"New Player Experience" changes on full release?

1567911

Comments

  • SSKnecaboSSKnecabo Posts: 2,721Player
    edited May 2015
    SithHunter wrote: »
    cK^KILL@ wrote: »
    If (which is not gonna happen, they already confirmed it) they should make everything available with ironsights, trainings to unlock sniper and all the scopes.

    Woot? Oh man, must have missed that.

    There was a podcast where they said that some scopes will be unlockable by doing some sort of "missions" like securing a given number of enemies for example. They also said that the unlockable scopes will be new scopes that just look different but have the same magnification to keep everything on a level. They also said they don't like the unlocking mechanic as newer players would be in a disadvantage.
  • SithHunterSithHunter Posts: 109Player
    cK^KILL@ wrote: »
    SithHunter wrote: »
    cK^KILL@ wrote: »
    If (which is not gonna happen, they already confirmed it) they should make everything available with ironsights, trainings to unlock sniper and all the scopes.

    Woot? Oh man, must have missed that.

    There was a podcast where they said that some scope will be unlockable by doing some sort of "missions" like securing a given number of enemies for example. They also said that the unlockable scope will be new scopes that just look different but have the same magnification to keep everything on a level. They also said they don't like the unlocking mechanic as newer players would be in a disadvantage.

    Reasonable arguments against that, we have to admit. If they manage to make new players stick to the game it's fine with me.
  • TheTotsTheTots Posts: 2,278Player
    All weapons will be available to all players and not behind a level / training wall. This was a design decision made early on in the game.

    We want an even playing field in terms of gear.
    The game wasn't made exactly to my specifications, so I feel it's broken.

  • Gronfather@TwitchGronfather@Twitch Posts: 466Player
    TheTots wrote: »
    All weapons will be available to all players and not behind a level / training wall. This was a design decision made early on in the game.

    We want an even playing field in terms of gear.

    76748-Gladiator-thumbs-down-gif-b5MO.gif


  • ProceduralPolyMathProceduralPolyMath Posts: 96Player
    edited May 2015
    TheTots wrote: »
    All weapons will be available to all players and not behind a level / training wall. This was a design decision made early on in the game.

    We want an even playing field in terms of gear.

    Hey Tots, I hate the RPG/FPS mix of the likes of CoD and BF (get 100 headshots to unlock a scope and crap alike). But that doesn't mean the game can't have a rewarding system to unlock weapons. Training and honor being the most reasonable one. Would a soldier be allowed to handle a system in a team he wasn't trained and tested for? Would a soldier in its first day be allowed to toy around with an M24?
    This is what I don't get in this game. Where is he army lore?
  • AvgusteAvguste Posts: 125Player
    edited May 2015
    @cK^KILL@ , I am not saying that AA is more difficult than CS or GRP or COD, however AA is a much different game than any other FPS and players coming from other FPS need the training to understand the difference and being able to better contribute to their team. But really, for me the training doesn't need so much emphasis on the weapons handling, as much as needs to be about teamwork, picking up teammates and such.

    @TheTots , I understand that the Army and the devs want an even playing field, which is great. However I do also agree with animatics

  • SacchoSaccho Posts: 1,577Player
    edited May 2015
    @cK^KILL@ , I am not saying that AA is more difficult than CS or GRP or COD, however AA is a much different game than any other FPS and players coming from other FPS need the training to understand the difference and being able to better contribute to their team. But really, for me the training doesn't need so much emphasis on the weapons handling, as much as needs to be about teamwork, picking up teammates and such.
    Again, I disagree about this game being that different from others. There's an entire genre of co-op shooters out there with revive mechanics and player cooperation. Games like CS have very strong player-to-player communication. GR:P encourages coordinated team pushes -- multiple players using their specials at once is way more effective than everybody taking turns.

    Introducing AAPG to a CS player: "It's hostage rescue, but with a flag instead of a person. Pick it up and carry it to extract. If somebody 'dies', you can revive them by holding F. Oh, and all guns use a scope now." That's not training, that's 5 seconds in TS.

    Saying "training needs to emphasize cooperation, revives, and teamwork so new players know what to do" is one thing. Saying that players coming from other FPS games need to be told "teamwork is good!" is just insulting to anybody coming from those other games. If you're going to make a strong statement about how AA is dramatically different and players from other games have to be re-trained to handle it, you need to explain what you think is so different that a seasoned FPS player is going to be lost.
  • `no_longer_active'`no_longer_active' Posts: 30Player
    edited May 2015
    In terms of the least cost implementation, I would recommend the introduction of "new player" servers. I often see a ton of new players join a server, get destroyed, then leave the server. I wonder what fraction of these players leave the game completely.
  • ProceduralPolyMathProceduralPolyMath Posts: 96Player
    edited May 2015
    In terms of the least cost implementation, I would recommend the introduction of "new player" servers. I often see a ton of new players join a server, get destroyed, then leave the server. I wonder what fraction of these players leave the game completely.

    Seen one alike the other day. Moderated. I don't know if it works otherwise, to be honest. Since it only sets the stage for people with a second account to wreck easy game for fun.

    I think people just have to deal with the frustration with not knowing the game and have to give it time to learn it. Plus they will be losing out watching good players in their team play and learn from that.

    The most balancing act for new players would be to have a matchmaking scheme and push for balanced teams instead of allowing unbalanced team stacking to carry on.

