Originally posted by DeTRiTiC-iQ
Good players don't spam, they use attacks only as much as they need to. Good players may use individual moves a lot in succession, but that's not the same as spamming. Because with a good player almost every single shot is well aimed and will probably hit you unless you evade.

"Spammers" just fire non-stop without really aiming in the hope that they'll actually hit something, the problem with pull/push spamming is that it actually WORKS.

A Spammer is one of those people who doesn't get many kills, but they lag the server to hell and back with non-stop shots. In JK2 its quite evident with lightning users, since they keep firing even when they're not actually facing the target.

True but my whole beef with the “Spam” thing is:

1-Spam by “definition” is the same thing over and over correct?

2-If a person repeats the same tactic; you know what is coming, so prepare for it.

Of course any person with even the slightest game plan won’t fall into a pattern of doing the same move/attack over and over so by nature this “spammer” is what many would call a “noob”.

Complaining (not you just anyone in general) that you can’t beat the predictable unskilled player and in turn considering yourself skilled is just kind of silly to me.

The lightning example was actually a good one.

There is always some guy in a FF/SO FFA blasting level 3 lightning like crazy.
Generally the players who ignore him and just run around swinging their sabers have scores much lower than Mr. Lightning.

However the players who zero in on him the second he makes it back to the fight and rush him w/ absorb or grip kick him the second they see him are usually the players with higher scores and ironically, players who don’t get killed by lightning.

People simply don’t put any thought into what they do.
Why bother to learn how to combat Force based attacks?
Just call the person gay or a “lamer” and vote them off the server.

Why bother picking up a gun in a FFA, just run around and try and saber the guy shooting 6 rockets at your head. If you die tell him guns are for noobs and call a vote to kick him.

That sadly, is the JK2 norm and has been for some time.

What ever happened to that JK2 mod that had a TFC feel?

Originally posted by Solo4114:

See, Al, I actually tried to be polite and such.Could have fooled me.

Originally posted by Solo4114:

But you know what? You can sit around a bitch and moan about how fanboys ruined the game. It doesnt' make it true. What ruined the game was not fanboys bitching, but rather the way in which the changes they advocated for were implemented.Oh I see. It wasn't the fanboys' fault, it was Raven's fault for listening to them? What rubbish.

Originally posted by Solo4114:

1.02 was flawed and needed fixing. Take the blocking, for example. The way blocking in 1.02 was implemented, it really was just a jousting match of who swung first, since you knew there'd never be any chance of your swing NOT connected. That's why a lot of folks asked for blocking similar to SP's method.You missed out three important words there: "In my opinion". Just because you thought the sabre combat was flawed because it didn't have SP blocking, doesn't make it so.

It was people like you who caused 1.03, people who didn't care whether they ruined things for other people, people who wanted their view of "improvements" inflicted on others before the game even had a chance to mature and develop, and it was a huge, a HUGE surprise (not) when these "improvements" resulted in catastrophic and irrevocable damage to the community. The nerfing of guns. The nerfing of drain and heal, all these things were specifically requested by the fanboys. Well done them.

No, it's not Raven's implimentation that was at fault. The fanboys asked for "SP STYLEE MROE BLOCKINGG SABARS" and they got random auto-blocking. Big surprise, nobody could have predicted that.

Originally posted by Solo4114:

A lot of people wanted the DFA fixed from 1.02 because it had no drawbacks to it, the same way that the backstab in 1.03 did. All you'd do was get into a group, spam the move, and watch your score climb. No challenge there, no real interest there.Yes, the fact that one could turn during a DFA was the only problem with 1.02, and it was indeed a bug. If this bug had been fixed in 1.03 and nothing else changed, all would have been right with the world, and 1.02 could have been left to develop, and succeed or fail, on its own merits.

Instead, Raven listened to what at the time was the most vocal portion of the community, and produced a monstrosity. The fanboys once again.

See the recurring theme here?

Originally posted by Solo4114:

The way I define balance is that weapons have an advantage and a disadvantage to their use. The RL in Quake has advantages. It's incredibly powerful and can be used effectively at medium and long ranges. In close, though, it has its disadvantages. If you misfire the thing, or if you try to kill someone right next to you, you'll seriously damage yourself in the process. That's balance.Don't be foolish, if a weapon is as powerful as the Rocket launcher was in Quake 1, players compensate for any "disadvantages" (or as I like to call them, "realities") associated with that weapon faster than you can scream "WALLHACKZZZ!!!11". The RL in Quake had nothing to DO with balance. It wasn't on the same PLANET as balance. And by your tenuous rationale, the Flechette in JO was balanced because people blew themselves up if they spammed in confined spaces. It was still the weapon intelligent players used 80% of the time.

You can manufacture disadvantages for any weapon, from the AWP to the Redeemer, it makes no earthly difference to anything. Innate POWER is all that's important. There will always be a most powerful weapon in each game, in each arena. Winners will always use that weapon. Whiners will always whine about balance when they do.

The only "balance" that's ever possible, OR DESIRABLE, is the balance between teams. Giving both CTF bases the same weapons, giving both sides of the Force counters to each other. 1.03 ruined that balance. The fanboys ruined that balance.

Originally posted by Solo4114:

Same with the ASMD. Great at long range sniping duties, reasonably powerful with the secondary fire, but the primary fire sucked in short range unless you were really accurate with it. That's balance. I don't think it's a terribly difficult concept to grasp.
It's obviously difficult enough to grasp that you've failed to grasp it. You can sit there and call the ASMD balanced when the power of its shock-combo was the cause of some of the biggest upheavals of discontent among the UT player populous? Amazing.

Originally posted by Solo4114:

Overall, in terms of force powers, I thought they were pretty balanced in the later patches. Dark side wasn't all powerful, and light side had no real offensive powers.I'm getting the impression that you only played on sabres servers. Only someone who never ever played guns could call the sides "balanced in the later patches".

The Light side was powerful before 1.03. After 1.03? One-horse race. Also a one-force-power-race. Only one power was worth having on either side, Absorb for the lightsiders, Rage for the darksiders. Rage gave a gunner kills, but it left them without a gun a lot, as they were vulnerable to pull. Absorb gave lightsiders a shield that let them keep their gun, and so they shot hundreds of people... but they didn't have the speed of a Rager. All other side-specific powers were useless post-patch.

And anyone who can sit here and claim without a shadow of a doubt that "Drain is great" post-patch, is obviously in need of restraint and medication. Drain IS great, if you want to GET KILLED. Who do you PLAY? the TELETUBBIES?

Originally posted by Solo4114:

Now, as for competitive gamers, I was quite serious in what I said. There's nothing wrong with playing to win. There's nothign wrong with using particular tactics on a server, provided that server has rules that permit it. And I don't blame you for using a single move over and over, if you're on a competitive server and it's a no-holds-barred match. Sorry to burst your martyr bubble, but spammers lose. No truly skilled player gets defeated by a spammer. Spammers are lame, yes, and annoying, yes, but dangerous to anyone with skill? Nope.

Originally posted by Solo4114:

Al, you put 1.02 up on a pedestal and say that it could've been a great game. I disagree.You're welcome to your opinion, and we all know how much store I set by it. :rolleyes:

Originally posted by Solo4114:

But see, there's this great thing called the "Marketplace of Ideas." It's the basic concept that if we keep discussing things, eventually, we'll get to a good result.A result like 1.03? What a fabulous basic concept that is. Let's all continue to mash our gums on a subject we obviously know nothing about, and maybe someday we'll get the satisfaction of having a Jedi-based game we can all RPG in. :D

shock ~ unnamed: Your post was an eloquent indictment of the fanboyitis that has been a canker on the heart of JO since it's conception.

uh i skiped a bunch of posts so this could have been said:

Solo, you can't compare blocking in SP and MP. in SP your fighting against AI, and the saber combat was totaly differant. infact i hated SP saber combat, it felt very sloppy and it luck based heh. MP sabering is alot better imo...

What mod was that? I'd DEFINITELY play a TFC style JO mod if they had one.

Shock, you're right that I'm basically equating lamers = spammers = 1337 players. Under the current style of gameplay, there are ways to beat the spammed attacks. There were ways to beat the spammed attacks in 1.03 too (I found kicking with absorb on to work pretty well, then finishing off with a throw), and you could SORT of beat a spammed DFA in 1.02 (but you'd better wait until the move is finished, since you could still rotate after finishing the move, and the sabre would damage you even if it was in the ground). The problem I have with people like that is that it's boring to play with them or against them. I mean, in the end, they're one-trick-ponies, which I find to be rather dull to play against. Yeah, it's possible to beat them. That's not my issue so much (although a lot of the spammed moves were the most effective and usually were one-hit-kill moves with no real downside to their use). It's more that, while it's beatable, it ends up being boring to play the game at all. THAT's where Raven failed.

Sure you can counter various attacks, but why bother? I mean, if the whole game comes down to trying to stop one attack, it'll just be a big yawn-fest for me. Especially once you develop a decent way to counter the attack. And while it's true that you could counter the spammed attacks in all of the versions, that sure didn't stop people from doing nothing BUT those attacks, since they weren't balanced properly (remember: balance = powerful move with corresponding disadvantage).

If the sabre had been a one-hit kill weapon regardless of what stance you used, regardless of what swing you made, the game would've been infinitely better. Or at least make it, say, a three hit kill weapon for ALL moves and stances.

Actually, in terms of game balance, I think a lot of the console fighting games provide an excellent example of how things are well balanced. Take any of the major titles from any particular time period, from Street Fighter 2 up to the Dead or Alive series, and you'll find well balanced gameplay. There's usually some big heavy dude who, if he hits you with the right combo, can beat you with only three hits. The downside is he's slower than a snail, and leaves himself open to attack (consider this Mr. Red Stance, if you will). Likewise, there's usually some fast little bastard who can jump and flip and throw about 20 punches in the time it takes Mr. Red Stance to throw three. The little guy's attacks aren't that powerful, but they move quickly and he's able to get out of the big guy's range quickly. That's balance.

An even better example are the Bushido Blade games from PS1. I can remember playing Bushido Blade 2, and finding it to be a real joy to duel with other people. You usually had three different stances in that game as well, the weapons were absolutely lethal (two hits and you're dead, or one clean hit and you're dead). The stance you used didn't really matter in terms of how lethal the attack was, it only changed what angle your attack came from or what combination you could do. This made the game much more strategic and less about "Oh, I'll just do this one combo over and over." Plus, each stance had its weaknesses, so no stance ever dominated.

ArtifeX's ProMod had these aspects, and you can see that Raven TRIED to include this style into their gameplay, but ultimately failed in most of their patches. 1.04 was probably about the most balanced of the patches, in that (at least from what I can remember), the uber-moves now had drawbacks to their use, but they also made sabre fighting essentially pointless, since it took FOREVER to kill someone. Which, of course, would lead to stupid rules like, "Ok, no using heal or drain in this match, alright?"

