Curse

Alleji · Jan 06, 2007, 07:00 PM // 19:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

Yes, the team does understand the process, and I do want to be sure you know that the change to 6v6 was not predicated simply by a weekend of double fame.

I didn't honestly believe you did, but that seemed to be the popular opinion and I can't see another one. So if you didn't base your decision on the double fame weekend, what was the rationale behind changing to 6v6 then?

I'm sure many other people would like an answer as well.

Randomway Ftw · Jan 06, 2007, 07:46 PM // 19:46

Rather than doing the reasonable thing and change HA back to the 8v8 environment that everyone who actually PLAYED HA enjoyed.

ANET has listened to the constant QQing of the guild hall, about why HA sucks and should be made into a six man version of GvG that they can play when they don't have 8 people online.

I think I know what these map changes are going to be and they will seriously mess up the fabric of HA, I think that ANET will change the objective of Halls because of all the QQing about altar maps/holding builds that has been going on. I don't like this idea at all, first of all it is based on a flawed "build wars" situation because of the lack of skill slots to include counters for common builds, while still having the ability to do damage.

Now I have a question for all the whiners about holding builds, What are these phantom, overly defensive holding builds that we keep hearing about? Any build that you cannot kill by spamming sandstorm, searing flames, or c spacing at with your grenth dervishes? Any build that you cannot kill while waiting for the last 45 seconds to attack in halls, and throwing everything you have at the ghostly? Any build that include fertile season?

Now, lets look at the builds that have the ability to hold in 6v6.

Pre-nightfall we had interupt holding from practised stance + seeking arrows, and/or psychic distraction. This no longer works because of song of concentration. Interupts provided the utility to hold while allowing the build the ability to still get kills.

Post nightfall release we had dual paragon holding builds that were extremely defensive, and provided monks with unlimited enrgy while give the entire party healing and defense boosts. The way these builds got kills was usualy through a type of rainbow spike. This build has since been nerfed, as it was evident that paragon energy gain skills were overpowered, this build was also countered by the metagame. THis is the only build that complaints about were justified.

Other builds with the capability to hold currently, but easily countered are SOMW spike, ele ball. Both of these builds can hold if their counters are not available on the attacking teams in sufficient quantity. When faced with enough enchantment hate and or aoe, both these builds collapse easily. THese builds have sufficient offence to kill off enemy teams.

We also have the necro curses builds, and the so called "spirit spam" builds that can hold but collapse when faced with enough pressure, they have sufficient damage to roll enemy teams quickly if played correctly.

Now if you are playing an aoe type ele build I do not care that you cannot kill these builds, I don't care how much you whine sometimes spamming skills and hoping the other team dies is not enough.

I never supported the 6v6 change from the beginning, I though it was a terrible mistake for ANET to make, it was based the double fame weekend, an event which attracted large numbers of players because of double fame, not 6v6. I believe that the post event comments in support of 6v6 by non-HA players influenced the change. I have that the majority of alpha testers are hostile toward HA. The vast majority of HA players who supported the change in the beginning have now changed their opinion and want 8v8 back, its disappointing that ANET is too caught up in a refusal to admit mistakes, and an attempt to cover that refusal with radical changes to HA to see this.

I ask ANET not to not make a similar mistake to the 6v6, and not make radical changes based on the whims of people who do not play HA, taking what is left of the arena from the people who enjoyed it so that people who do not play it can cheer from the sidelines. The change to 6v6 has proven that HA should not be changed based on the whims, and whining of a few people who do not play it, and/or get angry after losing on a particular type of map.

RandomEngy · Jan 06, 2007, 08:36 PM // 20:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alleji

I didn't honestly believe you did, but that seemed to be the popular opinion and I can't see another one. So if you didn't base your decision on the double fame weekend, what was the rationale behind changing to 6v6 then?

I'm sure many other people would like an answer as well.

With 8v8 you have super-defensive spiking/holding teams that are not fun to fight. All teams have to bring infuse and spike disruption (or a gimmick like IWAY) or they're toast. And remember to cover all the different kinds of spikes! Anyhow, you might find this fun, but I'm guessing Anet didn't like the idea of having a good handful of specific "bring this or you're toast" skills. It's inherent to the 8v8 type and not something you can easily balance out.

