Login

russian armor

If you were in charge of a Relic developer team....

13 Feb 2015, 20:31 PM
#21
avatar of GenObi

Posts: 556

Abstain and this is why this poll is completely irrelevant and even more idiotic to simplify it into some sort of moral black and white choice, so sit down children we have some talking to do,apparently we have not pass the stage of being naive . Relic as a studio relies on a publisher like SEGA to fund games like coh. Relic may have "creative freedom" but sega is busniess that dictates the products priorities like coh2. You snobs have to understand that when it comes to releasing new content to generate more sales is far more important then spending money on a already sold product. The fact that companys like sega allow studios like relic to re visit and balance the game (which equals expenses) is great. The faster you understand that extra content is both healty for the studuo, the publisher and the consumer the faster you annoying whiners can grow up and join us in the grown up world. Often times its not up to relic when it comes to releasing products and time tables for balance, a infusion of money into any studio or publisher insures the future of the brand and product, so obviously content is more important, not to say that balance isnt its just not top priority.
13 Feb 2015, 20:33 PM
#22
avatar of UGBEAR

Posts: 954

I'll revising the maps....maps in COH2 sucks so bad.
13 Feb 2015, 20:36 PM
#23
avatar of Vuther
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3103 | Subs: 1

To be frank, I don't really know why you expected the poll to be split Napalm - even if most of the fanbase just plays singleplayer, it's pretty clear this forum doesn't largely consist of that group.
13 Feb 2015, 20:44 PM
#24
avatar of 5trategos

Posts: 449

I'm surprised to see any other voting option reach double digits.
13 Feb 2015, 20:45 PM
#25
avatar of RPhilMan1

Posts: 106

The game itself needs a core overhaul and a redesign of its Faction/Gamemode functionality.


How feasible do you think that is? Do you think Relic has the manpower and time to handle a task as grandiose as this? I think that's far too ambitious for what they can do. Think realistically here.
13 Feb 2015, 20:53 PM
#26
avatar of Glendizzle

Posts: 149

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Feb 2015, 20:31 PMGenObi
Abstain and this is why this poll is completely irrelevant and even more idiotic to simplify it into some sort of moral black and white choice, so sit down children we have some talking to do,apparently we have not pass the stage of being naive . Relic as a studio relies on a publisher like SEGA to fund games like coh. Relic may have "creative freedom" but sega is busniess that dictates the products priorities like coh2. You snobs have to understand that when it comes to releasing new content to generate more sales is far more important then spending money on a already sold product. The fact that companys like sega allow studios like relic to re visit and balance the game (which equals expenses) is great. The faster you understand that extra content is both healty for the studuo, the publisher and the consumer the faster you annoying whiners can grow up and join us in the grown up world. Often times its not up to relic when it comes to releasing products and time tables for balance, a infusion of money into any studio or publisher insures the future of the brand and product, so obviously content is more important, not to say that balance isnt its just not top priority.


this is it. and who doesn't like new stuff. you elite 1v1 guys should know better than us 4v4 scrubs that this game is never going to be e-sports unless they totally redid the whole damn game, which they won't, and i wouldn't want. new stuff = more money = allows them to work on the game more. pretty simple really. at no point can you ignore economics when it comes to considering anything. Balance isn't as bad as some of you guys make it out to be either. In my experience, RNG decides more games than balance and those are few and far between. Usually what decides a game is who made dumbass mistakes and who capitalized on them.

absolutely, more new stuff. i like new stuff, it breaks the meta too, so there is another plus. just imagine how blown to hell the meta will be if what we think that custom doctrines ends up being true. its better for us the consumer, since it allows more customization to your play style, and it makes relic money, which in turn allows them to keep making new stuff and patches. the definition of win-win.
13 Feb 2015, 20:56 PM
#27
avatar of DasDoomTurtle

Posts: 438



How feasible do you think that is? Do you think Relic has the manpower and time to handle a task as grandiose as this? I think that's far too ambitious for what they can do. Think realistically here.


I am thinking realisticly. They put out WFA.....they build 2 factions from the ground up; therefore, it is very plausible to revamp the 4 factions.
13 Feb 2015, 20:59 PM
#28
avatar of RPhilMan1

Posts: 106



I am thinking realisticly. They put out WFA.....they build 2 factions from the ground up; therefore, it is very plausible to revamp the 4 factions.