Anyway, I still think that the DF series of games has potential and can go somewhere, if the devs take into account what went wrong with JO. God only knows if or when they'll release a sequel or expansion, though.

Originally posted by shock ~ unnamed
1-Spam by “definition” is the same thing over and over correct?


In my book spam is the same thing over and over without thinking or considering alternatives. A good player doesn't spam because as soon as that attack becomes unsuitable they switch to something different. Whereas a spammer will keep shooting despite being completely ineffective.

Exactly. A spammer is basically like I said, a one-trick-pony. The spammer doesn't know how to adapt tactics to a changing situation, and doesn't bother to try anything new. They just repeat a single move again and again without bothering to take the time to learn more moves. Unfortunately, the way the game was designed, it tended to lend itself to spamming moves because there often was no reason NOT to spam moves, since they had little by way of disadvantages, and for every player that could counter the moves, there were 50 people happy to get into basically a rugby scrum trying to spam the move first, which usually meant 49 dead people after the first guy did the move.
It didn't mean much in duels, since you could take your time and wear the bastard down, but in FFA, it led to spammers with high scores.

Originally posted by Solo4114:

It's more that, while it's beatable, it ends up being boring to play the game at all. THAT's where Raven failed.
Ugh, that's such a small-minded thing to say, blaming Raven for the fact that lamers exist. I'll try one more time to shatter your delusion on this subject, this time using the medium of rhyme: lamers will always find a way to lame, no matter the moves, no matter the game.

Originally posted by Solo4114:

It didn't mean much in duels, since you could take your time and wear the bastard down, but in FFA, it led to spammers with high scores.You DO only play Sabres, don't you. There is no way you could be referring to guns and force FFA, DFA spammers lose in guns FFA, flechette spammers lose in guns FFA.

Small historical factoid of some interest: Sabres-only FFA has been the most pointless and stupid game mode the world has ever seen since the days of Dark Forces II. Even people of immense sabre skill never claimed that the FFA victories they'd won amounted to anything, because a mish-mash of people waving sticks around is NEVER close to being a matter of skill, no matter WHAT moves are implemented. That's not Raven's fault, it's just the way things are. If you want sabres with skill, duel or TDM. It's that simple.

Originally posted by Solo4114:

Which, of course, would lead to stupid rules like, "Ok, no using heal or drain in this match, alright?"Once again you have everything backwards: The fanboys wanted heal and drain removed from the word go. From the moment the game hit the streets. From 1.02. Why? Because fanboys don't want to play a game, they want to play "let's pretend."

Originally posted by Solo4114:

Anyway, I still think that the DF series of games has potential and can go somewhere, if the devs take into account what went wrong with JO.Listening to the self-serving suggestions of foolish, ill-informed fanboys was what went wrong with JO. Once game developers learn to block out their eternal whinage, THEN the industry will be back on track.

Originally posted by DeTRiTiC-iQ
In my book spam is the same thing over and over without thinking or considering alternatives. A good player doesn't spam because as soon as that attack becomes unsuitable they switch to something different. Whereas a spammer will keep shooting despite being completely ineffective.
That is pretty much exactly what I define it as too.
The thing is some people want to lump those types of people in with those who simply use the most effective tools at their disposal.

Take me for example.
I have done almost nothing but FF dueling since 1.03 and I have swung a saber all of maybe 4 times in the last 6 months.

I’ve been called a kick/whore/lamer/spammer since day one because I simply don’t even bother using the saber at all.
Light saber swinging will get you killed against an experienced FF dueler pure and simple.
They are too slow, too random and too big of a risk so I simply do not use them.

This is why I defend “spammers/noobs/lamers”.
If people got made because all they did was DFA in 1.02 or back stab in 1.03 are they as dumb as people are trying to make them out to be?
Sure they just fired those moves off at any chance they got w/o thought but they at least realized that what they were doing was far more effective than the guy running around trying to look cool by doing 3 hit multi-stance saber combos on a crowd of people.

Shock,

I think your experience only serves to illustrate the problems with sabre combat. You're right that swinging a sabre around, especially when people were able to spam one move over and over with no fear of much retaliation, is pretty damn dangerous. That's an area where Raven failed, I think. The sabre combat should've been much more involved, less random, and more lethal than it ended up being. You're right that the reason why people did the one move kills was because they could. You could still beat them, but the one move was the most effective way to kill. Again, I don't fault people who play competitively and use what tools they're given. I fault the people who'll do those moves over and over, regardless of effectiveness because they want the kill that requires the least amount of keystrokes, though. 1.04, for it's faults with random sabre blocking, at least made it so that the one-hit kill moves had a downside, and I think 1.04 really illustrated the flaws with the REST of the game, when you took away the ability to spam one move without fear of retaliation. Because you could no longer do the one-hit move with impunity, you were left with all the rest of the sabre stances and swings, and they proved to be pretty ineffective.

The fact that in an FF duel situation, you've not ignited your sabre more than four times in 6 months shows REAL problems with the way that sabre combat was implemented in the game. That's why I think all hits should be one to two hit kills, and it should've been more of a question of when to use a particular stance/move/combo in order to either defend yourself or break an enemy's defenses.

I guess what I'd like to see in terms of sabre combat is a sabre that's truly lethal, takes skill to use, and requires you to sacrifice other abilities in order to use. Now, in a sabre-only duel situation, the sacrifice of abilities isn't as much of an issue, since you wouldn't have people using shields, guns, bacta, etc. But the sabre should at least involve skill and not randomize blocking, etc. If ArtifeX's sabre mod had been the default from the start of the game, I think that sabre combat would've been much more interesting. That said, it still would've gotten old with only the DM style of play offered by the game. And had the sabre been truly lethal, I think you'd have seen more use of it in CTF games as well. Then again, I didn't play a whole lot of CTF (the maps never really did much for me), so I might be wrong on that one.

Originally posted by shock ~ unnamed:

This is why I defend “spammers/noobs/lamers”.Spammers and lamers have a lot in common. Newbies on the other hand are just new to the game, and I don't think they deserve to be lumped in with the crap-tastic spamfesters. ;)

Originally posted by Solo4114:

I think 1.04 really illustrated the flaws with the REST of the game, when you took away the ability to spam one move without fear of retaliation. Because you could no longer do the one-hit move with impunity, you were left with all the rest of the sabre stances and swings, and they proved to be pretty ineffective.Once again you either forget or wilfully blind yourself to the fact that the sabre was made ineffective by 1.03, which was the fault of the fanboys, not the game design.

And for hopefully the last time, you'll never stop spammers spamming, and they'll always achieve a certain amount of success from it, too. Like campers, in fact. Because there will always be a move that's either powerful or quick to do, and there will always be lamers waiting to repeat it over and over and over again. "Balance" won't stop that. Tweaking won't stop it, and nerfing certainly won't stop that. But the lamers will never win the big games, and that's also the way of things.

Originally posted by Solo4114:

I guess what I'd like to see in terms of sabre combat is a sabre that's truly lethal, takes skill to use, and requires you to sacrifice other abilities in order to use.Sacrifice... other..? They always wheel this one out in the end. It's never enough that the sabre should be powerful, is it? You have to plot and scheme to nerf and degrade the experience of gunners on the side. How quaint. :rolleyes:

Bah, turn your back to this so called "balance". Give yourself to the dark side of cheap moves!

Is using a move over and over really all that cheap? Sounds like people are complaining just because they lost. Moves me as much as "you only won cause you used force powers" or "you only won cause you had your saber ON" or "I've got a bad connection, so stand still and do nothing". I think someone who uses these "balanced" powers will be bitched at just as much as some guy pumping out grenades from the flechette gun, simply cause they're winning. People need some excuse for their own inadequacey.

Actually, it's not so much about winning or losing, it's about how much fun the game was to play when everyone only ever does "cheap" moves, or when everyone only uses one move in particular, cheap or not. I want balance to give me variety and fun. I mean, technically, the game is balanced in the sense that everyone can do the uber moves with relative ease. The problem is, if you have this uber move to use, and there's no downside to using it, why bother using anything else? Why not just pull/push the guy down, spin 180 degrees, and use the backstab to kill him? It makes perfect sense if you want to kill the guy. It also makes the game all about using one move or combo over and over. To me, that's boring.

When it came to dueling (as opposed to FFA games), force on or off, I was pretty good. I don't claim to be a master, since I didn't really play often enough to get to that level, but I was usually able to defend myself against people using these moves. One on one, the moves weren't all that tough to handle. But, because of the spammers and lamers, opponents would keep trying it since it was the easiest, quickest way to getting a kill. It just made the game intensely boring.

The sabre's weakness with other swings led to people using the strongest move possible, even if it looked ridiculous, made the game less fun to play, etc., simply because the move was a guaranteed kill if you hit and because there was no real downside to doing it. The worst thing that would happen might be that you'd miss and have to try it again.

Al, as for your tirade on fanboys, I get your point, I disagree with it, and we're not going to see eye-to-eye on this. It's not willful blindness, just a difference of opinion. I think you're wrong, you think I'm wrong. I'm done with this particular debate on whether fanboys broke the game or whether the game had other flaws in it in addition to the way Raven patched it.

On a similar note, we disagree about what kind of game we want to play. You seem to want to play a quake style game where you have access to all weapons, powers, abilities, etc. I want to play a more limited game where you can be a master of one ability, but not be able to use another, including things like guns. You like a free-for-all style (not necessarily FFA, mind you, just the ability to use whatever whenever), and I want a more class-based system similar to TFC, RTCW, BF1942, etc. Difference of opinion. Now, before you throw out the argument that "You're trying to force people to play a particular way," consider the following.

1.) I have no problem leaving the FFA/TDM/Duel/DM style of play in a game. I think it's a good idea, if it broaden's the game's appeal. I do, however, want to have the option to ALSO play the class based style. I'd like to have the style of gameplay that I prefer implemented. I don't particularly care if they throw out the styles I don't like, but I'm not advocating that they do so. So I'm not really trying to force anyone into anything here, I'd just like to be able to play the game the way I want to play it. If others want to play it differently, that's fine, just give me the option to play it the way I like. Given an "either or" situation, I'd pick my style of play over the DM style. I don't really see that as forcing my opinion on someone else, I just see it as voicing my opinion. If you want to voice a different opinion, knock yourself out. That's what the forums are here for.

2.) If voicing one's own opinion is equivalent to "forcing" your style of play on someone else, you're just as guilty. If saying that "the game should work this way, not that way" is forcing your opinion, then you're doing the exact same thing by claiming that the game should be played the way it was with 1.02, with no classes, no objectives, no blocking, etc.