Is HA perfect right now? No. It's never been. But it can get a lot better than it's ever been through skill rebalances and objective changes. I'm guessing a lot of the 6v6 gimmicks you see now are going to dry up after the skill rebalancing.

drekmonger · Jan 06, 2007, 08:39 PM // 20:39

I suspect the decline in population started way before 6v6, just from my own unscientific observations. If the HA playing population had been stable and healthy, would a.net have taken such a drastic step?

My question: if HA becomes a fun, populated format as 6v6 with the upcoming changes, will the majority still demand 8v8? If HA is switched back to 8v8 but continues to wither away, will the majority be satisfied?

Personally, if HA was switched back to 8v8 for a weekend with triple fame, I wouldn't show up to the party. The idea bores me to tears. I have to wonder how popular 8v8 HA would have been at this time, had the change to 6v6 never occurred. Maybe just as empty?

(frankly, I wouldn't show up for 6v6 and triple fame either. But I certainly would for 24v24 with double fame, or the upcoming open beta with a double fame incentive.)

There are plenty of other factors beyond just the switch to 6v6 at work here, boiling down to a lack of new players to the mode and the normal fatigue from veteran players.

HA's death rate exceeds it's birth rate equaling a declining population. Even if the switch to 6v6 was a contributor, it certainly wasn't the sole or possibly even the primary cause of the continued decline of HA.

Bread Fan · Jan 06, 2007, 08:48 PM // 20:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by drekmonger

I suspect the decline in population started way before 6v6, just from my own unscientific observations.

Wrong and assumptions are the mutha of all f*ck ups. Funny how "new" players are commenting on 8v8 HA and are completely ignorant to how it actually was.
I see noobs comment "omfg but 8v8 was all iway/vim/b spike" uhh no it wasn't, perhaps these same players never made it past underworld.

Nadia Roark · Jan 06, 2007, 08:56 PM // 20:56

Someone linked to this thread in our guild announcement and I initially thought I'd end up sitting this one out but the sheer weight of stupidity in this thread has compelled me to throw my previous intentions out the window.

Please listen to what I'm about to say. I've moderated a ~50,000 user website for about four years now and I'm not claiming that it's necessarily anything like administrating GW [especially in terms of volume] but it taught me a lot of basic things about how players react to changes in games--since the site I moderate is a webgame--and how they choose to voice their malcontent. I'm seeing little or nothing different here.

A few things:

--Stop bitching to Gaile. Gaile is Community Relations and while she's the closest thing many of us have to a "contact on the inside" she is not a dev and the changes a number of you have been pressing she likely does not have the authority to enact. I remember the other day she signed on once and my whole alliance just about crapped their pants going "OMG Gaile is on and hasn't put up DnD." Please. Try to be a bit more rational. I'm sure she and the rest of ArenaNet is well aware of the demand for 8v8; and they will act accordingly. saying "I want 8 man back" contributes nothing new to the discussion. If you have nothing more to add please just accept that your viewpoint has been trumpeted to the ends of GW and leave it at that. You've voiced your opinions; now just be patient. It won't necessarily happen any faster if you just keep complaining about it.

--Stop sending Bug Reports to NCSoft. Those don't go to the devs either; and I've seen at least one person in my guild waste his time on this. If the NCSoft bug report centre is anything like my moderating centre, those messages will be erased before whoever reading it finishes the first sentence. That mechanism is not meant for game feedback and spamming it will only damage your credibility and make the NCSoft people angry. Nothing is more irritating to a moderator than idiots spamming their inbox with things that are explicitly mentioned as inappropriate for that particular "pipeline."

--8v8 still exists. The people who are complaining that they "Want 8v8 back" are not protesting the loss of 8v8 from the PvP environment. The people who play 8v8 for the sake of playing 8v8 play GvG. Personally, I believe it makes sense to have 4 man RA/TA, 6 man HA and 8v8 GvG. If you want 8v8, play GvG. 8v8 petitioners therefore are not lamenting the loss of 8v8--they're complaining that HA doesn't operate how they want it to. To be quite sure it seems there are a few good reasons to bring 8 man back, but what's wrong with having a 6-man pvp format?

Don't get me wrong: I'm not going to be heartbroken if they bring 8-man back, but I'm not going to lie: 6 hours of fighting nothing but bloodspike gets pretty old--and it's happened to me several times. I'm not complaining about the difficulty in beating it or necessarily that people even run it [I mean hey, it works doesn't it?] but a HA environment where 95% of all teams run IWAY or bspike gets really old really fast. I understand that the current metagame doesn't have that many fans [and perhaps rightly so] but the fact of the matter is that there are more different builds in HA right now than there ever were in 8v8. If you don't believe me you might want to stop complaining about 6-man and go play it: there are still two or three dominant builds but they only consitute a slight majority [spirit spam, fearway, SoMW, etc] as opposed to a profound one [IWAY & Bspike] when their presence is considered relative to other builds.