How long do you think it took them to plan, develop, and release WFA?

And you're leaving out one important aspect here... WFA allowed them to make money.

Entirely revamping all four factions is unrealistic.
13 Feb 2015, 21:01 PM
#29
avatar of Winterfeld

Posts: 249

Problem with this poll is that it is directed at the gamers, with no focus on the economics of the company. OF course in a dreamworld we have enough money to just focus on making a game, that people allready have paid for, better for many years. But in reality i would place most of my workerbees on making new content ( single and multiplayer, but after voorts numbers probably singleplayer ). Thats why i voted content!
13 Feb 2015, 21:02 PM
#30
avatar of Cabreza

Posts: 656

I voted revisiting existing content to make adjustments in balance and bug fixes but I believe that option is very closely tied to changing the core functionality of the game. A number of the balance issues facing CoH2 are intractably tied to core faction design and cannot be properly addressed without some degree of faction design overhaul. Examples of this include Soviet reliance upon call ins preventing changes to the current call in meta and OKW reliance on shreck Volks for AT perpetuating Volk blobs.
13 Feb 2015, 21:11 PM
#32
avatar of luvnest
Strategist Badge
Patrion 39

Posts: 1094 | Subs: 20

  • Revisiting existing content and making adjustments (example: unit balancing, map balance, bug fixes)
  • Changing core functionality of the game (example: faction design, OBS, game modes)

All the way.
13 Feb 2015, 21:11 PM
#33
avatar of DasDoomTurtle

Posts: 438



How long do you think it took them to plan, develop, and release WFA?

And you're leaving out one important aspect here... WFA allowed them to make money.

Entirely revamping all four factions is unrealistic.


You are leaving out the fact that if new content is developed that the projected earnings can be in jeopardy because its no different than having a 2 0year old car that you add bondo and paint to and try to sell it as a 5 year old car. The core of the game is crucial to its lifespan. BTW: Sega revamped the core of Rome2 and took large amounts of time to fix it before continuing to pump out dlc....FYI Sega owns CoH2.
13 Feb 2015, 21:11 PM
#34
avatar of Napalm

Posts: 1595 | Subs: 2

Note I said a team, not the entire studio.
13 Feb 2015, 21:17 PM
#35
avatar of DasDoomTurtle

Posts: 438

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Feb 2015, 21:11 PMNapalm
Note I said a team, not the entire studio.


I understand, just pointing out that the Rome2 team had in fact managed to fix the core of the game. Thus its is attainable by Relics team if the pieces fall into place. Sega is what makes that comparison worthwhile because they own both :)
13 Feb 2015, 21:39 PM
#36
avatar of Nuclear Arbitor
Patrion 28

Posts: 2470

i would start with balance and bugs to get the former as good as possible, short of an overhaul, and get rid of the later. then i would overhaul the things that needed it. you can make the game ok with just balance/bugs but an overhaul is really needed for soviet/OKW, OKH teching, and USF very early game.

I'd fire the whole team except Cynthia <444>3

i'm not sure this is going to stay legal...
13 Feb 2015, 21:49 PM
#37
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1

The right answer is all of these things, starting with redoing all the factions In a way that's actually consistent faction to faction and makes sense. When WFA came out Ostheer and Soviets should have both gotten a major overall.

Every faction in the game needs much more unit diversity.
13 Feb 2015, 21:51 PM
#38
avatar of Napalm

Posts: 1595 | Subs: 2

Note I said first priority.
13 Feb 2015, 21:53 PM
#39
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Feb 2015, 21:51 PMNapalm
Note I said first priority.


I know :(

It just seems like the problems in this game overlap so much that it's extremely hard to pick were to start first, but I did pick core faction design in the poll!
13 Feb 2015, 22:03 PM
#40
avatar of iTzDusty

Posts: 836 | Subs: 5

Id go for new content/factions/commanders etc. Theres no point hyper balancing existing content to a tee when theres bounds to be more coming in the near future. Imagine if the Ostheer/Soviet balance was perfect when WFA came out, WFA factions would still have shook balance big time.
0 user is browsing this thread:

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

1017 users are online: 1017 guests
0 post in the last 24h
10 posts in the last week
26 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49996
Welcome our newest member, maydongphuctc
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM