NON-FPS.

Frankly, go and e-mail LEC and ask them for a new "wierd Beat-em-up/RPG hybrid" and stop trying to make the next game in the DF series into your own pet "let's pretend" playground, if you please.

Originally posted by Smood:
SPIDER AL.... do you believe right now the saber is deadly, and can hold up to a gun?

SMOOD....... It never, ever will hold up to a gun. A sabre is a melee weapon, and even if it's a one-hit-kill weapon, the gunner of equal skill who kills from a distance will still win every time. The saber has its place, like the Tenloss.

Which is presumably why people of your ilk want to take gun-users Force powers away. Rule No. 7.

Prime
02-01-2003, 02:11 PM
Some kind of class system with different types of Star Wars characters would be cool. And maybe you could multiclass with pros and cons so you could get exactly the mix of abilities you want. Like a pure Jedi would have more force abilities than a Jedi/Merc, who would have more than just a Merc. The Merc would have a wide range of guns, but so saber. The Jedi Merc would have less guns but could use the saber, and the oure Jedi just a saber (and maybe the bryar). Would that work? Like Spider Al said, options are key!

I'am saying ENHANCE SABER COMBAT! Make saber combat MANUAL, make it more strategic, make it take more skill and make the saber more DEADLY (i.e. if the saber slides through your body, you should be DISMEMBERED NOT DECAPITATED BUT DISMEMBERED at that part of your body in 1 slice, [imagine if windu ran up to jango and slashed him and sparks popped off him and jango continued to shoot at him]).
and
SPIDER AL.... do you believe right now the saber is deadly, and can hold up to a gun? I didn't think so, this is what I want to change and my other host of suggestions come to support this one fundamental change. MAKE SABER WIELDING REQUIRE SKILL AND TIME TO GET GOOD, but allow it to have its own rewards.

Unfortunately, the majority of the gaming population is only casual gamers, and making the saber combat too strategic, making it take a lot more skill would turn off a lot of potential customers. Nobody wants to get a game about Jedi and be completely inept at doing anything Jedi-like with the saber. Most people do not want to put in a lot of time to get better at it. Many (most?) people do not look at the game as a competition. Besides, in the movies Jedi use the force to guide their actions with the saber. So to me it is perfectly reasonable to have auto-defence. There should be a happy medium though. Perhaps have the option for manual or auto defence?

Also, if you make it so the saber requires a lot of skill and time to learn, in a guns vs. saber fight, what are most people going to choose? Guns of course. Guns are easy. People will be saying, "Why the hell would I want to use that impossible saber when I can own right away with all these guns?" And they'd be right.

But, you can set up the saber so it is super deadly now with the following codes (there are more too, I think):

set g_dismemberProbabilities 0-100
set g_dismemberment 0-3
set g_saberrealisticcombat 0-1
set g_saberdamageScale 0-X
set g_saberghoul2collision 1
set g_sabertracesaberfirst 1

If you haven't tried those, give them a go, because you can slice and dice and make a mess with your deadly saber.

Hope that helps.

Unnamed Jed1
02-01-2003, 03:13 PM
Originally posted by Smood
I actually have not problem with movement speed in JO. When I said slow down movement relative to the world I actually meant slowing down eratic or wild movements down, such as strafing from side to side quickly, and replacing it with a blended slower movement.

The actual forward running movement is fine. Hrm, ACCELERATION. Yes I think that is what I'am looking for. Starting movement out at a fair speed, but as a movement direction is maintained it increases to a point which is the limit (including fatigue might be an avenue you could down).



Ok great for NF duels but what about CTF/TeamFFA/FFA/CTYellow Lizard Thing/Jedi Master/Holocron/FF dueling?


And as for the saber requiring skill, it does even in its current form.
If you change it or overcomplicate it you are only going to frustrate players even more and drive them off. Not everyone is dedicated enough to spend countless hours learning game mechanics. Some people just want to hop on and kill **** for a few hours a week.

All the idiots who whined about the back stab in 1.03 always made comments like “It’s for noobs who cares if they leave”.
Well the 1.04 patch produced the single largest exodus this game has ever seen.
Is that “good for the community”?
Nope.

Look I see where you are coming from dude I really do.
As someone who has put countless hours into Full Force dueling I understand how a person can look at things and see major room for improvement because you know the mechanics of the game so well.
But you also have to look at the big picture.
Not everyone will be on your level skill wise and if you overcomplicate things you simply drive off players.

Guardian Omega
02-01-2003, 06:40 PM
Hmmmm, I just thought up an idea that could make the idea of the mouse controlling the saber work............

The problem with that idea is aiming up and down, which the keyboard is horrible right? So my solution would be this: Get a joystick for movement (aka for the WSAD and up+down).

Jeff 42
02-01-2003, 07:06 PM
i believe it should be like this: in a TFFA, IF one teams was using guns, and the other sabers, if skills are equal, they should be tied.

If one team is using all the weapons available, and the other team is using less than ten percent of the weapons available (not counting Force powers, anyway), it should be an even match? How about no.

Reborn Outcast
02-01-2003, 08:04 PM
Originally posted by Unnamed Jed1
Well making saber combat "like the movies" would be boring as Hell.
Why?
99.9999999999999% of all the swings were blocked and every single time the saber contacted skin, the fight was over.

I'm not sure people would go for that instead of just picking up a gun and shooting you...

PERFECT. We finally have someone who knows what hes talking about besides Spider Al and Vagabond. Unnamed Jedi is PERFECTLY CORRECT. Smood, implementing what you said would make the game exactly as Unnamed posted and RUIN IT. This game is perfect the way it is.

Prime
02-01-2003, 08:58 PM
PERFECT. We finally have someone who knows what hes talking about besides Spider Al and Vagabond.

Hey! :(

Reborn Outcast
02-01-2003, 09:10 PM
Oh my bad Prime. :D I didn't really see, I kinda skimmed through... I'll change that sentence to


PERFECT. We finally have someone who knows what he's talking about besides Spider Al, Prime and Vagabond

ryudom
02-02-2003, 01:25 AM
If one team is using all the weapons available, and the other team is using less than ten percent of the weapons available (not counting Force powers, anyway), it should be an even match? How about no

guns wouldn't be all the weapons available, it would be all save sabers... anyway, someone skilled with a lightsaber should be really hard to kill, with that in mind its definitely possible to see a balance here. you just have to look a little farther then the current JO.

Spider AL
02-02-2003, 01:45 AM
guns wouldn't be all the weapons available, it would be all save sabers... anyway, someone skilled with a lightsaber should be really hard to kill, with that in mind its definitely possible to see a balance here. you just have to look a little farther then the current JO.

Not really, melee weapons became obsolete as major weapons of war for a reason. A swordsman must be within a certain range to attack. A gunner can be at any range. All he has to do is maintain distance, he doesn't have to increase it. The sabreist on the other hand must CLOSE distance. Who has the advantage? Two players of equal skill fight,.. the gunner wins.

Add to this the fact that there will always be a range of guns and explosives, and you see instantly that without taking abilities away from gunners, there will never be true balance.

The abilities must stay. This game is about guns AND sabres. There is no need to separate the two AT ALL.

Smood
02-02-2003, 01:50 AM
Originally posted by Spider AL
Yeah, I remember you said that in the original thread. I refer you to Phayyde's Book of Honor (http://www.lucasforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=44054) rule No. 10 and rule No. 11. THAT's what you want.

If you slow the game down, which IS what you're talking about, and would be the effect of your suggestions, it will ruin it. Only someone who knows nothing about the gameplay dynamic of an FPS would suggest such nonsense.



Yes, it really does. JO is an FPS. JK was an FPS. DF,.. you guessed it, was an FPS. FPS games have a particular dynamic, and have done since Wolfenstein 3D. If your unworkable and nonsensical suggestions were followed, such as "infinite sabre moves" and slowing the game down, IT WON'T BE AN FPS ANYMORE. It'd be some wierd beat-em-up or RPG hybrid, not a "unique fps" but a NON-FPS.

Frankly, go and e-mail LEC and ask them for a new "wierd Beat-em-up/RPG hybrid" and stop trying to make the next game in the DF series into your own pet "let's pretend" playground, if you please.



SMOOD....... It never, ever will hold up to a gun. A sabre is a melee weapon, and even if it's a one-hit-kill weapon, the gunner of equal skill who kills from a distance will still win every time. The saber has its place, like the Tenloss.

Which is presumably why people of your ilk want to take gun-users Force powers away. Rule No. 7.

OK SPIDER AL... before you were countering my points, now your just interpreting and assuming what you want from my posts and picking them apart from your imaginary angle.

MY SUGGESTIONS DO NOT SLOW DOWN THE FPS! Obviously you cant get this through your head so I will give up on trying to convince you. I await your post which will quote what I have just said and pick it apart from your own imaginary angle and interpretation.

Smood
02-02-2003, 01:59 AM
Originally posted by Unnamed Jed1
Ok great for NF duels but what about CTF/TeamFFA/FFA/CTYellow Lizard Thing/Jedi Master/Holocron/FF dueling?


And as for the saber requiring skill, it does even in its current form.
If you change it or overcomplicate it you are only going to frustrate players even more and drive them off. Not everyone is dedicated enough to spend countless hours learning game mechanics. Some people just want to hop on and kill **** for a few hours a week.

All the idiots who whined about the back stab in 1.03 always made comments like “It’s for noobs who cares if they leave”.
Well the 1.04 patch produced the single largest exodus this game has ever seen.
Is that “good for the community”?
Nope.

Look I see where you are coming from dude I really do.
As someone who has put countless hours into Full Force dueling I understand how a person can look at things and see major room for improvement because you know the mechanics of the game so well.
But you also have to look at the big picture.
Not everyone will be on your level skill wise and if you overcomplicate things you simply drive off players.

THIS I RESPECT. Take notes spider AL, from a guy who disagrees with me and makes a fair and good case. TAKE NOTES!

Unnamed Jed1
02-02-2003, 07:39 AM
I’m not saying what Smood is suggesting would “ruin” the game per se.
All I’m saying is the “average player” has little interest for refined game play mechanics.
Perfect example: Pro Mod.

Artifex put a tremendous amount of time and effort into making the game a test of pure strategy and skill and not a game based on random factors. In this he succeeded quite well.
As far as being a well put together build, I think Pro Mod in its current form is miles beyond anything Raven has put out.

Now that said, consider there are what 4-5 dedicated Pro Mod servers out of 700 running at any given time?

How many emote/silly animation servers are running now?
Hundreds.
The average player will flock to a game with big flashy guns, Darth Maul skins and jet packs.
They are not going to be drawn in by refined combat (saber or guns).

And to be honest it’s those “average players” that keep sales high.
Word of mouth spreads about his cool SW game and kids run to Best Buy and grab a copy.


Basically you need to add content to the expansion in the way of skins/maps/guns/powers/whatever to appease the “veteran players” and you need to make the game have a “pick up and play” skill level so as not to frustrate the new players.

ryudom
02-02-2003, 11:00 AM
Not really, melee weapons became obsolete as major weapons of war for a reason. A swordsman must be within a certain range to attack. A gunner can be at any range. All he has to do is maintain distance, he doesn't have to increase it. The sabreist on the other hand must CLOSE distance. Who has the advantage? Two players of equal skill fight,.. the gunner wins.

ok, so perfect balance might be hard to get, but that doesn't mean you can't increase it. here's some things you could do:

1- Guns: say you went back to the JK1 guns, and added the disruptor and mines.

2- Saber damage: think you know what i'm getting at here.

3- Force powers: they could add some saber orientated force powers, like another speed, exept this ones a short burst forward, possible lunging at the same time. powers like this could help sabers catch people.

anyway, i'm not saying the two should be separated, i didn't say that. i'm just saying sabers could be more more powerfull. don't get me wrong, i started gunning recently, and i love it. but, like i said, i'd still like to be able to kick ass with a saber, if at least sub-average asses hehe

Smood
02-02-2003, 02:19 PM
Originally posted by ryudom
ok, so perfect balance might be hard to get, but that doesn't mean you can't increase it. here's some things you could do:

1- Guns: say you went back to the JK1 guns, and added the disruptor and mines.

2- Saber damage: think you know what i'm getting at here.

3- Force powers: they could add some saber orientated force powers, like another speed, exept this ones a short burst forward, possible lunging at the same time. powers like this could help sabers catch people.

anyway, i'm not saying the two should be separated, i didn't say that. i'm just saying sabers could be more more powerfull. don't get me wrong, i started gunning recently, and i love it. but, like i said, i'd still like to be able to kick ass with a saber, if at least sub-average asses hehe

I concur.

Jeff 42
02-02-2003, 02:57 PM
Perfect example: Pro Mod.

Artifex put a tremendous amount of time and effort into making the game a test of pure strategy and skill and not a game based on random factors. In this he succeeded quite well.
As far as being a well put together build, I think Pro Mod in its current form is miles beyond anything Raven has put out.

Now that said, consider there are what 4-5 dedicated Pro Mod servers out of 700 running at any given time?

How many emote/silly animation servers are running now?
Hundreds.
The average player will flock to a game with big flashy guns, Darth Maul skins and jet packs.
They are not going to be drawn in by refined combat (saber or guns).

Why do I not play ProMod? It's not because I don't want refined combat. Heck, I think for saber combat it's way better than 1.04. But I don't play it because unlike the regular versions of JK and JO it limits you to being either a Jedi or a merc, or a weak hybrid. And this limitation, to me, makes the game less fun. Now, some people are suggesting that LEC should implement this exact same limitation into the next DF game, and I have to strongly disagree.

Unnamed Jed1
02-02-2003, 07:24 PM
What I was saying is Pro Mod accomplishes what it try’s to:
The elimination of random factors in regards to combat.

I'm not saying the overall game type pf Pro Mod should be implemented in an official release.

As for classes, an option to play a TFC type of class based mode would be cool, but it is just that. A game mode like CTF, not an overall turn in the games direction.

Spider AL
02-02-2003, 07:29 PM
Originally posted by Smood:
THIS I RESPECT. Take notes spider AL, from a guy who disagrees with me and makes a fair and good case. TAKE NOTES!

Gaining the respect of someone of your ilk is about as high on my list of things to do as "liquidise sensitive portions of own anatomy" is. I think I'll stick to blunt facts, thanks. :D

Originally posted by Unnamed Jed1:
I’m not saying what Smood is suggesting would “ruin” the game per se.

I am. We've seen it before, and no doubt we'll all see it again in some other game.

Originally posted by ryudom:
ok, so perfect balance might be hard to get, but that doesn't mean you can't increase it. here's some things you could do:

1- Guns: say you went back to the JK1 guns, and added the disruptor and mines.


Go back to JK1 guns? That would only increase the dominance of guns. The Conky was much easier to use than the Flechy is. Ask any good JK1 gunner. :)

Originally posted by ryudom:
anyway, i'm not saying the two should be separated, i didn't say that. i'm just saying sabers could be more more powerfull. don't get me wrong, i started gunning recently, and i love it. but, like i said, i'd still like to be able to kick ass with a saber, if at least sub-average asses hehe

Well, while I agree personally that the sabre should be much more powerful, I'm afraid that to achieve a situation in which the sabre could rival guns, one would have to disempower the guns. No amount of empowerment to the sabre could ever make it the equal of ranged weapons of the power of the flechette, for example. Plus, be realistic. Accept the game for what it is, and what it has been since JK1. Nowhere does it say that lightsabres should be as powerful as other weapons, it is only the fan in each of us that screams that.

Originally posted by ryudom:
3- Force powers: they could add some saber orientated force powers, like another speed, exept this ones a short burst forward, possible lunging at the same time. powers like this could help sabers catch people.

So these powers would only be useful when using the sabre? That's no different than Jedi vs. Merc, it's giving sabreists a free lunch. More advantages. Why? So sabre-fanatics can charge madly at gunners and actually have a chance of winning? That's awful. That's not rewarding skill, it's rewarding a lack of skill.

The sabre IS USEFUL in JO. It was useful in JK. I've killed good people with the sabre, in CTF, in guns FFA, in every damn game mode, in both games. The sabre is only useless, if you're unwilling to use it PROPERLY, in the RIGHT situations.

Like the Tenloss. Only useful in the right situation. As it should be.

And Jeff 42: Agreed. I've tried promod, and it is good fun, and good for sabres. But it's not JO. It is limiting in its nature, especially for someone like me, who played JK before JO. I don't like limitations. Back in the day, when I wanted to play with the sabre only, I joined a sabre only server. When I wanted No Force, I joined a NF server.

Never did you catch me, or any other JK player of any worth, whingeing and whining about guns, in a guns server. Or about Force, in a Full Force server.

We carried that discipline over. Others should learn it.

DeTRiTiC-iQ
02-02-2003, 07:42 PM
Exactly, mods are fun, but they should never become the game. Mods are aimed at people of equal mindset to the author, as a result its unfair to want to enforce these on the players who are perfectly happy with the existing concepts and implementationts.

lllKyNeSlll
02-02-2003, 08:10 PM
Spider Al and Det are right. Those who say otherwise don't know who they are talking to. Except i think the game should be faster more similar to jk1. THe conc and destruct are much too powerful for jk2 unless its sped up, so therefore it shouldn't havae stronger guns with larger splash damage, straight firing, and fast moving projectiles like the conc.

Smood
02-02-2003, 08:26 PM
SPIDER AL, stop saying ilk!! Sorry but I just had to say that.

You speak as if you are some authority on games with the ability to see through people you don't know and discredit them in the short time you observe them.

Everyone has an opinion, this thread was created to reflect mine. Although most disagree with my views, I still hold them.

Prime
02-02-2003, 08:31 PM
Originally posted by Reborn Outcast
Oh my bad Prime. :D I didn't really see, I kinda skimmed through... I'll change that sentence to

PERFECT. We finally have someone who knows what he's talking about besides Spider Al, Prime and Vagabond

I was just teasing, Reborn Outcast. I really should have put a smilie next to it instead of a frown. No offense taken :)

As for making the saber on par with guns, I agree that this is not too easy. Right now I think that the saber damage needs to be increased. I've played on some servers with increased damage (2x or 3x normal), and it seemed to make things better. But the point about the limited saber range is well taken. I wonder if perhaps the defensive aspects of the saber are where balance can be attained. Right now, unless you are using secondary fire on some of the bigger guns, the lightsaber is quite effective as a defence. But once once area effect weapons come into play, the saber is pretty useless. I think this is where the imbalance truly lies between sabers and guns.

Spider AL
02-02-2003, 08:43 PM
SPIDER AL, stop saying ilk!! Sorry but I just had to say that.

SMOOD, I'll stop using the word "ilk" when you snatch it from my cold dead hands. It's typical of people of your ilk to try to censor others. :naughty:

You speak as if you are some authority on games with the ability to see through people you don't know and discredit them in the short time you observe them.

If you mean that I can spot an ill-constructed whimsy a mile away, you're right. If you mean I can tell when someone, not unlike yourself, is obviously full of nonsense, you're right. If you mean I know the DF series better than most, you're right.

Everyone has an opinion, this thread was created to reflect mine. Although most disagree with my views, I still hold them.

Good for you. However it's my opinon that your opinion is worth precisely two- count them- two, half-chewed jellybeans. I'm not talking good jellybeans either, I'm talking cheap jellybeans sold on the Russian black market, made out of Uranium.

Please, don't start whingeing with nonsense like: "This is just my OPINION you cant argue with OPINIONS so stfu!!111" Because debate is based on the clash of opinions. Now, you can find whatever you like, fun. But when you request that your idea of fun should be forced onto others, it ceases to be a personal decision. Go and make a mod. Do not attempt to alter the great tradition of the DF series to conform to some hare-brained "More like the movies than like an FPS" idea.