There is actually a very easy solution to your problems if you view 1.02 as the Holy Grail of JO gameplay. Play 1.02. Reinstall your game, don't install any patches, and play to your heart's content. I'm sure you can find other likeminded individuals to play with on a server, or you can host your own. No one forced you to patch, and given the public outcry about 1.03 and 1.04, I'm sure there's plenty of folks who'd be happy to play your style. You also won't be forcing anyone to play that way, you'll just be exercising your option NOT to play the patched version.

Anyway, to sum things up, I don't think game companies should necessarily make their games "either/or" situations, where you can either play a DM style with full access to all weapons/equipment/powers or play a class-based system where you give up abilities to get other abilities. Ideally, the game should, out of the box, function with minimal bugs, offer a wide variety of gameplay styles, and cater to both sides of the debate in question. That's what I'd like to see most.

Originally posted by Solo4114:

Actually, it's not so much about winning or losing, it's about how much fun the game was to play when everyone only ever does "cheap" moves, or when everyone only uses one move in particular, cheap or not. I want balance to give me variety and fun.Once again you phrase your ideas as if "balance" is some sort of deity. Apart from your earlier comments about weapons "having disadvantages as well as advantages" which all weapons have in every game anyway, you don't even appear to know what you think "balance" means.

Secondly, fun. Now, fun is a subjective thing. The people you're complaining about, the lamers, the spammers, they're having fun while spamming you. Yes, they're craptastic. Yes, we agree on that point. But they're still having fun. They don't spam weapons or moves purely to annoy you personally, at least I hope not. So here's the juice: if you want "fun" do what ALL dedicated players have done since the days of DF2, find some people you like who play the same way as you and then, PLAY THEM. A public server is a place for practice, not for fun. It's a place for familiarizing yourself with the game, and for training against a wide range of opponents to increase your understanding of the game's mechanics.

This is the same in ALL games. Pub servers are pretty much ALWAYS full of lamers, spammers, unpleasant people, people who practice more than you, the whole kit and kaboodle. If you're looking for "fun", you're looking in the wrong place when you play strangers. Play your friends and online acquaintances for "fun". It's not the game's fault if you don't have fun on public servers. It's not Raven's fault. It's not even the spammers' fault. It's just the way things are, and always have been.

This was one of the most important points, in fact, during JO's genesis. There were a lot of SW fanboys running around who believed that their idea of fun should be forced onto other players. They didn't find RPG servers when they wanted to RPG, they went onto public FFA servers and demanded RPGing. They didn't look for duel servers when they wanted to duel, they went onto guns servers, took over the proverbial landing pad and kickvoted anyone who wanted to play guns, off.

They whined to Raven en masse, and Raven produced 1.03 to cater to what they saw as "the community". But they were only catering to foolish fanboys, and since fanboys know nothing about what makes a good game, their suggestions ruined JO for us all.

Because they never got the idea, you see. They never realized that even though games are supposed to be fun, fun isn't guaranteed at all times for all people. Fun takes as much effort to accumulate as skill does. Come to think of it, they never realized that one had to expend energy; make an effort to attain skill, either.

Originally posted by Solo4114:

I mean, technically, the game is balanced in the sense that everyone can do the uber moves with relative ease. The problem is, if you have this uber move to use, and there's no downside to using it, why bother using anything else? Why not just pull/push the guy down, spin 180 degrees, and use the backstab to kill him? It makes perfect sense if you want to kill the guy. It also makes the game all about using one move or combo over and over. To me, that's boring.

1.03 was indeed boring, like that. If 1.03 had merely been a DFA bugfix, it would have made a brilliant game. Sadly, the fanboys were abroad that even.

Originally posted by Solo4114:

Al, as for your tirade on fanboys, I get your point, I disagree with it, and we're not going to see eye-to-eye on thisAnd I'm glad to see you're keeping an open mind. :rolleyes:

Originally posted by Solo4114:

It's not willful blindness, just a difference of opinion. I think you're wrong, you think I'm wrong. I'm done with this particular debate on whether fanboys broke the game or whether the game had other flaws in it in addition to the way Raven patched it.I'm not interested in your dubious "opinions" on this subject, Solo, and this was never a debate. It's not a subjective issue. It's factual. 1.03 ruined any chance the game had to succeed, and the fanboys precipitated 1.03. It's that simple, and anyone who was alive during the period that led up to 1.03 (and is not a fanboy) would be aware of this.

Originally posted by Solo4114:

On a similar note, we disagree about what kind of game we want to play. You seem to want to play a quake style game where you have access to all weapons, powers, abilities, etc. I want to play a more limited game where you can be a master of one ability, but not be able to use another, including things like guns.Yes, the way I like to play is the way the Jedi Knight series has been played since its creation. What you want is tantamount to demanding that UT be transformed into TFC. Now, I have no problem with people who want a class-based game mode. That's what mods are for. :p

Originally posted by Solo4114:

If voicing one's own opinion is equivalent to "forcing" your style of play on someone else, you're just as guilty. If saying that "the game should work this way, not that way" is forcing your opinion, then you're doing the exact same thing by claiming that the game should be played the way it was with 1.02, with no classes, no objectives, no blocking, etc. Once again you miss the obvious with aplomb:

You want to change something. That means you're proactive. I've been playing these games since the year dot, and have enjoyed their unique flavour. I merely wish to continue to enjoy that flavour. Now review your nonse... er... post, and rethink. :D And yes, I'm aware that you're magnanimous enough to say things like 'I wouldn't mind if they left DM in my wondrous class-based RPG friendly ideal JK game' but frankly that's Patronese, a language I don't speak.

Originally posted by Solo4114:

There is actually a very easy solution to your problems if you view 1.02 as the Holy Grail of JO gameplay. Play 1.02.I'd be doing just that, if there was a healthy community associated with it. You see, when one reaches a certain level, one is more concerned with what the world associated with a game will be like, than what the game itself will be like. For example, if the JO 1.04 community was strong, I'd still happily be playing 1.04. I hope this clarifies things for you.

THis GAME IS DEAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
NO MORE 32 PLAYER SERVERS!!!
HARDLY ANYONE PLAYS IT!!!!!!!!!!!
I used to play this game 5 hours aday then my fav server was taken down. Ever since this game has been dying. Its sad beacuse i like JK2 but im leaving it now beacuse it is DEAD!:rolleyes:

Originally posted by Solo4114
Actually, it's not so much about winning or losing, it's about how much fun the game was...

This is what is most important to me too, because I play this game because it is a Star Wars game, and I like the thought of spending some time in that universe. Perhaps that makes me a Fanboy. However, I certainly realize that there are people who play this game for competative reasons, and its attention to Star Wars detail is not of the slightest concern. This is a perfectly valid reason for playing the game as well.


Originally posted by Solo4114
1.) I have no problem leaving the FFA/TDM/Duel/DM style of play in a game. I think it's a good idea, if it broaden's the game's appeal. I do, however, want to have the option to ALSO play the class based style. I'd like to have the style of gameplay that I prefer implemented. I don't particularly care if they throw out the styles I don't like, but I'm not advocating that they do so. So I'm not really trying to force anyone into anything here, I'd just like to be able to play the game the way I want to play it. If others want to play it differently, that's fine, just give me the option to play it the way I like.

I think this is the key. Try to provide as many options as possible for players. Just being able to provide an option for classes would be great, as long as people could also play the way they do now.

Perhaps this could be take one step further. Suppose you wanted to set up a server. First, there would be an option for whether you wanted class restrictions or not. If no, then everyone can use everything without restriction. If yes, maybe then you could define your own classes up to a certain maximum number. If I wanted to have a jedi vs gunners server, I could specify that jedi had access to all force powers but only the saber. Then I could define the gunner as having access to all weapons but no force powers. Later, if I wanted to add a hybrid, I could define a class that had access to the saber and some of the guns, and maybe only push and pull for force powers. So when you defined a class, you could set what weapons they had access to, what force powers they could use. This would be independant of the game type. Then people could have servers with all the classes they wanted, or no classes at all. I just think the players should be able to set up the game the way they want. Anyway, that's just a thought off the top of my head.

Prime,

Not a bad idea, but the one thing that you might want to do with that system is to limit the number of configurations available. This way you avoid the problem that has happened with the mod community in the game as it is: too many variants of gameplay. You do need a set of core rules for different gameplay types. DM is, well, DM. It's pretty straightforward, and I think that class based DM would be goofy. The reason why classes work in the games in which they're used is that the classes complement each other and are designed to be used in team play. Medics can heal, but are weak on attack; attack classes are powerful, but can't heal themselves and can't take out vehicles or resupply the team; support classes can take out vehicles, or resupply, but don't have the ability to hit hard like attack classes. You get the idea. Unless you're playing TDM, using classes in that sense would be goofy, unless you're talking about a division between gunners/saber users/hybrids. For DM servers, that kind of simple division might work (IE: ArtifeX's mod), but you'd have to make sure that the gunners' ability to use ranged weapons and such was balanced against the force users' abilities in short range and mobility.

The objective-based gameplay that I'd hope for, on the other hand, could have certain core classes broken down along the gunner/jedi division (IE: medic gunner -- can distribute bacta tanks and has long range abilities; medic jedi -- can use heal and team heal, and some other force powers; engineer -- can use the turrets and seeker drones, as well as explosives; no real equivalent here for jedi, but maybe have a class that's focused on defense -- IE: can use team energize or protect to act as a blocker of sorts. I dunno). This could get pretty complicated, but it could be done.

You'd just offer people the option to play with whatever mode they want. Now, in terms of universal changes, I'd still advocate that sabres be one or two hit kill weapons, regardless of the move. Certain moves break through defenses easier, certain moves defend at a higher level, but once you connect with the enemy, one or two hits and they're dead. THAT could be something that ALL game modes could have. It would drastically improve CTF games because you could still kill and keep moving, instead of getting into long drawn out duels.

I do think it's possible to design a game that effectively implements what the vast majority of the community wants, even if the community is divided on how they want to play the game. You do need to give the community options, and you need to not limit the way people play, but there are certain changes that I think everyone (or at least most people, regardless of whether they play "competitive" or "just for fun") could agree to.

I haven't played with the guns enough lately to remember what if anything needed fixing there, but from what I can remember, aside from ammo consumption rates, they were relatively balanced, if somewhat boring in design (rehashes of other guns from FPS games). I may have to reinstall the game, patch it up, and test some stuff out.

It is a shame that this game died the way it did. To date, I've yet to see a Star Wars FPS (that you can play MP) that REALLY does justice to the SW universe. Even JK1's MP never really did it for me.

