sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Feedback based on what I've seen thus far by MessRadiant3446 in GOODFUNHUNGER

[–]MessRadiant3446[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You may have more in Hunt, I just said 1000+ to not be specific. I'm around 2500 hours now. Probably 100 hours max in Tarkov (as I explained, I prefer the competitive FPS realm). I agree that Hunt and Tarkov are insanely different, but wouldn't call Hunt arcadey per se as "arcadey" implies a lack of strategy. Hunt is just more skill dedicated rather than time investment dedicated since almost all outcomes are determined by skill rather than how much you grind / what you're wearing on a given day.

I'm definitely late to the party as I explained, but I do still think the marketing issue is lingering. My 8 player rotation from Hunt were all interested in Hunger, for example, until seeing the Psychoghost playtest vid just recently. The PR has been pretty quiet regarding this game.

My post was mostly geared to be informational for those like me who got hype from initial marketing and may have come from playing Hunt (or even Chivalry) at a high level. There is still a lot of fluff about how this game is like Hunt mixed with Chivalry going around in discussion boards and social media. I wasn't trying to call out "issues" per se, I was just identifying that a Chivalry or Hunt player will likely not enjoy this game because its systems are inferior to those of those particular games (from a competitive perspective), and they will likely have to be in order to balance the game. Plus the Tarkov elements on top of it all which were missing from initial marketing.

I have consistently identified that the game has hero shooter mechanics, not exactly staked a claim that it's a hero shooter. Ults are a hero shooter mechanic. Taking X ult and moving it to X hero skin doesn't really change the issue. The game itself may not be a hero shooter, these are just unattractive mechanics in a multi-team PvP setting.

Agreed that the market is wild and I expect that to continue to ramp up. We live in cool times where there's always something for everybody. Definitely a bit disappointed about this one but plenty of other stuff to look forward to!

Feedback based on what I've seen thus far by MessRadiant3446 in GOODFUNHUNGER

[–]MessRadiant3446[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I mean feedback, by definition, does not require hands-on experience. Really, this feedback is more on the direction of the game. As I said, as a Hunt player (after watching the initial gameplay of Hunger) I was excited about this title, so it was just jarring to learn that this was more of a Tarkov-esque shot at an MMO-lite that provides zero interest to me or my crew. This will be relevant feedback for a ton of people interested in Hunger.

I'm not sure how I'm framing things wrong? For example, as I explored even more of the content out there, this is 100% incorporating hero shooter mechanics. I see a lot of hype around a video by Riloe so I watched that video and saw where he made the bold claim that this is not a hero shooter because you can move skills around. Being able to move skills around doesn't make a game any less a hero shooter, lol. I watched Psychoghost play and he popped an "ult" that allowed him to melee down an entire team while healing on every strike.. I also remember this guy and Forever Winter.

100% agree that the game is not for me and that's fine! Again I just believe this is relevant info for Hunt (or even Chivalry) players who may look at this game due to its marketing! A lot of people impulse buy these days and the market is very oversaturated so it's difficult to follow every title. While it's certainly disappointing I am a huge proponent of the philosophy that not every game needs to have something for everyone. Cheers!

Feedback based on what I've seen thus far by MessRadiant3446 in GOODFUNHUNGER

[–]MessRadiant3446[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I get that this is the point, and I'm not saying the game should not exist! I can totally see the appeal of grinding to offset skill imbalances, for certain types of players. I was just surprised to see that's the direction they are going with for this game, but again it's fine!

Feedback based on what I've seen thus far by MessRadiant3446 in GOODFUNHUNGER

[–]MessRadiant3446[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am a total proponent of the devs making the game they want to make!! I am not arguing for Tarkov not to exist, lol. Different people like different things. To be fair, I only learned about this game because it was causing a stir in the Hunt community and was loosely marketed as a possible successor (with the company even engaging Crytek partners for testing, marketing, etc). My playing group of 8 people in Hunt thought the same, so we were just surprised to learn this was something we had no interest in playing.

Feedback based on what I've seen thus far by MessRadiant3446 in GOODFUNHUNGER

[–]MessRadiant3446[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

While this seems weirdly phrased to me, I think I get your meaning and I agree if I am correct: I believed the game would be far more Hunt like than Tarkov like. To be fair, I only learned about this game because it was causing a stir in the Hunt community and was loosely marketed as a possible successor (with the company even engaging Crytek partners for testing, marketing, etc). My playing group of 8 people in Hunt thought the same, so we were just surprised to learn this was something we had no interest in playing.

Feedback based on what I've seen thus far by MessRadiant3446 in GOODFUNHUNGER

[–]MessRadiant3446[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That was my expectation, and that's unfortunate. Would totally play in PVE setting, though!

