Reflection on the Linearity of XT


(rookie1) #1

First I must say that I like the movement speed of XT as it is .
About the gameplay: XT has some of diversity in the merc to merc battle due to the diversity of Guns and abilities ,so on this side its not always the same type of Battle we encounters

But on the core Maps side : Its too linear and dont bring diversity in the gameplay from match to match.
Its will always be :Go to A destroy go the B hack then go C and Win, with a bit a variation on routes to achieved this.

I was playing this game That the only goal was only Destroy the other team Base .
One goal but so many ways to achieved it ,By different Routes, mercs, vehicules types (air, ground)
Destrtoying a barrack or an economy building or the Weapon factory first was part of the team tactic descision.
So what im saying is that even if the gameplay core map goal was A destroy B there was so much different scenario possible

There is no Buildings to destroyed in Xt that will change the gameplay dramaticaly .
If there were something that could be destroy (like a Bridge a Building a Catwalk ) and that could bring a new type of situation that could be see in a match but not in all match … You can see it as a Variable
The winning last Objectives is always the same what if to break this linearity The Winning objective would be C or D depending on a variable routes or objective choices done.

The idea is to Break the linearity and the feeling that the match/map is always the same thing where the borenest will come very fast .
Making the maps gameplay/scenario equation lots more complicate will bring interesting/fun games .
I think this is in the Top 5 important things to look at in XT


(Pytox) #2

That’s why we need command posts, hackable doors to make the maps more dynamic and also more side objectives that can change the outcome of the map


(prophett) #3

To Splash Damage - have you allotted a period/time on your development road map to address these concerns?


(Protekt1) #4

I am hoping the new maps come through with a more open/optional design. I pretty much gave up hope on the current sets of maps having these features beyond what the bit they have. I don’t hate the current maps and I think they are still fun, but hope for more open design. Not big open spaces but more paths to take. I think 3 should be the minimum amount. One direct route, one long route that has a big advantage for taking, and one short route that is hard to complete the objective from but helps the other routes…

Something like that. I think there are too many choke points where defenders can cover basically too much making it possible for them to just stack up and hold out. Especially on LB which technically has 3 main routes, but the defenders can kinda just stack up in 1 area of the map and cover all directions not really requiring you to split up at all.

Setting up a bomb to blow up a building sounds like a great side objective… in short - do it.


(dommafia) #5

[QUOTE=rookie1;485190]

I was playing this game That the only goal was only Destroy the other team Base .
One goal but so many ways to achieved it ,By different Routes, mercs, vehicules types (air, ground)
Destrtoying a barrack or an economy building or the Weapon factory first was part of the team tactic descision.[/QUOTE]

CnC renegade?


(attack) #6

sounds like .
otherwise giants citizen kabuto had a similar mode.

btw c&c renegade becomes in february an following titel
http://www.renegade-x.com/(i will check this one out for sure,for the reason alone that there is no ironsight required :D)


(rookie1) #7

[QUOTE=attack;485268]sounds like .
otherwise giants citizen kabuto had a similar mode.
btw c&c renegade becomes in february an following titel
http://www.renegade-x.com/(i will check this one out for sure,for the reason alone that there is no ironsight required :D)[/QUOTE]

Yes! :stuck_out_tongue: and I heard about renX will see then how it will look like :wink:
I know XT isnt the same type of game (no vehicules…) But I think it was a good exemple to show my point :slight_smile:


(dommafia) #8

[QUOTE=rookie1;485274]Yes! :stuck_out_tongue: and I heard about renX will see then how it will look like :wink:
I know XT isnt the same type of game (no vehicules…) But I think it was a good exemple to show my point :)[/QUOTE]

I played the game to DEATH. Was my first multplayer fps game. Such a great concept and too bad they never made a sequel ( they canceled it 2 times). What’s the renX site?

Edit
found this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-bLTYiaqqk OMFG ITS COMING OUT in 2 months. Rookie1, thanks for reminding me about this :slight_smile:


(acQu) #9

<totally random post inc>

CCRenegade was was also among one of the first multiplayer FPS games i played. Truly amazing game. Actually in this game i see so many nice concepts which could spice up todays FPS genre (simply by being different).