Originally posted by Solo4114
Prime,

Not a bad idea, but the one thing that you might want to do with that system is to limit the number of configurations available. This way you avoid the problem that has happened with the mod community in the game as it is: too many variants of gameplay. You do need a set of core rules for different gameplay types. DM is, well, DM. It's pretty straightforward, and I think that class based DM would be goofy. The reason why classes work in the games in which they're used is that the classes complement each other and are designed to be used in team play. Medics can heal, but are weak on attack; attack classes are powerful, but can't heal themselves and can't take out vehicles or resupply the team; support classes can take out vehicles, or resupply, but don't have the ability to hit hard like attack classes. You get the idea. Unless you're playing TDM, using classes in that sense would be goofy, unless you're talking about a division between gunners/saber users/hybrids. For DM servers, that kind of simple division might work (IE: ArtifeX's mod), but you'd have to make sure that the gunners' ability to use ranged weapons and such was balanced against the force users' abilities in short range and mobility.

You are probably right. I didn't put much thought into it, and I'm sure there would be many problems with the system. I was just wondering if there was a way to seperate somewhat the class system from the game types. But for sure this would not work for all game types.

Originally posted by Solo4114
You'd just offer people the option to play with whatever mode they want. Now, in terms of universal changes, I'd still advocate that sabres be one or two hit kill weapons, regardless of the move. Certain moves break through defenses easier, certain moves defend at a higher level, but once you connect with the enemy, one or two hits and they're dead. THAT could be something that ALL game modes could have. It would drastically improve CTF games because you could still kill and keep moving, instead of getting into long drawn out duels.

I agree with you completely on making the saber more deadly. I always thought that a hit in heavy swing should be a one hit kill, yellow two hits, and blue three hits, or whatever. This could also be dependant on where you actually hit. For example, a hit to the head would be instant death.

Originally posted by Solo4114:

I do think it's possible to design a game that effectively implements what the vast majority of the community wants, even if the community is divided on how they want to play the game. You do need to give the community options, and you need to not limit the way people play, but there are certain changes that I think everyone (or at least most people, regardless of whether they play "competitive" or "just for fun") could agree to.Yuh think? :confused:

Seems to me that the JO community could never agree on the colour of faeces. Basically, the number of people, like myself, who try to understand the nature and tactics behind every game mode, are in the minority. This is because of the huge number of variables the game contains. Will a server be FF? NF? Guns? Sabres? JvM? What Force level? CTF? FFA? Duel? Jedi Master? Ghoul2 or not?

So servers that played the game people wanted were rare, and people became insular and blind to the other styles, just as they did before, in the days of DF2 on the zone.

This problem intensified when a big wodge of mods that very slightly changed gameplay appeared. A promod server popped up here, a jediplus or whatever popped up there, it became harder and harder to find a vanilla server. Soon of course, the patching killed the game outright.

The more variables you add to a game, the more fragmented the community will become, and the easier it'll be to knock it down. I don't think making the game into something for everyone is a good idea, or even a sane idea. You can't please all the people all the time, or even most of them. The type of manic increase in possible variables you're talking about would be just about the worst thing for the longevity of a game I can think of. No two servers would be alike, if there was a variable to cater to everyone. There'd be no standard for serious play, which gives a game a core community to build around, and since servers close regularly people would become used to one set of variables and leave the community straight away when their skills didn't translate to another server.

I'll say it again, it's up to individual people to find fun for themselves, it's not the duty of the game to provide it. The game provides an arena to have contests in, it doesn't necessarily provide fun. If you look for fun on public servers, you're probably not going to find it. It's that simple.

No matter WHAT people say, what's happened to JK2 is WAY better than what happened to Tribes. I buy the game, can't play any MP until I get the patch, get it, and what the hell everyone has infinite flight, infinite ammo, all the guns and all the guns are basically chaingun/rocketlauncher combos. Guuu!! Now I go to play more JK2, which is not dead by any means IMHO, where I shall hunt wabbits.

Can there be degrees of dead... er... deadness? Deadosity? Mofo thinks so. :D

He's right though, Tribes players had a rough time of it.

Prime,

I don't even mean that the stances should have differences in lethality. Heavy stance, medium stance, light stance, doesn't matter. I would, however, base it on locational damage. A head shot gets an instant kill. Anywhere else, and it takes two hits. If you hit with a special move (IE: blue lung, yellow/red DFA, backstab in any stance) it's an instant kill, but at least these moves are not much more lethal than the other normal moves you have. The main difference that I'd have between the stances is the tradeoff of defense vs. offense. Blue lets you fend off attacks easier, but it can't break through defenses. Yellow is less powerful on D, but more powerful on O, and Red is great for bashing through attacks, but sucks on D. I'd either leave the speeds of the stances the same, or speed all of 'em up a little bit, but have the heavier stances open themselves up more to being blocked and countered, as well as leaving defenses open. IE: if you try to do a red swing or combo, and it hits, it'll bash through most defenses, but while doing the swing, you're swinging wide and leaving yourself open to attack. But I'd still have the player swing faster with Red stance than they do currently. (Otherwise, red would be worthless, since you could just dodge the swing or stab the guy mid-swing.)

Blocking would be determined on more of a rock-paper-scissors method, whereby blue can block all blue and yellow attacks and maybe one or two red swings, yellow can block all blue attacks and SOME yellow attacks (maybe one or two swings), and red can block up to three blue swings, but yellow and red swings break through easily. Your ability to block attacks would also be tied to your sabre defense force power. The higher the power, the more likely you are to intercept an attack. You'd have access to all stances from the start of the game, but your sabre offense attack would allow you to chain more attacks together. So, as your offense power increases, you can do, say, up to five blue swings in a row, four yellow swings, and three red swings as combos. Something like that anyway. Your defense could also be tied to the arc in which you defend. The lower the defense, the tighter the arc is in front of you (no back defense). You could also maybe allow people to get higher levels of offense or defense (IE: level four or five) if they sacrifice the opposing force power. So, if you pick only level one offense, you'd have access to up to level four or five defense. The higher levels could let you perform defensive maneuvers that most folks can't (IE: defend an attack from behind, intercept an attack on another person). Same for offense. At higher levels, you could give people access to dual-bladed sabre styles, or dual wielding of sabres. The offsetting factor would be that you wouldn't be able to defend as well, even in terms of basic defense.

Would that I could code and do animations, or I'd be able to make a kickass mod. :)

As far as Tribes 2 goes, I never played that one. I played a bit of the original and it was pretty cool. I tried the T2 demo, and it seemed ok, but then again, I was only playing against bots really. It looked like a game with real potential, though. I especially liked the ability to laze targets for other people to shoot. (or have them laze targets for me)

I have to say Solo, that most of your ideas are just overly contrived nonsenses. More variables does not make a game more complex, merely more fiddly, and your constant ranting about sacrificing some abilities to feed others is just going to annoy people who want to use everything the game offers. In other respects you're just juggling existing JO concepts around a bit, and calling it new. It's this sort of limited thinking that led to five-million unremarkable sabre-combat tweaking mods that merely helped to separate the community into umpteen paranoid camps.

Originally posted by Solo4114:

Would that I could code and do animations, or I'd be able to make a kickass mod. :)And if wishes were fishes we'd all cast our nets. Everyone and their uncle had some sort of opinion on what would make the game "BETTAR!!11" and so few people were willing to spend the time to participate in the community in any sort of constructive way at all, instead they spent their time mashing their gums pointlessly. Fiddling while JO burned. Sad...

Originally posted by Spider AL
Yuh think? :confused:

Seems to me that the JO community could never agree on the colour of faeces...

The more variables you add to a game, the more fragmented the community will become, and the easier it'll be to knock it down. I don't think making the game into something for everyone is a good idea, or even a sane idea. You can't please all the people all the time, or even most of them. The type of manic increase in possible variables you're talking about would be just about the worst thing for the longevity of a game I can think of. No two servers would be alike, if there was a variable to cater to everyone. There'd be no standard for serious play, which gives a game a core community to build around, and since servers close regularly people would become used to one set of variables and leave the community straight away when their skills didn't translate to another server.

I'll say it again, it's up to individual people to find fun for themselves, it's not the duty of the game to provide it. The game provides an arena to have contests in, it doesn't necessarily provide fun. If you look for fun on public servers, you're probably not going to find it. It's that simple.

I think in retrospect you are right Al. I was merely throwing out an idea off the top of my head. But I agree on the server fragmentation problem 100%. I tend to want to play on vanilla 1.04 servers, because I do not like playing when everyone is running around with double sabers kissing everyone else. 1.04 servers are now fewer and fewer in number.

Originally posted by Solo4114
I don't even mean that the stances should have differences in lethality. Heavy stance, medium stance, light stance, doesn't matter. I would, however, base it on locational damage. A head shot gets an instant kill. Anywhere else, and it takes two hits. If you hit with a special move (IE: blue lung, yellow/red DFA, backstab in any stance) it's an instant kill, but at least these moves are not much more lethal than the other normal moves you have. The main difference that I'd have between the stances is the tradeoff of defense vs. offense. Blue lets you fend off attacks easier, but it can't break through defenses. Yellow is less powerful on D, but more powerful on O, and Red is great for bashing through attacks, but sucks on D. I'd either leave the speeds of the stances the same, or speed all of 'em up a little bit, but have the heavier stances open themselves up more to being blocked and countered, as well as leaving defenses open. IE: if you try to do a red swing or combo, and it hits, it'll bash through most defenses, but while doing the swing, you're swinging wide and leaving yourself open to attack. But I'd still have the player swing faster with Red stance than they do currently. (Otherwise, red would be worthless, since you could just dodge the swing or stab the guy mid-swing.)

Apart from wanting the swings to be faster and location damage (which is a good idea, I think), from what I can tell your are wanting the saber combat to be as it is currently. I think the way damage is done now is proportionally correct. Heavy stance should and does do more damage than light stance. Heavy should be more powerful because it takes so many more force points to aquire it. This trade-off must give you an advantage, and it does.

As for special moves, I think it would be better to leave it the way it is now. The special moves do do more damage than their respective stances already. blue uppercut is quite damaging, much more so than a normal blue hit (at least double, isn't it?). Same for yellow special. And red DFA is the most deadly move in the game! Again this is how it should be, because I spent so many points to get Red stance, and thus the DFA attack. Why wouldn't I save my 14 or whatever number of points if I could instantly kill with blue uppercut? Then everyone would spam blue uppercut because no one would need to invest in red or yellow.

As for offence vs defence, some of what you are asking for is essentially describing how it is now. "IE: if you try to do a red swing or combo, and it hits, it'll bash through most defenses, but while doing the swing, you're swinging wide and leaving yourself open to attack." I believe this is currently the case. I think you are kind of contradicting yourself. You want blue to "let you fend off attacks easier", but you also want red to bash through most defences. It can't really be both.

