-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Uncharted 2: Among Thieves | The Official Thread
- Thread starter KilgoreTrout
- Start date
- Status
sankt-Antonio said:
:lol :lol are we playing the same game.
Also to the people who say stop complaining and adapt, maybe you haven't read properly. I'm not pissed that the game is harder. This game just got ridiculously easy and in my mind it went from a nice competitive game, to an arcadey random shooter just like COD. At the moment I'll continue to play I was blowing off steam yesterday, but I still stand by what I say, this is a sell out sort of move and they still are addressing non-issues, why not fix The glitches? Why not fix the grenades? These are the things people care about or at least from what I hear the most of.
Irish said:You really need to shut your fucking mouth. Why the fuck did you, with your DtI BS and only 52 hours played, have to ruin the game I've put 320 hours into instead of playing another?
Also, only 10% of the total playing population participated in that poll. I'm not really sure you can get an accurate representation of the population's wishes that way.
Hell, I voted for it having it's own playlist simply because I knew other people might like it. If I knew ND would focus on the first part of that phrase, I would have voted for what I truly felt. (hated it)
I'm a close quarters fighter and I'm not ashamed to admit it. I knew exactly how to manipulate my surroundings so my opponent's fell right into my traps and where to go to catch them off guard. However, with each and every change ND has made, it seems like they are trying to tell me to play the game a certain way. That way involves sitting way in the back with DtI and a FAL and camping until the sun rises.
I'll play through until the DLC comes, but once March 2nd hits, I might just have to:
for good.
BTW, here's my stats page so you can see exactly how I play.
BrokenOath
Run-n-gunner pwnt.
Stop being such a whiner Broken.
CozMick said:
Get it through your head man, it's not that he couldn't adapt to the changes (I feel I kind of have already), but it doesn't stop us from disliking the changes. My entire gameplan got screwed over because the new tweaks COMPLETELY change most people's playstyles, especially after months of having what they had before.
I'll be bailing out soon myself for GoWIII and FFXIII, not because I hate the same. But I still stand by my point to having the reduced health-mode as a playlist.
Oh, and yes, random shoulder-switching is a little annoying, didn't notice it until a few hours yesterday. IDK why this was done at all.
CozMick said:
That's just the point man and I get that, but you're missing what I'm saying. I feel like this is a sell out sort of move, but they gotta do what they gotta do I guess. This game was not like every quick fast arcadey console shooter there is. This one took precision, knowledge of the maps, and multiple skills beyond shooting. Now it's more of a camp out and aim anywhere you want kind of game. How can making shooting the legs do as much as a headshot balance a game out? That's the part that gets me the most, is that the people who are better at shooting are probably actually worse off, because naturally I shoot for the head, I guess I just should go for the legs:lol.
Anyways back to my point, I get it, this is COD-esque now. The kills come fast and if you're not careful you're dead. It's just not the same game it was 2 days ago at all, and it levels the playing field off for the newbies to be able to compete, which not being an asshole, they should work their way up like everyone else did.
edit- And once again like the 2 posts above me, please stop saying I or others have to adapt, because it's not like I'm having trouble here. It's too easy not hard now. This isn't at cozmick or anyone in particular, just anybody using that reasoning.
I'm mad that a game that catered to every playstyle before is now forcing people into a single playstyle where attempting to do anything other than staying in the back results in a quick death.
BTW, I only use the pistole once I realize a Sniper/Pistole match is going to be nothing but a Pistole a match and haven't used the shotgun since mid-November.
You were being a dick when you said this:
yet you couldn't get used to the old style of play.
BTW, I only use the pistole once I realize a Sniper/Pistole match is going to be nothing but a Pistole a match and haven't used the shotgun since mid-November.
You were being a dick when you said this:
yet you couldn't get used to the old style of play.
The changes don't seem too bad. It does seem to promote camping a bit more. I was playing in the Village and three of my teammates (random people from matchmaking) were all hanging out up outisde where villians spawn initially. Poking their heads out on either side of the building taking people out. Don't recall seeing that too much before. Felt odd. I kind of liked being able to do some crazy evasions and avoid being killed. Not like I was running around in the open, but even just being able to get to cover before dying if you were shot from behind if you were good. It takes a bit of adjusting, but I was playing as well as I usually play I suppose. I have only tried Deathmatch though. I love the new medals. They're great. The first and last kill ones, the retaliation, defender and tricky ones. I like them all a lot. Also, the new placement seems better for notification. Also, I haven't tried or felt the wrath of the sniper you guys were talking about in here yet. I'm sure I will though. Really looking forward to the DLC and new trophies.
