2 months to release and the game feels like pre-alpha and is a letdown. Please delay the release.

Discussion in 'Planetary Annihilation General Discussion' started by larse, October 27, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. ace63

    ace63 Post Master General

    Messages:
    1,067
    Likes Received:
    826
    Which is a good thing because this is a game about...war?
    With that many players you will be playing on multiple starting planets anyway.
  2. lokiCML

    lokiCML Post Master General

    Messages:
    1,973
    Likes Received:
    953
    [​IMG]
  3. thepilot

    thepilot Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    744
    Likes Received:
    347
    Until it support 40 players, it doesn't support 40 players. Claiming otherwise and say it's a feature is quite far-stretched.
  4. garat

    garat Cat Herder Uber Alumni

    Messages:
    3,344
    Likes Received:
    5,376
    Yes, because if you have design goals, and don't build your engine with those in mind, THAT will end well. ;-)

    There is nothing far fetched about it. We could already pretty easily bump up to 20 or so players, even with all the optimizations yet to do. But frankly, until we get more lobby control in, which is one of the things we're actively working on, we feel it's probably better to hold off.
    evilOlive, shootall, liquius and 5 others like this.
  5. siefer101

    siefer101 Active Member

    Messages:
    369
    Likes Received:
    171
    Because who wants to double the chance of receiving an in-lobby troll? without the proper tools to kick the troll, they will begin to thrive an multiply... we can't have that.
  6. garat

    garat Cat Herder Uber Alumni

    Messages:
    3,344
    Likes Received:
    5,376
    Most people are pretty nice about it but yes. That is one of the larger problems.
    LavaSnake likes this.
  7. LavaSnake

    LavaSnake Post Master General

    Messages:
    1,620
    Likes Received:
    691
    :D Can't wait.
    thetrophysystem likes this.
  8. stevenrs11

    stevenrs11 Active Member

    Messages:
    240
    Likes Received:
    218
    I am not saying anything about trusting them because they are confident/appear to be/etc. That, like people said before, could be acted or any number of things (though I doubt it).

    I am saying that they have a great deal more experience than we do judging if a game should be released or not, and we can help them by providing telling them everything we find about the game, good or bad. That is our job, and what happens with that information is their job. Of course, input/advice on units, balance, GUI and all that is a good thing too, but lets not overdo it and try to do their job by saying when they should release the game.

    The real reason I trust them is exactly what I said before- they are here, reading these posts and listening to a great community. They have proven that they are utilizing the resource they have here, and even if they have to postpone a release or release something that isn't their final vision at first, we will see that vision eventually and it will be everything we have hoped for.
    drz1 likes this.
  9. kalherine

    kalherine Active Member

    Messages:
    558
    Likes Received:
    76

    I kind understand you.
    But im more worry about the 1v1 gameplay then be worry about moore then 4 players for now.

    I personaly, and im just talk off what i like ,dont get confuse,its good players got diferent feelings and likes.
    I dont see any fun, play a rts with moore then 12 players on this kind planets.

    And again i say its just me and i now many like it and waiting for it, and i respect that since we cant all like the same things.

    On a fps like call off duty ghost ,or similar ...ok that can be fun...
    Let us not forget what an rts is .
  10. qwerty3w

    qwerty3w Active Member

    Messages:
    490
    Likes Received:
    43
    Yeah, it's totally possible to have 40 players games with p2p model just like in Spring. The simulation speed would be limited by the slowest computer, but there is no need for forced command delays, also you don't need massive upload bandwidth to host a big game.
    Like unconsumable mentioned, for the client-server model, if the players' views are not limited like in a FPS or MMORPG game, the need of bandwidth would grow as the players see more and more things at once.
    Anyway, many autohosts on the Spring server actually limit the player count for a better multiplayer experience, so having many players in a single map is not really important for a RTS game.
    Last edited: November 22, 2013
  11. MrTBSC