I think that is the case of dueling (this is what we are talking about, right?), where we differ is that I believe that red should be the most powerful, because it takes more points to aquire it than blue. I need to be rewarded for this investment. But the beauty is now is that each stance is useful. Red should be able to pound through blue defence, and it does. It should also be better at blocking heavy attacks, and it is. Tapping me with light stance shouldn't break through my strong stance. But when I attack in red, I am leaving myself open to attack more than in blue. But blue can strike much more quickly than red, which can be an advantage as well in certain situations (not to mention better at blocking blaster fire). And yellow is a nice combination of the two.

IMO, the tradeoffs between saber stances is good the way it is now. A good dueler uses each to the utmost effectiveness.

I tend to want to play on vanilla 1.04 servers, because I do not like playing when everyone is running around with double sabers kissing everyone else. 1.04 servers are now fewer and fewer in number.

This is the sad truth of the matter. As I mentioned earlier, I'd still be playing 1.04 happily, if there was a healthy community associated with it. Back in the waning days of JK1, there were still prize-tournaments on offer, with actual prizes mind you. Such things are a bit thinner on the ground for JO. It's doubly saddening because as a competitive game JO was so much more well-rounded than its predecessor.

Prime,

Actually, I was advocating that you change the sabre stance access system. You'd get access to all sabre stances from the start, but your ability to use them to break an enemy's defenses or to defend against an enemy would depend on how many points you assigned to the respective force powers.

So, for example, a level one offense would give you access to all three stances, and when applied against a level one defense it WOULD function similarly to what you can do now. The main difference would be the lethality of the sabres (IE: every swing, regardless of stance, would be a one or two hit kill). Aside from that, the general block/attack/parry structure would remain intact. However, if a level one attacker goes up against a level two defender, the level two defender will have a much easier time blocking or parrying the level one attacker's blows. Now, if the level two defender only had level one attack, when he went on offense, the two would be evenly matched again, but as far as defense goes, the higher level would generally reign, assuming he chose the right stance for the job.

Where things would really become different would be if you wanted access to level four or five abilities on either offense or defense. In order to do that, you'd only be able to take, say, up to level 2 in the counterpart force power. But at those higher levels, you could do stuff that wasn't accessible at the lower levels. You'd be given access to new moves, new abilities, new stances, or the ability to wield different types of weapons. HOWEVER, the sabres themselves would not change; they'd still be just as lethal and just as able to kill in one or two hits. What would change is your ability to effectively employ them to perform different tasks. I do agree, though, that if you spend points on something, you should get a benefit for it. With the system I'm proposing, though, you'd get that. :)

Now, as for whether this change alone would save the game, of course it wouldn't. It'd be a nice mod for dueling, but in the end, dueling and DM style play, I think, are just boring. I'd want to have objective focused gameplay included. You could leave the DM style of play in the game, but also include the class-based/objective focused gameplay as a different game mode. Actually BF1942 does this to a degree. It offers the ability to play simple TDM, CTF, or its Conquest mode (where the objective is to take and hold territory). I don't usually see any TDM servers out there, though, and I only occasionally see CTF servers. Now, granted, I'm not looking for the TDM servers, so there may be more of 'em than I see. But from what I can tell, the objective-focused style of play is the most popular one.

Al,

You seem to have missed my point in my most recent post, prior to this one. I'm not saying keep the game exactly the same. Far from it, in fact. The changes I'm advocating for are subtle, but meaningful. They wouldn't save the game on its own, because the game already lacks in immersive quality to it, but they would make it considerably more fun in my opinion. If you disagree with it, that's cool. I honestly don't care that much. But I do feel compelled to say the following.

You're really the kind of belligerent jackass that the internet seems to breed. I've simply been making suggestions here, basically ignoring you, and being generally polite when I took the time to answer you. In response, you've seen fit to basically make personal attacks for no apparent reason. If you disagree with what I say, fine. I have no problem with someone intelligently disagreeing. I enjoy a good debate. But when you start throwing insults around, well, even if it is the internet, that's just uncalled for. You're pissed that the game died. Fine. You blame folks who complained about the gameplay for it, and likely include me in that group. Fine. You want the game to be left alone, fine. Go play against the bots. You're pissed at the world about the fact that the game changed in a way you didn't like. I can sympathize with that. I'd be pissed too, if a game changed in a way that I thought killed it's community.

But enough already. Let it go, man. You seem entirely incapable of offering any kind of constructive opinion on the debate. You simply naysay and punctuate it with insults. Next time you have something to say in response, as I said before, try it with a little less vitriol and a little more rational thought. Like I said, I've got no problems disagreeing with folks, but there's no reason (other than your own impotent frustration at the fact that the game changed, I suppose) to be a jerk in the process.

Now then, in the immortal words of Joe Pesci, "I'm done with this guy." Anyone ELSE want to maybe ADD something to the debate? :)

Originally posted by Solo4114:

Now, as for whether this change alone would save the game, of course it wouldn't. It'd be a nice mod for dueling, but in the end, dueling and DM style play, I think, are just boring.You're in the minority. 1on1 and DM styles of play are extremely popular in most other games, yadda yadda yadda etcetera. You get the idea. And if you don't, skip it. ;)

Originally posted by Solo4114:

You seem to have missed my point in my most recent post, prior to this one. I'm not saying keep the game exactly the same. Far from it, in fact. The changes I'm advocating for are subtle, but meaningful.I missed nothing, your "changes" aren't subtle, they're just shallow. They're not meaningful, they're basically the same conservative juggling of the existing dynamics that spawned five-gajillion minor mods that merely fragmented the JO community. I'm sure you think your ideas are just dandy, but hey, so did the makers of all those farcically insipid excuses for mods. And of course, as I mentioned earlier, everyone and their uncle has their little ideas about how to "MAEK TEH GAEM BETTARRR!!!!11"

Originally posted by Solo4114:

You're really the kind of belligerent jackass that the internet seems to breed. I've simply been making suggestions here, basically ignoring you, and being generally polite when I took the time to answer you. In response, you've seen fit to basically make personal attacks for no apparent reason. If you disagree with what I say, fine. I have no problem with someone intelligently disagreeing. I enjoy a good debate.Ah, so you want me to stop disagreeing with you, but since you can't actually SAY that without sounding even more pompous and unpleasant, you've added this little caveat about "intelligently disagreeing", so that you can accuse me of unintelligently disagreeing with you? Pfft. That's thin. :rolleyes:

You've been making suggestions, yes. I've been pointing out the many, many gaping flaws in your grand design. If you don't like that, you "go play against the bots" to use your words. Furthermore, by calling me a "belligerent jackass" you not only stoop to petty personal slurs, but imply that I want an argument too. There is no argument. There's just you making dubious statements about how great the mod you're never going to make would be, and how the developer of the next JK game should listen to YOOO, and me? Well, I'm sitting here poking holes in an already flimsy construct that hath been arrayed before mine eyes. I wouldn't call that an argument.

Originally posted by Solo4114:

But enough already. Let it go, man. You seem entirely incapable of offering any kind of constructive opinion on the debate.Well, other than pointing out that your ideas really aren't very good, there's not a lot to say. As I told you before Solo, there have been many threads about the next game, how to improve on it, yadda yadda yadda, and I've contributed to many of them, weeks and months ago. I don't need to repeat myself here, nor would I glorify this blatant rehash of an old discussion with additional fodder.

Originally posted by Solo4114:

Next time you have something to say in response, as I said before, try it with a little less vitriol and a little more rational thought. Like I said, I've got no problems disagreeing with folks, but there's no reason (other than your own impotent frustration at the fact that the game changed, I suppose) to be a jerk in the process.You'd have made a good physician in the 1950s. They all thought that anyone who pointed out their errors was irrational too. LOBOTOMY!!!!11 And furthermore, your use of the word "folks" disturbs me. :eek:

As I said before, and I'm in danger of growing a string-pull out of my back I've repeated these simple ideas for you so much, I've seen all this before. This is old, old news. I saw it in the days of DF2. I've seen it over the past year with JO. I'll probably see it again in six years' time with JKIII. Instead of sitting here mashing your gums in a big wodge of futile and orgiastic self-aggrandisement, familiarise yourself with the techniques that are really necessary for supporting a game-community: Dedication, practice and understanding. Wandering around yapping about how to "improve" something you don't understand anyway is just about the most pointless occupation in the known universe.

No, actually, wandering around yapping about how to "improve" something that never had a chance to prove whether it was successful or not, that you don't understand anyway, tops it.

Originally posted by Solo4114:

Now then, in the immortal words of Joe Pesci, "I'm done with this guy."You've said this sort of thing several times now, and nothing's happened... Are you sure you're waving your magic wand the right way? :confused:

Originally posted by Solo4114:

Anyone ELSE want to maybe ADD something to the debate?Oooh ooh! I've got an idea, why don't you go and read all those old threads I told you about, and PRETEND that they're replies to your thread. That should keep you busy for the next decade. :)

***

Originally posted by Solo4114:

I do agree, though, that if you spend points on something, you should get a benefit for it. With the system I'm proposing, though, you'd get that.

On a side-note, I love the way they always get up on the podium about these things too:

The scene: Daylight outside a building that looks as if it's been made entirely of glass. A press-conference is occuring on the attractively marbled fascia of the steps leading to the main entrance.

ModCo(tm) CEO: "The synergized network of thought-fact modifications that we at ModCo(tm) are proposing here today will endemically unleashify the full and ultimate potentia of all the facets of the Jedi Knight(tm) experiencialism."

Journalist: "Question; What are you going to do in layman's terms?"

ModCo(tm) CEO: "Take away gunners' sabres and force powers and then make the sabre a one-hit kill weapon."

Journalist: "Umm... won't that make a lot of gunners unhappy?"

ModCo(tm) CEO: "REEL JEDI DONT USE GUNZ U LAMOR!11!!!"

:ewok:

*gets really broad and philosophical*

I'm seeing alot of people saying that gaming with a purpose is becoming more entertaining than pointless DM's. I think that's a sign that the gaming community as a whole is starting to become more mature. If this keeps up... fiften... twenty years down the road video games may be held in similar regards as movies, books, and maybe (juuuuuuuuust maybe) the fine arts.

(cept console games... DOA Xtreme Volleyball anyone? They will be children forever).

Spider your right this has been happening for a while now, I mean these threads,

I stand true one thing though, JO feel's like other Raven games, and that the sabaer system in SP needs better collision especially for saber locks, you can swing at one angle but the saber lock is identical, to much difference between stances, not enough difference in terms of strikes, the AI for all lightsabeer opponent's are really predictable and with no innovation

Originally posted by Naphtali
Spider your right this has been happening for a while now, I mean these threads,

I stand true one thing though, JO feel's like other Raven games, and that the sabaer system in SP needs better collision especially for saber locks, you can swing at one angle but the saber lock is identical, to much difference between stances, not enough difference in terms of strikes, the AI for all lightsabeer opponent's are really predictable and with no innovation

Heh.. on the contrary.. I found the AI for the saber opponents so random that it was frusterating. Also, when the AI executes a move, he'll execute the move no matter what. My favorite example is the blue uppercut attack... so far the only way to dodge that is to be running away. Best part is that the AI will just slap that puppy in whenever the hell he feels like it. You could be slashing, he could be defending... he could be slashing and you defending.. you both could be slashing... and suddenly the video will go slow mow as I watch Kyle keel over from the ending frames of the uppercut animation.

Oh and Dassan at the end is just rich. If I we're a reviewer, I would honestly publish that I inteaded to give the game a great score, but when I fought Dassan at the end I changed the score to 1.3 out of ten. You cannot fight him directly nor fight him indirectly. He has "magic instant slash" compounded infanitly. When facing him it all looks the same- straight combat until I die suddenly from the ending frames of god knows what slash. And I love how like when you get a little too far away from him he goes force crazy... lightning and chocking up the ass. And that level 3 push doesn't do jack against it, hope you pacted Bacta containers. The only easy way to beat this MF'er is to be cheap as hell. I've had more engaging duels with Reborn fodder than with him. And to put him at the end of the game, talk about a sour note to end on...

I thought i'd just say something about class-based objective multiplayer. I've seen it said (not sure if its this thread) that pure deathmatch games are so common that objective multiplayer is the way forwards.

This of course is a load of complete crap, the only deathmatch game to be released recently was ut2k3 (which sucks). Almost EVERY recent multiplayer game has been based on team objectives, the majority being based on world war 2 or something equally done-to-death.

I got JK2 wanting the kind of vanilla deathmatch with a difference, I wanted Quake 3 but with a little more in the way of vertical gameplay, I wanted UT but faster and more elegant. Now in all honesty, I think a class-based team-objective Star Wars game would be great fun, but i also want some "senseless" deathmatch too, JK2 was meant to keep me entertained until Quake 4 (assuming Raven doesn't screw this up too), instead it turned me into a bitter-twisted old fool.

So here's my thought: Someone go ahead and make JK3, give it a singleplayer experience worthy of the series, and give it vanilla JK-style multiplayer. Do it REALLY well, just cater for these two factors. Then ADDITIONALLY (notice the world ADDITIONALLY, as in NOT REPLACING) make a class-based objective based Star Wars game using whatever engine is appropriate with both a singleplayer and multieplayer element. Let people be Jedi if they want to too, but make sure its done properly.

Voila, in just 2 games, you have catered to the Star Wars paradigms.

If this is done in 2 games instead of one, you immediately get rid of any major arguments about "what the game was supposed to be", and people can get on with actually playing and having fun.

As long as there are no more WW2 Nazi guys or dudes in ski-masks w/ sniper rifles I'm all for another class based game.

Originally posted by ILR
*gets really broad and philosophical*

I'm seeing alot of people saying that gaming with a purpose is becoming more entertaining than pointless DM's. I think that's a sign that the gaming community as a whole is starting to become more mature. If this keeps up... fiften... twenty years down the road video games may be held in similar regards as movies, books, and maybe (juuuuuuuuust maybe) the fine arts.

(cept console games... DOA Xtreme Volleyball anyone? They will be children forever).

ILR,

You're right that a portion of the gaming community is becoming more mature (or at least getting older). Will the younger players ever be weeded out? Unlikely. There will always be a market for scantily clad, buxom chicks jumping around to, shall we say, emphasize the fact that they ARE buxom (you know what I'm talking about).

But, I think what you'll see is that, as with movies, you'll have games that cater to one audience, and games that cater to another. And the best games will be able to draw in both groups. Towards that end...

Originally posted by DeTRiTiC-iQSo here's my thought: Someone go ahead and make JK3, give it a singleplayer experience worthy of the series, and give it vanilla JK-style multiplayer. Do it REALLY well, just cater for these two factors. Then ADDITIONALLY (notice the world ADDITIONALLY, as in NOT REPLACING) make a class-based objective based Star Wars game using whatever engine is appropriate with both a singleplayer and multieplayer element. Let people be Jedi if they want to too, but make sure its done properly.

See, I don't think you even need to make two games. Just two game modes. And I don't think that having two general options for game modes would split the community terribly. Rather, it'd be a smart marketing move because you appeal to two different camps of players. On the one hand, you appeal to folks who want he vanilla, pick-up-any-gun, kill-'em-all DM style gaming experience. And on the other hand, you can simply have another game mode where you have access to limited weapons and abilities, but you play as a team and attempt to complete objectives. There were DM mods that came out for RTCW, because people wanted to play DM style. There were class-based mods for all of the Quake games (TF, WF, etc.), usually revolving around CTF modes, because people wanted to have classes and objectives to complete as a team. To my recollection, UT introduced the first real objective style game (the Assault mode), and RTCW was the first to create a game with classes focused on objectives.

Now, DeTRiTiC, you're right. The WWII theme is getting kind of tired. It's fun, of course, but I for one wouldn't mind seeing something new. A Star Wars class-based game would be a blast, but you could also do it with other settings. When you think about it, though, the gaming industry is a LOT like the movie industry. They put out repeats of the last thing that did well. If a WWII game sells well, you can bet you'll see a bunch of crappy knock-offs come out. It'd be nice to see that particular style of gameplay shaken up a bit. Regardless, I still think you can offer different game modes in one box and cater to the community. Oh, and yes, UT2k3 sucked. :) I played the demo and almost fell off my chair yawning too hard.

Originally posted by ILR:

Oh and Dassan at the end is just rich. If I we're a reviewer, I would honestly publish that I inteaded to give the game a great score, but when I fought Dassan at the end I changed the score to 1.3 out of ten. You cannot fight him directly nor fight him indirectly.Well, this might depend on what computer specs you have, but I didn't have a problem with Desann, and I played initially on the highest level of skill. It takes a few minutes observation, but he uses the same lunges quite a lot, and if one catches the windup one can whack him in the head while he's doing them. In the midrange, his lightning is a problem, but only if you haven't jumped into the special beam that protects you from Dark Side damage. Desann likes to try to jump into that too. :) Besides, there's always the pillars+sabre throw method of dispatching him, which I never could bring myself to use. Nor the speed + heavy stance method. Well, maybe once. :D

Shock and Det: Well sure. Let them play their class-based game somewhere over there. JK is sacred as a genre though.

Originally posted by shock ~ unnamed:

As long as there are no more WW2 Nazi guys or dudes in ski-masks w/ sniper rifles I'm all for another class based game.

Ever noticed that if you slap a Germanic helmet on someone it makes them a villain and hence okay to kill them? Stormtrooper helmets have Germanic overtones. Obviously the nazis in Indy had plenty of such headgear. Interesting... Maybe ski-masks are the new Germanic helmets? :eek:

Originally posted by Solo4114:

See, I don't think you even need to make two games. Just two game modes. And I don't think that having two general options for game modes would split the community terribly.It should be obvious even to you that another game mode would create at least one more division in the community. Then, what about force configuration? You'd have NF class-based players and FF class-based players, sabres only class-based players, guns class-based players etcetera etcetera ad infinitum. It's a terrible idea, live with that, and go back to the drawing board. ;)

Originally posted by Spider AL
Well, this might depend on what computer specs you have, but I didn't have a problem with Desann, and I played initially on the highest level of skill. It takes a few minutes observation, but he uses the same lunges quite a lot, and if one catches the windup one can whack him in the head while he's doing them. In the midrange, his lightning is a problem, but only if you haven't jumped into the special beam that protects you from Dark Side damage. Desann likes to try to jump into that too. :) Besides, there's always the pillars+sabre throw method of dispatching him, which I never could bring myself to use. Nor the speed + heavy stance method. Well, maybe once. :D


Its not a technical issue, at least I don't think. I've played Single Player on Jedi Master mode countless times from start to finish, and I've never caught on to any pattern with the dark Jedi. It never even occured to me that there WAS a pattern in the first place... I didn't focus on that. The only kind of lightsaber duels I know are the ones in the movie... where they always blocked and parried their way through their opponent's defense. Considering that the saber isn't exactly the heaviest mofo to whip around, it made sense to try and knock their saber down before going for the kill. I was so confused when playing JKII because sabers are treated like swords with mass (It will only have power when it is in motion... and the sword slashes cannot be stopped midswing to correct course due to its momentum). So the key to winning is duppin your enemy to slash where he thought you were going to be, and then slash while his blade is turned away. The Star Wars freak has a morol code about lightsaber duels... be true to the duels, no matter what!

About the several game modes in one thing..

I only played Duels, never touched the CTF or DM stuff *shrugs*. And I know quite a few who are the opposite. This is the biggest split in a gaming community I have ever experienced. 1.04 came out I was still in the duel servers, so it was like a godsend to me. However I hear people bitch and bitch about **** I've never concerned myself with! I felt very alienated when I tried to defense 1.04... With this game ya can't avoid one or two splits in the community, but ya should avoid the obvious extra ones..

Why worry about NF lovers verses Force lovers? Why not make Force not so ****ing retarded so that everyone can enjoy it and people will see the "disable force" button and simply wonder why it was even there....

Why is lightning a Jedi Ability? We saw the Emp do it once. Dooku did it to noobish Anikin, but Ben dispatched it easily. If you have to have your god damn lightning ability in a JEDI KNIGHT game, make it so Jedi's with level 3 defense can do what Ben did in ep2.

And where the **** did Absorb come from? And drain? WTF is that ****? Why is it in a Star Wars game? Shouldn't that be in a Bulder's Gate sequal or something? Force Healing is really stretching it too...

And saber throw! GOD!!!!!!!! Vader ****in tosses his saber up at the catwalk to get Luke down ONCE... ****ING ONCE. He may not have even guided it with the force.. he may have just tossed it a good one to get Luke down. The result: JKII Saber throw. Put that mouse 2 button to better use and GIVE US A DEFENSE COMMAND!!!

And what is the deal with Force choke?! Again.. we see vader choke NORMAL PEOPLE with the force... yet you catch a Jedi off gaurd and you choke him, lift him up, swirl him around in circles so he can't push you away, and all this while doing tons of lovely damage. IF Goerge Lucas was dead he would be spinning in his grave. Since he's not he's prolly just trying to remember why Lucas Arts was started in the first place.

THATS why there's a descrepency between NF and FF

Originally posted by ILR:

I've played Single Player on Jedi Master mode countless times from start to finish, and I've never caught on to any pattern with the dark Jedi. It never even occured to me that there WAS a pattern in the first place... I didn't focus on that.