I really need to play some more to really see how I feel though.
I really need to play some more to really see how I feel though.
Irish -- this is for you too, explaining why the # of responses we got is sound to use as a gauge.
So, two things.
1. The changes weren't directly based on that poll. It just let us know if changes to health or damage were worth looking into or if we were just crazy for thinking we wanted to tune it. We paid equal attention to both a new playlist or the global change. But we didn't implement it exactly because that was not where we netted out after tweaking it a ton and reviewing how the Experimental Weekend played.
2. I would, respectfully, suggest you take a look at how polls and surveys are conducted and how using a sample size with a great enough number of people can be extrapolated to represent the whole population with more than acceptable accuracy. The # of respondents was so high that we could based our margin of error on the TOTAL unique population since MP started, rather than a shorter time period (which would be a smaller population) -- to the tune of 99% accuracy within 1.2 percentage points, plus-minus. That's exceptionally high, thanks to the volume of responses we got.
For example, most surveys, say for political reasons, determine what the entire population of the US thinks based on 1,000 - 2,000 respondents, and the US population is 300+ million. Take a look at this, from a respected polling company: http://www.gallup.com/poll/125858/Americans-Slight-Improvement-Global-Image.aspx
They're basing their survey of ~1,000 to represent the entire population of the country, with 95% accuracy within 4 percentage points. We did better than that
Darkatomz said:
Darkatomz said:
So, two things.
1. The changes weren't directly based on that poll. It just let us know if changes to health or damage were worth looking into or if we were just crazy for thinking we wanted to tune it. We paid equal attention to both a new playlist or the global change. But we didn't implement it exactly because that was not where we netted out after tweaking it a ton and reviewing how the Experimental Weekend played.
2. I would, respectfully, suggest you take a look at how polls and surveys are conducted and how using a sample size with a great enough number of people can be extrapolated to represent the whole population with more than acceptable accuracy. The # of respondents was so high that we could based our margin of error on the TOTAL unique population since MP started, rather than a shorter time period (which would be a smaller population) -- to the tune of 99% accuracy within 1.2 percentage points, plus-minus. That's exceptionally high, thanks to the volume of responses we got.
For example, most surveys, say for political reasons, determine what the entire population of the US thinks based on 1,000 - 2,000 respondents, and the US population is 300+ million. Take a look at this, from a respected polling company: http://www.gallup.com/poll/125858/Americans-Slight-Improvement-Global-Image.aspx
They're basing their survey of ~1,000 to represent the entire population of the country, with 95% accuracy within 4 percentage points. We did better than that
Irish said:
Being a dick wasn't intended.
Also where do you get the assumption that I couldn't get used to the old style?
Apart from Objective games I come out pretty much on top every game. using only the AK/M4, pistol and occasionally a pick-up.
http://www.naughtydog.com/stats/index/cozmick Look ok to me.
Mt Heart Attack
Member
LET'S MAKE ANOTHER POLL.
Something like: you wanna keep the new health setting?
Only two possible answers this time around: 1) HELL YES 2) WTF NO
Something like: you wanna keep the new health setting?
Only two possible answers this time around: 1) HELL YES 2) WTF NO
arne said:
Well I appreciate all the answers, but honestly if health is such a concern, why haven't you guys factored in grenades, I know you answered it's not possible based on balancing but why not? I get killed by grenades 50 feet away and I live by some basically in my back pocket. They are overpowered and incredibly inconsistent. I feel like nobody ever complained about health, but this is one thing everyone I know that plays complains about. Have you ever considered changing them?
Don't mind me, I just rage when I type. I'm not actually that guy who screams and trashtalks all during a match.
I wish I would have been informed about that poll choice though. Lowered health is nice every once in a while, but not all the time. I mean, those Crushing GAF deathmatches can be amazing at times.
That auto-shoulders switch thing sucks though.
I wish I would have been informed about that poll choice though. Lowered health is nice every once in a while, but not all the time. I mean, those Crushing GAF deathmatches can be amazing at times.
