I am not on holiday, but I said already many things on this topic and others. Sadzealot is giving me lessons, somehow, saying that I am not taking game design related decisions, like if the game was made just of nothing.
really sad zealot wrote:And neither has anything to do with the gameplay. And I feel the same goes for MJ. You nerfed it, and you explained it, but it hasn't really been explained from a gameplay perspective. You've given reasons, but none of them really matters because they're arbritrary.
How lucky we are! We do just arbritraty stuff, and we happen to have a game that some says the gameplay was perfect before the removal of the micro jump.
There are at least four strong arguments for the removal of the microjump, and that's why they have been removed. But you can really ask yourself if having twenty arguments would convince someone that is unhappy to become happy.
I read all the feelings of the players, and they are ever true, but when I see the way sadzealot is insulting our work without reaction of others, I believe it is ok to say that the discussion is bias. I am taking decision more coldly, based on argument, for the future of the game, even if you believe the countrary. I would be stupid to do otherwise, even if it is still possible to make stupid choices: and that's why I read carefully. But so far, there is nearly no argument specific to microjump: it is often more related to the desire of some top skilled players to have speed & skill. So, if this can be achieve in another way, and that the troubles that are specific to the microjump be removed, then it would be the better since I don't think that keeping major flaws would do good for the future of the game.
It was like the strafe spamming of the alpha that was exploitng the reality of ping to bring chaos on dodging time. Really bad thing, and when we removed it, a lot of highly skilled players went away or started to argue in an unpleasant way, mostly based on how Shootmania is not as good as Quake. What can I say other than: go play Quake, and tell me here: what is the main issue with it. We will see how brillant you are in gamedesign, lessons giver. But making games is my job since 10 years, and you are yet to prove that you accept me as a pro. It does not mean I am always right, but I have a more global solid approach than: "shootmania should be a fast fps, so bring microjump back, you are so bad at game design"
By the way, we are going to test an half reload of laser when nucleus is denied, to accelerate the pace and nerf the nucleus, including Siege (that we would love to have time to consolidate, and I know that nucleus is OP in there) Being capable to go from one mode to another with knowledge of gameplay is something positive. A player must not have to learn again too many thing when changing rules. If you want different gameplay, then use different games. The same for Trackmania.