Another thing that we have to remember about 8-man is the attendant changes that will need to take place if its return is in fact imminent. Arenanet did the skill balance for Nightfall with 6v6 in mind; changing to 8v8 now would require a profound overhaul of many skills and character classes; the paragon leaps to mind. You're putting Arenanet in a potentially lose-lose situation. It would be like if you built a pyramid and decided right before putting the capstone on it that you wanted a broader foundation. The change won't come easily and you might like the end result even less.

That said, I think about the only thing that would make me rage tombs at this point would be if they changed altar-capping to AB style. That would be so gay.

EDIT:

Quote:

I see noobs comment "omfg but 8v8 was all iway/vim/b spike" uhh no it wasn't, perhaps these same players never made it past underworld.

I am finding it very difficult to take this statement anywhere near seriously. 85-95% of all teams in American Districts were IWAY. 50-60% of International teams formed bspike. I kept a tally after the night I tombed from 10pm-4am and fought nothing but bloodspike, and not just on Underworld. It was just about the only build that ever held and it was also just about all you played against to get there.... until you run a straight bspike counter build and then fight your first IWAY of the night.

So uhh yes it was.

Yunas Ele · Jan 06, 2007, 09:37 PM // 21:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by RandomEngy

With 8v8 you have super-defensive spiking/holding teams that are not fun to fight.

You have those in 6v6 too, if you haven't noticed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RandomEngy

All teams have to bring infuse and spike disruption (or a gimmick like IWAY) or they're toast. And remember to cover all the different kinds of spikes!

Ya, but you can fit that in in 8v8. Extra 16 skill slots ftw. Besides most 6v6 builds still carry some form of disruption (d-blow and/or shock on a war, savage and d-shot on a ranger, gale on eles, etc...) so you'd only be dedicating maybe 2 or 3 of those 16 slots to spike distruption. Not a problem...

Also, just fyi, IWAY had 4 d-blows (or 3 d-blows and 1 pd), and usually 2 copies of infuse so I don't see why you have to singlely mention it out

Its got just as much spike distruption as any other build...

Quote:

Originally Posted by RandomEngy

Anyhow, you might find this fun, but I'm guessing Anet didn't like the idea of having a good handful of specific "bring this or you're toast" skills. It's inherent to the 8v8 type and not something you can easily balance out.

In 8v8 you can fit all the "bring this or you're toast" skills. 6v6 still has these skills. Sure, not as many of them but its more than enough that you can't bring enough to counter every build. In 8v8 you could. Hence the rock, paper, scissors metagame....

Quote:

Originally Posted by RandomEngy

Is HA perfect right now? No. It's never been. But it can get a lot better than it's ever been through skill rebalances and objective changes. I'm guessing a lot of the 6v6 gimmicks you see now are going to dry up after the skill rebalancing.

Its never been perfect but I can tell you that IMO, it was definately a lot closer to being perfect back in the 8v8 days. That being said, even though I'm a big supporter of 8v8, you're right, it can get a lot better even if it stays 6v6, if ANet makes the necessary changes. But judging from past experiences its very hard not to be skeptical.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nadia Roark

--Stop bitching to Gaile. Gaile is Public Relations and while she's the closest thing many of us have to a "contact on the inside" she is not a dev and the changes a number of you have been pressing she likely does not have the authority to enact.

I agree that gaile is getting too much ****, I mean in the thread were people misinterpreted gaile's post about perma 6v6, I remember someone wishing her to have a car accident. That is ****ing sick and disgusting. How can someone wish a person to have a car accident simply because of her company's decisions about a video game. Disgusting... absolutely disgusting... I don't remember who posted that, but if you're reading this I encourage you to get psychological help, NOW.