That auto-shoulders switch thing sucks though.
Mt Heart Attack
Member
Yeah that should just be removed and forgotten.Irish said:That auto-shoulders switch thing sucks though.
Zombie James
Banned
CozMick said:
This patch is a gift from the gods.
The more I think about it I realize my only real issue with this patch is that leg shots do as much damage as body shots. Everything else I'm fine with and all of the annoying bits stem from the leg hitbox changes.
I really don't get the hate of the auto shoulder switching though. Since day one I've been wanting it in the game and now it is. It's been extremely consistent for me and I haven't had any issue with it yet.
I think it's just your aim. The change to the guns is fairly minor (just about every gun kills in just 1 less bullet than pre-patch). The major change is that getting hit in the legs now does just as much damage as getting hit in the torso. basically people that can't aim well don't have to worry about it anymore.Mizzou Gaming said:The new update saved me from trading my game in because the previous health system made me HATE the multiplayer. It was silly and frustrating prior to 1.05 because it took way too many hits to kill. It was silly because we play as normal human beings with super duper skin armor.
Pistol shots are MUCH easier to get after the patch. For shots ANYWHERE rather than 4~5 in the torso or above.CozMick said:
I really don't get the hate of the auto shoulder switching though. Since day one I've been wanting it in the game and now it is. It's been extremely consistent for me and I haven't had any issue with it yet.
arne said:Irish -- this is for you too, explaining why the # of responses we got is sound to use as a gauge.
So, two things.
1. The changes weren't directly based on that poll. It just let us know if changes to health or damage were worth looking into or if we were just crazy for thinking we wanted to tune it. We paid equal attention to both a new playlist or the global change. But we didn't implement it exactly because that was not where we netted out after tweaking it a ton and reviewing how the Experimental Weekend played.
2. I would, respectfully, suggest you take a look at how polls and surveys are conducted and how using a sample size with a great enough number of people can be extrapolated to represent the whole population with more than acceptable accuracy. The # of respondents was so high that we could based our margin of error on the TOTAL unique population since MP started, rather than a shorter time period (which would be a smaller population) -- to the tune of 99% accuracy within 1.2 percentage points, plus-minus. That's exceptionally high, thanks to the volume of responses we got.
For example, most surveys, say for political reasons, determine what the entire population of the US thinks based on 1,000 - 2,000 respondents, and the US population is 300+ million. Take a look at this, from a respected polling company: http://www.gallup.com/poll/125858/Americans-Slight-Improvement-Global-Image.aspx
They're basing their survey of ~1,000 to represent the entire population of the country, with 95% accuracy within 4 percentage points. We did better than that
Honestly I thought the poll was flawed in many ways.
The difference is that Gallup doesn't do website polling. The ~1,000 people they interview are not picked randomly. If you go into a bar an poll 100 people about drinking you're not going to get something representative of an entire population.
The subset of players that visit naughtydog.com regularly may not be representative of the entire player user base. Also, people wanting the game to change have more reasons to go and vote for it rather than those who are happy about it. And that's not to mention that the options available were not good at all (for example, a number of people did not want you to change the game but voted for the playlist option, as evidenced by many replies in this thread).
If you want to have a good poll you shouldn't ask people to come to you, you have to go after them. For example if you do a poll on abortion on a website you're going to get most of the votes from people who are either strongly in favor or against legalizing it, ignoring everyone not in the extremes (which tends to be the majority).
This is what I want to see.
I want to see someone who does not have a majority of their kills from either grenades/shotgun&pistole/melee and still complain about the new changes..
The people who are complaining about the changes have something in common, but maybe I'm wrong.
I want to see someone who does not have a majority of their kills from either grenades/shotgun&pistole/melee and still complain about the new changes..
The people who are complaining about the changes have something in common, but maybe I'm wrong.
There you go.Snipes424 said:
CartridgeBlower
Member
CozMick said:
Uh, it's much EASIER to get kills with all those weapons now...so...yeah...