Jeff 42
02-02-2003, 09:13 PM
Right now, unless you are using secondary fire on some of the bigger guns, the lightsaber is quite effective as a defence. But once once area effect weapons come into play, the saber is pretty useless. I think this is where the imbalance truly lies between sabers and guns.

That's exactly how it should be. It's silly to think that a lightsaber would be a useful defense against explosive weapons.

ryudom
02-02-2003, 11:24 PM
So these powers would only be useful when using the sabre? That's no different than Jedi vs. Merc, it's giving sabreists a free lunch. More advantages. Why? So sabre-fanatics can charge madly at gunners and actually have a chance of winning? That's awful. That's not rewarding skill, it's rewarding a lack of skill.


wasn't saying that, you wouldn't be able to "charge madley at gunners". a short burst foward is hardly charging madly, and would require alot of skill and timing. theres some force power out now that are more advantageous for a gunner, and i'm sure there could be more. also, i'd rather get blasted from a precise shooting conc rifle then random balls blowing up everywhere

Jolts
02-02-2003, 11:45 PM
been reading the bf1942 star wars mod forums and they are having an argument over not adding jedi into the mod because jedi would be too powerfull against a gunner.

http://www.bfcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=3782

enjoy.

Spider AL
02-02-2003, 11:52 PM
Originally posted by ryudom:
you wouldn't be able to "charge madley at gunners". a short burst foward is hardly charging madly, and would require alot of skill and timing.

In which case it wouldn't be of any use to 90% of the JO population. It'd just become another spammed move, like DFA. Even so, it's still another device to increase swordsmen's chances of survival against gunners, when they deserve no such thing. If one wants to use a sabre all the time, a sabres only server's the place to do it.

Now don't get me wrong, as I've said before I think the sabre is stupidly weak at the moment... but even if it was a one-hit-kill weapon, it still wouldn't equal guns for versatility. Even with the backswing and the ammo-drain in 1.03, gunners still won against sabreists.

Originally posted by ryudom:
i'd rather get blasted from a precise shooting conc rifle then random balls blowing up everywhere

Maybe you would, but it'd still increase gunners dominance over sabre-users, which was not your idea, no? And it'd be spammed by new players, just like other weapons/attacks. Spam is relatively easy to avoid.

As for random balls, as a player's skill increases, his number of deaths-by-random-effects decreases.

And Jeff is right, so what will you do? Remove all explosive weapons? It's a slippery slope, mate.

Originally posted by Jolts:
been reading the bf1942 star wars mod forums and they are having an argument over not adding jedi into the mod because jedi would be too powerfull against a gunner.

Oh, before anyone runs off to rant about how Jedi are hard done by in JO in that thread, remember that JO is ALL about Jedi. Jedi with guns, Jedi with sabres, Jedi with both. A lightsabre does NOT make someone a Jedi, and likewise holding a gun doesn't mean you're not a Jedi.

It just means you're a more intelligent Jedi. ;)

GEEZus
02-03-2003, 10:03 AM
Best idea for the next game is for the devs to ignore this forum and take input from competitive players. You people are responsible for the way the game currently is you had input on every patch and look what happened. It's a saber newb fest. I say bring the next dark forces game back to the gunners the saberists already have jk2 as it's their definitive vision of the game.

ryudom
02-03-2003, 10:48 AM
haha GEEZus thats rediculous. obviously you haven't been paying attention to what the anyone's been saying. sure dueling might be alright for sabers, but other then that, read some of the posts here hahaha

Spider Al, as long as you agree that the saber currently is way too underpowered, then i'm happy.

also while this is true:
As for random balls, as a player's skill increases, his number of deaths-by-random-effects decreases.

that wasn't my point. the point was, a good saberer should be able to take out bad gunners. accually thats quite possible when saber damage is like 4x, but anyway

GEEZus
02-03-2003, 10:52 AM
False, I have been playing since the game came out and kept track of things. These forums WERE responsible for the games current state. Sure opinions might have changed since the new patch came out, but at the time it was these forums that made impacts. Maybe if you weren't new to the game you would know this eh?

Prime
02-03-2003, 11:37 AM
Originally posted by Jeff 42
That's exactly how it should be. It's silly to think that a lightsaber would be a useful defense against explosive weapons.

and

And Jeff is right, so what will you do? Remove all explosive weapons? It's a slippery slope, mate.

I didn't mean to imply at all that explosive weaponry should be removed. Sorry for my poor choice of words if it sounded like I did. I mearly meant that since the saberist has no defence against these attacks (apart from getting out of the way, etc.) that this makes the saber pretty useless against guns. I was only trying to state the problem as I see it, not propose a solution. I'm not sure what a solution might be, but I certain do not want to see nerfed guns. Explosive weaponry is one of the best parts of the game. Of course the saber shouldn't be able to deflect these attacks.

So is the consensis that saberists should not be able to compete with gunners? If that is the case, the game is like that now, and nothing needs to be changed (besides more damage for the saber, perhaps).

Best idea for the next game is for the devs to ignore this forum and take input from competitive players. You people are responsible for the way the game currently is you had input on every patch and look what happened. It's a saber newb fest. I say bring the next dark forces game back to the gunners the saberists already have jk2 as it's their definitive vision of the game.

I don't get this at all. Firstly, why should the devs only listen to competitive players? The majority of players (i.e. where the majority of sales is coming from) do not look at JO as being a sport or competition. They have other things to fulfill that aspect of their lives. Most just play for a bit of fun. Why are competitive players the only ones that matter? I'm not saying that non-competative players have all great ideas, but they are not all bad either.

And why is the game so bad right now? Wasn't fixing the bounding box problem on DFA and making backstab not an instant kill a good thing? What has ruined this game for you? Why is it a saber newb fest? From this thread alone it seems the general feeling is that newbie saberists get owned by gunners, and that the saber is underpowered. The only argument is whether this is a bad thing or not.

DeTRiTiC-iQ
02-03-2003, 12:08 PM
Well actually, if you look at the animation and concept of backstab, then it SHOULD be an instant kill. The problem was that it was too easy to execute. The patch made it harder to execute (not hard enough) AND made it the weakest move in the game. There is simply no reason for it being in the game at all now.

Luc Solar
02-03-2003, 01:03 PM
Oh cool, Geezus is back. This should get interesting! :D

Trying to get banned for the 16th time, eh? ;)

Anyways...I don't think this forum is to blame for the patches, Raven is. No-one wanted the absurdity of 1.03. No-one wanted to swing pretty 1.04 glowsticks instead of deadly sabers.

Instead of correcting bugs (DFA etc.) and balancing the game by adding stuff, Raven chose to nerf the hell out of everything.

Unfortunate. :(

Spider AL
02-03-2003, 03:15 PM
Originally posted by ryudom:
that wasn't my point. the point was, a good saberer should be able to take out bad gunners. accually thats quite possible when saber damage is like 4x, but anyway

Well, I can take out bad gunners with my sabre. Anyone can, with a little thought and practice. But yes, I think the sabre could stand to be beefed up, to fix the nerfing of 1.03. Not TOO beefed up though. Just restored to its previous usefulness and all stances made equal with judicious balancing.

NO new force powers for sabreists, NO nerfing of guns.

Originally posted by Prime:
I didn't mean to imply at all that explosive weaponry should be removed.

Didn't say you did! That paragraph was directed to Ryu, in response to the paragraph, by him, that I quoted.

Originally posted by Prime:
So is the consensis that saberists should not be able to compete with gunners? If that is the case, the game is like that now, and nothing needs to be changed (besides more damage for the saber, perhaps).

Well, for what it's worth, let me put my position on this down clearly:

Someone who chooses to use only one weapon, should lose against people who choose to use all twelve weapons. Is it twelve, not counting the stun baton?.. Oh well, you get the idea.

It's silly to use only one weapon. People should not be rewarded for such silliness with more force powers or abilities, as some people suggest they should. The lightsabre is a good weapon when used properly, and I certainly would never have gone into a game without it... but it was NEVER meant to be all-powerful, or even to equal all the other guns in power. Why bother having guns at all, if the sabre's more powerful? People wouldn't use them if they were weaker than the sabre. All servers would become sabre-only. What would be the point? Silliness.

Originally posted by Prime:
From this thread alone it seems the general feeling is that newbie saberists get owned by gunners, and that the saber is underpowered. The only argument is whether this is a bad thing or not.

That's true, and IMO the sabre should be more powerful than it is at the moment, but I base that opinion not on adoration of the sabre itself, but a desire for variety. The 1.03 patch nerfed all the sabre moves, nerfed the dark side and nerfed guns. That restricted people. There was NOTHING wrong with 1.02 except the rotation of the DFA, which was an easy bugfix. But instead of that, Raven listened to all the whining fanboys who couldn't be bothered to even practice playing the game.

Originally posted by Luc Solar:
Anyways...I don't think this forum is to blame for the patches, Raven is. No-one wanted the absurdity of 1.03. No-one wanted to swing pretty 1.04 glowsticks instead of deadly sabers.

Actually a lot of wannabe duellists and wannabe FFAers loved 1.03. There were lots of positives on this forum at the time it was released, and the newbies who liked it on the servers I frequented found themselves suddenly able to avoid negative scores.

And certainly, this forum was a huge concentration of whining fanboys at the time of 1.03's release.

"Waaah drain r too powarfal"

"Waaah heal r too powarfal"

"Waaah gunz r too powarfal"

All common sentiments. Oh, I have no doubt that people on this forum contributed to the awfulness that is 1.03. Some of them still exist here.

Originally posted by Luc Solar:
Instead of correcting bugs (DFA etc.) and balancing the game by adding stuff, Raven chose to nerf the hell out of everything.


People asked them to... What Raven did wrong, was listen. My philosophy is: Once a game's released, the next patch should be bugfixes and NOTHING else, no gameplay alterations, and it should be released a minimum of six months after the game goes on sale.

If a game is good, people will play it. If not, they won't. Gameplay altering patches only serve to alienate the people who enjoy the game.

Smood
02-03-2003, 10:11 PM
Originally posted by Spider AL
Oh, before anyone runs off to rant about how Jedi are hard done by in JO in that thread, remember that JO is ALL about Jedi. Jedi with guns, Jedi with sabres, Jedi with both. A lightsabre does NOT make someone a Jedi, and likewise holding a gun doesn't mean you're not a Jedi.

It just means you're a more intelligent Jedi. ;)

ROFLOL!! Where do you derive JEDI from? Where are the concepts of a jedi demonstrated? Your idea of a jedi is so skewed that you are talking about a completely different person. I find you give very little weight to the SW movies which should be the foundation of all arguments (about jedi, not gameplay) since they are the official demonstration and outline of what JEDI are (which movie was it that OBI-WAN blasted a storm trooper away again? LOL). Yes, Kyle has the ability to be a gunner and a saberist but this is a game opposed to the LUCAS content delievered in a movie (this is what true jedi are, I'am sure kyle is able to use guns and the saber because doing otherwise would comprimise gameplay in the eyes of the developers. To say an 'INTELLIGENT JEDI' is one who uses both guns and sabers is laughable!

If on the other hand you meant intelligent INDIVIDUAL/GAMER that is different but JEDI NO!

DeTRiTiC-iQ
02-03-2003, 10:46 PM
In the movies I don't recall Jedi ever coming under attack from heavy explosives either. So there is no movie precendent for how a Jedi should cope with such an attack

Reborn Outcast
02-03-2003, 10:53 PM
Originally posted by Smood
ROFLOL!! Where do you derive JEDI from? Where are the concepts of a jedi demonstrated? Your idea of a jedi is so skewed that you are talking about a completely different person. I find you give very little weight to the SW movies which should be the foundation of all arguments (about jedi, not gameplay) since they are the official demonstration and outline of what JEDI are (which movie was it that OBI-WAN blasted a storm trooper away again? LOL). Yes, Kyle has the ability to be a gunner and a saberist but this is a game opposed to the LUCAS content delievered in a movie (this is what true jedi are, I'am sure kyle is able to use guns and the saber because doing otherwise would comprimise gameplay in the eyes of the developers. To say an 'INTELLIGENT JEDI' is one who uses both guns and sabers is laughable!

If on the other hand you meant intelligent INDIVIDUAL/GAMER that is different but JEDI NO!

Why do you insist on making the game like the movie. I didn't buy the game to play the movie, I bought it because it looked fun. I don't care if my Jedi can use guns because ITS FUN. And I believe that 90% of the JO gamers will agree.

And we're talking about the game here not real Jedi. Spider-Al is right.

GEEZus
02-03-2003, 11:07 PM
I play this game way less than most of you, yes I did play a lot during the summer, but now I play for less than an hour every few days. People that compete just like the game style better and innovate things into the game. I am sorry to inform you but EVERYONE who plays games competes. Are you not trying to beat your opponent in rpg duels or ffa's? Some people just have more of a competitive edge and unless you do nothing, but mindless rpg in the game you too compete. Almost everyone uses play styles similar to the best competitors in the game now, most of which were displeased by the game and the outcome of the patches. 1.02 would've been fine besides the invisibility bug, but thanks to people's bitching on these forums the disaster of 1.03 occured and caused a lot of people to stop playing.

Spider AL
02-03-2003, 11:20 PM
Thanks for the support, Reborn and Det, but Smood's just plain wrong about everything, as usual.


Originally posted by Smood:
ROFLOL!! Where do you derive JEDI from? Where are the concepts of a jedi demonstrated? Your idea of a jedi is so skewed that you are talking about a completely different person. I find you give very little weight to the SW movies which should be the foundation of all arguments (about jedi, not gameplay) since they are the official demonstration and outline of what JEDI are
"Roflol." Variations on a theme.

Ah, I see. Let's examine the SW films you give so much "weight" to. Maybe you think that only Jedi carry lightsabres?

Wrong.

I point you towards Qui-Gon Jinn's line in The Phantom Menace, in which he states that just because Anakin saw that he had a lightsabre, doesn't necessarily mean that he's a Jedi:

Qui-Gon: "Perhaps I killed a Jedi and stole it from him."

Perhaps, SMOOD... you think that only Jedi can use lightsabres?

Wrong.

I point you towards the scene early in The Empire Strikes Back, in which Han cuts open his dead tauntaun so that Luke can use the hapless creature's body heat to stay warm. He uses Luke's lightsabre to do this.

Han: "Agh... I thought they smelled bad on the outside!"


Originally posted by Smood:
which movie was it that OBI-WAN blasted a storm trooper away again? LOL
Ohh, so you believe that those adept in the Force "can't" use guns for some reason?

Wrong.

I refer you to The Empire Strikes Back, in which Luke uses a blaster regularly, not just after being trained by Obi-Wan, but Yoda too.

Not to mention (As Det noted) the fact that there are no rocket launchers or flechettes in the original films. If there were, you might have seen some scenes of Jedi wielding them, as the lightsabre is very effective against energy blasters, but not so against explosives.

Congratulations SMOOD, you've achieved a truly amazing feat. You've proven that your knowledge of Star Wars canon is just as feeble as your knowledge of gameplay balance. And that's saying something.


Originally posted by Smood:
To say an 'INTELLIGENT JEDI' is one who uses both guns and sabers is laughable!
The fact that you think so would perhaps be laughable, if it weren't so pitiful. :disaprove

Prime
02-04-2003, 01:46 AM
Originally posted by Smood
ROFLOL!! Where do you derive JEDI from? Where are the concepts of a jedi demonstrated? Your idea of a jedi is so skewed that you are talking about a completely different person. I find you give very little weight to the SW movies which should be the foundation of all arguments (about jedi, not gameplay) since they are the official demonstration and outline of what JEDI are (which movie was it that OBI-WAN blasted a storm trooper away again? LOL).

I have to admit I chuckled when I read this. Just to add to what Spider Al has said about others being able to use lightsabers, there are other references to non-jedi using sabers (but not to the same level of skill, you can be sure). In A New Hope Obi-wan himself states that lightsabers were once widely used, "still are, in some galactic quarters". Since Obi and Yoda are the only Jedi left after the purge, this would indicate that others use lightsabers as well.

If you need a more explicit example of a saber/guns user, I direct you to the entry for Aurra Sing at starwars.com (http://starwars.com/databank/character/aurrasing/index.html). Note that under weapon it lists: Lightsaber, projectile rifle, blasters. You will agree that Aurra uses the saber to do more than turning a Tauntaun into a fort :D

Also, in addition to Luke using a blaster on a regular basis, he also used explosives (I leave the reader to decide what type it might be) to take out the AT-AT at the Battle of Hoth. A nice example of a Jedi using an array of weaponry, including the lightsaber, to be that much more effective.

Smood, I do agree with you in that personally I like having the Jedi portrayed properly, not just for game purposes, but for Star Wars purposes. But that's just my own selfish desire, and I wouldn't inflict this view on other players. But I think that the Jedi have been represented in good faith.

However, I sense that you are of the younger generation, whose view of Star Wars deals mainly with the Prequals. This is perfectly valid, but remember, there are many like me who are of an older generation, who grew up with Luke as our Jedi hero and Han as our "merc" hero. Believe me when I say that there are many out there who are my age that are drawn to the Dark Forces series just as much for the smart-talking mercenary (who wasn't a Han fan back then?) aspect as for the Jedi aspect. And the fact that these two types have been brought together in one character is very appealing for us old guys. I mean, the lightsabering brilliance of Luke combined with the wit and toughness of Han? My stars! :D So don't be so quick to say that JO is un-Star Wars. Because that's not true at all.

P.S. When our hero Obi-wan was actively battling the forces of evil, there were no Stormtroopers to blast.

Smood
02-06-2003, 12:26 AM
Originally posted by Spider AL
Thanks for the support, Reborn and Det, but Smood's just plain wrong about everything, as usual.



"Roflol." Variations on a theme.

Ah, I see. Let's examine the SW films you give so much "weight" to. Maybe you think that only Jedi carry lightsabres?

Wrong.

I point you towards Qui-Gon Jinn's line in The Phantom Menace, in which he states that just because Anakin saw that he had a lightsabre, doesn't necessarily mean that he's a Jedi:

Qui-Gon: "Perhaps I killed a Jedi and stole it from him."

Perhaps, SMOOD... you think that only Jedi can use lightsabres?

Wrong.

I point you towards the scene early in The Empire Strikes Back, in which Han cuts open his dead tauntaun so that Luke can use the hapless creature's body heat to stay warm. He uses Luke's lightsabre to do this.

Han: "Agh... I thought they smelled bad on the outside!"



Ohh, so you believe that those adept in the Force "can't" use guns for some reason?

Wrong.

I refer you to The Empire Strikes Back, in which Luke uses a blaster regularly, not just after being trained by Obi-Wan, but Yoda too.

Not to mention (As Det noted) the fact that there are no rocket launchers or flechettes in the original films. If there were, you might have seen some scenes of Jedi wielding them, as the lightsabre is very effective against energy blasters, but not so against explosives.

Congratulations SMOOD, you've achieved a truly amazing feat. You've proven that your knowledge of Star Wars canon is just as feeble as your knowledge of gameplay balance. And that's saying something.



The fact that you think so would perhaps be laughable, if it weren't so pitiful. :disaprove

It is not a matter that they cannot physically do something, its the principle that they do not. If you do not wish the game to be based on the movie that is fine, I respect that, but to say intelligent 'JEDI' are ones who use guns and sabers is stupid!

