(This post was last modified: 01-09-2013, 08:41 by SUICIDAL.)
Some of you guys are funny :lol:
I can totally understand that some people would want to wait and see how the game turns out before buying it. Me, I like to be supportive, so even if it doesn't turn out great, I still want to hand them my money - for a few reasons. The game is being developed by a group of guys that have worked on some of the best old school games and their primary focus is to offer a game that is 1 life, 1 objective, no health regeneration, no respawn and realistic scenarios and objectives.
As far as realism goes, as long as it is 1 life, no health regeneration and no respawn, it is going to be a hell of a lot more realistic than almost every shooter game on the market. So far the weapon models look amazing. The game offers the ability to lean left and right, which is extremely important to me. The maps look like very finely polished Rainbow Six maps and being that I am a huge fan of the Unreal Editor, I am extremely pleased that I will be able to make maps for this game.
The game is not being funded by a rich guy, lol. The game was successful at reaching it's kickstarter funding goal of roughly $220,000, where a lot of other games have failed. The kickstarter was helpful in getting things started, but it is by no means enough money to make the best game in the world, so I'm not really expecting it to be. I'm sure they have their investors to help push their project as well. They have proved to me that they are extremely dedicated, talented, professional and are doing the best they can - and they constantly interact with the community. I have had a few private email discussions where the developers contacted me regarding a few things, which I found to be quite flattering. Very nice people.
I want to play this game so I can get involved in team vs team tournaments where when I kill an enemy - he stays dead. I want to play with a team where we can practice strategies and tactics and focus on 1 primary objective. This is how I used to play back before games like CoD and BF3 made respawn a standard. Whether or not Takedown is realistic doesn't matter to me. I don't care how accurate the game is when it comes to scopes, HUDs, mini-maps, player gear, player models, animation etc. As long as I get to rescue some hostages and the enemy stay dead when I kill them, I'll be extremely happy. The games out there that still exist that offer 1 life 1 objective scenarios suck, unless you consider Counter Strike Global Offensive to be a good game with it's no ability to use iron sights, switch fire mode, lean left or right or kill anything effectively with horrible cone fire, lol. Most of all I just want to make maps for the game.
The terrorist hunt mode in Takedown looks a little stale with bots that seem a bit dumb, but those things can always easily be improved on, and I am honestly more interested in playing verse real players, but I am sure their terrorist hunt mode will be quite decent, otherwise they wouldn't have offered terrorist hunt in their pre-order sneak peak single player map "Kill House". KIll House was actually the name of a R6 Raven Shield map and also the name of a R6 Vegas 2 map that was very popular.
Anyway, I got my fingers crossed, but I know this game is going to be awesome from what I have seen so far. 23 more days to go before we can give it a test run.
Quote:I hope those animations...aren't the final animations...
I was excited about this game because it's supposed to be realistic, but everything I just saw was a Rainbow Six clone fail.
I'll wait for some post release reviews/gameplay footage before buying. If it's awesome I'll buy it then.
Maybe people who play INS and Takedown can all play together some day.
^ they went all on about how realistic its going to be, i still remember the crap they spewed.
i too hope those anims are WIP because thats one thing they promised was going to be top notch, was how the animations are superbly realistic.
still just waiting patiently for ground branch......the TRUE successor to Infiltration
(This post was last modified: 09-09-2013, 17:13 by Gnalvl.)
Just watched some more footage here:
Didn't realize this was coming out as soon as September 20th. It seems really unlikely that the animations would see drastic improvement in such a short timeframe, which is unfortunate. That being said, once they get into the PvP modes and the action heats up, the awkward animations become much less noticeable.
On the up side, Ground Branch (note: totally different game) is indeed looking good in this particular area:
(This post was last modified: 09-09-2013, 20:03 by SUICIDAL.)
The pre-order sales will drive more development and the animations will more than likely improve. If the animations were a deal breaker, you wouldn't be playing Insurgency right now, lol. There will be no ability to go prone or jump at all either, which I am very happy with since I can't stand bunny hoppers and guys that go prone and camp forever. There won't be any ability to sprint fast either.
1 life, 1 objective, no respawn, no health regeneration, no cone fire, high damage weapons, realistic scenarios like bomb, extract and ***rescue***. Players that prefer to respawn and run and gun will probably not like Takedown, which is great, because then I can finally play a competitive game with players that take gaming a little more seriously. I'm sick of all these other unrealistic objective bunny hopping respawn games. The maps are going to be amazing.
