Optimization (lower resource demand ofc), coop bot ai and pvp map balance is quite important to get right (both from general feedback and what I believe is success factors). Adding feature x or y should have lower priority.
On your second paragraph/idea. There is a lot of other ways to improve the a.i. and it could use a lot of work in that regard as all multiplayer coop games currently do=)
Your first paragraph regarding accuracy where you mention random headshots, and what is considered fair or jarring for the player I would mention that this is subjective and should first and foremost be fixed with suitable difficulty settings that can be voted on so that players can experience what they themselves regards as fair, fun or jarring.
Way too much speedrunning in my opinion as well, and it makes it unplayable because the game feels so outrageously easy for me subjectively and I have zero patience for easy games where death ratio is low and every headless chicken can work their way across the finish line=)
Also what do you mean by accuracy when you want to avoid random headshots from bots, you mean tunnel sighting on certain areas with cooldowns?
You seen this?:
EDIT: Not that it is anything wrong with lower difficulty, less headshotting bots or people being able to rush maps. It is just subjectively not what I prefer and a solid game should envelope that as well.
Andrew Spearin was very important in the development of Ins2014. He is currently "pursuing other opportunities". Look at vid if you want, he explains it better himself what his role was and it makes sense Sandstorm took a different path when he is not onboard:
You probably heard about LEAN production and the principles about asking "why?" until you expose root causes of problems.
Why is the game not succesful?
Because it still feels like a beta.
Why does it still feel like a beta?
Because the game is not finished.
why is the game not finished?
Because there has not been put in the work hours needed, miscalculated time schedule, difficult to adapt to a new engine etc
Now we get a lot of branches on our tree, and must decide what branch to follow. For example: Why has it not been enough working hours to finalize the product?
Because game devs are underpaid and those who complains gets fired, leading to less motivation, exhaustion and unrealistic time schedules.
Quote from Spearin:
"Public stories are the tip of the iceberg floating in NDA Ocean. The waters are frigid below the surface where hard working game devs find themselves drowning from crunch, harassment, burnout and depression."
One of the root causes I would guess;)
Depends if its player controlled or enforced by server. I agree that it is sometimes serves a purpose to keep on deadchat, in other case some random guy starts backseat driving telling the guy what to do and shouting commands so it drowns out all enemy sounds, making it impossible to gain intel on enemy presence, which is really important for me anyway. I prefer teammates being able to write text or use a discord as you mention.
So is the inconsisty made on purpose to create variety in "bot difficulty" or something else. Personally and subjectively I would prefer them all being elites. Bots are most often easy to make counter tactics against also at higher difficulties, but if players meet the slow bots and the elite bots in a variety, it may elude players in to a false sense of control when experiencing dominating bots in some cases and being owned in other cases. Thanks for your perspective, Im glad someone can say speedrunning is actually a thing here.
I know a lot of people see it like you because difficulty is subjective. I did not need to even watch the whole video because I know the game is quite solid already, I can trust the game being itself without needing to cherrypick a video for demonstration. Cherrypicking is a bad thing remember. Imagine a difficulty scenario ( a situation u can meet in the game) that is impossible for 100% of gamers. All the gamers will agree that it is impossible. Now imagine a difficulty scenario (still a situation that u can meet in the game) that is impossible for 80% of gamers. Now most people will agree with u that it is bullshit and impossible, just a few gamers here and there (20% for example) will tell you the game is fine. Now most people will agree with you and maybe say this guy have no idea what he talks about. Sounds familiar? ( No answer needed).
I made a link to the same video where we discussed the death at 17:03 and will go as far as saying there is not even close to being a unfair death in this situation from my subjective point of view, because the death could have been avoided. The player had room to improve in mutiple ways. I rewatched the death again more closely because I thought maybe I had overseen something because of your reply, but no, not in this case. You can slow the video down in youtube settings if the kill feels instant;)
Lets walk through the situation one more time:
at 16:58 the bot reveals itself by opening the door
at 16:59 he attempts to shot the bot first time.
at 17:01 he sees the bot for the second time but hesitates and does not shot
at 17:02 he shots at the same bot a second time but misses
at 17:02 he looks away from the bot to his left again.
at 17:03 he gets killed by the bot. The same bot he first saw at 16:58
All the time he stays at the same position. He has made a lot of noise at 16:59 and the bots are aware of his position. His choice to stay still is relying on luck.
He have had 3 chances to kill the bot but failed each time. This is not an instakill by any definition, this one actually extends for approx 5 seconds which is a lot for this game in many cases.