(acQu) #10

[QUOTE=dommafia;485301]Edit
found this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-bLTYiaqqk OMFG ITS COMING OUT in 2 months. Rookie1, thanks for reminding me about this :)[/QUOTE]

Oh yeah :smiley: SD, what is your stance on such games? I think it fits perfectly to your company. (Finally an Open World game from SD again, i can dream, right?) :smiley:

EDIT ups double post, i wanted to put that in edit section above :o


(chump) #11

It’d be nice if we could get some remakes of the classics. Some maps that have withstood the test of time. Like goldrush, or radar, or even salvage. Counterstrike players seem to have to problem playing the same maps for 10+ years. If ain’t broke don’t fix it, right? It would also save some dev time as the layout is already there and would only need some modifications.


(prophett) #12

Three great maps to start with. Might need some adjustments to avoid the whole “performance issues when a space is greater that 2096 units” (or whatever that problem is), but with some creative reworking it could work while retaining the exciting gameplay of those maps.


(rookie1) #13

[QUOTE=acQu;485302]<totally random post inc>

CCRenegade was was also among one of the first multiplayer FPS games i played. Truly amazing game. Actually in this game i see so many nice concepts which could spice up todays FPS genre (simply by being different).[/QUOTE]
Im thinking at few things for LB that could be done to break the linearity ,will come back on this later this week :slight_smile:


(rookie1) #14

LB map



Not fully detailled but here what I think for maps


(.Chris.) #15

What if the attacking team doesn’t want it to go the other way? If the defence puts up the blockage before the EV gets there then due to the short distance from the start it would be very difficult to remove that blockage before it reaches it and then you’re forced to go the much longer route, seems really unfair.

This kind of setup should only really be used for standard objectives with side routes blocked by secondary objectives like in Radar.


(rookie1) #16

[QUOTE=.Chris.;485552]What if the attacking team doesn’t want it to go the other way? If the defence puts up the blockage before the EV gets there then due to the short distance from the start it would be very difficult to remove that blockage before it reaches it and then you’re forced to go the much longer route, seems really unfair.

This kind of setup should only really be used for standard objectives with side routes blocked by secondary objectives like in Radar.[/QUOTE]
Good question …but why they wont like to take a shortcut ? There always a way to tweak for good gameplay …Anyways its an exemple that could be to lead to something similar by brain storming the possibilities.If its standard objectives we go back to case one to linearity


(.Chris.) #17

The other way is twice as long, hardly a shortcut, you’re punishing them too much if they can’t get the barrier down in time before the EV gets there. Obviously you can just leave the EV alone till the barrier is down but on a public server with 7 other people on your team all it takes is one idiot to hop in an drive the EV when the barrier is still up and then you’re stuck taking the longer route.

I don’t get how using this approach on non-EV objectives which was used well on many ET and ET:QW maps is considered linear, or did I misread your last sentence?

Applying it to an EV objective just gives you two options with no way to change that decision once the EV gets passed the point where the split occurs. On standard objectives you can keep fighting over that alternative route till the stage is complete. Engineers can repair the blockade again if blown forcing the attack back down the other routes, the attack can decide if they try again taking it down or go the other way, they are risks and rewards involved for both teams.

Maybe if there was another escort able objective like on Railgun where both teams can control a tram or something you could do something like this with track switches and barriers, this would work because the tram is moving in both directions


(spookify) #18

Maps wont matter if they cant control the spread or the shooting aspect of the game, which sucks right now…

Again 34% acc is too high! PFFT!!

We have told them how to balance the guns a little better and they arent listening… Fall off Damage, Total Headshots, ROF, true damage are all things to look at before spread!


(rookie1) #19

[QUOTE=.Chris.;485560]Applying it to an EV objective just gives you two options with no way to change that decision once the EV gets passed the point where the split occurs[/QUOTE] that’s the idea ! of non linearity you have options …linear like it is you have no choice you go from A to B then C win

On standard objectives you can keep fighting over that alternative route till the stage is complete. Engineers can repair the blockade again if blown forcing the attack back down the other routes, the attack can decide if they try again taking it down or go the other way, they are risks and rewards involved for both teams.

that can be done also in a semi linearity way like you describe^^

Maybe if there was another escort able objective like on Railgun where both teams can control a tram or something you could do something like this with track switches and barriers, this would work because the tram is moving in both directions

also this ^^


(ailmanki) #20

This ain’t a single player game where you decide the EV to go left or right… Its a multiplayer, and this decision for the EV will get very borring. Also its not really a decision at all; or will you make the game Pause, and let a team vote about it?
Its just a case for raging.

“EV will go all around if path is blocked” at which moment is that decided? Does it mean one just has to camp there and push the button in right moment?

Nonlinear in a MP means, you can decide for yourself where to walk. And not always walk down the same way to the EV, objective, enemy.