Jump to content

robertapril

Members
  • Posts

    4
  • Joined

Reputation

10 Good

Personal Information

  • Location
    Canada
  1. Just wondering, but during PVP, since last patch, my inputs are a lot more unresponsive. Same FPS, same latency on my side, but it seems that my inputs take forever to be taken into account. BTW, I'm one of those people who get 10-40 fps during PVP. I understand that my FPS isn't stellar, but that doesn't change the fact that the game was more responsive a few days ago. I'm pretty sure that if you get a better frame rate out of your game, you probably won't have noticed this. Anyone else in the same boat? Anyways, have fun out there.
  2. I do believe that some people get great performance no matter what they're doing. I also believe that a lot of people get sub-par performance no matter their hardware-software configuration. The issue here shouldn't be whether people are lying or not about their performance. It should be about: Why the hell does this game run so poorly for a lot of people, when it is clearly not an issue caused by underpowered hardware or improperly configured software. A lot of people here have good computers that run other, more demanding games, perfectly well. Why does a simple 2vs2 pvp sequence make my computer lag more than when I'm playing BF3 with 32 players, or WoW on a 40+ pvp battlefield. Love the game, hate the performance I'm getting. P.S. I noticed that my game is a lot more unresponsive since the last patch. Same visual and network performance (same fps, same latency), but my inputs seem to take forever now to be taken into account.
  3. Well over 60 RE of a level 50 blue (overkill if I recall) assault cannon to get any kind of epic recipe. None so far. Later, I browsed the GTN and I found the exact gun I'm trying to get, for 40K. This made me sad. For a measly 40K, I could have saved myself so much time, creds and disapointment. I quit that character, and I'm not doing any trade skills until they become less frustrating (not even gonna say fun, cause unless you're lucky, it aint gonna happen). There's a lot of good in the crew system, but the overall annoyances and inherent frustrations far outweigh any initial enjoyment. Disastrous strings of bad luck are simply not fun, especially if someone else can be incredibly luck at the same time. Rewarding the same behaviour very differently is not to my liking. With that said, I understand the place luck and randomness can have in these types of systems. But, having it be the principle deciding factor of the success or failure is ludicrous. All the effort I put in doesn't seem to be worth it in the end because what I create will have cost way more creds and time compared to alternate source of equipment (pvp or pve). Not satisfied with the current state of things.
  4. While some of the choices are more obvious, the problem with these dark side / light side issues is that it could be argued both ways most of the time. So for instances, you could take a "big picture" view to explain why one choice which appears dark, is actually light, or vice-versa, because of repercussions or some specific part of the context. While for another choice you could simply argue that killing/stealing/passion is always dark, saving/healing/kissing is always light, and ignore everything else. That is what makes these dark/light options so great and aweful. You're always right and wrong. But the real problem in my opinion is clarity, limitation and expectation. If I need knowledge outside of the current quest information, to understand the conclusion to my quest (why the hell is X dark/light), then that is a game design error. I should not need to have done all the quests in a zone to understand why the choices seem erroneous. Then, there's the simple fact that they reduce the complex world of morality to a black and white outcome. There is bound to be multiple times where you won't agree with the decision since there is zero leeway. You're either going to completely agree or disagree with their judgement. It could be that the Dark and Light side aren't actually good/evil. Someone mentioned dark being passion and light being love_of_local_sports_team, but few people know that, and ya can't really blame em. Dark side and Light side pretty much equates to good and bad in the majority of people's mind. The last problem I think this system has is answering player expectations. If I want to be evil, but the dark side option seems to be a goodie-goodie choice, I'm instantly confused and disappointed, because this is basically the conclusion, the pay-off, and it doesn't match-up with what I expected. I don't want to have someone explain to me why, it turns out being kind is actually evil. Unless it happens very rarely, or I'm slow upstairs, understandable expectations should generally be met. Also, sometimes you get very unusual choices. A serial murderer is captured, and you can either arrest him or let him free. I instantly think... where's my murder him option? But then, I deal with a harmful computer tech, and I have the option to kill him. Where was that option when I caught the murderer? And as was mentioned earlier, I capture an enemy general, but I only have the option to kill him or set him free. Where is my "put under arrest" option. I like the effort BW has put in the game. I appreciate the idea. Most of the time I'm satisfied with the outcome. But more often than I'd like, I tilt my head like a pug wondering what kind of moral compass the designer of that particular quest has. Also, I've worked in the videogame business and I know that for a project this size, it is near-impossible to always be coherent. Different developers interpret differently design documents, so you get decisions that aren't totally in sync. There's also the fact that the right/wrong answers were decided by people who had deadlines, not philosophers with infinite time. So you're gonna get "good enoughs" and "whatever ship it" scenarios.
×
×
  • Create New...