I'm very excited - 11 more days.
Insurgency is not anywhere close to final release, so there's plenty of time to change any flaws .
With Takedown, we are less than a month from release, so I worry. Massive animation overhauls are not the type of thing which gets released as a post-release patch.
Plus, Insurgency's animations for basic things like standing and walking are not nearly as awkward as in Takedown's betas.
No prone is weird too - not totally essential for a CQB-focused game, but it still seems lazy to just leave it out. As we have seen in Insurgency, it takes attention to detail to prevent certain prone exploits, but normally those things can get polished up before release.
At this point I'm just keeping my fingers crossed Takedown has heavy post-release update support.
(This post was last modified: 10-09-2013, 16:09 by SUICIDAL.)
Prone in most games causes collision problems. This occurs in Insurgency too, where players legs stick through walls, often a player will go prone and then back into a corner to the point where half his body is hidden in a wall. This is the main reason why Takedown did not want to use a prone ability. Some newer games have prone detection and if you try to go prone in a corner, it will tell you that "You cannot go prone in this location", then the player steps a few feet forward and they are then able to go prone. This is something that the Takedown team has looked into, but at the same time it is not a high priority nor does a prone ability serve any kind of great importance.
From experience, a prone ability is often more problematic than it is worth. Then there are the players that constantly go prone in the middle of almost every long range firefight they get into. I often shoot at players that are far away and they will suddenly go prone and I often think that I killed them and their body flopped to the ground dead, but then they suddenly return fire from a prone position and kill me. There is nothing wrong with this, I just prefer that players don't abuse it - and I enjoy fps close quarter games more that don't offer prone.
It's funny how some good games out there have some amazing developers on staff and the money to create a great game, but they often can't seem to create good player animations. Then there are smaller companies with only a few developers on staff and don't really have the money to push the development of their game, yet they show some preview movies of some of the best player animations I've seen. For instance, Ground Branch uses player animations that I would consider equal to that of Crysis 3, in some ways better.
It would have been nice to see Ground Branch and Takedown work together, or at least source out their animation guy for a few weeks.
Quote:The pre-order sales will drive more development and the animations will more than likely improve. If the animations were a deal breaker, you wouldn't be playing Insurgency right now, lol.
In insurgency it doesn't look like they're waddling their way around like penguins. Since it's in beta I would live with it and voice concerns to have it changed. I doubt I'll buy Takedown until the first two months have passed to see if they improve on it - IF the animations are crappy looking like that. For a product that's releasing that's already been through beta(?) you would expect better animations from the animation guy or at least see that they look ridiculous.
"Only the dead have seen the end of war."
I feel bad for all involved when the lead dev starts offering to refund people's money.
That being said, it could still be worth playing, visual flaws aside. Even if the multiplayer somehow feels an inferior, "penguin waddling" version of Insurgency's MP, just being a finished release with a co-op campaign counts for a lot. I can almost guarantee I'll be able to get my friends to put in hours doing the co-op missions, whereas trying to get them into Insurgency's beta release with multiplayer-only has been like pulling teeth.
Insurgency is taking an iterative development process, so we have demonstrated a commitment to experimenting and improving the game as we go. However, I have not heard anywhere that Takedown is pursuing a similar process. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
If that's the case, then I can see how people might be disappointed with the quality of Takedown's visuals or gameplay features - albeit, they shouldn't be surprised with such a tight development time.
Co-founder & Creative Director of Insurgency
I feel bad for these guys... their game mode selection is not quite awe inspiring...
When I first heard about TD and GB I was worried, after seeing them more, I'm worrying less.
It's a monumental job to get a game completed and close to the original vision. Insurgency is going to satisfy a lot of people...
(This post was last modified: 14-09-2013, 02:33 by SUICIDAL.)