With that out of the way though, gaile is the only one we have to complain too about the ANet's decisions regarding HA. I can tell you that if a dev was here posting along side gaile, that dev would be getting the heat, not gaile. Its like at a restaurant. If you get slow service or the food is bad or something, its the waiter who takes the heat. Even though its not the waiter who cooked the food, or who is taking a long time to cook it or w/e, that would be the chef. If you haven't picked up on it yet, gaile is the waiter, and the devs are the chefs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nadia Roark

--8v8 still exists. The people who are complaining that they "Want 8v8 back" are not protesting the loss of 8v8 from the PvP environment. The people who play 8v8 for the sake of playing 8v8 play GvG. Personally, I believe it makes sense to have 4 man RA/TA, 6 man HA and 8v8 GvG. If you want 8v8, play GvG. 8v8 petitioners therefore are not lamenting the loss of 8v8--they're complaining that HA doesn't operate how they want it to. To be quite sure it seems there are a few good reasons to bring 8 man back, but what's wrong with having a 6-man pvp format?

I'm not sure if you've played both 8v8 HA and GvG, but they are very different game plays. Its not the loss of the 8v8 format, its the fact that HA was much more enjoyable in 8v8 format as it was designed for it. If ANet can get 6v6 to be as fun with these upcoming changes, I'm happy. But 6v6 HA in its current state is a joke and a half. Theres absolutely nothing wrong with having a 6v6 pvp format. However, there is something wrong with taking a fun pvp format designed for 8v8, removing a map, adding a lever to another map and then saying that format can work in 6v6. However, hopefully ANet will adress this in the upcoming changes, but judging by past experiences, its hard to keep hopes up, but we will see...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nadia Roark

until you run a straight bspike counter build and then fight your first IWAY of the night.

You can the skillslots to counter both of them in 8v8. Try doing that in 6v6 while still having enough killing power and at least a somewhat decent backline too....

Nadia Roark · Jan 06, 2007, 10:40 PM // 22:40

I know what you mean about "gaile is the only one we have to complain to about;" I'm sure gathering feedback from players and reporting back on their general dispositions is somewhere in her job description. I was specifically referring to the practice of wetting oneself in those few seconds before she puts up DnD; as it's indicative of a rather exasperating trend for players [and not just in this game] to open their mouths and fail to close them until they're either satisfied or banned.

I have played 8v8 tombs (~3000 fame), GvG (1 mysterious champ point), and 6v6 tombs (~300 fame). I understand that HA was designed for 8-man--which is probably part of the reason why ANet is looking into taking such drastic measures to change it. I realize the differences in gameplay between HA and GvG (even though I'm no good at the latter) and I'm glad you brought them up because it affords us the opportunity to define our terms: are we angry that 8v8 is out of tombs or are we just angry that our favorite builds don't work anymore?

To avoid ruffling the feathers of those who elected to play them I will not list the builds explicitly but we all know what they are--somehow I would tend to guess that if they worked as well in GvG as they used to in tombs we wouldn't be hearing nearly as many complaints about the 6 man format. Saying 8v8 was "more enjoyable" is something of a stretch since obviously not everyone will agree with it. I think both formats have their pros and cons; barring whatever other changes they plan on making that I might dislike, I don't plan on leaving tombs whether it stays 8v8 or stays 6v6. I'm just trying to play devil's advocate here.

I agree that more can be done to improve the HA environment, but that does not in my view mandate a change back to 8v8. Of course its harder to build far-reaching counters into 6-man builds, but isn't that sort of the point? We need to avoid skillbars that have potentially game-ending counters to all other builds.

Bread Fan · Jan 06, 2007, 10:53 PM // 22:53

Another long winded person that can't grasp the fact GvG and HA are two COMPLETELY different playing fields. ie vod, splitting/ganking

bigboi26 · Jan 06, 2007, 10:53 PM // 22:53

my 2 cents:

as long as they get it fixed where its not one build or a couple (like right now) beat mostly every other thing (because you cant balance against everything, not enough room) ill be happy. even if it is 6v6, as long its FUN

Bacon Goes Monk · Jan 06, 2007, 10:55 PM // 22:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nadia Roark

I have played 8v8 tombs (~3000 fame), GvG (1 mysterious champ point), and 6v6 tombs (~300 fame). I understand that HA was designed for 8-man--which is probably part of the reason why ANet is looking into taking such drastic measures to change it. I realize the differences in gameplay and I'm glad you brought them up because it affords us the opportunity to define our terms: are we angry that 8v8 is out of tombs or are we just angry that our favorite builds don't work anymore?

