Raptor29aa

Sorry for the double post, but when I reflect back I realized I grew up in a fortunate time in gaming. The PS2 game ICO was art and it sold, maybe not the best but it paid for itself. Or morrowind, or GTA vice city, Or shaddow of the colossus. The worlds weren't 1,000s of km big, but they were dense with things to see and do. No map markers, just exploration and around every hill or building was a new adventure. Buildings had interiors and everything was placed by human hands not AI generated. In those games you were allowed to fail and learn from it. There was no paid shortcut. The objective wasn't endless clearing of quest markers. My little brother never even finished the main questline of Morrowind or Oblivion. The thrill was in the experience. (By the way- My little brother messed up his morrowind game by killing off too many main quest NPCs, lol. Talk about learning experience). I posted this to end on a high note of what I think makes a good open world game.

A little backstory; I told told a friend of mine, I tested games for fun as a hobby. He told me he knew a guy involved in accounting for a game developer. It sounded cool, and I inquired to get a small meet up. I had a few questions, and spoiler I left feeling depressed. I started off with how I gave feedback into how the experience could be enjoyable, and often checked for bugs or glitches things like that. He told me that the big money maker in games were open world games because they generated live services. I asked what are live services he said you know RCS? I shrugged, he said you know PRI? I asked what PRI was. PRI stand for Player Recurring Investment. I said micro-transactions? He laughed. He told me games are measured in Sell-through, Engagement Time, and Yes in-game store transactions. I asked why open world was so lucrative? He painted a picture... A game is a virtual world, a box, and a while ago was asked the question, "what if the box was a disguised store?" Like what if world of warcraft allowed purchases at any time? You'd never have to go to the store, you'd be in it all the time. Like Disneyland where every 200m is a shop. The more customers in the door aka game sales and the longer browsing time aka Engagement through quests, maximizes the potential for in-game purchases. I was stunned. So the quests are there for Engagement time? He said yes. The quests keep you playing and logged-in, that why we measure potential play-time in hours. We are measuring a metric of potential store transactions. You know cosmetics, DLCs, currency packs, exclusive perks, etc. Exclusive perks? He said, well the enemy of play-time is when the player feel discouraged, so we offer perks to maker their shopping or playing experience better. Is that what people call play to win I asked. He told me no it makes accomplishing time fillers are tasks easier. (I call it grinding but whatever.) He told me difficult and repetitive tasks often drive the sales for these perks. It's a feature, like icons on a map. I asked what he meant by map icons. He told me game metrics requires a certain amount of icon density to give players time consuming tasks to keep him busy. Like Disneyland's rides. So success is measured by square km, icon density, and potential hours of engagement. He told me optimizing these three lead to potential additional transactions. Then he got real excited. AI is making it so we can generate thousands of km, icons/quests, and thousands of hours of potential live service sales. He told me players want more to do, more see, and more hours of game-play. He couldn't share any of his company's formulas (for obvious reasons). I said, that's a lot of AI work how do you quality test it? He said, the elements individually tested, then simply randomized. Like testing the cookie shapes, not the cookies. He told me not all assets need interaction, some are just ascetic. It's expensive to detail buildings and interiors, while it's easier to generate square exteriors, but change color or positioning. He let me know they are saving money by limiting total designers and focusing on modulating unit for projects. The idea is reusable assets with minimal bugs or errors. I asked about how that might effect aesthetic. And he told me that's what the graphic design departement solves. You know lighting, shading, and etc. So game design is making stores with the interior as theme parks with facade castles and quest distractions all for the purpose of the gift shop? He said, games are expensive and don't pop out of thin air. There are shareholders to please and quarterly earnings to account for. He told me if the model wasn't profitable it's wouldn't be used. After about an hour or two I thanked him for his time, and did my best not to feel depressed. So I did what any angry millennial does and write an angry blog. Thank you for your time.

I remember people kept saying she looked like the borg queen, lol. I also remember the chaingunner firing from the hip and boy bullets hit hands before heads, lol. Good memories, good times.

I remember Shocky Gonzales... he was my favorite APB meme. I used to test this map and many maps that were Zunnie's creations. Yeah that guy was cool. This map suffered from scaling issues when it was first developed. It was a fun and excellent concept map. Para bombs were not added... but that was during a time in which air flight was said to be impossible.

Zoomers want story grit. They are tired of soft games. One Example: ODST halo over newest halo.(ODST seemed more visually appealing to my younger coworkers even though it's technically lower graphics). The storyline seemed more real and emersive, as instead of telling you how rough it is in the halo universe, they showed you. Lastly older games relied on artists drawing/faking lighting rather than relying on dynamic engine lighting. Something about all the above adds grit or a sense of reality, which most my younger coworks appreciate more. Bonus anecdote: One of my coworkers played tiberian sun for the first time and said he was surprised a character named hassan was executed by Kane early on. Do newer games not have executions.

But this forum will get more action than Elvis' dead body. (so not dead just slow... like me right now recovering from an injury.) The most effective counter for Biker rush is a mixture of Rocket and Officer. Discs in mass might kill the bikes, but not so much the infantry inside. Discs right now are better for stationary or Large targets. -Or Rockets alone work because gattlin' turrets are thursty for Nod Blood.

Sorry for the double post, but I have two more

And That's how PXD2000 steals a Yak

Sorry to double post/resurrect. The Vigilante has a light armor class that's why an anti-tank/ramjet rifle can chew through it in one magazine. Maybe if it just had a stronger armor class it wouldn't explode so easy. I don't know if that was a bug or intentional

I like the current set up of the Vigilante, it can shoot vertically (excellet degree of rotation), it has the range of the SPAAG, it is much more accurate, and does more damage than the SPAAG. It can kill snipers in the field with ease. It also melts tank armor beautifully (2x more than the SPAAG). I just won't pay 6000$ for a tank that has the same hp/ap as a 500$ apc. It would be perfect if it wasn't one shotted by a 400$ artillery.

1.) Reduce Zippo tank's reload time by 30% (it doesn't do much to buildings or tanks, and has thin armor) 2.) Give Repair APC and Mortor APC the ability to travel on water (its in the name amphibious) A) Nod has an amphibious Repair APC they use to repair battleships, MRLS husks on the water, and steal Naval Yards (so why not give GDI one?) B) Nod has the Nona which is a Naval Mortor with twice the health (range won't be an issue since Nod has a lot of counter artillery, so I don't see why not) 3.) Give the Vigilante either A.) 400hp/400ap to help it kill banshees better (It's too fragile, for 6000$). Why? Well, the SPAAG is currently the better AA choice, because its cheaper, has more ammo, 2x more hp (able to take the abuse of a banshee), and lastly its reload time is almost the same as the Vigilante. -or- B.) An armored deploy like artillery, so it can take the abuse of banshees as a stationary AA turret.

I have done tests with bots on my own time and I found if I host my own match and do the command ~ botcount 30 and after 20min bots on the opposing team start to become invincible for no reason. It is a weird phenomina, but does exist.

Sorry I’ll clarify. Some units have binoculars, and when using binoculars the message “binocular recon detected” pops up. It would be interesting if a tank icon would temporarily appear when looking at an enemy tank. (Or symbol for boat or aircraft) It was a suggestion that would parallel the spy plane idea. In no way was I suggesting anything about altering the engineer markers system.

Spy plane could finally be of use hmm... Also I could also think of binocular recon working this way too. (That is to give some use to binoculars)

Cool 😎 *downloading*