    MrTBSC Post Master General

    Messages:
    4,857
    Likes Received:
    1,823
    it´s not about it beeing important ... it´s about having the Option for those who are intrested ... and i don´t doubt that there are intrested people to it ...

    this game is all bout scaleability ..
    be it armies, individual units or the battlefield you and/or others play on
    it wants to offer something for everybody while keeping the macrofocus-philosophy
    be it for those that just seek their quick competitiv matchfix or those who want the more epic team or multifaction broad area of battle experience
    weither or not the gameplay, unitrooster and ui-functions suffice for that scaleability is to be seen
    drz1 likes this.
  12. drz1

    drz1 Post Master General

    Messages:
    1,257
    Likes Received:
    860
    I for one am not super interested in high level play and the minute balancing that needs to be done (at least not as a priority, as a more casual player), and am TOTALLY interested in the ability to have 20, 30 or 40 player games over a huge star system, with people sending out units to different planets all over the place, and huge battles between 4-6 people on a few planets. To me, that is definitely worth striving for, as it is, to me, something truly unique in this genre, which is what we are here for, right?
  13. nestar2

    nestar2 Member

    Messages:
    39
    Likes Received:
    11
    I am used to wait for release dates and the actual release,
    in SC2 (or all Blizzard Games) the release date is published when the game could be fully released the day before,
    so why are you mocking the devs for release dates?

    When money is out they will have to release it, ready or not it will come,
    and after all they have financial interest too.
    1.8 billion is a small budget to make a game like Blizzard SC2.

    So I do not mind waiting that gameplay will get better.
  14. cola_colin

    cola_colin Moderator Alumni

    Messages:
    12,074
    Likes Received:
    16,221
    FA shows that you would need a massive upload for every player instead of only for the server. I don't see how that is any better.
    Also the part about the slowdown is already a problem with setups like 4v4 in FA (okay maybe not anymore as much, CPUs get faster after all). Having a 20v20 results in a very high chance that somebody with a pentium 4 is in there.

    From that perspective it is quite understandable why PA uses server client.

    EDIT:
    Or how does Spring fare bandwidth wise when you play 20v20?
  15. Gunman006

    Gunman006 Member

    Messages:
    99
    Likes Received:
    48
    I would like to see a filter that filters out the people that are expecting to get a new TA game or another franchise follow up instead of a brand new game and concept that PA is. I remember playing a rts game on colicovision back in the day, but I didnt cry and whine when C&C came out in 1995 and was a totally different experience.
    shotforce13 likes this.
  16. ace63

    ace63 Post Master General

    Messages:
    1,067
    Likes Received:
    826
    Yeah it is totally unexpected that people want a TA follow up when PA is announced as a spiritual successor!
    Oh wait....
  17. Gunman006

    Gunman006 Member

    Messages:
    99
    Likes Received:
    48
    Yes, exactly, SPIRITUAL successor. What most people are whining about here is that the game is not a true successor that adresses everything TA did and builds on that. Spiritual and in spirit of can mean whatever Uber entertainments decides it means. Thanks for complementing my argument.
  18. ace63

    ace63 Post Master General

    Messages:
    1,067
    Likes Received:
    826
    "Spiritual" is a wording used for legal reasons. It was stated multiple times that PA should be more like TA than like Supcom. It isn't however and that makes people sad.
    Gunman006 likes this.
  19. drz1

    drz1 Post Master General

    Messages:
    1,257
    Likes Received:
    860
    To me, it feels exactly like a follow on to TA...
    Quitch likes this.
  20. Gunman006

    Gunman006 Member

    Messages:
    99
    Likes Received:
    48
    From the first developer interviews the devs were quite clear that this would be a new game experience in addition to reviving a genre that economists and game analysts decleared dead. I dont object to all the "bring back TA" arguments on principle as they are good valid points but there is good constructive criticism and then there is these drama queen "this game is not what I demand" threads like these, and the most annoying part is that they try to hide it by playing condescending like the OP.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page