So I got to play a good bit with the patch. After reading some of GAF's impression, it sounded like they completely ruined the game but it's not bad. I kind of like the health decrease, it didn't really effect my performance in a good or bad way. My only issue is that it makes the nades even worse. They're by far my most hated part of U2's MP, the only thing that actually manages to take away from my enjoyment of the game. After the patch I was still getting killed by them even if I moved away, over half of my deaths came from grenades, usually dropped by an enemy I kill. It's just an easy and effortless way to get a kill by only having to tap a single button, no skill or brain function required. I really do fuckin hate them, it's too bad ND isn't interested in changing it.
Anyways, overall the patch didn't really make that big of a difference for me, I already hated nades. I guess I might feel differently if I had played it for over 300 hours but I'm not gonna ragequit the game because of it. It's just a minor adjustment for me, no love lost.
Yeah, but if you try charging @ someone with your shotgun or pistole, you'll most likely get gunned down due to lower health and the stopping power of something like an AK or FAL. Now I really like this, players shouldn't be able to charge through a stream of gunfire and get a one shot kill with the shotty, I've seen it happen too many times.
Anyways, overall the patch didn't really make that big of a difference for me, I already hated nades. I guess I might feel differently if I had played it for over 300 hours but I'm not gonna ragequit the game because of it. It's just a minor adjustment for me, no love lost.
Yeah, but if you try charging @ someone with your shotgun or pistole, you'll most likely get gunned down due to lower health and the stopping power of something like an AK or FAL. Now I really like this, players shouldn't be able to charge through a stream of gunfire and get a one shot kill with the shotty, I've seen it happen too many times.
MoonsaultSlayer
Member
arne said:
Thanks for the response. I just have a feeling that douchebaggery wasn't factored into the equation. Sure, we'd all love a balanced game to be played the way the devs want it to be played but making the changes that have been made just bring out the exploiters from the woodwork.
i realize ND intended people to play the way they were but with lowered health... that's not going to happen. I say this again, the traversal options in this game set it apart from every game out there and it has been taken away. A team can sit back at their starting spawn point and just survey the area and watch for people to enter the open. 3-4 shots and they're dead. Lifelike? Sure. Fun? GTFO.
I imagine plunder is terrible now. You're dead within the animation of picking up the idol and throwing it in time is moot.
CartridgeBlower
Member
Snuggler said:
I can see this line of thinking, but so far from my playing experience, it's been the opposite. On most maps people are still able to get a good jump on a lot of players, and then one quick blast with the shotgun or a few pistol shots at the legs and now you're down. Not to mention that's the exact reason camping is now breaking out everywhere. The pistol is very powerful with this patch.
Run and gunners hate this patch, campers love it. That's how it's looking to me, at least.
mescalineeyes
Banned
arne said:2. I would, respectfully, suggest you take a look at how polls and surveys are conducted and how using a sample size with a great enough number of people can be extrapolated to represent the whole population with more than acceptable accuracy. The # of respondents was so high that we could based our margin of error on the TOTAL unique population since MP started, rather than a shorter time period (which would be a smaller population) -- to the tune of 99% accuracy within 1.2 percentage points, plus-minus. That's exceptionally high, thanks to the volume of responses we got.
For example, most surveys, say for political reasons, determine what the entire population of the US thinks based on 1,000 - 2,000 respondents, and the US population is 300+ million. Take a look at this, from a respected polling company: http://www.gallup.com/poll/125858/Americans-Slight-Improvement-Global-Image.aspx
They're basing their survey of ~1,000 to represent the entire population of the country, with 95% accuracy within 4 percentage points. We did better than that
permission to use "lawyered"
Massa said:
Thankfully this is the best post in explaining potential inaccuracies in the poll. The points you have brought up are certainly valid, although I do have some counterpoints for discussion.
The first counterpoint is that we didn't take the results of the poll as an absolute certainty of fact, but rather as an overall temperature check, so how we weighted the poll into our own decision making process (along with internal playtesting tech and anecdotal data; overall gameplay data from the Experimental weekend; etc.) lessened the severity of bias or error.
Indeed, a more robust poll would be a random sampling, say an e-mail survey we send to folks who have played or purchased Uncharted 2 -- although that falls into a similar issue as not everybody who receives the survey may respond unless they're inclined to do so. However, the bias/error factor in that would be less than a poll that required the respondent to come to the website. Again, another reason why we didn't take it as an absolute indicator.