If you are saying an intelligent JO jedi/player, then I understand. But JEDI NO. THEY CAN PHYSICALLY USE WEAPONS but they do not by choice!!!

VaderJM
02-06-2003, 09:08 AM
Originally posted by Smood

If you are saying an intelligent JO jedi/player, then I understand. But JEDI NO. THEY CAN PHYSICALLY USE WEAPONS but they do not by choice!!!

So, you're essentially admitting you're a stupid JO player with that first line, right?

You couldn't cut it, could you? Instead of learning, adapting, changing yourself to make yourself a better player, you took to whining. Your "opinion" is unfeasible, unrealistic, and so typical of those who are rigid. This is a game, not the movies. It contains many elements taken from the Star Wars universe, but it was never intended to be a recreation of it.

You want an RPG? Guess what, you already have something close enough to it. It's called mods. There you can live out your fantasies of being a jedi, with all the kiss and sit emotes that you could ever dream of! Or you can wait for Star Wars Galaxies, though good luck on that one. Verant is notorious for shafting anybody and everybody for no real reason at all.

Your attempts to glorify the saber are hilarious. Considering the imagery associated with it, I'm sure Freud would be quite interested in you.

Spider AL
02-06-2003, 01:36 PM
Originally posted by Smood:

It is not a matter that they cannot physically do something, its the principle that they do not.Originally posted by Smood:

But JEDI NO. THEY CAN PHYSICALLY USE WEAPONS but they do not by choice!!!
You've never seen ESB, have you. Nor did Prime's post, or mine, register on your conciousness. Ergh. For the last time, The Original Trilogy contains the only examples we need of how Jedi use the right weapon at the right time, to get the job done. Try reading through again, sound out the syllables this time.

And frankly the most hilarious thing about you is your continuous delusion that you're qualified to interpret the Star Wars canon to the rest of us. You're not.

Originally posted by Smood:

to say intelligent 'JEDI' are ones who use guns and sabers is stupid!
I fear that only you can lay claim to having posted wodges of incomprehensible guff that all qualify as "stupid". :rolleyes:

graigsmith
02-07-2003, 08:55 PM
who cares about single player? single player games suck. i bought Jedi knight 2 for 2 reasons. it had multiplayer, and i heard it was fun.

it was fun, till raven patched the fun right out of the game. now its just stupid and pointless, i actually uninstalled the game from my pc. and raven now gets on my black-list of do not buy games from, along with nihillistic for making such a buggy vampire the masquerade game.

if theres a sequel to this game i likely wont buy it cause it will suck. if lucas arts / raven diddn't care to make the multiplayer good in the first place, then i don't wanna try another one of their games.

however if a jedi multiplayer ONLY game comes out, i might try that, if i hear its fun and bug free and balanced..

BlackDove
02-07-2003, 11:39 PM
Excuse me for breaking the discussion, but I have to ask, why does this thread really exist? Is it a debate or are you people actually really hoping to get what you want by some of the developers looking at your posts?

Spider AL
02-08-2003, 07:53 AM
Originally posted by graigsmith:

who cares about single player? single player games suck. i bought Jedi knight 2 for 2 reasons. it had multiplayer, and i heard it was fun. Ohh, "SP games sux0rz!!11" do they? Well you're welcome to your opinion. :D

You should be aware however that an awful lot of people, games-buying people, still purchase titles for their single-player capabilities, even more so with Star Wars titles. So really, your opinion is much too personal to you to be at all objective, and games developers will continue to make Single Player titles simply because the market's there.

Originally posted by graigsmith:

if theres a sequel to this game i likely wont buy it cause it will suck. And I'm glad to see you're keeping an open mind.

Originally posted by BlackDove:

Excuse me for breaking the discussion, but I have to ask, why does this thread really exist? Is it a debate or are you people actually really hoping to get what you want by some of the developers looking at your posts? Perhaps some people think so, but they have reason. Raven listened to a vocal minority and created 1.03, the satan of patches. Why shouldn't it work again? Smood seems to think it will. :D

RpTheHotrod
02-08-2003, 12:07 PM
Look at Team Fortress Classic. Crappy crappy graphics, yet it is very very well known and fun.


JK needs a class-based STRATEGIC and balanced game. Right now, any player can do anything, so he can go rambo...forget the team.

In TFC, at least it does take teamwork.


There needs to be classes.

Jedi/Sith (pure saber and force)
Hybrid (lil force and guns)
merc (most of the guns)
Heavy Gunner (the more powerful, explosive guns)
Sniper (weaker guns, but gets distruptor)
Engineer (can build a few things)
Guard (can increase the team's defensive strength)
Killer (can increase the team's offensive strength)



Yeah, there won't be any "I wouldn't be able to run to the enemy base and kill everyone alone!" That gets so boring...teamwork, however, is fun.

Luc Solar
02-08-2003, 12:21 PM
That's sounds an awful lot like...

*drumroll*


.......PROMOD! :D


*tries desperately to hold back yet another shameless Promod-plug*

Spider AL
02-08-2003, 12:22 PM
JK needs a class-based STRATEGIC and balanced game. Right now, any player can do anything, so he can go rambo...forget the team. In TFC, at least it does take teamwork.

Well I'm all for more game modes to add to the existing ones. No replacements though. :) It's important to remember that people "go rambo" all the time in TFC, and it's tough to get any teamwork at all on a public server unless you yomp on there with your whole clan... in which case it'll be a little one-sided.

I doubt a class-based system would automatically mean instant online success for the DF franchise.

But sure, a class-based mode to ADD to the existing DM and vanilla CTF would be fine.

DeTRiTiC-iQ
02-08-2003, 12:23 PM
I would argue that the sniper has the most powerful weapon.

Also currently in CTF, no "rambo" has a chance in hell of winning unless the opposition is extremely poor. All you need is 3 defenders and any one man army *shouldn't* be a problem anymore. I was playing CTF the other day with Skygod and we were seeing how quickly we could reach 8 caps, we had reached 7 caps within a few minutes when the enemy suddenly decided to catch on and start defending. It took us another 4 minutes to get the last cap simply because it took us that long to experiment and find the weakness (incidently the weakness was that they were bad aims).

Prime
02-08-2003, 01:32 PM
Originally posted by graigsmith
who cares about single player? single player games suck. i bought Jedi knight 2 for 2 reasons. it had multiplayer, and i heard it was fun.

it was fun, till raven patched the fun right out of the game. now its just stupid and pointless, i actually uninstalled the game from my pc. and raven now gets on my black-list of do not buy games from, along with nihillistic for making such a buggy vampire the masquerade game.

if theres a sequel to this game i likely wont buy it cause it will suck. if lucas arts / raven diddn't care to make the multiplayer good in the first place, then i don't wanna try another one of their games.

however if a jedi multiplayer ONLY game comes out, i might try that, if i hear its fun and bug free and balanced..


Then for God's sake why are you here? That's some sweet trolling you got going on there. "I don't play this game, I don't like, everything sucks about it, and I will never buy anything from Raven ever again because they destroyed all my fun." Any reason why you think it sucks? Can't pull-backstab any more? And you actually have a blacklist? What are you 8? You are certainly entitled to have your opinion about not liking singleplayer games, but again, if you are going to take the time to post, at least say why you don't like it. I bought this game because of singleplayer, not MP. And there are many people (most?) that love SP as well. Not all of use play to be 1ee7 d00ds. But MP is fun too, and I am so glad you won't be around playing this game or the next.

Spider AL
02-08-2003, 03:06 PM
Originally posted by DeTRiTiC-iQ:

incidently the weakness was that they were bad aimsIs that a working sentence? Mur. Regardless, that's the whole point in a nutshell isn't it? Those who can't cut it won't, regardless of what team they've got, or what tactics they use, or what game modes they like the idea of. A lot of people who want CHANGE! want CHANGE! because they think CHANGE! will help them win, because they're unhealthily obsessed with winning.

They couch it in such fluffy terminology as "Let's make the game fairererer" or "Let's balance0rz the game" but what they mean is "Let's go through infinite permutations until I find one which I have so much natural talent at, I won't need to practice at all ever ever ever. And what happens is something 1.03-esque, and they STILL don't win.

It's all so depressing. No game has any hope of being great, as long as people like the whingers who precipitated 1.03's release, are among us.

Prime
02-08-2003, 05:45 PM
Originally posted by Spider AL
Is that a working sentence? Mur. Regardless, that's the whole point in a nutshell isn't it? Those who can't cut it won't, regardless of what team they've got, or what tactics they use, or what game modes they like the idea of. A lot of people who want CHANGE! want CHANGE! because they think CHANGE! will help them win, because they're unhealthily obsessed with winning.

They couch it in such fluffy terminology as "Let's make the game fairererer" or "Let's balance0rz the game" but what they mean is "Let's go through infinite permutations until I find one which I have so much natural talent at, I won't need to practice at all ever ever ever. And what happens is something 1.03-esque, and they STILL don't win.

It's all so depressing. No game has any hope of being great, as long as people like the whingers who precipitated 1.03's release, are among us.

Here here...

Smood
02-08-2003, 07:04 PM
Originally posted by Spider AL
Is that a working sentence? Mur. Regardless, that's the whole point in a nutshell isn't it? Those who can't cut it won't, regardless of what team they've got, or what tactics they use, or what game modes they like the idea of. A lot of people who want CHANGE! want CHANGE! because they think CHANGE! will help them win, because they're unhealthily obsessed with winning.

They couch it in such fluffy terminology as "Let's make the game fairererer" or "Let's balance0rz the game" but what they mean is "Let's go through infinite permutations until I find one which I have so much natural talent at, I won't need to practice at all ever ever ever. And what happens is something 1.03-esque, and they STILL don't win.

It's all so depressing. No game has any hope of being great, as long as people like the whingers who precipitated 1.03's release, are among us.

Oh god plz. You are so ignorant to what this game is that you shut down any suggestion be it big or small.

The distinction between change, and improvement is almost none existant. When you improve upon something, you mimic it but CHANGE certain attributes or characteristics to enhance it in some way.

Your problem is lack of respect for the SW movies, thats the bottom line. You are one of those individuals who casually enjoys SW (which is fine) but who also dislikes much of it for ridiculous reasons. I can imagine you in the theatre, 'Please is this suppose to be some poor excuse for a workable plasma based ignition module. That is just sad, I would laugh if it weren't so shameful. Force? Non-newtonian physics, bull.'

Your 'know it all' attitude is extremely unwelcoming and is probablly the reason I have been arguing with you for such a long time. You do not accept anything unless it is exactly what you want, and you furture redicule with your stupid stereotypes. I say I had it with you. Although many disagree with my views, Prime and the others, they do it in a much more respectable manner. Forget you spider al.

Spider AL
02-09-2003, 01:07 PM
Originally posted by Smood:

Oh god plz. You are so ignorant to what this game is that you shut down any suggestion be it big or small. You're the one who's patently ignorant of the true nature of the DF series, willfully ignorant that is. Not only are your suggestions unworkable and ludicrous, but if they could be implemented by some miracle, the only possible result would be an unwieldy, slow and cumbersome RPG/beat-em-up hybrid, a heaven for those fanboys who enjoy bowing, scraping and spinning before an all-blue-stance duel no doubt, but a hell for every player who has ever experienced the atmosphere, speed and wealth of options that characterize the Dark Forces series.

Originally posted by Smood:

The distinction between change, and improvement is almost none existant. When you improve upon something, you mimic it but CHANGE certain attributes or characteristics to enhance it in some way.The difference between change and improvement, my dear Professor Bunsen, is that while change can be for the better, or for the worse, improvement is change for the better. In other words, your suggestions, were they ever to be implemented on some hell-world in a parallel universe, would effect the opposite of improvement upon the unsuspecting Dark Forces IV.

I really shouldn't have to explain all this... :D

Originally posted by Smood:

Your problem is lack of respect for the SW movies, thats the bottom line. You are one of those individuals who casually enjoys SW (which is fine) but who also dislikes much of it for ridiculous reasons.

Hah! I was busy appreciating the very subtlest nuances of the Star Wars trilogy before you'd seen your first keyboard. Last week, in other words. Regardless of my newbieness and "casual" status however, it's plain for all to see that I have a deeper respect and understanding of the Star Wars movies than you do, you who proclaim without a shadow of humour that "Jedi nevar nevar nevar use anything but teh litesabar!!!11"

Even if I didn't possess superior SW skillz0rz to you though, the fact remains that the game is a game, not a movie, and even if your suggestions made the game truer to the movies (which in fact they would not) they most certainly would not improve the gameplay.

Originally posted by Smood:

Your 'know it all' attitude is extremely unwelcomingI rarely welcome anything that threatens to lower my IQ by ten points solely through its presence. :naughty:

Originally posted by Smood:

Forget you spider al.Have I just been the victim of a TV-cut swearword removing overdub? If so, there's just one thing to say to you... Yippee ki-yay, kimosabe!

DeTRiTiC-iQ
02-09-2003, 02:56 PM
*goes to the shop to get more popcorn*

DeTRiTiC-iQ
02-09-2003, 02:58 PM
Interesting that Spider_AL has posted at least twice as many useful and informative posts as me since the points system was introduced yet has a lower total, especially since he doesn't strike me as the kind of person who would bother spending them.

*approves Spider_AL's latest post*

Smood
02-09-2003, 04:16 PM
Ya here's spider AL's right hand man. I guess if spider AL quotes everything I say and has the last word then DeTRiTiC will agree...

DeTRiTiC-iQ
02-09-2003, 04:31 PM
really? personally I don't like him much, but I also happen to agree with his points. I'm just finding this thread to be a great source of entertainment.

You see, both of your posts consist in their entirety of quoting other posts. So you have to ask yourself, why not come up with something new?

Vagabond
02-09-2003, 06:10 PM
Okay, let's stay on topic people - move along...move along :cool:

Darth Vicious
02-09-2003, 06:13 PM
lots of flaming going on here. I'm going to give my ideas/changes but i'll prolly get flamed too.

If the third Jedi Knight game (expansions don't take nearly this long so i doubt it's one.) continues the trilogy of Jedi Knight (i don't count DF because it's more like a prequel) then i have little doubt it will be a NJO game.

Obviously, i'm talking SP, not MP. you guys can discuss MP better than me.


In any case, i believe a "roleplay" aspect of choosing light/dark for Kyle should still be available. As fighting the Yuuzhan Vong has made countless Jedi go dark, it's only rational that Kyle get a chance to as well.


Also, the game combat should be sped up. Lightsaber on lightsaber, lightsaber on amphistaff, the faster and more realistic the better. Faster-paced battles get adrenaline pumping and heighten the experience. Saber combat works well as it is now, but it could be a little more up to pace.


If the game doesn't continue the JK storyline and instead goes back to Anakin and obi-wan and all of them... forget i said a word.

Obi-Wan X
02-09-2003, 07:18 PM
While I would love to see a Yuuzhan Vong based game, its just not going to happen. Not everyone knows about the New Jedi Order, and it would take a lot of work to get non star wars readers to really know a lot about the game. It would be nice to see it, but its just not going to happen imho.


I think this game will have something to do with Tavion, obviously because of an escape that occured *coughs*. Id like to see a few things in the Expansion/ Sequel.


- A solid amount of civilians, it just didnt feel like Star Wars walking around Nar Shadaa with humans without blasters. Little things like this can really set the emotion of a game.

- Harder lightsaber combat, and when I say this, I dont mean the force being in this. I think the majority of JO players can agree with me when they say after a set time, JO SP lightsaber combat just wasn't hard. It was, but for a solid reason, the force. I want to be able to get my a** handed to me without the use of the force, me actually losing to a superior saber wielder.

- Multiple SP characters, Kyle is great, but playing Luke or Mara or someone of the sort would be great to play as through some parts of the story.

- Be able to set your path in the game, ala JK 1. Due to actions you'll become a jedi or sith, but even more indepth. Being able to choose to become a Mercenary again for a set amount of time, unlocking certain missions that you couldnt play starting out as a jedi, but still leading along the same plot.

- More Star Wars characters. It was sad to see double faces in the Jedi Academy, double jedi trainers in the same room :rolleyes:. I was also sad to see Han and Chewie not present, Leia as well.

- More lightsaber options, twin sabers, lightstaffs, better weaponry

- Melee combat consisting of more than just your lightsaber

- More rpgish levels, im not asking for an rpg here. But I would like to be able to do some investigating in a city to find a bounty hunter or something :p

DeTRiTiC-iQ
02-09-2003, 07:31 PM
^ some nice ideas.

Prime
02-09-2003, 08:10 PM
Originally posted by Darth Vicious

If the third Jedi Knight game (expansions don't take nearly this long so i doubt it's one.) continues the trilogy of Jedi Knight (i don't count DF because it's more like a prequel) then i have little doubt it will be a NJO game.

Obviously, i'm talking SP, not MP. you guys can discuss MP better than me.

In any case, i believe a "roleplay" aspect of choosing light/dark for Kyle should still be available. As fighting the Yuuzhan Vong has made countless Jedi go dark, it's only rational that Kyle get a chance to as well.


As Obi-wan X stated, you can almost be sure that the next JO will have nothing to do with the NJO, for reasons that have been stated in thread and elsewhere (i.e. most SW fans don't know about it, no stormtroopers to fight, and having force powers that don't do anything). Maybe there will be an NJO game eventually, but it won't be in the Dark Forces series.

The reason that JO did not have the ability to choose the light or dark side was because of implementation issues. The problem is that if you allow people to develop their force powers in their own way, you have to make the game for the lowest common denominator. Suppose that one player wants force jump at level 3 and another wants jump at level 1. The developers have to make sure that all the jumps can be made by jump level 1 so that player can finish the game. Same goes for the case where one player has force pull at level 1 and another has it at level 3. Now the devs need to make sure that switch you need to force pull can be made at level 1. So ultimately, the devs need to take into consideration all the possible variations in force powers. This is a lot more work than having a predefined progression of powers.


This is not directed at your post Dath Vicious, but I hate that fact that the post ROTJ has all these Jedi turning to the dark side and then coming back. They make it sound like it is as easy as pie. Maybe I'm sounding like a fanboy, but isn't there enough evidence from the movies that "once you follow down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny." Vader was obviously a special case, as he was the Chosen One. From what I remember, the EU had Luke, one of the Solo twins, Kyp, and who knows who else going to the Dark Side and coming back. If it is that easy, why doesn't everyone do it? "Man, getting out of this sticky situation will be easy when I nuke everyone with force lighting. Sure it will turn me to the dark side, but I'll turn back to the light tomorrow." To me, it just makes the Dark Side have no consequence. Anyway, sorry about the rant.

Obi-Wan X, I like some of your ideas, especially the civillian bystanders. I really missed having them in JO...

Spider AL
02-09-2003, 08:14 PM
I agree with you on all the points you made in that post, Obi-Wan X, except maybe the multiple character thing... but that could be because I'm hopelessly institutionalized and insist on playing as Kyle all the time. :D

But hey, as long as the plot involved Kyle's character in some manner, It'd be cool.

Darth Vicious
02-10-2003, 12:20 AM
Yes, the post-ROTJ books have made it annoyingly easy. If you read dark journey, (one of the worst star wars books i've ever read. a black spot in the NJO) you have Jaina solo falling to the dark side, using the Force like a kid eats candy...

And she doesn't fall to the dark side...uhh...because she doesn't!

Really really bad book and a perfect example of what you mean.

and, in Traitor, Jacen really does fall to the dark side... but for some stupid reason he never does anything wrong. hell he actually saves several dozen people. (ironically this is also one of the best SW books out there.)


