Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'meta'.
Found 3 results
The game is pretty cool and rewarding if you are good, problem, when you are good and you kill another player, he often is a naked runner with only an hatchet or knife, that's not rewarding at all. Fact is that you can lose too much in a run so to remove this absurd meta there can be some "starter" weapons that are not lost in the end (like the melee weapon), for example a pistol with 3 magazines, a scav jacket or even a "starter" jacket that has significant less space, something like that, this starter items or "secure" items could be tiered: why should a level 20 pmc be starter with a pistol like a level 0? at level 20 (for example) you unlock a "starter" shotgun with some rounds, or something else not too OP but useful and rewarding for a veteran, that also does not reduce 90% of players to be fearless rabbits running everywere naked, and also scav gameplay has to be improved, it is ridicolous that scav players kill each other on sight, it must be made clear that they should cooperate.
So.... it begins? I've yet to receive any emails, has anyone?
I am sure that we've all noticed at least to the very slightest, a divide amongst this community regarding to what is happening in the backend of the game we've all been dreaming to play. Whether you are happy or not so happy regarding to the postponement of the Alpha to March, I'd kindly ask everyone to ease the tension between one another's opinions. Now, I know I am in no position of authority to ask you of this, but at the end of the day, regardless of your take on the postponement, we're all just gamers at heart, dreaming the same dream to play the same game and hoping that one day it'll become big. Instead of telling eachother to gtfo because of the slightest difference in opinion, why don't we all put down our pitchforks, take a seat around the same table and discuss about what went wrong and what could've potentially gone better for future references. Because no matter how much we support or defend the argument, that whether or not battlestate games is making the right choices, we can't change nor are we helping to make this idea of a great game into reality. And there is really no need to hold a grudge against your mates before the game even comes out. We're all reasonable human beings, if Battlestate's willing to reach out to us and update us honestly as to what went wrong, then I'm sure there'll be at least some room for compassion eventhough they've just missed the acceptable margin by a great chunk. However, if things like this continues to happen, it will definitely be disastrous. I'm not sure how Battlestate can confidently say that the alpha WILL release in march, from what we've gathered so far, the game is still in a relatively raw state.. So the new question becomes, is it REALLY realistic to assure a release in March assuming that there's still much needed to be done. Missing the March alpha release means that both the alpha and the beta will be squeezed out of Q1 2016, showing a significant lack of professionalism in the studio and the unsatisfied population will surely increase exponentially. By then, be prepared to be ravaged by nay-saying wildfire on social media sites. Not very healthy in the long run.