Some people seem to expect the highest level of development standards from Serellan as if they were a big company like EA games. Serellan is not a big Company. They are small start-up company. They don't have an endless supply of money. I think that in the time frame that they have had to work on the game - they have accomplished a lot of amazing things, a lot more than what their funding should deliver. And really, how many *new* close quarter fps games are currently out there that focus primarily on 1 life, 1 objective, no health regeneration, and no respawn? There are none. And there are no new games on the horizon that plan on focusing on these things either, unless you want to count the 1 or 2 other tiny little startup companies struggling to get things off the ground. Takedown came out of the woodwork promising players that they would bring back old-school gameplay - and they kept their promise. They never promised a bunch of stupid game modes and childish crap. And they met their funding goal, because there is a high demand for what they are offering. Since then they have listened to wants and needs of their community and they have tried very hard to fulfill their community's wishes to the best of their limited abilities. Their lead developers respond to almost every topic in their forums. I've started 1 fan art topic in their forums and have replied to only 1 other art thread. 7 posts in total, all art related. Not once did I ever suggest anything regarding how they should design their game. I have full confidence in Serellan.
(This post was last modified: 14-09-2013, 21:34 by SUICIDAL.)
I wanted to find the time to reply to you guys individually. I think you guys are smart, but some part of me can't help but feel like some of you guys are wearing blinders and can't see the big picture. I remember following the development of Insurgency 2 long before it ever released. Even now I imagine where Insurgency will be 3 years from now and what they have planned for their future. When it comes to Takedown, I more concerned about what Takedown 2 is going to be like. Anyway...
If you do not want to buy Takedown and support a good cause because of waddle animations, thatâ€™s your choice. I can understand that the waddle animation does look a little funny. Iâ€™m sure the game will play great regardless of the waddle animation. It actually wouldnâ€™t be that difficult for them to tweak the animation. I prefer to look at the big picture and look much further down the road. I care that Takedown is a success so they can work on the development Takedown 2 in the future, which I am sure will be more sufficiently funded and have more/better staff and will offer better everything, including better animations, but right now I don't care much about any flaws the game might have. I just care that they are focused on bringing back old-school 1 life 1 objective gameplay. I am very supportive towards any game that is going to do a better job than Ubisoft's Tom Clancy Rainbow Six games, which have taken a nasty turn for the worse over the past 8 years.
In general, I do not support fps games that offer respawn because I donâ€™t consider it to be realistic at all and respawn always promotes spawn raping. I also do not support close quarter fps games that do not offer a realistic primary objective, because it fails to promote tight teamwork, but I donâ€™t mind playing 1 life team death match. Rainbow Six Raven Shield was worthy of serious competitive clan wars and it offered 1 life 1 objective, and you limped when you got hurt. Then later they released Rainbow Six Vegas 2 and players were suddenly able to respawn and they automatically regenerated health, which is a clear sign that R6 games were never going to go back to the old school ways. Rainbow Six Patriots is going to offer the same respawn and health regeneration features as well as 3<sup>rd</sup> person â€œtake coverâ€ and blindfire abilities. Vegas 2 also did not offer the ability to host a dedicated server, which made it impossible to run a clan server, which also made it pointless to start a clan for the game. Ubisoft also did not offer any game updates, DLCâ€™s or anti-cheat support ever. Vegas 2 was loaded with bugs that were never fixed. Worst of all they never released an updated Unreal editor, I only bought Vegas 2 because I thought I would have the chance to continue using Unreal Ed. Ubisoft is responsible for allowing Tom Clancy games to evolve into childish garbage, all they care about is money and catering to children. Takedown stepped up and promised to bring back old school serious gameplay that big boys want to play. They are delivering a game that offer that Raven Shield game play style and they are making it sexier and more user friendly. With all of my gaming and development experience, this is the best thing Iâ€™ve seen happen for fps gaming in 10 years. I think a true close quarter fps player would be a fool not to support them.
You shouldnâ€™t feel bad for Takedown. You might think that their game mode selections is limited and lacks awe, but Takedownâ€™s primary focus was to promise a 1 life Attack & Defend game mode with no health regeneration. That's why they reached their funding goal. Insurgency had Insmod to push their fund raiser and they were able to use Insmod to prove their strong foundation, dedication, devotion and hard work, which was a lot more than what Takedown had on the table. Takedownâ€™s promise worked quite well for them. In my opinion, a 1 life attack & defend mode will always be king. Takedown fundraiser proved that players do want this very badly. Players will be joining clans and getting involved in clan wars for Takedown right away. Takedown also offers Terrorist hunt, which I consider a fun bonus, but killing bots was never Serellan's primary focus. Iâ€™m sure plenty of unsupportive fussy players will complain that their Ai lack intelligence. The important thing is that they are on the right track. Iâ€™m sure Takedown 2 will set their standards much higher and offer an even better game. I know that other games will want to follow in their footsteps because Takedown did succeed.