And yes... now that i think about it, the NJO is simply too alien for most people to go for it. there's no stormtroopers or sith, so it's not immidiately recognizable.


I say, hang tight, though... Once George Lucas is dead, his companies will immidiately begin to make rights for more games, more books, more movies... and a sci-fi channel TV series. GL may be stupid enough to try and let the franchise die after the prequels, but his company sure ain't. :D

ryudom
02-10-2003, 12:55 PM
The developers have to make sure that all the jumps can be made by jump level 1 so that player can finish the game.

you could make the player get all neutral or essential force powers, then he could pick light/dark beyond that. sure it might take a little more work, but would pay off, IMO.

Spider AL
02-10-2003, 02:45 PM
you could make the player get all neutral or essential force powers, then he could pick light/dark beyond that. sure it might take a little more work, but would pay off, IMO.

Yer, yer, possibly true... JK1 was pretty well tailored for all force-configurations, after all. Couldn't be that hard.

One point though, I think giving Lightsiders different powers to Darksiders is self-defeating to begin with. There'll never be a true balance between them unless they both have access to the same powers, and before anyone says anything, no, Jedi use the same powers as Sith in the canon as well, they just use those powers for different purposes.

JO 1.02 came pretty close to a balance though... Sigh.

ryudom
02-11-2003, 12:28 AM
a couple of ideas (for singleplayer anyway)

1. Force powers could maybe progress with use. the more you use the force power (in porportion to others maybe?) the more powerfull it gets.

2. Kyle's path of dark or light would not depend on the powers he uses, but how he uses them and other actions. (ie killing civiliens, probably if you choke millions of troopers your a sith hehe, etc...)

just spewing some random ideas :)

ryudom
02-11-2003, 12:31 AM
also spider... imaging grip and aborb *shivers* or rage and aborb... or drain and protect... heh yeah i know there's lots of means against that, dunno why i brought it up heh

Doctor Shaft
02-11-2003, 03:11 AM
Some good ideas here.

Although I am a promod player these days, I did at some point take pleasure in JO. I like using guns and sabers (sniper plus saber - sweet). Most unfortunately, I came to the game when 1.03 came out, and my first reaction was "what the..." It just didn't feel right. Even the original JK didn't have things that bad. Guns were powerful in JK, but so were sabers. If you didn't have what it took to get close, well, you were dead. Then again, that conc rifle with force destruct was pretty unbeatable ;).

I'm ready for a change of atmosphere though. I'm talking restrictions on what weapons you carry. More force powers would be nice. Stop giving us the same list with a few amedments. I know it would be difficult to make more powers that wouldn't be ridiculous or useless, but come on, the developers have time, start brainstorming.

Explosives and stuff. I'm all for it, I think it would be nice if we got rid of the "I walk around with all 10 weapons, fully loaded, at a break neck speed". I say give everyone all the explosives and stuff they want, but impose carrying limitations, and weight restrictions. Of course, once again this wouldn't fit the Dark Forces tradition, in which I carry enough stuff to arm 20 people. Personally, I would gladly welcome the disappearance of that one tradition.

Kyle must never disappear. Ever. I'd like to see different characters, but Kyle stays.

Saber combat should be made more difficult. I'm right there with you. JO combat was nice, and Promod's aim thing is nifty, but it isn't all that great. There's still that feeling of just random clashiness. It needs to be fast, it needs to fps style, but we should get a variety of stances and the methods of getting hits and blocking should have more depth. Some swings that go low, some swings that would be used if my opponent enjoyed leaping everywhere.

Right now, we have a variety of saber swings, but they all go in the the frontal area, at about the mid section. Swinging low CAN be done, but the game doesn't really take that into account in terms of blocks. People that jump and leap around are generally safe becasue the swings are all designed to fight someone who likes to fight fair and stupid. Hacking gunners wouldn't be so hard if our saber swings weren't merely designed for saber clashes. If gunners were dangerous, but I had dynamic saber moves, I mean things that lunged me across the floor, let me do specialized techniques that attacked both the ground beneath me and the air above me, then we wouldn't have so many complaints (perhaps).

ryudom
02-11-2003, 10:07 AM
right on, thats exactly what i was saying (about the saber anyway) i agree with the rest too heh

Doctor Shaft
02-11-2003, 11:12 AM
Well now that I think I'm on a roll, I think this is the key thing.

I'm almost certain that the next Dark Force game will allow us to every weapon. I don't want force powers that give me special saber swings.

Here's yet another list of what I think the next game should do:

- Get creative with the guns yet again. I liked JK's guns, even though the conc rifle was the end all of weaponry. The rail detonator was cool. I like JO's rocket launcher, but I hate what they did to the repeater.

- The reason so many people are opposed to powerful sabers that could own gunners is because no one wants to play a game where running around as fast as you can and simply clicking will win. Each game that we've been given has taken the lightsaber to a different level. JK introduced it, MotS gave us a saber throw. JO gave it a whole new function and style, but it's still so much like a clunky combat knife that it wasn't a l33t weapon. We've got these exhibition videos coming from Nutritious, from members of DSbr, and they're good, but the videos basically contain tons of people using guns to wipe out other people.

The saber should become a more complicated entity. In terms of saber moves, I felt Raven spent too much time giving us a variety of the frontal moves. I can attack someone in front of me about 30 ways, but they all don't make much a difference. We need slashes in the next game that are designed to cut off feet, designed to destroy things leaping over top of you, designed to help you destroy things that are beneath you. Simply aiming up and down these days doesn't help; the slashes are too awkward for that. A blocking system that isn't done by pushing buttons persay, but requires that we do more than simply look at our opponent. Strikes should be almost always near fatal, blocking system requiring that we anticipate where the opponent is attacking (top, middle, bottom). Something where if i don't pratice with it, I get wiped out quickly. This way, even our pro gunners would not only have to be skilled in all weapons, but also skilled in saber combat. Everyone would have to be skilled in using all or at least most of the weapons to compete, pending the situations given.


If there's anything I most want to see, I would like to see the next game allow people to 0wnz with a saber against all types of players. I'd like to see a video where someone who is good at the game can at times dodge fire, get in close, and then just unleash some nasty moves.

The saber should be powerful. If the imperial flechette, which is an incredibly powerful gun in JO, can knock out opponents in one hit, well, I think the saber should do it too, pending the hit is clean and dead on. That means that blocking and swinging pattersn would have to become more in-depth. I don't like it when the lightsaber is a weapon that everyone and your six year old can spam away with.

Some of us talk about movie atmosphere. I say that the only reason why we see jedi in the movies using sabers for a majority of the time was because they were *#*@ good with it! JO, unfortunately, does not provide a super complex saber system nor the appropriate damage, to allow things like that to happen. A lightsaber with high damage, like it is in Promod, will kill a gunner in one hit. However, the advantage isn't as significant as it sounds. The pure gunner, even without force powers, can consistently dominate promod games. I don't have a problem with that. It's just a testament that damage or no, the saber is not very complicated, and kinda spammy.

There are people who play JO and use pretty much one gun. And they use it to amazing effectiveness. However, for some of the guns used, it takes a certain skill level. Make the saber a complicated weapon (in terms of a weapon used in an fps) and THEN we can put it up there as a powerful weapon. Something that would be useful in many situations only if you were a master at it. The learning curve should be high, not low. This way, the saber only, casual fans can be casual. The ctf, ffa players in competitive players can only be good with the saber with LOTS of practice. At least I think that's a good idea.

Rumor
02-11-2003, 11:35 AM
well i would make a ten page post but unnamed and shaft have summed up all of what i wanted to say. saber combat is way to easy. its sad. i have seen n00bs on their first fight dominate a seasoned player. its quite sad.

DeTRiTiC-iQ
02-11-2003, 12:58 PM
The problem with making the saber combat more detailed, is that the more you rely on locational targeting, overhead slashes etc. The more you will be relying on everyone having pings of 20. Consider how fast players move in the game, your timing would have to be flawless to get an overhead strike as the target jumps over you, add lag to this and you see the problem.

I agree the saber needs to be a more powerful weapon. What Spider_AL, myself and most other gunners object to is the common argument that the saber should be some godly weapon that can beat everything else. If this was the case, then there would be no reason whatsoever to use other weapons. :(

Doctor Shaft
02-11-2003, 04:46 PM
I agree with that assessment. AT the same time, I have seen people another weapon besides the lightsaber to max effectiveness, and it ALSO makes you wonder what the point of another weapon is.

I feel the weapons should have learning curve that was steep enough that you could eventually use whichever weapon you like in a variety of situations. People have done this with the flechette, turning it into a medium AND close range dominance weapon.

I understand that complicated saber system would be difficult due to pings and game speeds. I cannot even begin to imagine an innovative method of doing saber combat. However, something in my gut tells me that we could have been given swing animations and attacks that that worked in more capacities than the three we ended up getting.

JO's stances, while providing different swings, are all mainly useful for a person standing in front of you with two feet planted. It doesn't help if the guy starts rolling, it gets worse when he starts bunny hopping, and when fighting gunners, instead of giving saberists a logical quick poke attack, we have to do baseball bat swing. Of course, this takes far too long, and you see a jedi get blown across the room.

In terms of blocking, I guess creating blocking stances (ah that's too complicated) or just some system where it's not simply the generic "look at the guy". Chances are that won't happen.

The stances. The stances should go beyond simple saber combat. there should be stances that excel at people who are grounded and runnig. there should be a stance that works well in aerial combat (high attacks, low attacks, attacks that allow us to efficiently attack when we decend). Stances that incorporate lots of fast, moderate lunges (not exactly like blue lunge). A stance that would have moves that are quick like blue stance, but not wholly inefficient (like blue stance). A stance with quick stabs and pokes, something that would excel in close range combat against a person not armed with a saber, or even when they are armed. All I'm asking for is stances that will work against possible movements of a person. I don't want super speed, i don't want automatic saber lock on. Just something that isn't so clunky and primarily suitable for saber-only servers.

Emon
02-11-2003, 07:34 PM
I think the best combat system would be one similar to FAKK 2's. In FAKK 2, you can wield several different swords and different shields at the same time. You can also wield a gun and a sword, a gun and a shield, two guns, etc., which allows you do do a lot of different combinations. There are also two handed swords and axes. The concept of the system is what you want to be concerned about, as the number of moves and combinations that you could pull off was limited, since it's a few years old. That's the area you would want to improve on, as well as add for two swords (lightsabers), various styles for the sabers, lightstaves, etc.

If a good physics system could be worked out, most of the saber combat could be more random and generated on-the-fly, as opposed to premade sets of collision and repel animations.

Prime
02-11-2003, 08:35 PM
Originally posted by Rumor
i have seen n00bs on their first fight dominate a seasoned player. its quite sad.

If this was the case, then the seasoned player wasn't very good :)

Spider AL
02-11-2003, 11:37 PM
If this was the case, then the seasoned player wasn't very good :)

He or she must have been lightly seasoned.

Hur hur. Ahem.

Yes, quite. Some people claim that those who are new to JO can easily take out those who have been playing for a long while, and are "leet." But the people who claim this are plainly overestimating the skills of the allegedly "elite" players they've seen beaten.

Trust the Spider: If you ever encounter a really good JO player, you'll be lying on the floor groaning about the license plate of the truck that just hit you. There are players so good out there that you'd think they were cheating.

Besides Rumor, how do you know the person you saw win, was a newbie? Just because he said he was? Or because his name was all in white? Or because you hadn't seen him around before?

People in every game online pretend to be newbies to such an extent that they lose some games on purpose to deepen their disguise.

DeTRiTiC-iQ
02-12-2003, 12:08 AM
Its an annoying truth, knowing that out of about every 10 players I beat with ease, that at least one of them is an "elite" just screwing around.

That being said, Spider knows what he says, unless the player is using their real alias, you have no idea who you're up against.

Luc Solar
02-12-2003, 03:54 AM
There's nothing that infuriates me more than getting my ass handed to me repeatedly by mr. Padawan (no colors). :D

DC | Dark Luke
02-12-2003, 10:52 AM
Ok, i´m a very new gamer of JK2, but if there´s something i hate is weapons.
Ok, mercs should have their place too, but this game is called "Jedi Knight", a jedi knight doesn´t use blasters or cannons very frequently, i hate when i´m in mplayer and some bastard sees me with my saber and put out some "bfg" and kills me in a sec.(yeah yeah, i´m a noob:( )
Maybe it should be servers for jedis and servers for mercs.
Maybe it woun´t be so fun if you can´t deflect blasters and kill some pts, but i prefer that instead pts with big weapons.

That`s my opinion, i hope you respect it.:)

SAlu2

DeTRiTiC-iQ
02-12-2003, 12:08 PM
there ARE servers for sabers only.

Aoshi
02-12-2003, 01:23 PM
heh interesting little debate here.

I'm not gonna get into all of the 'what jedi are' arguments and all that. I just think that the next game should be more competitive based. The RPGers have Galaxies so now Lucas should concentrate on making a balanced fps game that will appeal to fans but also appeal to nonfans. Keep in mind that I played guns CTF on teamwarfare so my opinions might not reflect the rest of the saber community.

1) increase the damage of the saber so that a light stance swing = instant kill if directed at an open body part (like the back or the whole body if you dont have your saber out)

2) increase blocking as 'saber defense' goes up and also increase dodging so that duelists can have their "movie like" duels. what i mean by this is say a lightsaber does an instant kill against a gunner who doesnt have his saber out. if he does have his saber out he will either block it or his evade will be activated so that he can partially deflect the brunt of the attack and take minimal damage (35 or so for light stance). as the stance changes for the aggressor, though, the chance to partially evade the attack goes to zero (so a heavy swing unless blocked will kill).

3) do not separate classes and dont separate forces. we all saw in epII that yoda not only absorbed dooku's lightning, but he shot it back at him. why cant a lightside use lightning or a dark use absorb?

4) rework the forces. for example absorb should FRIGGIN ABSORB (so that im not strafing along and then someone pulls me and all of a sudden all of my hardworked velocity is reduced to nothing). and make team energize not so damn spammable. also increase the force used for push and pull or make it so that even at level 3 your crosshair has to be on the person or almost on them for it to work. (in ctf all defenders need to do on ANY map is have 2-3 spamming pull, energize while another kills the guy i mean... there's something wrong here). also rage should have the speed and power bonuses but not the invulnerability bonus too. also i think that increasing the firing rate of a gun while using rage is ridiculous... what do you do, use the force to make you pull the trigger faster? i think that instead, the damage of every shot should be beefed up (like it is being supported by the force or something)

5) increase the damage of saber throw to around 70 or so against someone who doesnt have his lightsaber out. this is the only solution to equalizing gunners and saberists. (also it should move quite a bit quicker and have a fairly wide area of effect)

6) make it so that when a sniper uses seeing in conjunction with his disruptor, he stands a greater chance of piercing his target's defense.

7) instead of making separate stances for holding the lightsaber why not make different fighting styles? there are like 7 in the SW universe or something with 3 being the whirly kind that most use (anakin and luke). dooku uses 1 and i think mace uses 2 (i think yoda uses all of them...dont ask me how i know this). therefore there could be multiple ways of fighting with each having certain strengths and weaknesses instead of just increasing the speed and decreasing the damage or vice versa. for example since 3 was developed to defend against blasters, it's blocking rate and speed is higher but its attack power is lower; 2 would be quick speed wise as well but have lower blocking and higher damage. 1 would be something like strong but with lunges (because that's how dooku fights); it could have massive attack power but medium speed and crappy blocking. all of this would make it so that someone would have different strategies when dealing with different types of aggressors. also maybe another style or two could be invented. one being to counter explosives (it allows for quick bursts of speed with a recovery time inbetween) and maybe another could have pretty weak attributes (quick, low blocking, weak)but incredibly high attack from above.

Anyways these are just some of my ideas about how gameplay could be tweaked. As i said i'm a gunner, but i'd love it if a ****ing sword made of light could do more than 35 damage. maybe then i'd use it as more than a shield.

oh and just on a side note. luke skywalker almost always runs around with thermal detonators (he uses them at Hoth and at Jabba's place) and jedi use the lightsaber because it is the most effective weapon in that universe. i'm sure if they played jko they'd either adapt to using guns or there would be another 'great jedi purge'

Spider AL
02-12-2003, 03:35 PM
Some excellent points for a future sequel in your post there Aoshi. I too have noted at several points that it would be an improvement if the sabre had tangible damage/area-specific damage or dismemberment in DF4. (note: Not in an expansion to JO mind you)

With regards to point #7, I'd also like to see each style available in isolation, (unlike the stances in JO, one had to have both blue and yellow to gain Red,) and I think a player should only be allowed one, possibly two styles, at any one time. This would make one's choices much more personal, and you'd see a greater variety of uses around the pub servers. Naturally everyone would end up using one "ultimate" combination, but it'd increase the learning curve most pleasantly.

Re: Point #6, I believe that the sabre throw, like the sabre, should deal damage proportionate to the area it hits. If you get a headshot, it should be an instant kill. Having said this, sabre-throw would be quite powerful then, so the thrower should lose his/her sabre for at least ten seconds post-throw, hit or miss.

Just some self-indulgent suggestions from me there, as I don't think many gameplay changes should be irrevocably introduced into an expansion pack. Maybe if it ran as a mod though.

Doctor Shaft
02-12-2003, 05:13 PM
Yes, the stances idea is good. Something that works well in certain areas. More importantly to me, I want stances that provide me with stances that aren't all focused in the frontal area.

Going back to MotS style force setups would be nice. Technically, a Sith isn't restricted in what he can do. If we looked at "movie canon", at no point does Yoda say that the Force is give and take, that the Sith gave up one power for another. The whole point of giving into the dark side, in my opinion, wasn't because you thought it was cooler to be on the other half, but because it made you MORE powerful. MotS let you do that. You could give into your violence and have healing powers, or you could be the true light jedi and have mastery in the defensive powers.

Of course, that would mean that more force powers would have to be added in. MotS had plenty, including the saber throw, the projection (useless), deadly sight and protection. You could make interesting setups.

FatalStrike
02-12-2003, 05:17 PM
The "lightsaber v guns" debate still rages on. hehehehe Nothing has changed.

Raven has left you in the cold and yet you all remain here adding to the wish lists. Spineless_Al is still filling his role as resident corporate whore, attempting to silence all the voices that noticed when Raven destroyed their own game.

People there is no need for debate. ProMod awaits those that value the saber. If you don't like ProMod and miss the special moves then their are a few 1.02 servers swimming against the current of change.

Allow the gunners to embrace the bone Raven tossed them in an effort to increase their player base. They worked hard to destroy this game, allow them to enjoy the fruits their labor.

Good day.

Reborn Outcast
02-12-2003, 05:36 PM
Originally posted by FatalStrike
The "lightsaber v guns" debate still rages on. hehehehe Nothing has changed.

Raven has left you in the cold and yet you all remain here adding to the wish lists. Spineless_Al is still filling his role as resident corporate whore, attempting to silence all the voices that noticed when Raven destroyed their own game.

People there is no need for debate. ProMod awaits those that value the saber. If you don't like ProMod and miss the special moves then their are a few 1.02 servers swimming against the current of change.

Allow the gunners to embrace the bone Raven tossed them in an effort to increase their player base. They worked hard to destroy this game, allow them to enjoy the fruits their labor.

Good day.



Just wondering but are you one of those people that gets owned by every single gun out there and thats why you hate them. 75% of the owners of JO wouldn't have bought it if it didn't have guns. Just go play on a saber only server sheesh...