Only 3000 fame? And you're arguing with rank 10-11's? We aren't angry because we can't run our favorite builds. We're angry because balanced isn't even worth running anymore. You either run fotm's or you don't play HA. We've tried to run a dual sin's with some shutdown, but zergway rolled it. Why? No wards. We tried to run something similar to it but dropped a mesmer for a warder. Spirit spam rolled it. Why? We couldn't shutdown a spirit spammer. Sure we had a few r7's playing with us, but still.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

..blah blah..1st post..

The last "revision" you did was a lever. A whole lever. I almost pissed myself because of how excited I was... because of... a lever... Yes that was sarcasm.

I honestly don't see why you won't just say "We screwed up with 6v6, we'll bring back 8v8." 80% wants it, even you yourself were spammed with "bring back 8v8" when you visited HA. What's with that?

Every single revision done has screwed HA over. How bad will this one be? Maybe you need 4 caps on relic runs instead of 3? Maybe halls will be a different color. Hell, maybe the ghostly will carry a different kind of bow! I just can't wait!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gimme Money Plzthx

Good to know, except somehow I get a sense of "we're trying not to have to revert to 8v8"...

I just thought the exact same thing. Literally.

Alleji · Jan 07, 2007, 02:20 AM // 02:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nadia Roark

--8v8 still exists. The people who are complaining that they "Want 8v8 back" are not protesting the loss of 8v8 from the PvP environment.

Um... duh? We're protesting the loss of 8v8 HA. I know that GvG exists. I don't like GvG. Please show me someone who's actually "protesting the loss of 8v8 from PvP", kthx.

Quote:

The people who play 8v8 for the sake of playing 8v8 play GvG.

Once again, missing the point.

Quote:

Personally, I believe it makes sense to have 4 man RA/TA, 6 man HA and 8v8 GvG. If you want 8v8, play GvG.

Yeah, what's next? You're gonna tell me if I like 8 people in my party I should go PvE, because it has 8 people too?

Quote:

8v8 petitioners therefore are not lamenting the loss of 8v8--they're complaining that HA doesn't operate how they want it to.

Isn't that what everyone has been saying for pretty much the last 3 months?

Quote:

To be quite sure it seems there are a few good reasons to bring 8 man back, but what's wrong with having a 6-man pvp format?

What's wrong with it? They destroyed the old HA to create it. That's what's wrong with it. I wouldn't give a f*ck if they made a seperate 6v6 arena.

Talk about the sheer weight of stupidity in one post.

Gimme Money Plzkthx · Jan 07, 2007, 02:24 AM // 02:24

Quote:

I have played 8v8 tombs (~3000 fame), GvG (1 mysterious champ point), and 6v6 tombs (~300 fame). I understand that HA was designed for 8-man--which is probably part of the reason why ANet is looking into taking such drastic measures to change it. I realize the differences in gameplay and I'm glad you brought them up because it affords us the opportunity to define our terms: are we angry that 8v8 is out of tombs or are we just angry that our favorite builds don't work anymore?

Unfortunately, that argument no longer works as nightfall came out, which drastically changed builds, presenting new ones, new modifications, counters, etc. Thus, if tombs were to return to 8v8, many of the previous fotms would be largely modified or ineffective. Thus, your argument no longer works. Also, for those fotms to work in gvg as you hypothesize, it would need to be like HA, perfectly illustrating how the two are completely different. In short, people want 8v8 back because it was more fun and more competitive, the people that keep saying they just wanna play their favorite builds... that's a defunct argument, the end.

tacitus · Jan 07, 2007, 02:47 AM // 02:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nadia Roark

I understand that the current metagame doesn't have that many fans [and perhaps rightly so] but the fact of the matter is that there are more different builds in HA right now than there ever were in 8v8.

I am shocked by this statement.
so many places in this forum on other threads this comes up time and time again and people still believe that iway and blood spike dominated old HA more than Jagged way does now and paragon did before it.

First off back in the day with 8v8. Yes there was bloodspike, yes there was IWAY, but there was also migraine, eburners, condition builds vim/ and other types, spikes of many varities, spirit builds. As well as random stuff people would just dream up like taking panic or some other hardly used skills and it having a decent chance of success if you had the skill to pull it off. Not to mention individual guild builds like Ansy or IA which were different to most of the common stuf fout there.

Now you see the same builds far more than ever in 8v8, for one people cannot make builds themslves so easily and so even more people just copy halls winners and go in with the same build.

6v6= build wars
8v8 was far more on peoples skill as players.