Well, dere you go. There's always a pattern with opponents. Human, AI, vegetable, mineral, there's always a pattern. The key to winning is to understand that pattern.

Originally posted by ILR:

Why worry about NF lovers verses Force lovers? Why not make Force not so ****ing retarded so that everyone can enjoy it and people will see the "disable force" button and simply wonder why it was even there....

Well besides the massive amount of swearing and exclamation marks in your post, you have an interesting point. Personally though, I don't think the force is "****ing retarded"; I think people who play NF FFA or CTF might be a little silly though. And frankly comparing the films to the game is a waste of time. Making a game exactly like the films would probably only be interesting to the fanboys or die-hard RPGers.

Originally posted by ILR:

IF Goerge Lucas was dead he would be spinning in his grave.Lucas doesn't care about keeping the Star Wars movies sane, let alone cool, judging by the prequels. Don't think he'd care too much whether a game was exactly the way the OT was. :)

For duels, 1.04 helped somewhat. Though the blocking could've been more logically based and not so random. As far as why bother including the various force powers you mentioned, they've been in the game for a while so that alone would piss people off if they were removed. Plus, people see them in the movies, hear about a game coming out where you can play as a jedi or a dark jedi, and they want to emulate whatever they see on the screen. I don't have a problem including the various force powers, but I think that, after a while, they did end up becoming kind of useless. I know that when I dueled, I ALWAYS set Absorb to level three, if only because it was the only way to counter darkside force powers. People who set lightning to 3 or grip to 3 were able to beat the hell out of you if you didn't assign force powers to absorb.

All in all, I thought that the force powers were reasonably implemented, though when everyone had things set to level 3, it got so that the powers were basically useless. You really DID have to settle things with a sabre if you had absorb at 3 and the other guy had lightning at 3. Again, though, that only highlighted the flaws in sabre combat. You're right that the sabres were treated as having mass when they should be able to move at roughly the same speed all the time. That goes to my point about making all swings equally lethal, but making the type of swing and speed or force of your blow (light, medium, or heavy) deal more with battering through defenses, or keeping your defenses up.

Wow, there have just about been some FLPs in this thread. :)

Everyone has their own subjective standards by which they've judged the game and decided whether to continue playing or participating in its community. Whether I agree with them or not, that's fine by me.

I find it is both fair and appropriate to compare the quality of my JO experience to that of other game experiences when determining my level of satisfaction. For a game in a series, the preceding games of that series serve as an additional benchmark is this regard.

1) Did I enjoy JO more than most games I've played?

Yes. This means the game got its fair share of play time, plus community time, the duration of which was primarily determined by the following:

2) Did I enjoy JO as much as or more than Dark Forces I and II?

Definitely Not.

Single player was plagued by stunted level progression, poorly implemented and executed puzzles, and an anti-climactic ending, all of which registered noticably with me.

For multiplayer, Raven heavily tweaked kinds of experiences similar to those I've already had via Jedi Knight. I was ready for something fresh from the core, not old with new trimmings. They failed to innovate enough to satisfy this tired JKer beyond a relatively short period.

What would have made me buy the farm?

Class-based objective multiplayer (good acronym needed) is my cup of tea, my soup du jour, the apple of my eye as far as what can still be considered the FPS genre is concerned. This mode of play is superior to others only because that is it what I enjoy the most when playing with guns in the first person.

I can't see why this would be a problem to someone else, save that numerous invested parties (used to be part of one) with different preferences were all hoping the game catered to them. A Star Wars FPS is, after all, a huge pooling of official resources likely to produce something only once every few years. It's a valuable commodity if you're into that sort of thing.

So that's my story and I'm stickin' to it.

Originally posted by Solo4114
For duels, 1.04 helped somewhat. Though the blocking could've been more logically based and not so random. As far as why bother including the various force powers you mentioned, they've been in the game for a while so that alone would piss people off if they were removed. Plus, people see them in the movies, hear about a game coming out where you can play as a jedi or a dark jedi, and they want to emulate whatever they see on the screen. I don't have a problem including the various force powers, but I think that, after a while, they did end up becoming kind of useless. I know that when I dueled, I ALWAYS set Absorb to level three, if only because it was the only way to counter darkside force powers. People who set lightning to 3 or grip to 3 were able to beat the hell out of you if you didn't assign force powers to absorb.

All in all, I thought that the force powers were reasonably implemented, though when everyone had things set to level 3, it got so that the powers were basically useless. You really DID have to settle things with a sabre if you had absorb at 3 and the other guy had lightning at 3. Again, though, that only highlighted the flaws in sabre combat. You're right that the sabres were treated as having mass when they should be able to move at roughly the same speed all the time. That goes to my point about making all swings equally lethal, but making the type of swing and speed or force of your blow (light, medium, or heavy) deal more with battering through defenses, or keeping your defenses up.


I'm not sure where you did most of your 1.04 Force dueling but statement could not be more off if you tried man.

1.04 Force dueling is ALL about Force based combat and maybe 1% saber swings.

99% of the top ranked FF duelers throughout all of 1.04 didn't even use sabers in FF dueling other than as a follow up swing after a kick knockdown.

And there has never been an "elite" light side FF dueler throughout all of 1.04 on any ladder or league.

Light side at any level is completely and utterly worthless in 1.04 dueling.

I zap you with a short blast of lightning.
You reflexively flip on absorb.
I simply pull+throw the hell out of you (absorb makes doing that very easy).

You try a heal you waste 1/2 of your pool for a measly 25 hp.

All I have to do is drain whore you and kick you to death and the match is over.


In 1.04 FF dueling this is how it goes in terms of what is best:

Drain (it is simply too damn easy to reverse 80 hp of damage by whoring it on a person with poor evasive skills)

Kick (level 2 jump)

Pull

Saber throw/Grip

I put the last two on about the same level because they are more of a "part" of devastating combos rather than the actual attack itself.

A properly done grip+kick can take a 100hp person down to 0 in one shot.

Two back to back throw+pull+kick combos will finish off a 100 hp person as well if done properly.

shock ~ unnamed: Exactly, the sides of the Force aren't balanced in any of the game modes as far as I'm aware. The closest they come to being balanced is in FF guns CTF, but even then... Now, MotS was good, as "sides" had no meaning in its Force selection. All powers were available to all... Nifty.

I really don't know where Solo's getting his ideas though. Certainly not from Jedi Outcast... Maybe he's confused and is playing Bubble Bobble instead. ;)

Originally posted by Krayt Tion:

I can't see why this would be a problem to someone else,Because, Krayt old bean, the Dark Forces series has always been made up of pure FPShooters. Would one go to the Quake community and say "I think the next game should be a flight sim"? Class-based-objective games are completely different to a vanilla FPS. There's both a tradition to uphold and a dedicated and long-standing community to honour.

The only reason so many people want this game to be something different next time is because it's a Star Wars game and all Star Wars fans feel that they have a right to demand whatever they want from it. (Note: I'm not lumping you in with them, merely pointing out that there's a lot of them.) But I don't think Star Wars fans should count, frankly. The game's the important thing, not the genre/franchise on which it's based. Now, sure, you like class-based games at the moment, and DM probably seems old to you. But how will you feel about objective-based games in four years time? Who knows. Meanwhile, the tradition of the Dark Forces series should be observed, because it's always been truly classic.

Most games are punched out of sheets of plastic these days. Fast food games. Who wants another McCounterstrike or another McUnreal Tournament? The unique flavour of Dark Forces must be preserved.

Shock,

It's not so much WHERE I did my dueling as much as it is WHEN I did my dueling. For the most part, I didn't play competitively, so I probably wasn't going up against people who were all that good. I also didn't play for very long after 1.04 came out. I'd stopped playing when 1.03 came out, due to the inability to avoid people spamming the backstab, and only came back briefly when 1.04 was first out. I played some duels and some FFA, and maybe one or two CTF games. I think I lasted MAYBE a month with 1.04 before I quit the game altogether and uninstalled it. I'd imagine that a lot of the techniques you're talking about came into play on competitive or ladder servers and were being used a while after I'd quit.

If what you're saying is true, though, then that REALLY sucks. I mean, I'm all for using force powers in a duel, but what you're describing is ridiculous. Call me crazy, but I think duels should be mostly about the sabre, and only have force come in occasionally. Even so, while duels are cool, they still boil down to DM style play, which for me, even with a well balanced force system, and even with well executed sabre combat, would grow tiresome. That was actually the reason I quit 1.04. It wasn't so much flaws in the patch (though it DID take forever to kill people with sabres), as much as it was that the style of play just really bored me.

I'm with Krayt here. I'd much rather play CBOM (how's that for an acronym? :) ) than screw around with DM. I know folks want to play DM, though, so more power to 'em. That's why I'd say include your basic DM mode in any sequel. There's a contingent that really wants to play it, so fine, let 'em play it. Me, I'd rather play CBOM. And yea, Krayt, I too was hoping for something new and fresh from JO. The single player was fun overall, though the end DID leave something to be desired (You shake your head at Desann and that's it???). I did like the fact that you could have AI buddies tagging along, like Luke in that one level. I get tired of the "You against the universe" style of play, and like to play as a team. That's probably why I'm drawn towards CBOM style games. Anyway, I'd hope for the next game that, while they keep some aspects of the underlying series intact, they try to freshen things up a bit. The same old formula is getting boring.

As for the same old stogy style of play being some sort of sacred cow, I say innovate a little. There's no reason why you can't have a nice change of pace in the series AND still keep the old style of play, though some seem to believe that any change will instantly spell the death of the game. I think sticking to the same old worn-out style of play, without ever bothering to innovate will lead to the stagnation of the game, and while a small, fervently loyal, intensely conservative (in terms of changes to gameplay, mind you, not politically) group may support it, the majority of people out there will grow tired of it quickly, and will drop it as soon as the next shiny game comes out.

If the next game has nothing but DM styles and CTF, I know I won't buy it, even though I'm a Star Wars fan. It's not because the game is Star Wars that I'd want CBOM. It's because DM style of play bores the crap out of me and the DF series has NEVER had good CTF gameplay. I never bought Q3 or Counterstrike because they basically boiled down to DM, which bores me. I got into UT, but only ever played CTF because the other modes (aside from Assault, I suppose) bored me. I love the Aliens and Predator movies, but I never bought AVP2 because the first game just boiled down to variations on DM style play, and I figured the second one would too. The underlying license isn't the issue, it's the gameplay found within that will convince me to spend my money.