FatalStrike
02-12-2003, 06:31 PM
Originally posted by Reborn Outcast
Just wondering but are you one of those people that gets owned by every single gun out there and thats why you hate them. 75% of the owners of JO wouldn't have bought it if it didn't have guns. Just go play on a saber only server sheesh...

Yes that is exactly why. Do you play BF1942? Why don't you come to the Brother's in Arm's server and show me your skill :D.

Zodiac
02-12-2003, 06:48 PM
Sabers and guns should be kept separated! History has shown us (= JK1 AND JK2) that there is no way you can balance them and please both sides.

Future developers have to realize that sabers and gunners are 2 completely different worlds; with different styles, different tastes, different gameplay and different players.

It's always been like that, and I think that's where Raven went wrong: trying to totally balance the gameplay to satisfy those who wanted sabers to be equal to guns and/or guns to be equal to sabers.

They can't be equal. They need to be different. They ARE different.

Trying to totally balance one to the other always means that the other one gets less playable and less fun. Having two separate communities (gunwhores and gayberists) isn't bad at all. It's actually a lot more fun. More rivalry.
And one can always step over to 'the other world'. Don't try to make a gunning saberist, create a 100% saberist and create a 100% gunner and the two worlds will eventually find eachother, skill will evolve.

Learn from your mistakes. Make the game more fun.

Zodiac
02-12-2003, 06:57 PM
I'm only talking about Multi Player btw.

What I'm saying is that they should concentrate on the different types of play first, and just focus on separating them and making them ALL fun, in their own individual kind of way. Not balance one to the other to make one more fun, because that'll always result in one getting more fun, but one getting less fun. They should concentrate on making them all more fun.

That may initially lead to separation of the playing styles or the community, but after a while, skill will evolve and the seperate worlds will combine with eachother to create a new world: 1 combined world.

So after a while, the gaming-community will consist of combined and separated worlds, thus giving the game more depth and more rivalry and competition and more fun.

Spider AL
02-12-2003, 07:28 PM
Originally posted by FatalStrike:

Raven has left you in the cold and yet you all remain here adding to the wish lists. Spineless_Al is still filling his role as resident corporate whore, attempting to silence all the voices that noticed when Raven destroyed their own game.

Nice to see you've matured, Foetalstrike. Who knows, you may even be walking in a couple of decades. :rolleyes: One thing that hasn't changed is your dubious choice of challenges though... You saunter on to a dedicated Jedi Outcast forum, insult the patrons and when one of them questions the veracity of your motives, you challenge them to a game of Battlefield 1942. That's apt. Really, really apt. Almost as funky as the time you challenged me to a duel match, and never showed up on any of the servers I listed, despite my constant monitoring of those servers. ;)

Reborn Outcast: Foetal was a no-guns-ctf only fanatic according to his own posts, so the answer to your question- straight from the subconcious mind of Foetalstrike- was: "Ah shore am!!11"

Originally posted by Zodiac:

Having two separate communities (gunwhores and gayberists) isn't bad at all. It's actually a lot more fun. More rivalry.

I don't agree. Even in 1.04, I would never go into a guns FFA without my sabre. It's like any other tool, useful in the right hands. Separating the community into two camps and keeping them apart is the constant occupation of complete muppets, IMO.

Who says a sabre can't be a useful part of a gunner's arsenal? It's hardly writ large in stone.

FatalStrike
02-12-2003, 08:05 PM
LoL Spineless_Al is still the same. I call people out in BF1942 because that is the latest and greatest I just came here to confirm that Raven left us all in the cold.

Confirmed

Nice to see you still defending them though. See ya.

Spider AL
02-12-2003, 08:34 PM
Originally posted by FatalStrike:

LoL Spineless_Al is still the same.

Uh-huh. Still assisting you in your eternal quest to make a fool of yourself. :cool: As if you need any help.

Originally posted by FatalStrike:

I call people out in BF1942 because that is the latest and greatest
You challenge JO players to BF1942 because you hope fervently that they've never played it before, because you are, and always were, a digital coward. That is all.

Originally posted by FatalStrike:

I just came here to confirm that Raven left us all in the cold.
Well, you've managed to confirm that your cranium is full of salty, salty porridge. Well done. Not sure about anything else though.

Originally posted by FatalStrike:

See ya.
Come back soon, I like an easy target every so often. Relaxing.

DeTRiTiC-iQ
02-12-2003, 08:54 PM
I am using the saber more and more in Guns CTF. I don't use it much because even I know that its only useful in certain circumstances.

It was the saberists who requested 1.03, 1.04 was simply a fix of what went wrong in 1.03, albeit not a very good one. But let me tell you this as a fact. Short of a few posts on their own forums immediately after each patch saying what they liked and didn't like, the competitive community just got on with the game.

The saber moveset (I say moveset to mean everything involving the saber) is used A LOT by competitive players, there is little more satisfying then a well-timed kick to knock a rager off course. Not many competitive players rely on moves that take away from the enjoyment of the game though. Which is why, even if i'm being completely owned, competitive players are far more fun to play with.

What went wrong with JK2 was that the force powers weren't considered well enough for all the play modes. Pretty much every force power is balanced in FFA, in CTF there are real issues with rage, pull/push and the like. I can't speak for duel since I don't play it. But its clear the game was designed for FFA, since that's where the force powers really come into their own.

Zodiac
02-12-2003, 09:10 PM
Originally posted by Spider AL
I don't agree. Even in 1.04, I would never go into a guns FFA without my sabre. It's like any other tool, useful in the right hands. Separating the community into two camps and keeping them apart is the constant occupation of complete muppets, IMO.

Who says a sabre can't be a useful part of a gunner's arsenal? It's hardly writ large in stone.

I'm not saying it can't be. I'm not even saying there will be a permanent separation of two worlds. My point was that sabers with guns eventually will be a good option to play with.

I just think Raven missed a step and went right through to balancing those sabers with guns, while some aspects of those separate settings weren't even tweaked to perfection.

I say: first focus and try to create perfect saber gameplay and perfect gunning gameplay, and after a while, those 2 settings will combine automatically, because players who are used to perfect sabering would want to expand their horizons and start using guns too and vice versa.

It's a whole new perspective of how Raven chose to do it, and new perspectives are probably better, because these perspectives have learned from the past and are adapted to previous experiences. It's just that JK2's MP was and still is a big dissapointment, and the small JK2 MP community proves that JK2 MP never reached its goals. Future expansions and/or sequels should learn from these 'mistakes' and new perspectives should be looked at to see how things can be done differently to get a more succesful outcome.
Now some people might disagree, but to deny that JK2 aimed for a much larger community is like eating poo and saying u like it.

Zodiac
02-12-2003, 09:14 PM
And it's obvious that what I'm saying for guns&sabers also goes for force&noforce. :)

focus on the separate settings first, then move on to see how they work with other settings. When you do this, you have a lot more info of what players like and what not. And this info can be used when something has to be changed in a separate setting to balance it with another setting.

Aoshi
02-12-2003, 09:36 PM
Originally posted by DeTRiTiC-iQ
I am using the saber more and more in Guns CTF. I don't use it much because even I know that its only useful in certain circumstances.

It was the saberists who requested 1.03, 1.04 was simply a fix of what went wrong in 1.03, albeit not a very good one. But let me tell you this as a fact. Short of a few posts on their own forums immediately after each patch saying what they liked and didn't like, the competitive community just got on with the game.

The saber moveset (I say moveset to mean everything involving the saber) is used A LOT by competitive players, there is little more satisfying then a well-timed kick to knock a rager off course. Not many competitive players rely on moves that take away from the enjoyment of the game though. Which is why, even if i'm being completely owned, competitive players are far more fun to play with.

What went wrong with JK2 was that the force powers weren't considered well enough for all the play modes. Pretty much every force power is balanced in FFA, in CTF there are real issues with rage, pull/push and the like. I can't speak for duel since I don't play it. But its clear the game was designed for FFA, since that's where the force powers really come into their own.

actually i just got done playing a ffa on oE's server... the saddest thing was that a rager beat everyone there including me toosexy and contender. this was on warring factions and all he did was run around and switch on rage when he met a group of people. then he was invulnerable and most of the time the people in the ffa didnt have enough force to pull whore him. this is why rage shouldnt have increased speed/firing rate/invulnerability. sure you have a down time, but just /kill and it's gone. therefore the forces are generally unbalanced in every gametype. sure you can push/pull a rager, but honestly how often do you have enough force to do so in a ffa? almost always my force is below 1/2 because i use seeing constantly.

Spider AL
02-12-2003, 10:03 PM
Well Aoshi, there are a few simple rules and tactics. Don't use seeing when there's a rager around, any more than any other extraneous force power. Just stalk them, pull their gun repeatedly and wait around for rage to run out. Then they're a puppy dog, and if you've been pulling their gun, they shouldn't have made many kills. Try to hog the Boon. Ragers like the Boon. Deny them the Boon.

Actually one of the last challenging FFAs I played was against a Raging aliaser. He was good... he racked up kills, but not as fast as I did with Absorb. Pull is the secret.

I too would disagree with Det, and say that the Force is imbalanced in FFA. But I'd say Absorb is the imbalancing factor, and hence the light side. It's never failed me, against any and all opposition.

Originally posted by Zodiac:

I'm not saying it can't be. I'm not even saying there will be a permanent separation of two worlds. My point was that sabers with guns eventually will be a good option to play with.

You aren't? What about this:

Originally posted by Zodiac:

They can't be equal. They need to be different. They ARE different.

And this:

Originally posted by Zodiac:

Future developers have to realize that sabers and gunners are 2 completely different worlds; with different styles, different tastes, different gameplay and different players.


:confused: Seems like you said it to me.

Rumor
02-13-2003, 12:48 AM
Originally posted by Spider AL
He or she must have been lightly seasoned.

Hur hur. Ahem.

Yes, quite. Some people claim that those who are new to JO can easily take out those who have been playing for a long while, and are "leet." But the people who claim this are plainly overestimating the skills of the allegedly "elite" players they've seen beaten.

Trust the Spider: If you ever encounter a really good JO player, you'll be lying on the floor groaning about the license plate of the truck that just hit you. There are players so good out there that you'd think they were cheating.

Besides Rumor, how do you know the person you saw win, was a newbie? Just because he said he was? Or because his name was all in white? Or because you hadn't seen him around before?

People in every game online pretend to be newbies to such an extent that they lose some games on purpose to deepen their disguise.


the person is my 6 year old brother. and he played for about an hour before he beat most of the m0h clan minus the agents in duels

Spider AL
02-13-2003, 01:57 AM
the person is my 6 year old brother. and he played for about an hour before he beat most of the m0h clan minus the agents in duels

m0h? As in [M0H]? They're rubbish, apparently. Two major UK clans that I know of defeated them in official clan matches on [M0H]'s own server in America. Now that's a glowing demonstration of their skills. So they're lightly seasoned indeed; it's not really surprising that your six-year-old brother managed to beat some of their lesser members in some duels. This does not mean that newbies have as much chance of winning as truly seasoned players do.

Besides, don't sell your brother short! Perhaps he has some natural talent as well. :)

Prime
02-13-2003, 02:35 AM
FatalStrike does seem quite bitter. I mean it is just a game, after all. Promod seems to be pretty cool, but to my knowledge there are single digit servers that actually run it. If it solved many of the problems of JO, why isn't everyone using it?

I really don't think gunners and saberists need to be separated much more than they are. I mean, I don't use the all seeing eye, but the majority of servers I see are all saber only anyway. So surely if you want to just use a saber there are many servers that cater to your tastes. This is probably all the seperation between the two groups that is necessary.

I definitely agree with Aoshi's idea if making a saber hit on a saberless opponant much more damaging, and possibly fatal (and I like some of his others as well). In a guns and sabers game, the saber should have the advantage in melee range combat. It already has the best defensive capabilities of any weapons, and so increasing the damage of it would make it just as useful, if not more so than the guns in the right situations.

Ultimately, I don't see how the game is so unbalanced. To me, unbalanced means that one player as an advantage over another. But how can this be since everyone has access to everything that everyone else does? I mean, everyone has access to all the guns, and everyone can decide what force powers (and side of the force) they want to use. If someone is owning you, they are doing it with the same weapons and powers that you have access to. It's not like they have the rocket launcher and all you have is the stun baton. If you are getting owned by someone, you know what, they are probably better than you. You just have to learn to use those same tools and abilities in a more effective fashion. The problem of people claiming big unbalances (i.e. FatalStrike), is that they decide that they want to use one of the weapons exclusively. Unfortunately this tactic doesn't work. And instead of people saying, "Well, I'm getting owned when I just use the saber, so I better come up with another tactic", they moan that the game is broken because the way they want to play doesn't lead to victories. There are tactics against pretty much everything. And for crying out loud, if people want to use the saber exclusively, there are certainly many servers where they can do this :)

That being said, JO isn't perfect by any means, and some of the suggestions here would help make the saber a more valuable asset than it is currently in a guns game. And other changes mentioned here might introduce more variety. But I think that JO is a good game. But keep the suggestions coming!

UgonDieFoo
02-13-2003, 03:11 AM
I'd just like to throw out a few ideas for an upcoming expansion or sequel to Jedi Outcast.

It would be cool if the saber system was reworked so that saber combat and defense involved the use of force. It should take a certain amount of force to block and incoming shot from a saber. The amount of force it takes should depend on certain factors, like where the blow is landing, what kind of swing was used, the timing of the blow and how direct the blow was. For example, a head on light stance attack that was made from the very edge of swinging distance should take very little force to block. Heavier blows that are more direct, properly timed, and that land farther away from the center of an opponent’s defense should take more force to block accordingly. Theoretically, you should be able to block any blow provided you have enough force to do so. However, if you lack the force to block a particular blow, it would penetrate your defense. A direct red stance attack from behind should probably bypass anyone’s defense, unless maybe if they have a full force meter. Other things would be taken into account, such as if two opponents swing at the same time. If they both hit each other, then the sabers should collide and each opponent should lose force as if they both blocked. If one hits and one does not, then the person who missed should still be able the block but should lose a lot of force.

This system would possibly be a great improvement over the current system for several reasons. It would help to eliminate the random feel of saber fighting by introducing a definitive system in which skillful sabering and defense was rewarded. The problem of randomness in the defensive arc would also be addresses by this system. In addition, the saber could be made so that it is extremely lethal, as in a one hit kill, and this wouldn’t create problems in dueling the way it would currently. In fact, the same kind of system could work when it comes to blocking shots from guns, although less force should be required to block a shot from a gun than from a saber swing in general. This, combined with sabers that kill in basically one shot, might help to improve the balance of guns vs. sabers. In general it would be a lot more fun to play this way.

Another idea that might be nice would be to vary the effect of certain force powers on an opponent based on how much force they have. Take push and pull for example. As of the way things are in Jedi Outcast, push and pull are fairly useless. They were too powerful and easy to use before the patch, and now they aren’t really good against anyone. They should be powerful provided that they are used appropriately. For example, a push or pull could be made to have little or no effect on someone with full force, but have a great effect on someone who has depleted his force meter. This might be better for gameplay and balance. Also, if this element was combined with sabering system I described above, it might make for some truly interesting and dynamic saber duels. Conservative and intelligent use of force powers along with skillful sabering would become necessary. Unintelligent abuse of force powers would leave you vulnerable.

Third, I’d like to see force sight replaced by something that’s a little more useful overall. I’ve always felt that the only reason it's in the game is to counter mind trick. I’d like to see something like “force sense” in its place. As for how it would work, here are few ideas. At level one, it could allow you to sense other Jedi that are close, as well as what side they are on, through some kind of audio or visual indicator. At level two, it could reveal Jedi who are using mind trick, and perhaps allow you to see people through walls for a limited distance. At level three, it could allow you to see people through walls farther away. It could also highlight and reveal things like mines or det packs through walls. It addition, it could show how much force another Jedi has by giving them a glow, or perhaps show how much health they have. Finally, it should let you dodge sniper fire or maybe even a homing rocket :).

Anyway, these are just my ideas. If I had the ability or the time to mod them into Jedi Outcast, I would. But I do not, so I hope that they are considered for a sequel or expansion to Jedi Outcast.

UgonDieFoo
02-13-2003, 03:46 AM
Oh and there's one more thing I'd like to add. Bring back force throw! It was one of the best and funniest force powers to use in Jedi Knight. It was always very enjoyable to make someone have a suicide count by smashing things into them :D. There wouldn’t have to be a ton of debris lying around, as long as it’s in the right places, like it was in JK.

DeTRiTiC-iQ
02-13-2003, 04:25 AM
if you made pull/push have little or no effect on people with full force. Then people would just bunny-hop through CTF maps without a care in the world...

My force config:

Jump - level 3 (essential, nuff said)
Speed - level 3 (" ")
Pull - level 3 (I don't use them much, but I need from passively for defense)
Push - level 3 (" ")
Seeing - level 3 (essential)

Rage - level 3
Team Energize - level 3

Saber Offense - level 2
Saber Defense - whatever I can spare.

The only ones of these I use regularly are Jump, Speed, Seeing. The others aren't part of my playing style, they're just there for when they might be useful in CTF.

Heck, in the average FFA I don't use any light/dark powers at all.

My actual post was stating that FFA had the most balance in force powers, if someone is absorbing, they are moving slower. Hence you shoot them... CTF is newb friendly, in that it is true that 3 well-placed darksiders can hold off an entire enemy team without breaking a sweat :(

The most fun i've had in CTF in months was playing instagib, unfortunately its only practical with a non-fluctuating ping

But essentially, if another sequel is to be successful (in the multiplayer department(, multiplayer tests, aka what ID does, would be a really good idea. Let the balance issues be fixed before the game even hits the shelves.

Luc Solar
02-13-2003, 05:09 AM
(Hahaha! Fatal is back. How delighful! :D )

I only have this one little thing to add:

Movement with or without the saber should be similar. Why can't I wall walk or kick while holding a bryar? :confused:

That's just dumb.

Luc Solar
02-13-2003, 05:40 AM
Originally posted by UgonDieFoo
Another idea that might be nice would be to vary the effect of certain force powers on an opponent based on how much force they have. Take push and pull for example. As of the way things are in Jedi Outcast, push and pull are fairly useless.

* In saber only pull is very effectice --> pull-throw, pull-kick.

* With weapons enabled pulling is essential for a) pulling the opponents gun (duh!) and b) pulling them down "The Void".

Push is a good defensive power. Makes you hard to kill with a rocket launcher and gives you enough time to outrun a flechette-spammer. Handy in levels with pits.

I’d like to see force sight replaced by something that’s a little more useful overall. I’ve always felt that the only reason it's in the game is to counter mind trick.

I'd say that when guns are enabled Sight is the most useful power of all. (Wouldn't use it in saber only, though) You really should try it sometime.

You can spot hiding snipers easily and bryar them down.

Detpacks and traps show up clearly.

You see people through walls and can blow them into pieces before they even know what happened.

Seeing mind trickers is just a bonus. :)

And if you are into gettin loads of frags, you might want to know exactly where on the map that pack of saberists are swinging their glowsticks and go pay them a visit with your rocket launcher :D

Sight is teh winnar! :thumbsup:

FatalStrike
02-13-2003, 11:22 AM
Originally posted by Spider AL

You challenge JO players to BF1942 because you hope fervently that they've never played it before, because you are, and always were, a digital coward. That is all.


HEHE! Funny!

I challenged you in JKII and instead of meeting me at one server you decided to hide by stating "find me" at one of 25, however that is the past. I did not come here to damage your weak little ego nor to giggle at your clever remarks which are meaningless given your inability to back them up when you had the chance.