You say Insurgency is going to satisfy a lot of people, and I have no doubt that it will, but currently I am not very satisfied with Insurgency. Iâ€™m to the point where I am most interested in seeing how Insurgencyâ€™s Hunt and Checkpoint evolve, but I have lost almost all hope for Insurgencyâ€™s team vs team game modes. I'm really hoping that Insurgency might satisfy me in the future, but as far as team vs team goes - Insurgency feels like 1 train riding on like 5 different tracks and none of the tracks are heading in a direction where I want to go.
Not 1 single friend of mine that bought Insurgency has any interest in playing it at all, they all gave up on it fast. They all want to play an attack & defend style game on a much more serious competitive level. They don't want use old guns. They don't want to play strange maps and strange game modes that don't offer any real objectives or any kind of competitive feeling. They don't want to watch their teammates run in 10 different directions towards a bunch of different control points. They donâ€™t want to get spawn raped. I have like 15 or more friends that own a copy of Insurgency at this point and I canâ€™t get any of them to play the game with me. It would actually be easier to pull their teeth.
You wonâ€™t feel bad for Takedown when their community grows to be much much larger than Insurgencyâ€™s community. You wonâ€™t feel bad for them when you see thousands of Takedown players competing in clan league â€œladderâ€ tournaments. Takedown will no doubt be stealing some Insurgency players, so you should worry a little. Luckily the full version of Takedown is not set to release for a long time. I strongly suggest that Insurgency implement a 1 life 1 objective game mode that doesnâ€™t offer respawn. Had Insurgency offered a game mode like this from the start, their fundraiser might have ended differently.
you are right and wrong. Takedown would have had to release an incomplete game in order to allow the community to interact with their development, but they decided to design Takedown behind closed doors. They did ask for the community to get involved and they did listen to the suggestions and requests from the users in their forums. The Takedown developers are extremely active in their forums.
When you didn't meet your funding goal, you decided to release Insurgency early on steam at a low price to help fund you game development and gain the attention that the game desperately needed. There was really no way you could have then told the community to stay out of the development process after you released a very incomplete game, the community would have gotten involved whether you wanted them to or not. You actually drove more sales by offering to let the community to get involved with the development process, this is one of the reasons why I bought Insurgency. You didnâ€™t have to release Insurgency early, but my guess is that you needed the communityâ€™s input, help and financial support. Had you decided not to release Insurgency early and continued to develop the game behind closed doors, you would not have come this far and most people wouldnâ€™t even know that Insurgency 2 exists. You could have treated Insurgency 2 like another mod, but then you wouldnâ€™t have made a dime.
The approach you took is considered a nightmare for most gaming companies, that is why most gaming companies prefer to design their game behind closed doors and wait until their product is near completion before giving the public access to it. It took a lot of courage for you to decide to do what you did and I give you a lot of credit, but it did make Insurgency look desperate. I liked feeling like I was apart of the development process, but I have so many forum bruises, lol. It really would have helped if you had some good riot control forum moderators from the start.
After you released Insurgency early, you were bombarded with both good and bad feedback from players regarding every aspect of the game, but you never listened to the important things. You still haven't implemented any kind of attack & defend mode or any kind of state of the art weaponry. Kids these days want an ACR or a Kriss Vector, they're bored with old weapons, an MP40 and M1A1 might be temporary filler, but these weapons will do more harm to the game than good. You could double your community size if you implemented an attack & defend mode, in fact, if you implemented a 1 life attack & defend game mode correctly, it would very likely become the most popular game mode and players would instantly want to join clans and start wars. They would probably lose all interest in capturing control points. Things like wave respawn, Push, spawn rape situations... these things do not promote clan wars or get players interested in joining a clan.
You mentioned wanting to do things like implement an attack & defend game mode in the future, but you really should have made more of an attempt to implement it from the start of Insurgency 2. I wish you would stop everything else you are doing and put all of your focus on this now. I kept telling you to start by implementing an Intel extraction because it would be easiest to implement and it would work well for any map size, and you could offer it with or without respawn. I also suggested implementing a couple of state of the art weapons. These things alone would really make huge difference. If Insurgency were to offer these things, I know for a fact that my friends would want to play the game.