    Being the worst player of a team and sitting out while watching others better players carry on in a fair match is one thing. Having one team wrecked round after round, map after map because for some "TeamSpeak > Game Balance" is another. Plus the matchmaking would only break people apart if it couldn't come up with a balance. Otherwise the common issue is 4 TS guys stack and another other better players who even used auto-assign, are also in that team. It's not rare to see games with mostly 20's vs mostly 0's

    Training is not to makes you good at the game. But to inform you about the game goals and means along side with army lore. And could be useful to do a small check on what you can do in the game.

    Only issue I see with training is if you want to do a second account ;)
  • frankoffrankof Posts: 1,077Moderator
    For people complaining about mandatory training for secondary accounts, cry me a river, i got my waders on...
    ss_4_frankof.png
  • .shhfiftyfive-.shhfiftyfive- Posts: 495Player
    edited May 2015
    TheTots wrote: »
    All weapons will be available to all players and not behind a level / training wall. This was a design decision made early on in the game.

    We want an even playing field in terms of gear.

    but that entire argument is self-defeated on both ends of the spectrum.
    -
    on one end, not everyone on the team can have a sniper rifle... so it's not an even playing field...
    -
    and there's no reason to shy away from delaying access to sniper rifle (to require higher than a level 1 account...) because those level 1 players can still pick up said weapons from dead players...
    -
    so this early-on decision has no real bearing on the game. actually, what it is doing is taking away any real incentives to dig in and play for say 10 hours before judging if you want to bother playing the game further... after say your first session where you as a new player get to try out out all the guns for 30 minutes and then uninstalls before even learning the maps which is by far a much more important part of the gameplay... before they actually give the game some time to resonate with them on a deeper level.


  • SOPMODSOPMOD Posts: 230Player
    edited May 2015
    There's a difference between weapon unlocks, passively through XP. And unlocking something by other means than simply gaining XP.

    I remember a thread about unlocks a long time ago and most people were against it in the form of unlock weapons through XP.

    Putting it in the form of training is different though because you unlock the possibility to do the training, not the option to instantly use that weapon.
  • SOPMODSOPMOD Posts: 230Player
    SOPMOD wrote: »
    There's a difference between weapon unlocks, passively through XP. And unlocking something by other means than simply gaining XP.

    I remember a thread about unlocks a long time ago and most people were against it in the form of unlock weapons through XP.

    Putting it in the form of training is different though because you unlock the possibility to do the training, not the option to instantly use that weapon.

    That way is just a hurdle to get it, not an achievement. When you unlock it by xp or getting a stat it rewards the player for doing what this game has trouble with.. playing the actual game. It creates a challenge.

    You're being forced to do something you don't want to do with training which doesn't sound fun to me.

    In this case, hurdle or achievement is subjective. For a seasoned gamer it's not a hurdle at all to complete a training in 5 minutes. At max, it's a minor annoyance. However for someone who isn't that good at playing it's an achievement.

    Again, there is only the point of view of seasoned gamers here. All i'm trying to do is point out that, with the majority of people on the forum that make any sort of sense being seasoned gamers or comp players, the casual point of view might be neglected entirely. The target audience should be as wide as possible within the boundaries of making a good well balanced game. Having a minor annoyance for seasoned gamers is an acceptable negative point if you ask me.
  • SSKnecaboSSKnecabo Posts: 2,721Player
    It actually felt like an achievement for me on aa3 but I was 13 back then. After doing it once it's just an annoyance and for the example of aa3 not just a minor that is done in 5 minutes.
    If they'd allow multiple soldiers on one account so you'd have to do the trainings only once I'd love to see them back personally even though I don't think it would be good for the game regarding new players.
  • =IK=Doba==IK=Doba= Posts: 2,789Player
    People talk about training like that's the part of game they love and replay it all the time.. lol@that... in AA3 you ran through it quickly just to be done with.. there was ever a cheat to get through medic for second account or something like that.

    Training is a one and done, it's good for new players not knowing what anything is but for veteran players it's a waste of time
  • =IK=Doba==IK=Doba= Posts: 2,789Player
    Maybe the new player wants a challenge and this game is too easy so they quit?

    Easy is boring....a challenge is Rewarding ...Training is not challenging
  • `no_longer_active'`no_longer_active' Posts: 30Player
    edited May 2015
    Under the following (correlated) premises, I think the DEVs should devote more time to making the game better in terms of new maps, etc., instead of creating more tutorial training.

    1. The Steam user strictly prefers multiplayer gaming over tutorials.
    2. The Steam user spends a non-significant fraction of his/her time on tutorials.

    I think both are reasonable. I personally have not played any tutorials for a FPS game more than once. In addition, I think the normal sequence for a gamer would be 1. to play the multiplayer game first, then 2. look at the tutorials to see if there was anything he/she missed.

    In other words, tutorials are the most boring aspect of an online FPS game. I have yet to hear about a game that attracted new players because it had a wonderful tutorial. (In addition, out of the 10 people that I have introduced AAPG to, none of them actually played the tutorials despite the fact that we already have them.)

    Since the DEV's time are valuable, I rather see them devote most of their time on high impact items like creating better maps and improving other aspects of the online game. Creating new contents that will barely be played/used is not an efficient use of time at this stage. Furthermore, I question the assumption that tutorials will help retain new players (see 1 and 2, and the sequence).
Sign In or Register to comment.