As I said before I came to find out if Raven was supporting this game or if they had left you all behind. It seems obvious since you are in the same debate you were in 6 months ago that they have. I also note that BigGay_Al is still defending this action.

Have a great day everyone!

(PS sup Solar!)

Spider AL
02-13-2003, 12:32 PM
Originally posted by Luc Solar:

Movement with or without the saber should be similar. Why can't I wall walk or kick while holding a bryar?A good point: Perhaps in a sequel it would be nice if acrobatics were a separate skill/power.

Originally posted by FatalStrike:

I challenged you in JKII and instead of meeting me at one server you decided to hide by stating "find me" at one of 25,Hmm, you know son, I think you'll find that when you challenge someone, they get to pick the server. I gave you a choice of four duel servers, and a specific time to meet, and you never turned up on any of them. I know, because I was monitoring them during that time, and even outside the time frame. Isn't player-searching wonderful?

You are, and always have been, a paper tiger. your presence online is as strong as a liquorice hawser, and your abilities are as tangible as a moth's methane. Your ego is as diminutive as a house found in a land atop a beanstalk, and your abilities are as extensive as the population of Vatican City is large.

You're a digital coward, and you flee from those that you yourself have challenged. You challenge JO players to BF1942, after insulting them. This is you. Feel pride in your courage, maturity and honour. :rolleyes:

Originally posted by FatalStrike:

I did not come here to damage your weak little ego nor to giggle at your clever remarks Well at least you have the wit to appreciate the cleverness of my posts, if little else. :) As for my ego being weak, that's possibly the first time anyone's ever erred on that side of the equation. Hur hur.

Originally posted by FatalStrike:

As I said before I came to find out if Raven was supporting this game or if they had left you all behind.Actually you came here to attempt to add air to your already inflated ego... You've only succeeded in demonstrating just how infantile a human being can be if he really tries.

Originally posted by FatalStrike:

I also note that BigGay_Al is still defending this action. Foetalstrike, fount of all maturity. Tell me Foetal, do you obtain all your witticisms from South Park? You could learn a lot from Mr. Hankey: He talks a darn sight less excrement than you. ;)

Zodiac
02-13-2003, 12:32 PM
Originally posted by Spider AL



You aren't? What about this:



And this:



:confused: Seems like you said it to me.

My post did not consist of only those two statements. I wrote at the end: "Don't try to make a gunning saberist, create a 100% saberist and create a 100% gunner and the two worlds will eventually find eachother, skill will evolve."

And let's also not forget the post I made directly after that post, which explained my point of view a lot more. Just quoting 2 sentences I wrote down don't do justice to the overall statement I was referring to.

So what I was trying to say was that guns and sabers are different, they have to be kept separated during the first stages of development to perfectionize the gameplay of those settings alone, but at the end they will eventually find eachother, because some players will evolve into gunwhoring gayberists (or gaybering gunwhores).

ryudom
02-13-2003, 12:59 PM
^hehe

SkinWalker
02-13-2003, 01:33 PM
I'm a little late checking this thread, so I only did a quick, 15 min, scan of a couple of pages....

Did anyone discuss the possibility of cooperative-type play in the multiplayer environments?

I've always thought that having a server that had several localities within it along with non-player characters would be interesting. The NPCs would interact a bit and perhaps respond to hostility either by running or defending, but this would allow a human player to blend in.

Killing an NPC would result in a points loss, so as to discourage random violence. Upon entering the "world" the human player could chose a variety of missions.... perhaps, and I'm just thinking off of the cuff: 1) a bounty-hunt mission; 2) avoid a bounty hunter 3) gather information; 4) reccon; 5) team up with other players to bring another team to "justice"; etc.

This might entail more than an expansion pack, but it could even be possible to "check out" with the server so as to save any collected items, skills, points, etc. in order to resume a later time.

This would start bringing JK more to a Massive Multiplayer game, but I think it would be more interesting than some of the routine that's developed in the past.

Oh, well.... just my opinion.... the way I'd like to play the game. I'm not really into role playing games, but I suppose that's what I'm describing... just with the combat opportunities of JK2.

SkinWalker

FatalStrike
02-13-2003, 02:29 PM
Originally posted by Spider AL
A good point: Perhaps in a sequel it would be nice if acrobatics were a separate skill/power.

Hmm, you know son, I think you'll find that when you challenge someone, they get to pick the server. I gave you a choice of four duel servers, and a specific time to meet, and you never turned up on any of them. I know, because I was monitoring them during that time, and even outside the time frame. Isn't player-searching wonderful?



Why lie? You gave me NO specific time and a group of 20 servers. Hehehe! This is great! You see your own action as so being so laughable that you now seek to cover it up.

Well NoShow_Al it's been fun. Look me up when you unstaple yourself form your workstation and buy a more recent game. I will be glad to provide the time and place, and bet your smug behind that I won't play your "hide in the crowd" game. You are a fraud, old friend, and I proved it long ago.

You may pad your ego by remembering that you have at the very least managed to convince these forum folk that you have a spine.

In my eyes you will remain the inadequate frightened invertebrate you proved yourself to be.

Good day :jawa

Prime
02-13-2003, 02:42 PM
Originally posted by UgonDieFoo
It would be cool if the saber system was reworked so that saber combat and defense involved the use of force. It should take a certain amount of force to block and incoming shot from a saber. The amount of force it takes should depend on certain factors, like where the blow is landing, what kind of swing was used, the timing of the blow and how direct the blow was. For example, a head on light stance attack that was made from the very edge of swinging distance should take very little force to block. Heavier blows that are more direct, properly timed, and that land farther away from the center of an opponent?s defense should take more force to block accordingly. Theoretically, you should be able to block any blow provided you have enough force to do so. However, if you lack the force to block a particular blow, it would penetrate your defense. A direct red stance attack from behind should probably bypass anyone?s defense, unless maybe if they have a full force meter. Other things would be taken into account, such as if two opponents swing at the same time. If they both hit each other, then the sabers should collide and each opponent should lose force as if they both blocked. If one hits and one does not, then the person who missed should still be able the block but should lose a lot of force.

This system would possibly be a great improvement over the current system for several reasons. It would help to eliminate the random feel of saber fighting by introducing a definitive system in which skillful sabering and defense was rewarded. The problem of randomness in the defensive arc would also be addresses by this system. In addition, the saber could be made so that it is extremely lethal, as in a one hit kill, and this wouldn?t create problems in dueling the way it would currently. In fact, the same kind of system could work when it comes to blocking shots from guns, although less force should be required to block a shot from a gun than from a saber swing in general. This, combined with sabers that kill in basically one shot, might help to improve the balance of guns vs. sabers. In general it would be a lot more fun to play this way.

Another idea that might be nice would be to vary the effect of certain force powers on an opponent based on how much force they have. Take push and pull for example. The way things are now in Jedi Outcast, push and pull are fairly useless. They were too powerful and easy to use before the patch, and now they aren?t really good against anyone. They should be powerful provided that they are used appropriately. For example, a push or pull could be made to have little or no effect on someone with full force, but have a great effect on someone who has depleted his force meter. This might be better for gameplay and balance. Also, if this element was combined with sabering system I described above, it might make for some truly interesting and dynamic saber duels. Conservative and intelligent use of force powers along with skillful sabering would become necessary. Unintelligent abuse of force powers would leave you vulnerable.

Third, I'd like to see force sight replaced by something that?s a little more useful overall. I?ve always felt that the only reason it's in the game is to counter mind trick. I'd like to see something like ?force sense? in its place. As for how it would work, here are few ideas. At level one, it could allow you to sense other Jedi that are close, as well as what side they are on, through some kind of audio or visual indicator. At level two, it could reveal Jedi who are using mind trick, and perhaps allow you to see people through walls for a limited distance. At level three, it could allow you to see people through walls farther away. It could also highlight and reveal things like mines or det packs through walls. It addition, it could show how much force another Jedi has by giving them a glow, or perhaps show how much health they have. Finally, it should let you dodge sniper fire or maybe even a homing rocket :).

I'm afraid I have to disagree with you on most of these points :) First regarding having force used up for defending with the saber. The problem I see is the same thing that happened when heal was much more powerful. People would get their force pool low and then run off until it came up again. There would have to seriously get the pool usage levels right for it to work. In a full force game, people probably wouldn't use force powers because as soon as they did, they would get chopped down with no ability to defend themselves. The biggest problem would be with gunners. This would make guns against sabers even more deadly. If I attack you with even my alt-fire blaster rifle, I could just stand there and lower your force pool because you would have to deflect all my shots. This gives me a great advantage because I am reducing your ability to use absorb, defend against push/pull, and whatever else, all the while my force pool is increasing to the max because all I'm doing is pulling the trigger. Hell, then I can pull out my rocket launcher and blow you away, because you don't have the mana left to push the rocket back, or I'll lightning you, as you can't use absorb.

I don't see how push and pull are useless right now. You say that push should not have much affect on someone with full force, and more effect on low force. Isn't that the way it is now? If I push someone with full force, they counter that and don't get moved, knocked down, or whatever. If someone has depleted their force pool, they get shoved around. So what's the difference? And combining this with your proposed saber system would probably mean I can't use push because I'm spending all my power defending.

I also don't see how what your proposing for Force See is drastically duifferent than what we have now. And frankly, seeing is very useful. Besides the handy thing about seeing through mind trick, and as has been said before, you can spot snipers and detect people behind walls, and so on. And the higher the level, the farther you can see. This is just what you are wanting, isn't it?

I do like some of your ideas for getting more information from force sight, like maybe force alignment and health.

DeTRiTiC-iQ
02-13-2003, 03:22 PM
yay, its a "lets make up insulting variations of people's names" thread.

Well, FatalBreath, you could always reissue your challenge to Spider_AL. Because I still remember him hanging around in the massassi chatroom whilst waiting for you to show up on one of the designated servers. He won countless games of iSketch whilst waiting. By about 3am he got bored and went to bed (several days in succession).

Spider_AL has no reason to be insecure about his skills, i'm aware of players that could probably beat him, but non of them are you. He is a good player, and based on the fact you've never played him, you have no evidence to the contrary. I've played him numerous times (albeit not recently, but back when you issued the challenge I was playing him all the time). I honestly don't know if you could beat him i've never seen you play, but your comments are irrational, unfounded, and downright childish.

Actually, this is pretty much exactly the post I made all those months ago, shows how much you've changed really.

Spider AL
02-13-2003, 04:50 PM
Originally posted by Zodiac:

My post did not consist of only those two statements.

Nevertheless it contained those two statements. It's hardly my responsibility to compensate for the fact that your posts contradict themselves and each other. :D

Originally posted by FatalStrike:

You gave me NO specific time and a group of 20 servers.Actually I specified late evening in the GMT time zone. You confirmed this in the original thread. I further fulfilled my promise and spent at least 45 minutes each night in those duel servers, in fact, I played nothing but duel on those servers for ten days. In addition to waiting all evening, every evening for ten days for you to arrive, I waited long after midnight too, regularly searching for the name you gave me. That's something Det can confirm, and has confirmed. How many games of Isketch was that? Ugh. Quite honestly you have no excuse for your absence. There was nothing more I could have done.

Twenty servers? Look here:

Originally posted by Spider AL:

I play on the Blueyonder and Jolt duel servers, I play on the Boomtown and Gamesdomain FFA servers, and the CTF servers on all the above networks.You then said:

Originally posted by FatalStrike:
A saber challenge is what I am looking for. JKII guns became rather dry since I got Unreal 2003.So you had the Blueyonder and Jolt servers to choose from, at the time, numbering four default-map unmodded (adminmodded) NF duel servers.

Hence, four.

When I confirmed my time zone to you on the forums, you responded with this:

Originally posted by FatalStrike:

I will go when I have time after work, if that doesn't match with your time you are free to confirm what you want. I really don't give a damn what a smug fool thinks of me. I will not be changing my schedule just to run into you. You are free to find me on 1.02 if I don't run into you Which was the worst pre-game insurance excuse for chickening out, I have ever seen. Quite an achievement really. So from then on I pretty much knew you'd turned a nice jaundiced colour.

You then proceeded to challenge me to 1.02 or Promod on a server of your choice, repeatedly. Needless to say, this was laughable. The challenger comes to the challenged. Quite simple as a concept, but you never grasped it.

Originally posted by FatalStrike:

Well NoShow_AlMake your mind up. That one doesn't even begin with an "S". Find one you like, and stick with it. I'm extremely happy with my 'FoetalStrike', and I've gotten a lot of use out of it. Truly a match made in heaven.

Originally posted by FatalStrike:

Look me up when you unstaple yourself form your workstation and buy a more recent game. I will be glad to provide the time and place,Once again you lay down a challenge and expect to be able to choose not just the time and place, but the game as well. You're living in a dreamworld. ;) If you want my game, you step up to the plate I specify. That simple enough for you?

Originally posted by FatalStrike:

You are a fraud, old friend, and I proved it long ago. If that's what you call proof, "old furend", you must have worked in the Justice system of apartheid South Africa. I dread the day you become a scientist. I can see the headlines now:

"FOETALSTRIKE CLAIMS TO HAVE DISCOVERED PROOF OF CONNECTION BETWEEN MOBILE PHONE USE AND LEPROSY"...

Prime: Good points.

Luc Solar
02-13-2003, 04:53 PM
ROFL! :D :D

Can I play too?? Can I??? :bounce1:

Hahahaha - "FatalBreath"! Good one, DeTRaCteD-iQ! :D

NR_SC_ReBoRN__
02-13-2003, 05:16 PM
I think that a good solution to the gun/saber inbalance would be to have the saber do more damage to someone who is using a gun... its tricky enough getting to the gunner before you dead, let alone dealing with 3 or 4 heavy swings.

Spider AL
02-13-2003, 05:33 PM
Originally posted by NR_SC_ReBoRN__:

I think that a good solution to the gun/saber inbalance would be to have the saber do more damage to someone who is using a gun... its tricky enough getting to the gunner before you dead, let alone dealing with 3 or 4 heavy swings.Simple and to the point. I agree, for a sequel the sabre should do more damage than it does in JO at the moment. But I think it should be area based, headshots = death etc.

Luc Solar
02-13-2003, 05:43 PM
:bounce1:

Well, Spiky AL... if we'll get area based damage, I sure hope they work on some new saber-swings. The ones we have are all pretty much alike and aimed at the torso.
That's how it seems anyway.

DeTRiTiC-iQ
02-13-2003, 06:01 PM
ahhhh, but area damage isn't required because its a simple matter to decapitate whichever limb is hit ;)

Reborn Outcast
02-13-2003, 06:24 PM
Originally posted by FatalStrike
Yes that is exactly why. Do you play BF1942? Why don't you come to the Brother's in Arm's server and show me your skill :D.

HAHAHAHAHA... pardon me while I laugh some more... HAHAHAHAHA... now....


DON'T try to compensate for your crappyness in JO by challenging me to a game that I have never played before. LOL


I think Spider_Al put it the right way. :D


I think that a good solution to the gun/saber inbalance would be to have the saber do more damage to someone who is using a gun... its tricky enough getting to the gunner before you dead, let alone dealing with 3 or 4 heavy swings

It does. :D Blue lunge move does damage, red overhead does 1 hit kills, and yellow does some serious damage. But yes they should be made more powerful (except the red special move)

Smood
02-13-2003, 07:07 PM
Originally posted by Doctor Shaft
Some good ideas here.

Although I am a promod player these days, I did at some point take pleasure in JO. I like using guns and sabers (sniper plus saber - sweet). Most unfortunately, I came to the game when 1.03 came out, and my first reaction was "what the..." It just didn't feel right. Even the original JK didn't have things that bad. Guns were powerful in JK, but so were sabers. If you didn't have what it took to get close, well, you were dead. Then again, that conc rifle with force destruct was pretty unbeatable ;).

I'm ready for a change of atmosphere though. I'm talking restrictions on what weapons you carry. More force powers would be nice. Stop giving us the same list with a few amedments. I know it would be difficult to make more powers that wouldn't be ridiculous or useless, but come on, the developers have time, start brainstorming.

Explosives and stuff. I'm all for it, I think it would be nice if we got rid of the "I walk around with all 10 weapons, fully loaded, at a break neck speed". I say give everyone all the explosives and stuff they want, but impose carrying limitations, and weight restrictions. Of course, once again this wouldn't fit the Dark Forces tradition, in which I carry enough stuff to arm 20 people. Personally, I would gladly welcome the disappearance of that one tradition.

Kyle must never disappear. Ever. I'd like to see different characters, but Kyle stays.

Saber combat should be made more difficult. I'm right there with you. JO combat was nice, and Promod's aim thing is nifty, but it isn't all that great. There's still that feeling of just random clashiness. It needs to be fast, it needs to fps style, but we should get a variety of stances and the methods of getting hits and blocking should have more depth. Some swings that go low, some swings that would be used if my opponent enjoyed leaping everywhere.

Right now, we have a variety of saber swings, but they all go in the the frontal area, at about the mid section. Swinging low CAN be done, but the game doesn't really take that into account in terms of blocks. People that jump and leap around are generally safe becasue the swings are all designed to fight someone who likes to fight fair and stupid. Hacking gunners wouldn't be so hard if our saber swings weren't merely designed for saber clashes. If gunners were dangerous, but I had dynamic saber moves, I mean things that lunged me across the floor, let me do specialized techniques that attacked both the ground beneath me and the air above me, then we wouldn't have so many complaints (perhaps).


YESSSSSSSS! MY GOD YES! FINALLY A BELIEVER!!! :)

Hey spider AL take a look :)

Zodiac
02-13-2003, 07:39 PM
Originally posted by Spider AL
Nevertheless it contained those two statements. It's hardly my responsibility to compensate for the fact that your posts contradict themselves and each other. :D


Those sentences are there for context and to help clarify my overall statement. Like I said before: you can not quote a few sentences and then come to a conclusion, based on those few sentences and not the entire post(s). If you would've read my post correctly, it'd be clear that those sentences are there purely as context to help people understand what my point was.

It's like if someone said:

"I like fags, they are so useful for lighting cigarettes"... and you quoting only the I like fags part and concluding he's a homosexual. It is not a correct way of discussing things.

Bilbo Skywalker
02-13-2003, 07:55 PM
Originally posted by Zodiac
It's like if someone said:

"I like fags, they are so useful for lighting cigarettes"...



ah my... roflmao, you mean lighters, a 'fag' is a british term for a cigarette, you dont light cigarettes with cigarettes, well you can, but im sure you meant lighter.. right?






right?




this thread will probably get locked like the other one soon.




:wavey:

Zodiac
02-13-2003, 08:13 PM
LOL. darn!. You are so right! I thought a fag was a lighter in British. :p

I ment lighter yeah. :D, so the sentence should be:

I like fags, they are good for smoking and relaxing.. and someone quoting only the "i like fags"-part and concluding i was homosexual.

sorry for the mistake, my Dutch brain got them a bit mixed up.

are these correct?

Pub = Bar

2 pints of stella = 2 pints of beer

:p

Bilbo Skywalker
02-13-2003, 08:19 PM
lol, yeah those are fine.


:wavey:

Smood
02-13-2003, 08:29 PM
I was wondering where all those individuals were that supported ideas not so different then my own (refer to the beginning of the whole thread!). It is so refreshing to have some people on my side.

No more Spider AL + (the world) vs. Myself.