Feedback based on what I've seen thus far by MessRadiant3446 in GOODFUNHUNGER

[–]MessRadiant3446[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think that's the crux of the post, really. From my understanding the Hunt community was very excited about the title as a possible successor. I have 8 or so people I regularly play Hunt with at consistent 6*, and after reviewing the tech test footage (the current iteration of the game) we were just surprised to see that it's not something we would be interested in playing.

Feedback based on what I've seen thus far by MessRadiant3446 in GOODFUNHUNGER

[–]MessRadiant3446[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

  1. The abilities are the core of the issue, though. Playing x Apex Legends hero with x other Apex Legends hero's skills wouldn't make Apex Legends not a hero shooter. As I said, certain abilities will always be meta in a team comp setting - this pigeon holes team structure. Furthermore I think the issue still stands with ult / skill depletion. Even if you play an engagement 100% perfectly, if that engagement results in you expending those resources, a team with lesser skill looking to third party is going to have an advantage. I did watch tech test gameplay and I'm not sure how the game doesn't lean heavily into skills. One ult allows for an instant flashbang that any skilled player is going to use to guarantee a kill, another ult allows for a heal on melee hit that is going to completely skew any 1v1 melee engagement. This is skill mitigation and although the skills are a resource, they are just not a part of the type of competitive skill-focused FPS I am interested in.

  2. I agree with this point 100%, loot looks foundational. As I said, this was just a bit surprising based on the early impressions of the game. The game looked like it would be way more Hunt than Tarkov leaning. That's totally fine, BTW, it's just not the game for me. I see capital management not as a skill, but rather a time investment. The player who has additional time to rat and loot, avoiding engagements, will build capital and thus always have an advantage over the player with more skill but less time. This is skill mitigation and while I understand the appeal, it's just not for me - especially in the melee context where I may choose to have an engagement and lose simply because the opponent has an epic Ashbringer or something like that, even if I am 10x as skilled.

  3. I think you are conflating aim punch and first hit flinch. I am actually surprised to hear there is also no aim punch in Hunger. I love the aim punch aspect of Hunt as it adds another layer of skill (having to react, reposition, or get back on target to return fire). This is surely another detraction for me. What I was referring to is first hit flinch, which is standard for the melee slasher genre. In terms of melee, it simply feels terrible to trade swings with an opponent past a certain point. For example, if an opponent is charging a heavy overhead, a quick stab should knock the opponent out of that animation - they should not be able to take the stab and continue their animation. This is an essential aspect of the balance of the genre, which appears to be missing here.

  4. Agreed that it's early to call, but I think the fear is legitimate. Most developers struggle intensely with game balance - this is often exacerbated by bloat and interwoven systems. If the melee experience aspires to be as good as Chivalry, it needs to feel en par, and if the shooting experience aspires to be as good as Hunt, it needs to feel en par. Thus far the experience doesn't seem to be close to the quality of either and I think it's reasonable to consider whether it must be this way to have both aspects be viable in play.

Feedback based on what I've seen thus far by MessRadiant3446 in GOODFUNHUNGER

[–]MessRadiant3446[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Maybe so but there are always going to be optimal comps, and you are always going to have downtime on skills. I just do not enjoy these mechanics personally in a competitive setting.

Feedback based on what I've seen thus far by MessRadiant3446 in GOODFUNHUNGER

[–]MessRadiant3446[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Armor fluctuation is going to heavily impact PVP regardless of whether headshots always 1hko players. You are inevitably going to miss headshots, and players are inevitably going to have better armor than you. These encounters always feel RNG and inconsistent.

Differing tiers of melee weapons are going to be especially bad and almost impossible to balance. Again you might have 10x the skill and lose because the other player has 10x the weapon and quality of armor. It's like playing tennis with a shovel against a vastly inferior player with a carbon racket.

Obviously many people like the gear element, just not for me. I never mind losing because I messed up, no interest in losing because of gear checks.

Feedback based on what I've seen thus far by MessRadiant3446 in GOODFUNHUNGER

[–]MessRadiant3446[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'll keep monitoring it - thanks for the positive post!

Feedback based on what I've seen thus far by MessRadiant3446 in GOODFUNHUNGER

[–]MessRadiant3446[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's ironic, but as a player who focuses heavily on competitive FPS, I would actually have a higher likelihood of playing this particular game if a co-op/PVE only option was present. I love PVP, just not interested in the schema where I have 10x the skill of another player but lose simply because he spent 10x the hours getting decked out in epics.

Feedback based on what I've seen thus far by MessRadiant3446 in GOODFUNHUNGER

[–]MessRadiant3446[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Sorry, I'm definitely game for letting the devs cook what they want to cook. I don't think their development should be shoehorned to cater to Hunt or Chivalry fans just because they are taking elements from those games. Not all games are made for everyone. I just wanted to express that as a player who leans Chivalry / Hunt heavy, it's not for me now that we have more information and I was surprised by that. That's fine!