Lykan · Jan 07, 2007, 02:51 AM // 02:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nadia Roark
I understand that the current metagame doesn't have that many fans [and perhaps rightly so] but the fact of the matter is that there are more different builds in HA right now than there ever were in 8v8.

No. Dont know where you have been playing but thats just wrong.

Divinus Stella · Jan 07, 2007, 02:54 AM // 02:54

A change i think everyone in HA can agree on is cutscenes, an option to disable cutscenes would be god-like, they explain objectives for new players, but most seem to ignore them anyway, once youve seen them once you skip them, it just adds to loading time and annoyance.

Bacon Goes Monk · Jan 07, 2007, 03:14 AM // 03:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Divinus Stella

A change i think everyone in HA can agree on is cutscenes, an option to disable cutscenes would be god-like, they explain objectives for new players, but most seem to ignore them anyway, once youve seen them once you skip them, it just adds to loading time and annoyance.

Oh yes, remove cutscenes. That'll bring back all the players I know who quit, and make everyone enjoy HA again.

........

Messner · Jan 07, 2007, 03:30 AM // 03:30

Given the lackluster changes to HA in the past, I among others am skeptical to say the very least of the new changes.

I also want to touch on the point from Mr Dbest:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Dbest

My only problem with this is the proposed time change.....2 more weeks of waiting for rebalancing and skill changes? I mean, this has seriously gone to far.....How long does Anet expect our patience to last, tossing out an expansion with not evn a half-assed attempts at rebalancing, putting (i think), the second or third fun season in a row, changing HA to 6v6 w/o ne indication or information of the statistics used to justify their change (no link to polls or such), another half-assed attempt at HA revitalization with supposedly "new" maps, which got rid of a much-loved map, made every altar match a 3-way gank fest, and added a lever to an alrdy useless map.........Not to mention the inclusion of upto four Heros in a 6v6 man environment with no action until recently.......Now you want us to go through a full test weekend to gather enough info to make changes?...So how long till these changes are actually implemented?....One month? 2 months? Half a year?
I mean really, i think im forgetting some stuff here but still, ANet u have really taken this game down to a level unimagined by its original dev team.......

We've known Nightfall was incredibly imbalanced as a player community from very early on after the release, you as developers know it wasn't tested thoroughly, if at all (Correct me if I'm wrong because I promise I'll have about 400 more questions for you if I am). My question is "Are you treating this situation like your job or are you simply waiting until the last minute like us college aged people and throwing out whatever comes to your mind before the due date?" I think the problem is that you guys are the students and the teacher in the sense you're obligated to learn about and correct issues with the game yet conveniently answer only to yourselves. The only difference is you don't even have the obligation to a due date, you yourselves can change when things are due (or more recently, if anything is due at all). Most procrastinated works end up looking like garbage and the lack of effort is apparent, I'm not saying it can't be done well, I myself work better as a deadline nears, just making a point. What it feels like I'm seeing from these previous updates and the apparent lack of motivation and desire on behalf of the developers looks like byproducts of procrastination. With those things coming from a professional company I see it as anything but professional and nothing short of an embarrassment to a reputation.

When Nightfall was released, I bought a game and what I got was an untested beta. So what I'm expecting along with the balance updates is a check for the interest I could have earned on the $50 over the last few months while helping you test your game in its beta stages.

Divinus Stella · Jan 07, 2007, 03:59 AM // 03:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bacon Goes Monk

Oh yes, remove cutscenes. That'll bring back all the players I know who quit, and make everyone enjoy HA again.

........

Didnt say its the only thing wrong, infact i didnt even say remove them, just add an option for them, so try read before acting an ass.

Gaile Gray · Jan 07, 2007, 05:07 AM // 05:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Divinus Stella

A change i think everyone in HA can agree on is cutscenes, an option to disable cutscenes would be god-like, they explain objectives for new players, but most seem to ignore them anyway, once youve seen them once you skip them, it just adds to loading time and annoyance.

Interesting point. Frankly, I'm pondering if removing the cutscene would truly or at least signficantly reduce the load times for any HA map. I know that loading a movie for the first time can be costly in time; you have to gather all the assets, the triggers, and so forth. But once on your system, why would you be loading a movie, rather than simply accessing it via your already-organized game files? Seems to be it would simply be a "go here now" command, a trigger, rather than an actual load.

Edit to add: Sorry, recognized the load components: Party members are specific to each film and therefore would comprise some load time, sure. I don't know how much, really, but it's an interesting proposal and I'll ask to learn more about it next week.