Fatal Strike makes some valid flames as well. :)

Prime
02-13-2003, 08:38 PM
Originally posted by Spider AL
Simple and to the point. I agree, for a sequel the sabre should do more damage than it does in JO at the moment. But I think it should be area based, headshots = death etc.

This simple change alone would go a long way in making the saber one of the most useful weapons in JO. See how simple this all is? :)

No more Spider AL + (the world) vs. Myself.

Ahh Smood! Don't look at it that way! I'm not against you anyway. Just because we disagree on a few issues, our goal remains the same, to make JO fun to play. It's always good to debate different points of view. :D

Spider AL
02-13-2003, 10:14 PM
Originally posted by DeTRiTiC-iQ:

ahhhh, but area damage isn't required because its a simple matter to decapitate whichever limb is hitANOTHER ONE! My god man, decapitate a limb? SEVER! SEVER! Sigh. Twice in one... set of threads.

I'd like to see an overall area-specific damage map actually. Guns and sabres.

Originally posted by Smood:

YESSSSSSSS! MY GOD YES! FINALLY A BELIEVER!!! :)

Hey spider AL take a look :) I don't think he says that he agrees with your more... outlandish theories anywhere in that post, Smood. Possibly he agrees with some of your more sane ideas. Of which there were few. ;)

And why do you persist in the annoying practice of quoting an entire message just for a two-line reply at the end? Ugh.

Originally posted by Zodiac:

Those sentences are there for context and to help clarify my overall statement. Like I said before: you can not quote a few sentences and then come to a conclusion, based on those few sentences and not the entire post(s).Wrong. The snippets I quoted were not merely self-contained sentences, but also standalone paragraphs. Self-contained units of text that convey ideas. There's no way you can get out of it linguistically. You said it. Now if you didn't mean to say it, that's fine, but you did say it, and that's a wrap.

Originally posted by Zodiac:

"I like fags, they are so useful for lighting cigarettes"... and you quoting only the

"I like fags"

part and concluding he's a homosexual. It is not a correct way of discussing things.Wrong again Zod, that's three words, not a whole paragraph, not even a sentence. I always quote paragraphs for preference, sentences when the paragraphs are too large, and I always preserve context no matter what I quote. :D You said it. Just because you contradicted yourself later, doesn't mean you didn't say it.

Here's an example: Detritic says:

"I am a goldfish!"

Then posts later:

"I am not a goldfish."

Then I could quote the first line, and say with all legitimacy that he had claimed to be a goldfish. The fact that he contradicted his own statement later does not make his earlier statement defunct, whether he intended to post it or not.

He can't come back later and say "I meant to say that I wasn't a goldfish, and my second line was a clarification of that sentiment". It just doesn't work that way. Unless you're a politician, but they're subhuman and they don't count.

Originally posted by Smood:

No more Spider AL + (the world) vs. Myself.Heck, persecution complex much? Your ideas aren't too good. Get over it. :naughty:

Originally posted by Smood:

Fatal Strike makes some valid flames as well. :)Yes, I've noticed you following me around into other threads, posting "LOL NICE 1 NICE 1" whenever anyone disagrees with me. Vindictiveness is such a pleasant, mature thing. ;)

DeTRiTiC-iQ
02-13-2003, 10:31 PM
Originally posted by Spider AL
ANOTHER ONE! My god man, decapitate a limb? SEVER! SEVER! Sigh. Twice in one... set of threads.


For crying out loud Spider, READ... I very deliberately put a wink emoticon (for example: ";)") after that line, I was referring to the page long argument on that very issue... jeez.

UgonDieFoo
02-13-2003, 11:44 PM
Originally posted by Prime
I'm afraid I have to disagree with you on most of these points :) First regarding having force used up for defending with the saber. The problem I see is the same thing that happened when heal was much more powerful. People would get their force pool low and then run off until it came up again. There would have to seriously get the pool usage levels right for it to work. In a full force game, people probably wouldn't use force powers because as soon as they did, they would get chopped down with no ability to defend themselves. The biggest problem would be with gunners. This would make guns against sabers even more deadly. If I attack you with even my alt-fire blaster rifle, I could just stand there and lower your force pool because you would have to deflect all my shots. This gives me a great advantage because I am reducing your ability to use absorb, defend against push/pull, and whatever else, all the while my force pool is increasing to the max because all I'm doing is pulling the trigger. Hell, then I can pull out my rocket launcher and blow you away, because you don't have the mana left to push the rocket back, or I'll lightning you, as you can't use absorb.

I don't see how push and pull are useless right now. You say that push should not have much affect on someone with full force, and more effect on low force. Isn't that the way it is now? If I push someone with full force, they counter that and don't get moved, knocked down, or whatever. If someone has depleted their force pool, they get shoved around. So what's the difference? And combining this with your proposed saber system would probably mean I can't use push because I'm spending all my power defending.

I also don't see how what your proposing for Force See is drastically duifferent than what we have now. And frankly, seeing is very useful. Besides the handy thing about seeing through mind trick, and as has been said before, you can spot snipers and detect people behind walls, and so on. And the higher the level, the farther you can see. This is just what you are wanting, isn't it?

I do like some of your ideas for getting more information from force sight, like maybe force alignment and health.

You have very valid points Prime. I had even realized some of the weaknesses in my system that you pointed out when I was making my post. Serious reworking of the force powers and the overall amount of force each player gets would be needed. A lot of thinking would have to go into how much force powers would cost, how powerful they would each be, how they would work, and some other stuff I can't even think of right now. There would also have to been lots of testing on the saber combat as well as the effectiveness of guns vs. saber defense.

I would agree with anyone who asserted that all that balancing would be extremely difficulty to do. My system would be very complicated to properly implement because the main elements of combat would be totally interdependent on each other. However, despite its potential problems, I still believe that the system I proposed could work, if all the necessary balancing and adjusting was made to all the areas where it was necessary. The issue of gunners draining someone using a saber of his force might not even be an issue at all if it was properly balanced. The issue of people not willing to use force powers might be resolved, provided that the amount of force each player gets was properly adjusted. If all of this was done, then the interdependency of the force and the sabering might work out to be a very good system. The reason I proposed it in the first place was because everything would be tied together. This could make the entire gameplay experience much more dynamic and skillful. Obviously, this kind of system would not work with the way thing are in Jedi Outcast, but perhaps with a fresh start it could work.

Regarding what you said about force push and pull, are you sure what you said is true? Is push or pull really more effective against someone with little force? I though it said somewhere in the 1.04 patch description that it was based on how many points each person had in push or pull. Anyway, the reason I said they were worthless was because push and pull seem to work so rarely, other then move a guy a little bit which isn’t helpful. When you do knock someone down they, flip up immediately. I guess they do have other uses, like pushing people off of cliffs and stuff, but again they still work rarely. All this of course is debatable. It’s just my take on push and pull.

Prime
02-14-2003, 01:42 AM
Originally posted by UgonDieFoo
However, despite its potential problems, I still believe that the system I proposed could work, if all the necessary balancing and adjusting was made to all the areas where it was necessary. The issue of gunners draining someone using a saber of his force might not even be an issue at all if it was properly balanced. The issue of people not willing to use force powers might be resolved, provided that the amount of force each player gets was properly adjusted.

Regarding what you said about force push and pull, are you sure what you said is true? Is push or pull really more effective against someone with little force? I though it said somewhere in the 1.04 patch description that it was based on how many points each person had in push or pull. Anyway, the reason I said they were worthless was because push and pull seem to work so rarely, other then move a guy a little bit which isn’t helpful. When you do knock someone down they, flip up immediately. I guess they do have other uses, like pushing people off of cliffs and stuff, but again they still work rarely. All this of course is debatable. It’s just my take on push and pull.

Perhaps what is needed is something other than force power to accomplish the same goal. Like maybe a strength or stamina meter (I'll call it strength for now). That way, the defender's ability to use the force would not be diminished, and would be available for counterattacks. Sort of like your idea, if player 1 blocks player 2's overhead strong swing, this would deplete substantially player 1's strength meter. Then player 1 has less ability to defend against the next attack. This strength meter would of course ramp up rather quickly to full strength. Blue stance attacks that are blocked would drain less strength. Also, glancing blows would drain less strength than direct blocks. If a player makes a few blocks, his strength meter momentarily drops to a lower amount depending on the strength and directness of the blow.

Now, I like Spider Al's area damage idea, so maybe that could be incorporated as well. When a player has full health, his strength is at 100%. If a player has been hit and his health is lowered, that would lower the maximum that his strength meter can recharge to. So if a player gets hit in the arm and his health is at 60, maybe his strength can only reach 60% of max. I always thought that someone with 5 health points left meant that they were really hurt and near death. And yet, in the game, they are still running and jumping like just had a good nights sleep. And for those who care about such things, this would reflect the movies, for example when Luke is fighting Vader in Cloud City. After beating on Luke for a while, and Vader starts flinging hardware at him, you'll notice that Luke is much less effective at defending himself with his saber. Or when Luke start wailing on Vader with overhead chops in ROTJ, Vader can't defend himself nearly as well as he could in the beginning. Now you know why, their strength meters were low! :p

All this would still allow the player to use the force to full capacity, and not be affected by their sabering.

What I was trying to say about force push/pull is that if you push someone who has little or no force mana left, they will be pushed far or even knocked over, whereas someone with full force strength will just counter and not be moved. IIRC the 1.04 readme is refering to the case where someone pushes someone else when both are at equal force strength. In that case the person with the higher rank will be more effective. I know what you are saying about push/pull being ineffective, but I think the real strength of these powers is using them at the right times. If used strategically, they can be very powerful.

Anyway, I look forward to hearing what people think of this modified idea. And if you need a break, it might be a fun drinking game if you read this post and take a shot every time you see the word "strength". Strength, strength, strength, strength... :guiness:

Spider AL
02-14-2003, 02:20 AM
Originally posted by DeTRiTiC-iQ:

For crying out loud Spider, READ... I very deliberately put a wink emoticon (for example: ";)") after that line,

Does one read images? Anyway, there wasn't any winky there when I read it. *Coughcougheditcough* :D Now I know you're going to deny it, but frankly who can trust a man who claims he's a goldfish?

***

Prime: All good points, I actually like the... well, sort of RPGesque strength score idea. In a sequel, nothing would please me more than the kind of successful cross-genre blending that we saw in say... System Shock 2. The positive simplicity must be preserved, however, and I have a feeling that once you start introducing ability meters of the type you suggest, you'll never be able to stop. You know what I mean, stamina dials, dexterity dials, etc etc.

What I'd like to see in a JO sequel then, is everything that was good about JO, (1.02 w/o rotating backswing, in other words ;) ) with some added benefits, area-specific damage map, some JK1-esque longer range Force powers, beefed up sabre damage... But here's an important point: Unless there's a paradigm shift in the mentality of games developers, they will continue the always-harmful gameplay-altering patching process with every game that comes out. As long as this is going on, I doubt we'll ever have an ideal JK game. Too many fanboys spoiling the broth, in an already much too player-majority-pandering online society. Perhaps we should be turning our turgid, obviously active minds to the problem of how to stop people like Raven listening to the inevitable whining?

_NinjaGaiden_
02-14-2003, 03:11 AM
the expansion no matter what it contains will be cool ....... you guys need not worry about it ..... Lucasarts got it covered :)

IronJedi Kaga
02-14-2003, 03:33 AM
Just scanned the thread so not sure if these have already been said, but here are my ideas for the expansion:

-The dark side needs to be rebalanced. Absorb makes nearly every dark side power useless. Dark rage works but thats an automatic life and force loss. The way the other dark powers interact with absorb needs to be changed, or new darkside powers have to be added or used as replacements the current ones.

- The saber needs some changes so that it can be more useful against guns. My suggestion, if it's possible with the game engine, is to have both saber throw and saber swings destroy guns with a well aimed swing or throw. I would also increase the number of saber throw rotations for those with rank 3 in saber throw. The saber should spin twice instead of once when it comes into contact with someone thus causing 60 damage.

- A new gun would be nice. Perhaps they could bring back a version of the concussion rifle. Primary fire could be a concussion blast and secondary could be some sort of concussion grenade that causes damage and knocks people down.

Zodiac
02-14-2003, 08:06 AM
Originally posted by Spider AL
Wrong. The snippets I quoted were not merely self-contained sentences, but also standalone paragraphs. Self-contained units of text that convey ideas. There's no way you can get out of it linguistically. You said it. Now if you didn't mean to say it, that's fine, but you did say it, and that's a wrap.

Wrong again Zod, that's three words, not a whole paragraph, not even a sentence. I always quote paragraphs for preference, sentences when the paragraphs are too large, and I always preserve context no matter what I quote. :D You said it. Just because you contradicted yourself later, doesn't mean you didn't say it.


That's where you're wrong Spider Al. This is not an essay or assignment, this is the internet. I don't use ordinary hard returns to create paragraphs on a message board on the internet. I use them to make the post more easily readable. If you had the idea they were separate paragraphs, then you didn't read it as I intended it to be read. I could not've used hard returns, but this is a whole other discussion. If you got confused by my way of writing: sorry. But this is the internet and I don't actually care about spelling or paragraphs.. all I care about is: can people easily read the words I write down?

And even if it actually ARE paragraphs.. did I ever say the two worlds would be separated forever/permanently? No. Did I ever say a gunner couldn't grab a saber in a fight? No.

You quoted these two sentences of mine
Originally posted by Zodiac:

They can't be equal. They need to be different. They ARE different.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



And this:


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Zodiac:

Future developers have to realize that sabers and gunners are 2 completely different worlds; with different styles, different tastes, different gameplay and different players.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Seems like you said it to me.

Did I ever say those worlds should be separated permanently? No.

Did I say they are totally different: Yes. Does that mean a player can't play with both sides? NO!.

I did say they had to be separated, but did I say permanent or does that mean forever? No!!! also because in the same post I explained they wouldn't be separated forever and that eventually they would find eachother.

So my point still stands: There are two really different worlds. They should be separated. But does that mean permanent separation? No! I never said forever or permanent and I'm still not saying that! I never said a saberist couldn't or shouldn't be able to grab a gun in combat!! So stop with this bickering, admit you didn't read my post as I intended people to read it (which could also partly be my fault, due to misunderstood hard returns), so we can close this and get on with more useful things.

Prime
02-14-2003, 12:33 PM
Originally posted by Spider AL
Prime: All good points, I actually like the... well, sort of RPGesque strength score idea. In a sequel, nothing would please me more than the kind of successful cross-genre blending that we saw in say... System Shock 2. The positive simplicity must be preserved, however, and I have a feeling that once you start introducing ability meters of the type you suggest, you'll never be able to stop. You know what I mean, stamina dials, dexterity dials, etc etc.

I didn't really intend it as an RPG thing, so maybe strength meter is a bad name for it. I was just proposing some sort of measure that could determine how good your saber defence is going to be. I think in a FPS, the "RPG ability scores" should come from the players themselves, not determined by the game (dexterity and so on). A good example of this is the saber lock. I feel that this translates strength from the player in a good way.

Originally posted by _NinjaGaiden_
the expansion no matter what it contains will be cool ....... you guys need not worry about it ..... Lucasarts got it covered

I agree :) Dispite the debate of how to maybe improve the game, I think that Raven has made a great game.

Originally posted by IronJedi Kaga
-The dark side needs to be rebalanced. Absorb makes nearly every dark side power useless. Dark rage works but thats an automatic life and force loss. The way the other dark powers interact with absorb needs to be changed, or new darkside powers have to be added or used as replacements the current ones.

- The saber needs some changes so that it can be more useful against guns. My suggestion, if it's possible with the game engine, is to have both saber throw and saber swings destroy guns with a well aimed swing or throw.

I don't think that the light/dark force balance needs to be tweeked too much. The thing is, absorb is the only power lightsiders have against the dark side. If it wasn't for absorb, lightning and drain would be spammed o'plenty. The difference is that when lightsiders use absorb, there is no damage or other affects to the darksider. A darksiders powers DO affect the lightsider, and so lightsiders are at a disadvantage. In my view, absorb balances this trait. By altering absorb and allowing dark side powers to affect it, dark siders will be much more powerful than lightsiders.

the idea of being able to destroy guns with the saber is very interesting. I like this idea a lot. In close combat, the saber should have the advantage. This would definitely tip the scales to the saber in this situation.

Originally posted by ZodiacSo my point still stands: There are two really different worlds. They should be separated. But does that mean permanent separation? No! I never said forever or permanent and I'm still not saying that! I never said a saberist couldn't or shouldn't be able to grab a gun in combat!! So stop with this bickering, admit you didn't read my post as I intended people to read it, so we can close this and get on with more useful things.

I really don't understand what you are trying to say here. If they should start out seperated, what changes so that they should come together later? If you're saying a saberist should be able to grab a gun, why should gunners and saberists start out seperated? If saberists and gunners are going to end up interacting, shouldn't this happen from the start? If not, wouldn't things be unbalanced, as the tactics that would be developed during the seperated time period would not translate to success in the new reality of gunners vs. saberists? I'm not trying to flame you, I'm just trying to get a better understanding of what your views are :)

DeTRiTiC-iQ
02-14-2003, 01:32 PM
Originally posted by Spider AL
Does one read images? Anyway, there wasn't any winky there when I read it. *Coughcougheditcough* :D Now I know you're going to deny it, but frankly who can trust a man who claims he's a goldfish?


Either you're connection is incapable of loading tiny emoticons, you're blind, or you're lying. I only agree with you when I have reason to, right now you are only succeeding in annoying even those who have supported you in the past. I've known what "decapitate" means since I played Decap Attack on the Mega Drive, ie A LONG TIME AGO.

Zodiac
02-14-2003, 01:42 PM
Originally posted by Prime
I really don't understand what you are trying to say here. If they should start out seperated, what changes so that they should come together later? If you're saying a saberist should be able to grab a gun, why should gunners and saberists start out seperated? If saberists and gunners are going to end up interacting, shouldn't this happen from the start? If not, wouldn't things be unbalanced, as the tactics that would be developed during the seperated time period would not translate to success in the new reality of gunners vs. saberists? I'm not trying to flame you, I'm just trying to get a better understanding of what your views are :)

What I'm saying is that Raven tried to balance the game in a way that saberists and gunners could play with eachother in a fair and competitive way on the same server. That is a noble goal and I respect and support that.
But I think Raven used a wrong balancing method. They tried to balance it, while each separate setting, like pure saber and pure gunning still had its flaws. Like the sabering hit system wasn't good yet, and some guns were too powerful in comparison to other guns, etc. And while they were fixing those things, they also edited the different gameplay-settings to get them balanced. All at the same time. I don't think they should've done everything at the same time. They should've split it up.

My point: Concentrate on each separate setting first, like only focus on sabering, and perfectionize this setting to get the best gameplay with this setting only. Now after that, write down what makes sabering great and what not. Now do the same for all other settings: Make the gameplay perfect for all individual settings first. (And if you have multiple development groups, you can work on each different setting at the same time.)

After you've done that, THEN try to balance it with eachother, and keeping in mind what was great about a setting and keeping it and what was not good about a setting. If something that was fantastic fun has to be deleted from the game, just because it can't be balanced to another setting: don't balance it! Special moves and special skills will evolve like that, because players will adapt. It's better to let the players adapt to it than removing something that's enormously fun.

Spider AL
02-14-2003, 03:15 PM
Originally posted by Zodiac:

That's where you're wrong Spider Al. This is not an essay or assignment, this is the internet.That is no excuse for bad English. Get your act together, soldier! You use too many full-stops too. :p

Originally posted by Zodiac:

I don't use ordinary hard returns to create paragraphs on a message board on the internet. I use them to make the post more easily readable. If you had the idea they were separate paragraphs, then you didn't read it as I intended it to be read.Pfft! With your poor layout, you'd have to be psychic to know how you intended that post to be read.