Ideally it should be more complex bot behaviour and not only superaim that is used to increase difficulty - If NWI don't have the time and/or human resources to do that, they could consider the methods used by modder of Bef server in ins 2014. I never went to the download page myself, because i stumbled upon this server in the server list ingame which download the files when you just join. If this link is not for the whole mod, they could contact Artos, which I believe knows more since he is listed as author of said page:
Because super aim in itself will make all rushing players die very fast, so unless having a super organized team that watch all directions from inside a relatively small safe perimeter the team will fail - This I have experienced being the actual result for hundreds of hours on said server. Combining this with other adjustments like the bots not spawning too close to players etc, could at least make a option for higher difficulty that a certain type of players will enjoy.
The new enemy that bef server introduced who had shield was also pretty cool. You always played as insurgents on this server, so some enemies having a shield was somewhat more believable. Its also believable that it should be more difficult to play as insurgents as in most real world scenarios they are the underdog.
We think very differently, I will try to leave out all text that is just noise in that regard and stay on the topics. For me this is not a battle.
What I have said about ue4 and programming here was trying to tell u about principles about adjusting parameters that is common in games without in any way trying to pretend I am sure exactly how NWI have solved it, just probabilities.
I said the a.i. is bad in the gaming industry in general and that devs use godlike aim on the bots to compensate - I don't have a problem with that, both in Ins2014 and in Sandstorm. What I have said is that I didn't want the devs to lower the difficulty because it [the difficulty] is not bugged from my point of view, it is merely the devs doing a good job compensating in the current situation we have with stupid a.i. in the whole gaming industry. I think they do that in a fun way, that is why I replied to the post by kanyo to begin with. I think very good aim from the bots is a necessity on higher difficulties.
Did not watch the whole video myself, just skimmed through some parts of it. Like I said watching the whole thing would be boring for me. I looked at the highlight u mentioned at 17mins in the sandstorm video and I find no bugs in the way the player dies - And that is the core of where I was going with my reply to begin with. The player looks at the door where his teammate died being open (blind) from both right side and behind, he then see a bot at his right side and goes for a shot but fails to kill the bot. He then keeps staying in the same position and looks away from the bot to his left door again and gets killed - That is the kind of difficulty I enjoy playing at, and he made several mistakes in that situation he could work on improving - Or he could play at a more suitable difficulty for him if he does not enjoy that kind of challenge. There can never be proof of balanced difficulty when difficulty is subjective, what I am trying to show is that it exists customer segments that enjoy that difficulty and that it should remain as an option. @Flair had a recent post that said it quite well imo.
I am not cherry picking examples from the games you mention, I simply just don't have the time to spend hours looking for them, so I tried finding some relevant videos. I would like to see more relevant examples that you may know of from the same games if you find the time to post them here, I am genuinely interested to see some cool bot behaviour somewhere.
I am aware the payday 2 video focused on team a.i. , a.i. is a problem in shooting games no matter the side they are on. I also think payday 2 is a fun game and played it quite much, I still think it is not very good a.i. wise both on the team and on the enemy side. The enemies shows up in extremely large numbers and are bullet sponges on the higher difficulties exactly for the reason that they cant make better a.i.- Stupid a.i. is not necessarily a problem when a game is fun to play. I never said scripts are not used also in multiplayer games, by all means they are - bots being spawned in to strategic positions when you have capped a point in Sandstorm is an example - What I tried to address was that people who complains about a.i. in multiplayer games and use singleplayer games as a reference have some standards and benchmarks of what good a.i. is, that the multiplayer coop games still haven't figured out, so comparing those types of games is misleading.
I looked at two vids made by Worth a buy (wab) today of brand new games 2019ish , new metro game (at least 1 stalker dev worked on that title) and the division 2. Both games are new and have according to dear old Mack poor a.i. - As I said it is a situation across the whole gaming industry with bad a.i. and I think NWI solves bad a.i. in a brilliant way with what they have to work with (compensating with bot aim being very good) - Ins2014 and Day of Infamy is both really good games, and I just hope NWI will keep having at least 1 high difficulty option (hopefully a higher max difficulty than they had in ins2014).
From u, about pistols:
"So the problem isn't the fact that they can headshot you from 100 meters with a handgun. Nope. It's the fact that they choose to use a handgun at 100 meters.
First of all, some bots only have pistols. In fact, many of them only have sidearms.
Second, pistols are somewhat viable at range, especially the PF940 and L106A1. The M9 can hold its own as well. That being said, they probably aren't accurate enough to actually hit a headshot at 60 meters.
You actually said that you'd refuse to comment on this one at all, even though I have a point I'm making here. GG."
From me about pistol:
Bots could be tweaked to not use pistols at unrealistic distance, that would solve the situation for players that like the challenge of bots able to oneshot from long distance at the high difficulty I hope stays as an option. I did not mean to refuse any point you had, I just did not have anything more to add. You seem to have a lot more knowledge than me on weapons. Maybe the devs could take the different realistic ranges that applies for pistols into account and solve the bug that you have noticed in this regard?