I have to say while I can see the need to bottleneck and guide players at times, I think that this should be the task of the map design. Take the game mode skrimish for example: No map restrictions whatsoever. This enables you to do much wider flanking manuvers, but it also means that you need to prepare against the opponent's moves.
Why does this increase the diverstiy and quality of the game?
Right now I do think the defense is at a huge advantage. Most of the explosive support can't go through ceilings/walls and besides closing in with frags, there is nothing really to discourage the defenders from just camping inside.
With the map opened up, they would now need to spread thinner, watching their flanks or risk to get attacked in the back. This would also give offensive gunners a bigger purpose as in looking for a pisition to be able to cut off enemy reinforcements.
I really appreciate the headsup. Thx for that.
During this period, however, our community and design teams were spending a huge amount of time reading through hundreds of reviews and comments across Steam, Reddit, YouTube, news sites and more, gathering feedback and prioritising our year ahead.
May I just point out that that bit sounds like you read literally everything just not these forums? I have noticed a lack of NWI comments on the forum especially until the recent increase, which makes me wonder whether this is just put in a misunderstanding way or has actually been like that.
I do agree with a fair bit of your points here. Also I would like to aplaud to this very thorough analysis and insight given.
While I think that realism and the resulting authenticity are very imperative for good game design, I also think that you can go overboard with it. You get to a point where real life would lead to frustrating game experiences.
Point 3 especially. Though sway would realistically occur with heavier weapons, it is a RNG element that I generally frown upon for it not being manipulatable by the player. Adding high amounts of recoil to a weapon instead makes it controllable by a skillfull player without it being random. It is not realistic, no, but it still feels authentic, doesn't it? The SAW being more unwieldy and uncontrollable without sacrificing immediate and satisfying controlls for the player.
Though the point about longer ADS for heavier weapos is very right.
Malfunctions in point 11 would be another RNG element with very limited controll by the player, I think it doesn't belong into a game that is as fast paced as Insurgency, at least not in the competitive modes. It belongs to full on milsims like Arma in my opinion. The same goes for the many different kinds of ammunition, which would be especially intimidating for newer players/ players who aren't as knowledgable about firearms as you.
A huge +1 for the flip-up optics though, and interesting points you make about supressors, armour, calibres, barrel length and weigth.
I think it ads to the excitement when you get nearly missed by an explosive. Love a rocket whizzing by your head or a near miss running from a clinking grenade. The problem with Molotov with pin point accuracy is really the lack of warning. It would be nice to see some bot fails of hitting windows and above door ways and screaming in agony as they burn their own team like we often do.
Exactly. A grenade bouncing off the environment gives you enough time to gtfo of that room. Molotovs are the silent killers that get hurled through the air just to instantly make the player die in agony without any possibility to counteract besides possibly seeing the incoming bottle.
In addition to my priorly proposed changes I'd like it so that molotovs will no longer insta-kill thge player damage wise, but reduce their health significantly while staying in the flames, like a more extreme version of how CS:GO handles fire.
This has been brought before, but doesn't seem to be have adressed in the last update.
Bots literally snipe you from miles away without a line of sight. Through Smoke.
But not only that, even when under heavy fire, they refuse to seek cover and when in doubt, torch the static attacker while dying.
This is not only unrealistic, but very unrewarding and frustrating in terms of gameplay. Please think about decreasing bot thowing accuracy even further or ristricting aggresive use of molotovs to line of sight targets (or targets that left line of sight a few seconds ago).
I second the standalone practice map.
But, with all due respect, I think that NWI would be better of focussing on the things that make Insurgency special instead of buying into the Battle Royale hype. They should prioritize bringing back older game-modes and the ones they originally planned for release.
@olyyourfriend said in [[TO THE DEVS]
Who doesn't want battle royale games in 2018, or 2019?
That one would be me.
If you wanna go for a WW2 game maybe take a look at Day of Infamy (developed by NWI).
Upon vehicles: I don't think tanks or APC's would suit Insurgency's CQC heavy gameplay like at all. Also piloting helicopters would be implementing a whole new mechanic with all its required development time and effort which I would rather like to see spend on other things.
My main urge would be developing the single-player campaign to be released maybe in the end of 2019 or even 2020 and besides focus on game-modes, polish/optimization and bringing more minor content like additional weapons. And I really really really want my Glock back :'C.
@tooth-decay Maybe I should have made it more clearly: I do dislike RNG horizontal recoil, though I have never had the situation of it being overly infulential on my shooting in this game.
@cyoce Same thing as above ^^
@marksmanmax And about the sway from supression: While I think it is very immersive and adds nicely to the more scary and traumatizing fell of the game, especially against AI, I do agree that for the very reasons you and others have pointed out upon that it has no place in PvP. Not the way it handles right now.
Concering the sway from supression I would suppose to increase the ammount of time it takes for a player to become supressed. Like a single-fired rifle shouldn't be enough to make me stay in cover, especially as it rewards, as has been said, the bad aim of an opponent. However when being under constant automated fire closely to let's say 10-20 rounds, then the effect should hit in like it does already.
This would give the LMG's the distinct role of supressing enemies and take that away from the ordinary rifleman or at least make them think whether emptying half a mag is worth the effect.
I think the decision was made on a gamepla-design choice:
We have vertical recoil, right? No matter how high it is, it can be controlled rather easily by just pulling the mouse down. The mg feels powerful when deployed, but while standing or crouching you feel at a disadvantage, giving the gunner a distinct role. The recoil is hard to contol, but, still controlable if you get the hang of it and first and foremost, responsive.
Now if you were to replace the recoil with sway: The gunner would now have a 200 round assault rifle with a heavier weight, better recoil management, but RNG sway added to the gun to not make it OP. I would consider the later approach worse game-design wise, as it takes away controllability from the player and replaces it with rng stuff, making for frustrating and unresponsive controlls. In addition to that, the difference against other classes would be reduced.
So while I am still all in favour of realism in games, some real-life mechanics just don't lend themselves well to the game world.