Originally posted by Zodiac:

If you got confused by my way of writing: sorry. But this is the internet and I don't actually care about spelling or paragraphs.. all I care about is: can people easily read the words I write down?Apology accepted! but paragraphs are there to assist you, and when used correctly they make ideas easier to convey, and easier to read. from what you're saying, you're guilty of mangling the written word as well as contradicting yourself repeatedly.

Originally posted by Zodiac:

And even if it actually ARE paragraphs.. did I ever say the two worlds would be separated forever/permanently? No. Did I ever say a gunner couldn't grab a saber in a fight? No.You're grasping at straws there. You said this:

Originally posted by Zodiac:

Sabers and guns should be kept separated! History has shown us (= JK1 AND JK2) that there is no way you can balance them and please both sides.

So if you then say in another post that they should go hand-in-hand, you're contradicting yourself. There's no way you can squirm out of it. You may have misunderstood what you were typing, but I certainly didn't misunderstand what the finished text meant. once again, it's not my responsibility to compensate for your mistakes.

Originally posted by Zodiac:

But I think Raven used a wrong balancing method. They tried to balance it, while each separate setting, like pure saber and pure gunning still had its flaws. Like the sabering hit system wasn't good yet, and some guns were too powerful in comparison to other guns, etc.

Ah, an interesting point to address here, how powerful is "too powerful"? I think the guns in 1.02 were perfect, but what do you believe was wrong with the balance? And the sabre in 1.02 was exemplary... what was wrong with that?

Originally posted by Prime:

I agree :) Dispite the debate of how to maybe improve the game, I think that Raven has made a great game.Thinking about it, this is true. Even 1.04 JO is more inspiring than the flat-pack fast-food releases of the past year, and I'd rather play 1.04 than UT2k3, any day of the week. Which is why I don't play anything at all, probably. :(

Originally posted by DeTRiTiC-iQ:

Either you're connection is incapable of loading tiny emoticons, you're blind, or you're lying. I only agree with you when I have reason to, right now you are only succeeding in annoying even those who have supported you in the past.Methinks Deditric doth protest too much! :D Besides, here's an important point: support what you agree with, not the person who posted what you agree with. I certainly don't automatically support someone I've happened to agree with in the past. You shouldn't go around pledging allegiance to all and sundry, because vocally supporting someone when you don't agree with what they're saying is always dishonourable.

DeTRiTiC-iQ
02-14-2003, 03:54 PM
Originally posted by DeTRiTiC-iQ
I only agree with you when I have reason to

By which I meant, I only agree with you when I think you're right.

Spider, if you learnt the following about PEOPLE, it might help you better defend your own "honour":

- This is the internet, its a lot harder for some people to express their meaning in words alone.

- Just because you interpret someone's words in such a way that they are wrong, doesn't make that person wrong.

- Calling strangers "my son" can only be interpreted as arrogance.

- Credit people with some intelligence, you may disagree with them, they may even be completely wrong. But this does not give you the right to talk as though you have the entire "real gaming" world behind you.

- Many people, including myself, find it difficult to convey a meaning by both written and vocal means. Make sure you fully understand what people are trying to say before you jump on them and lecture them about "honour".

Oh, and the only people i've met who have considered YOU honourable are you clanmates, who I might mention are extremely obnoxious during games

btw: I didn't edit the post, there was a ";)" there all along, if you read the post AND placed it in the context of the post above it your small mind may stand a chance of understanding.

In fact, I have NEVER edited a post of mine after it has been quoted. I post corrections seperately to maintain continuity.

(disclaimer: by "small mind", I of course refer to narrow-mindedness)

lllKyNeSlll
02-14-2003, 04:29 PM
Spider Al. You were never like this in jk1.

Zodiac
02-14-2003, 04:46 PM
Originally posted by DeTRiTiC-iQ
- Just because you interpret someone's words in such a way that they are wrong, doesn't make that person wrong.


That says it all for me. good point.

When I'm explaining my point of view in several posts, and one person still doesn't understand it (or doesn't want to understand it), then I'm out of words.

I hope Prime understands me now tho. If you did understand it, it'd be clear that I'm not contradicting myself: Separation during development doesn't mean the player can't play both settings at the same time.

I'm out. if anybody else still has questions about my pov after all my posts: private message me, and I'll write you an essay about it, with paragraphs and all.

Spider AL
02-14-2003, 05:46 PM
Originally posted by DeTRiTiC-iQ:

- This is the internet, its a lot harder for some people to express their meaning in words alone.
Funny, I haven't had that problem much, I don't think. Perhaps because I post long, exhaustive explorations of my point. Some may call that long-winded, I call it being thorough and/or making a genuine effort. Not contradicting myself helps, too. :D

Originally posted by DeTRiTiC-iQ:

- Just because you interpret someone's words in such a way that they are wrong, doesn't make that person wrong.
Don't be foolish, by that rationale one could never disagree with anything online for fear that you weren't interpreting it the way the author meant it! Of course people's opinions are defined by what they post! If they post things they don't mean to, that's their responsibility, it is not the responsibility of the readers to mentally correct it. People are rarely psychic enough anyway.

Originally posted by DeTRiTiC-iQ:

- Calling strangers "my son" can only be interpreted as arrogance.
I make it a rule of honour to respond proportionately, in the same tone as I am addressed. You may have a problem with that, but you should know that at I, at least, have reasons for my responses to everything.

Originally posted by DeTRiTiC-iQ:

- Credit people with some intelligence, you may disagree with them, they may even be completely wrong. But this does not give you the right to talk as though you have the entire "real gaming" world behind you.Find a post where I've claimed that the "entire real gaming world is behind me", and you may have a point. Until then, it remains a gross generalization, unworthy of any attention.

Originally posted by DeTRiTiC-iQ:

- Many people, including myself, find it difficult to convey a meaning by both written and vocal means. Make sure you fully understand what people are trying to say before you jump on them and lecture them about "honour".Hmm, I've understood the point of view of everyone I've ever lectured about honour, I think. :)

Originally posted by DeTRiTiC-iQ:

Oh, and the only people i've met who have considered YOU honourable are you clanmates, who I might mention are extremely obnoxious during gamesHow nice! Slurs not only upon my character but the characters of my clanmates too. :rolleyes: FYI, my good friends in [FW] were the most studiously reasonable and intelligent people I've ever met online. That's because myself, Ant and Cal decided early on to only allow those of temperate dispositions into our fold. We have always observed that tradition. Furthermore, I used to be well known for my honourable conduct in both the JK1 and JO communities. This is, of course, a matter of record.

Originally posted by DeTRiTiC-iQ:

btw: I didn't edit the post, there was a ";)" there all along, if you read the post AND placed it in the context of the post above it your small mind may stand a chance of understanding.Obviously I can't prove whether you edited it or not. There was no smiley in it when I read it, otherwise its context would have been altered.

I realise you wrote a little "disclaimer" saying that "small-mind" was referring to alleged "narrow-mindedness" on my part, but if that was what you wanted to say, why didn't you just say "narrow mind" instead? It's kind of like saying: "You have a big bum" and then adding: "by big bum I mean that you have buttocks slightly larger than the national average size." This is an example of a poor choice of phrasing. I could quite legitimately take offense at the implication that my mind is in some way "small." Very bad form, Det. :tsk:

Originally posted by lllKyNeSlll:

Spider Al. You were never like this in jk1.I don't know what you mean; I haven't changed since 1998. Check out some of the alt.games.jedi-knight archives or the massassi forum archives. You'll see I speak the truth!

Originally posted by Zodiac:

When I'm explaining my point of view in several posts, and one person still doesn't understand it (or doesn't want to understand it), then I'm out of words.Oh I never said I didn't understand what you were trying to say, I merely resent your many previous assertions that I had misquoted you, quoted you out of context and/or misinterpreted what you had said. None of the above was or is true. :cool: I just posted what you'd said, and replied to it as it was written. Only then did you post, contradicting yourself.

DeTRiTiC-iQ
02-14-2003, 06:00 PM
Either your FW entry procedures are flawed or you have some imposter going around using your "Force-Warriors honour, victory blah blah" tag upon victory.

Either way, this person was acting extremely obnoxiously towards other players. Now since FW is a little-known clan, the odds are that you have yourself a stalker, or its one of your own members who isn't as "honourable" as you thought.

Anyway, as much as I love having arguments with people on these forums, this is going too far off topic.

So please, someone suggest some NEW ideas/suggestions related to the JK2 sequel/expansion.

Spider AL
02-14-2003, 06:12 PM
Either your FW entry procedures are flawed or you have some imposter going around using your "Force-Warriors honour, victory blah blah" tag upon victory.

Either way, this person was acting extremely obnoxiously towards other players. Now since FW is a little-known clan, the odds are that you have yourself a stalker, or its one of your own members who isn't as "honourable" as you thought.

Oh, is that right? Well, post the details and the appropriate action will be taken if it was indeed a member. Until then, kindly stop casting childish aspersions upon our "little-known" clan. :)

So please, someone suggest some NEW ideas/suggestions related to the JK2 sequel/expansion.

Hmm, let's see. One thing that was good about Star Wars as a genre was its sense of scale, of a truly galactic conflict. I would like to see a new game mode added which addressed this sense of scale and added to the teamplay experience as well. A game mode where one would fight over territory, maybe gaining control of an area of space/planet/continent with each level won. A last-man-standing style realism-based mode perhaps, when each player gets killed, they stay dead until the end of the level, etc. Class-based gameplay would come into its own here too. (Mind you, this should be in addition to the default DM and CTF game modes, not a replacement for them)

This would also open up an issue I've been wondering about for a long time: random map generation. I for one think its about time FPS technology moved into the next phase of its evolution, with the increased processor power of today's average home computer. I'm sure generic level prefabs that fit together could be created with a little effort, and a simple process could generate a game arena of fixed size, with the prefabs arranged in a pseudo-random format (building prefabs arranged on the floor, floor terrain prefabs arranged likewise, etc.)

Just an imaginative indulgence mind you, it'd be a big project to implement, that's for sure. ;)

<edit>

Out of curiosity I just looked this up, and SOF2 has random map generation apparently. Does anyone know anything about this? Is it any good?

</edit>

ryudom
02-14-2003, 08:19 PM
alternative weather would be cool too heh

Rumor
02-14-2003, 08:43 PM
clientside scaling of models would be nice. both in sp and mp. if i see a gundam, i sure as hell want it to be 2x my size. if i see yoda i don't want a big ugly thing, i want a small fry who kicks ass.

Prime
02-15-2003, 12:59 AM
Originally posted by Zodiac
What I'm saying is that Raven tried to balance the game in a way that saberists and gunners could play with eachother in a fair and competitive way on the same server. That is a noble goal and I respect and support that.
But I think Raven used a wrong balancing method. They tried to balance it, while each separate setting, like pure saber and pure gunning still had its flaws. Like the sabering hit system wasn't good yet, and some guns were too powerful in comparison to other guns, etc. And while they were fixing those things, they also edited the different gameplay-settings to get them balanced. All at the same time. I don't think they should've done everything at the same time. They should've split it up.

My point: Concentrate on each separate setting first, like only focus on sabering, and perfectionize this setting to get the best gameplay with this setting only. Now after that, write down what makes sabering great and what not. Now do the same for all other settings: Make the gameplay perfect for all individual settings first. (And if you have multiple development groups, you can work on each different setting at the same time.)

After you've done that, THEN try to balance it with eachother, and keeping in mind what was great about a setting and keeping it and what was not good about a setting. If something that was fantastic fun has to be deleted from the game, just because it can't be balanced to another setting: don't balance it! Special moves and special skills will evolve like that, because players will adapt. It's better to let the players adapt to it than removing something that's enormously fun.

I get you now, and I agree. For some reason, I thought you were saying seperate the actual players after the game was released, and then bring them together later. Which of course doesn't make any sense. I guess I didn't read the thread back far enough. Sorry about that. I agree with you on this point. I'd prefer if the got the sabering as good as it could get, and the same with the guns. Sorry about making you type all that out again :)

Smood
02-15-2003, 10:44 AM
I believe the two biggest and if done right best core changes that could be made are graphics (expand engine capability or move to a new engine), and saber combat.

In fact my proposed/elaborate system would be amazing but any significant improvement in saber combat, or simply making ALL BLOCKING manual would probablly satisfy me.

BTW, I know Spider Al is going to quote this and tear it up, so I will just ignore him if he does.

GonkH8er
02-15-2003, 10:48 AM
Anymore flaming or personal attacks and the instigators will get a temp ban.... understood?



good :)

Spider AL
02-15-2003, 03:19 PM
Originally posted by Smood:

any significant improvement in saber combat, or simply making ALL BLOCKING manual would probablly satisfy me.

BTW, I know Spider Al is going to quote this and tear it up, so I will just ignore him if he does.

Oh no, I actually agree that manual blocking is better. I've always said that manual blocking would be good, but since I know that the simplicity of the system must be preserved, I'd like to see a single key function: While the player has the key depressed, he/she goes into blocking mode, and blocks energy projectiles and sabre strikes. Intuitive and simple, just the way I like it. Not that I'd mind learning more complex controls, it's just that DF has always been intuitive since the first game, and the series would suffer from all those unnecessary bells n' whistles.

Prime
02-15-2003, 04:42 PM
Originally posted by Spider AL
I'd like to see a single key function: While the player has the key depressed, he/she goes into blocking mode, and blocks energy projectiles and sabre strikes. Intuitive and simple, just the way I like it. Not that I'd mind learning more complex controls, it's just that DF has always been intuitive since the first game, and the series would suffer from all those unnecessary bells n' whistles.

I agree that this is probably the most manual you could make blocking without making it so complex that it would be ineffective for the average player.

Smood
02-15-2003, 09:36 PM
Intuitive and simple! ARGH! That is what makes for a noob feel as the system progresses. If the game mechanics are challenging and require practice to be used well (effectively reflecting real jedi), the system will be better, period.

Zodiac
02-15-2003, 10:02 PM
That's a good point Smood. I agree with you on that. If they can find a way to make it not simple, but also not too difficult (=in the way that it wouldn't be fun to use), then I'm all for that option.

Spider AL
02-15-2003, 11:22 PM
Originally posted by Smood:

Intuitive and simple! ARGH! That is what makes for a noob feel as the system progresses. If the game mechanics are challenging and require practice to be used well (effectively reflecting real jedi), the system will be better, period.Firstly, the DF series is a series of FPS games, and if it serves the cause of good gameplay, then "reflecting real Jedi" should take a firm back-seat. The game does not exist in this galaxy to allow people to roleplay as Jedi, it's here to be a fully functional FPS. Secondly, complexity does not equal better; the DF series is not a series of flight simulators, and increasing the complexity of the controls to a dizzying level (the level you suggested in your original post) could only slow the gameplay down to such an extent that the fast-paced feel of the JK series would be lost.

Also, you keep saying that a simple so-called "intuitive" control system gives a game a "noob feel". I'm not sure what you mean by that. It certainly doesn't close the gap between newbies and elites at all, I'm quite certain that those dedicated people who are good now, would be good regardless of what control system the game was fitted with. Neither does an intuitive control system make it easier to become good. In fact, all an ultra-complex control system could do would be to scare away many potential players, who might one day become valuable contributors to the SW FPS community.

Hmm, the control system in JO is roughly the same as in JK, and that was a classic... nay, all-time-great game. In fact, it's about the same as every other FPS on the market, because it is in fact, an FPS. Perhaps you mean that a simple control system merely makes you yourself feel as though the game is in some indefinable way "noob". In that case it's just a matter of your personal opinion, and many people would obviously disagree with you.

Prime
02-15-2003, 11:27 PM
Originally posted by Smood
Intuitive and simple! ARGH! That is what makes for a noob feel as the system progresses. If the game mechanics are challenging and require practice to be used well (effectively reflecting real jedi), the system will be better, period.

I don't think it is "Period". And better for what? It may be more fun for people who want to practice at a video game and view it as a competition, but the majority of players (casual gamers) do not want to do this. They want to pick up a game and be reasonably effective with the control system right off the bat. Not everyone plays so that they can be better than the next guy, and they don't care if someone considers it "noobish".

Besides are you going to be happy if you pick up this game and play the role of Kyle as a full Jedi and every time a rodian happens to fire in your direction you miss the block? Even if you are willing to practice, many will say, "What kind of stupid game is this? I'm supposed to be this great Jedi, yet I can't block a damn thing". Can you imagine these boards then? :) Also, what if your ping is worse than someone else's and your block commands don't get picked up in time? If the system is too complicated, the lag problem may just be exaggerated.

Now I'm not trying to say that any complexity is a bad thing, but I think you have to be careful with the reason you are adding complexity. The complexity should be just enough to make saber defence as accurate and realistic as possible. Adding complexity for the sake of making the game "require practice" or so "noobs can't be good right away" does not work from a mass market perspective. Anyways, simple moves and controls do not make a simple game. Chess has simple moves, but is probably the most complex game there is.

You bring up the reference to real Jedi. Personally, I think the less complexity the closer it will be to the movies. Luke in very earliest training on the way to Addleraan was able to block blaster bolts, and blind at that. Hell, even six year olds were able to do it. So I imagine a game featuring Kyle (a much more experienced Jedi) should allow the player to be very effective at saber defence. The best way to do that is to make saber defence as simple as possible. I always thought that since "the force guides your actions", blocking bolts and whatnot was accomplished by allowing the force to control your movements. Not unlike the saber defence system we have now.

Luc Solar
02-16-2003, 04:47 AM
Originally posted by Prime
I agree that this is probably the most manual you could make blocking without making it so complex that it would be ineffective for the average player.

About a year ago I suggested a manual blocking system in the way that you should be *aiming* at the opponent to block his attack.
A while later a guy called ArtifeX stole my brilliant idea and used it in his Pomod-mod...mod. :D :rolleyes:

(Seriously! I made a thread about that before Promod came out, I swear to god. :) )

What I'm trying to say is that: if we get manual blocking I prefer the idea of "aiming" to "mashing the block-button". Aiming has it's problems with lag but... I still think it's more "realistic".

EDIT: I got proof! :D >>> http://www.lucasforums.com/showthread.php?threadid=70506&highlight=manual+blocking

Spider AL
02-16-2003, 11:52 AM
Originally posted by Luc Solar:

What I'm trying to say is that: if we get manual blocking I prefer the idea of "aiming" to "mashing the block-button". Aiming has it's problems with lag but... I still think it's more "realistic".Well, blocking frequency dependant on aim is a fine idea... I have to say once again though that I think "realism" and other similar concerns should take a back seat to gameplay concerns, and you already mentioned the lag problems. I'd like to be able to block incoming blaster fire within a certain angle without worrying that the attacker will warp twenty degrees to my right side and mash me up. :D Furthermore I like the idea of having real, manual control over where and when I block things.

Finally, I think you'll agree that whether one mashes buttons or not (just as whether one spams or not) is a question of individual skill and finesse rather than any fault of the control system. You'll always get some who mash, regardless. ;)

Rumor
02-17-2003, 03:35 PM
Originally posted by Rumor
clientside scaling of models would be nice. both in sp and mp. if i see a gundam, i sure as hell want it to be 2x my size. if i see yoda i don't want a big ugly thing, i want a small fry who kicks ass.

i think this is a very good idea. do you?