Originally posted by Solo4114:

I know folks want to play DM, though, so more power to 'em. That's why I'd say include your basic DM mode in any sequel. There's a contingent that really wants to play it, so fine, let 'em play it.Once again your magnanimousness is choking. Your "generous suggestion" would merely fragment the community further than it already is, damaging it. I presume you want to do that, otherwise you'd be lobbying for a separate game by now.

/me shudders

Ugh-h-h-h. Folks.

Originally posted by Solo4114:

The same old formula is getting boring.Gosh, and there was little old me thinking that it was interesting enough to keep Dark Forces 2 alive for at least five years without dev support. :D

Originally posted by Solo4114:

I think sticking to the same old worn-out style of play, without ever bothering to innovate will lead to the stagnation of the game, and while a small, fervently loyal, intensely conservative (in terms of changes to gameplay, mind you, not politically) group may support it, the majority of people out there will grow tired of it quickly, and will drop it as soon as the next shiny game comes out.The "majority of people" or at least a vocal majority managed to ruin JO. So who cares what they think, feel or do. A small "fervently loyal" following kept JK alive for years and preserved the competitive game with tournaments and prizes. It preserved the game for those that truly enjoyed it. That's what's important, not the "fun" of the fickle fanboy masses.

Originally posted by Solo4114
All in all, I thought that the force powers were reasonably implemented, though when everyone had things set to level 3, it got so that the powers were basically useless. You really DID have to settle things with a sabre if you had absorb at 3 and the other guy had lightning at 3.
"Obviously, this contest cannot be decided by our knowledge of the force. Only with the our skills with a lightsaber." -Dooku :)

Originally posted by shock ~ unnamed
I zap you with a short blast of lightning. You reflexively flip on absorb. I simply pull+throw the hell out of you (absorb makes doing that very easy).
I understand that many people play purely for competative reasons, and their only goal is to win. But do people have any fun doing the above? I mean, it just seems so boring to me. If that is what you feel the game comes down to, is it really worth playing? Sure, you get some wins, but you just spent a few hours of your life pressing two keys on a keyboard repeatedly. Ahh, good times! :) Does anyone besides me play this game just for fun? :p Since I fulfill my competative cravings with basketball, I just play this game for the Star Wars related aspects. To each his own, I guess.

Originally posted by Spider Al
The only reason so many people want this game to be something different next time is because it's a Star Wars game and all Star Wars fans feel that they have a right to demand whatever they want from it. But I don't think Star Wars fans should count, frankly. The game's the important thing, not the genre/franchise on which it's based.
I don't think that is entirely fair. I agree completely that SW fans, or anyone for that matter, don't have the right to demand whatever they want. But I don't think that the fans don't count at all. I mean, like it or not, this is a Star Wars game, so at least it should be reasonably faithful to that genre. Financially speaking, SW fans (which I am one), are a good portion of the customers for this game, and for Raven/Lucasarts to completely disregard them would be foolish. That being said, I agree with you that the gameplay should take priority, since really that is where the fun and longevity will be derived. Also, I agree that since this game is a Dark Forces game, it needs to follow the standards set by that series (refering to the whole jedi with guns debate). The funny thing is, I feel that this game and the Dark Forces series in general is very close to the standards set in the movies. I have no problems with Jedi and guns, and so on. I feel Raven has made a game that is very respectful to the Star Wars universe. I also feel that have made a game that is fun to play. Just my take. Al, hopefully you will not group me in with all the other Star Wars "fanboys". :)

Originally posted by Prime:

I understand that many people play purely for competative reasons, and their only goal is to win. But do people have any fun doing the above? I mean, it just seems so boring to me. If that is what you feel the game comes down to, is it really worth playing? Sure, you get some wins, but you just spent a few hours of your life pressing two keys on a keyboard repeatedly. Ahh, good times! Does anyone besides me play this game just for fun?This is an important question, and one worthy of a seriously thought out answer:

If one first decides to pursue victory, it is because one enjoys winning. Over the course of one's training, winning becomes a different type of fun, a fun that's worth the time and effort one puts into the game. It's a buzz when you win a tournament, or overcome a difficult opponent. It's not about what powers or guns you use, as every game at some stage turns into a one-gun match. (railgun in Quake, Flechette in JO, specific force powers etc) It's about who uses them the best. And after a while, you start to use the other guns and powers to surprise your skilled opponent. You jump out of the shadows and whack him with your sabre. You shoot him from a mile away with your tenloss. You knock him from a ledge with your DEMP. And those are the kills you come to cherish the most.

So you could say, if you practice enough, you go THROUGH the stages of using one weapon or few weapons, and come out on the other side. You go through the period where winning is your only fun, and finally come out on the other side to appreciate the whole game in a way you never could have done before.

It's rewarding. It's also the same with every game, computerised or not, in my experience.

Originally posted by Prime:

I don't think that is entirely fair. I agree completely that SW fans, or anyone for that matter, don't have the right to demand whatever they want. But I don't think that the fans don't count at all. I mean, like it or not, this is a Star Wars game, so at least it should be reasonably faithful to that genre. I understand where you're coming from, and I used to say the same thing. But after 1.03, no longer. I used to look on obsessed Star Wars fanboys as cute and helpless, until I saw what destruction their ignorance wrought. :D Now I have no time for them.

Btw, I AM a Star Wars fan. But I can see the game for its own merits, separate from the franchise and its foibles. If something in the game works well but is different from the films, I love it. I have no problem with it. It's only those fanboys that cannot make that distinction and have no desire to learn to, that I despise.

Originally posted by Prime:

Just my take. Al, hopefully you will not group me in with all the other Star Wars "fanboys".Of course not. Though many people have different takes on what defines a fanboy, my criteria are crystal clear, as espoused in the "JO bashing" thread. You don't quite fit them so far. ;)

Originally posted by ILR

And saber throw! GOD!!!!!!!! Vader ****in tosses his saber up at the catwalk to get Luke down ONCE... ****ING ONCE. He may not have even guided it with the force.. he may have just tossed it a good one to get Luke down. The result: JKII Saber throw. Put that mouse 2 button to better use and GIVE US A DEFENSE COMMAND!!!


In Kathy Tyers' "The Truce at Bakura", Luke uses saber throw to get rid of several opponents in a room. Very handy if you ask me. If I'd have The Force, I'd be throwing my saber all the time.

But I agree with you on one thing: I didn't really like saber throw in JKO either. :p

I don't what the problem is with saber throw. I mean, it can't hurt you if you keep your saber in a non-attacking stance, or you're not using a force power. So what, you want to be able to attack and not take any damage in the process? I find it a usefull tool, I like to throw the ol saber at people who foolishly wave their saber around while chasing me. Anymore, my biggest/only problem with the game is the absorb/flechette gun combo. If you could still take their gun it would be fine, methinks. Might make it unbalance something else though. Thoughts?

I generally take the view that a sequel (in gaming) should be an evolved and improved version of the original. To make a sequel for JK2 into a CBOM game wouldn't be evolution, it would be starting from scratch. I'm all for a Star Wars Team/Squad Objective game, it would make for some fun singleplayer too, but the Dark Forces series should keep to its roots.

Originally posted by Prime
I understand that many people play purely for competative reasons, and their only goal is to win. But do people have any fun doing the above? I mean, it just seems so boring to me. If that is what you feel the game comes down to, is it really worth playing? Sure, you get some wins, but you just spent a few hours of your life pressing two keys on a keyboard repeatedly. Ahh, good times! :) Does anyone besides me play this game just for fun? :p Since I fulfill my competative cravings with basketball, I just play this game for the Star Wars related aspects. To each his own, I guess.

Of course.
I have a total blast playing JK2 Instagib CTF.
Am I good at it?
No not really but I still have fun.


I stuck with FF dueling over FFA/mass player mods because of the thought and strategy that had to go into taking out a single aware and alert opponent.

There would be no mass crowd kills or sloppy random DFA kills.

As I started learning the finer points of dueling I really did have a great time watching my skill level develop and progress.

The challenge is what was fun for me.

Why do people play puzzle games like Tetris?
There is no story so how could they be any fun?

The reason is because it is fun to face a challenge and overcome it.

It’s not about “owning people” it’s simply about overcoming an obstacle or challenge.
At first the challenge was learning the game and combos, now it is beating other skilled players.

I’m not saying it’s not fun to just screw around in maps, I do it.
But competition has always been and will always be present in online gaming so it’s kind of hard to avoid.

Originally posted by shock ~ unnamed
As I started learning the finer points of dueling I really did have a great time watching my skill level develop and progress.

The challenge is what was fun for me.

Why do people play puzzle games like Tetris?
There is no story so how could they be any fun?

The reason is because it is fun to face a challenge and overcome it.

It?s not about ?owning people? it?s simply about overcoming an obstacle or challenge.
At first the challenge was learning the game and combos, now it is beating other skilled players.

I?m not saying it?s not fun to just screw around in maps, I do it.
But competition has always been and will always be present in online gaming so it?s kind of hard to avoid.

I completely understand. It is one of the things that made JO so fun for me. This is the first game that I played online with people I didn't know. I got this game 100% for the SP game, and never gave much thought to the MP aspects. I just gave it a try for the hell of it. I figured that I would get destroyed. But I guess since the game was brand new to everyone at that point, I did okay. That sort of got me thinking that I could improve. Like you describe, this was very fun and challenging. I normally play FFA and Duels, and I can usually end up at the top end of the scores list. Like you say, getting better and seeing improvement was a source of great enjoyment.

I understand the competative enjoyment that people get from this game. Hell, I enjoy beating someone, and I do try and win when I play. But when I play I usually do so in a manner I feel the game was intended, i.e. using different moves and countermoves. The point I was trying to make was if the game to someone comes down to just pull/throwing all the time, is winning that way really fun to them? I guess for me it would take away some of the enjoyment of the win. I enjoy a win much more when I defended one attack in a good way and had a well placed counter attack, and so on. If I just pull/threw for the umpteenth time and won because once again there was nothing the opponent could do, that just doesn't seem appealing. But everyone is different.

Originally posted by Spider Al
So you could say, if you practice enough, you go THROUGH the stages of using one weapon or few weapons, and come out on the other side. You go through the period where winning is your only fun, and finally come out on the other side to appreciate the whole game in a way you never could have done before.

Very interesting. I hadn't thought about that before. Meditate on this, I will.

Originally posted by Spider Al
Btw, I AM a Star Wars fan. But I can see the game for its own merits, separate from the franchise and its foibles. If something in the game works well but is different from the films, I love it. I have no problem with it. It's only those fanboys that cannot make that distinction and have no desire to learn to, that I despise.

I agree. I bought this game because it was Star Wars. I am still playing this game a year later because it is a great game. I would enjoy this game if it wasn't Star Wars. I also have no problems with were it seperates from the genre, firstly because I think it still captures the feel and important elements of Star Wars, and secondly because I feel the changes lead to a better game.