Gallup polls, at least from my understanding when I did surveys while a public policy major, do indeed take a number of people at mostly random -- but narrowed down based on certain particulars. The broadest poll would be just to narrow it down by age, typically adults. Actually, unless they indicate otherwise, narrowing it down even more and trying to represent the population without doing a random sampling would actually introduce more error since they would be affecting system detrimentally by ensuring certain criteria are met. Generally, the more you enforce certain rules or criteria to create a "random" sample to extrapolate the results to a larger population, the less robust your data is because you're introducing artificial factors that do (rather than may) affect true randomization.
The large number of respondents (in relation to our total unique player population) do help the robustness of the data, regardless of arguments that the extremes could be represented unequally. Even if I assume that 25% - 33% of the responses in each category are biased (which I would hope we could agree is an arbitrarily large number to reduce the incidence of edge cases), all we're doing is reducing the percentage difference between the responses to be narrower, yet we'd still be well within the margin of error for the smaller sample size and smaller number of respondents. With this poll there's no way to eliminate the "highest" (love it) and "lowest" (hate it) to find the median because then that favors the responses in the middle in way that would entirely invalidate the poll.
Lastly, when reviewing a poll, even as worded, it would be unsound to attempt to make any sort of guesses as to the behavior of our respondents. again that would introduce even more bias/error than just taking the results as they were.
and again, most of this discussion is academic in the end because we only took this as a general direction rather than as an absolute mandate.
(note: we also looked at global vs. playlist-specific end results. while there are many factors, many of which I can't or won't be able to get into, I can say that the playlist-specific option presents are least one major issue working against it -- which would be to fracture the matchmaking pool of players.)
/tl;drwalloftext
Rewrite
Not as deep as he thinks
Let me just mention this, I have to give you major props arne for staying level headed and being completely reasonable in trying to back up your arguments even if people disagree with you. I think all these reactions are great because it's creating discussions about what works and what doesn't work. Hopefully you get enough proper feedback as to what the majority like and dislike about the update. (Although this update made the game easier to me!)
Thanks for still reading the thread and keeping us posted.
Thanks for still reading the thread and keeping us posted.
Irish said:
or you're a) too good or b) great at adapting to change.
maybe or maybe not things will be different once the dust settles and the majority of the player population has had a chance to purposely or naturally adjust to the differences.
Rewrite said:
we're not absolutists, at least I don't like to think we are. there's room for flexibility and discussion. our development environment here values opinions and debates in order to iterate and ultimately create a better game. i believe we also extend that to the debate and opportunity to our players as well.
KilgoreTrout
Banned
As for the argument this is to ease new players into the game, I don't think it's really gonna help. The problem still remains that the most powerful booster is unlocked 14 levels in.
Maybe it's time for an experimental weekend without boosters, or DTI?
Maybe it's time for an experimental weekend without boosters, or DTI?
One thing that I've mentioned before in-game, but not here on GAF: It'd be nice if there were another button to switch weapons other than the D-Pad and L1+Triangle. I realize that it might be an intentional design decision, but it seems more likely that it's just a holdover from single player where you're not constantly switching weapons on the go.
Having to stop moving in order to change weapons is far from ideal. L3, R3 (when not aiming) or Holding Triangle all would work well as alternate weapon switch buttons. On a slightly related note, being able to hold triangle to pick up the treasure and ignore any weapon/ammo pickups that are next to it would be useful too. There have been a handful of times where I've gone to grab the treasure only to accidentally grab some ammo.
Having to stop moving in order to change weapons is far from ideal. L3, R3 (when not aiming) or Holding Triangle all would work well as alternate weapon switch buttons. On a slightly related note, being able to hold triangle to pick up the treasure and ignore any weapon/ammo pickups that are next to it would be useful too. There have been a handful of times where I've gone to grab the treasure only to accidentally grab some ammo.
I'm actually one of the worst players you'll ever meet in the game, so I guess I'm B.
I can't give up my Uncharted. I love it to death, but it sorta feels like my wings have been clipped and I'm no longer free to fly. (literally) It's also hard when 80% of my friends list is playing it constantly.
I really don't have as bad of an attitude as my posts make it appear.
I can't give up my Uncharted. I love it to death, but it sorta feels like my wings have been clipped and I'm no longer free to fly. (literally) It's also hard when 80% of my friends list is playing it constantly.
I really don't have as bad of an attitude as my posts make it appear.
- Status