If you took even 3 or 4 of the best CS:GO bomb maps right now and dropped them into Insurgency, you would have a game that would beat the snot out of CS:GO, because that game doesnâ€™t even allow the ability to lean left or right or use iron sights, they also use inaccurate cone-fire and they donâ€™t have any weapon sway or stamina effects. The CS:GO community is enormous and that game sucks, but they have a 1 life attack & defend mode. Do you honestly want to keep assuming that respawning and capturing control points is going to be a big success? Okay, so I know you canâ€™t just steal a bunch of CS:GO maps and I know it takes a while to model a bomb and code everything, but you seriously need to get started on this like right away. You can still offer game modes that offer control point scenarios, but they wonâ€™t ever be as popular. You still have the chance to do something that no other games has done yet.
On a different note... When it comes to visual qualities, both Insurgency and Takedown have their own visual standards. Insurgency is known to have more of a dirty dusty desert look and Takedown is known to have more of clean office and warehouse look. If you compare the glass windows in Insurgency to the shiny reflective diamond wire glass in Takedown, itâ€™s obvious that Takedown does show some superior visuals to Insurgency. From a mapper and architectural perspective, Takedown offers some of the best close quarter maps I have ever seen in a game in my entire life. I do think that some surfaces in Takedown look a bit too shiny, but Iâ€™m not going to complain about it. Most players these days think a great looking map is something you'd see in Battlefield 3, but serious close quarter players, like myself, prefer a much cleaner map typically of Rainbow Six close quarter games. Takedown managed to make maps that look way better than any Rainbow Six map I've ever seen, and they did this using the same engine and editor, not counting the many updates that both the engine and editor have seen over the years. Takedown maps look a zillion times better than R6 Raven Shield maps (2003) or R6 Vegas 2 maps (2008), they even look better than the R6 Patriots maps Iâ€™ve seen and that game hasnâ€™t even released yet. In my honest opinion, the Insurgency maps do not look better than CS:Source maps from 2004. The architecture in CS: Source maps was far superior. The Unreal Engine has also been though a lot more changes and advanced updates than the Source Engine.
Takedown has Insurgency beat visually when it comes to almost everything - weapons, player models, maps, textures, lighting, map objects. Just about the only thing you can make fun of is... their player waddle animation and their Ai lack intelligence, and I honestly do not think the waddle and Ai are that bad at all. Their Ai actually are kind of smart and use cover and lean out and fire. The waddle looks similar to Arma 3â€™s diaper waddle.
Here are a couple of movies that show some of the visuals, player animation and Ai. Yeah, it could still use a few minor tweaks, but I'm happy with it so far. This game reminds me so much of Raven Shield, but Raven Shield did not allow players to use iron sights and they used a reticle, other than that it's almost the same game, but better.
Yeah, I didn't read all that... I still feel bad for them. But I'm glad they are doing well and stuff... it will be good...
But INS is going to be great.
Suicidal, games that don't offer what I'm looking for I don't buy. The whole waddle animation wasn't the only animation flaw I saw for something that's supposed to be the most realistic tactical shooter. It was just one of the many animations that stood out.
I said after a couple months if the gameplay footage and reviews convince me otherwise I will probably buy it.
I don't just support games based on what you're saying, Suicidal, because I play games that I find fun. If the animations make me laugh and shake my head. I lose fun playing the game because I'm just going to be focused on how stupid the animations look even if the gameplay is great. The game can have respawns, 1 life, 2 lives, etc I would still play it if there weren't obvious distractions that would turn me off. Anyway, I never mentioned anything else other than the animations. I like games with fluid animations that look natural because you spend a lot of time watching teammates. That's my perspective, no one elses'. I don't have to buy the game for it's gameplay because I haven't seen gameplay worth playing that I can't do in Insurgency. In the newest Insurgency update the bots are extremely fun to play against now. My whole team spent about an hour battling with them. It was fun. I saw ********* animations and terrible AI from the videos of Takedown. I'm sure it'll be a good shooter for those looking for something extremely specific but from all the footage released so far I haven't seen what i'm looking for.
"Only the dead have seen the end of war."