Do NOT like the game

eeyore said:
wow. I see some of the 12 year olds aren't back in school yet. In 8th grade they will teach you bigger words than "moron" and "idiot" so don't worry. You might even start liking girls and play less video games.

As regards the non-smacktards who had intelligent replies to my post: I loved T1, and still play it. Not sure what people mean by what was removed from T1. The one thing that really bothered my was the removal of the deployable sensor jammer. One of the things I liked to do in T1 was hunt snipers; ON THE LARGE MAPS IT WAS A CHALLENGE (caps for TV devs).

In T2 I like to shrike cap, and that is GONE. It was a rush, as any capper knows. Grapple capping is cute, but not a rush. BTW, I didn't like being a cloaker, I liked killing them. As a HOF, or doing base d, some of my best times were these contests with some very skilled cloakers. GONE. In T2, fast bomber capping was a blast. GONE. Yes, I hated small maps like minotaur, so I can see where people who like the deathmatch/ctf feel rather than the largescale/strategic/challenging aspects of Tribes (1 or 2) would disagree with me.

I can see where the devs are trying to make a game that pulls people into the action and keeps them there. But like I said, I have UT2004 or quake for that. Tribes was something different. TV is a step backwards for the Tribes franchise. Just how rapidly the flaming started in response to my views is a good indicator of that. Twitchy smacktards will be in their glory with TV. Neat game, but no substance.
Click to expand...


Most of the people here that are slamming you are highly competative and look at it that way. Most of us viewing Cloaking, shrike capping and bomber capping as stupid no skill things. That is why you see many of the T2 classic and T1 people loving it. Yes having a real command screen and such would have been cool. Some of the strats will not be as in depth as T2/T1, but you would be amazed at what more/new maps could do.

I do some what agree that TV wont have the lasting power for most that T1 did. But T1 was unique in so many ways, realistically those games come along every 10 years or so.

Oh and btw, calling other name callers names does not show the maturity that you are trying to project. It just makes you look like an arrogant fool. You posted this here at Tribalwar, if you expected any other type of reaction, then maybe you are the one that needs to go back to school for further education.
 
Last edited:
Plague said:
I think the problem you have with the game, that you aren't properly addressing, isn't that the game's combat and movement are too slow, or that your favorite vehicles are gone, it's that you don't like how everything is so compact that there's relatively little to do in comparison to past titles other than fight.

With the maps being as small as they are, and vehicles sponsoring a nonessential cowboy philosophy rather than T1's team-necessity or T2's service role philosophy, as well as the nuetering of the support deployables, T:V flourishes an even flow of design. This is designed for the purpose of accessibility, although this in turn makes the game too fast in terms of the roles it dictates and not in terms of how fast it moves physically.

In Tribes 1 and even 2, everything was very team-oriented - all concepts were formulated to necessitate this. The vehicles often were useless without a teammate, speeds were regulated by massive terrain that thinned as player numbers increased, and objectives were inaccessible to solitary players because they funneled players through enemies.

While T:V obviously has teamplay in mind, there's a greater mindset that's influenced its development, and that is the mentality that the core gameplay is still under revision. How the player skis, how the packs work, how fast and heavily armored all the players are - these are the things that T:V has adjusted. However, with the focus resting on the player, not the game, we end up with a superior first person shooter. Sounds good, right? Not necessarily.

When the game is balanced to focus on how players combat one another, you end up with the mentality of the game falling into what you're doing, not what's going on around you. That's why you'll hear some people cry foul and claim the game resembles UT or Quake, since the game itself is centrical to the player and equipment and not the surroundings.
Click to expand...


well said, Plague, and a breath of fresh air to see one of few intelligent posts.
I'm tripping over the smacktards in here. TV is trying to do something different, and even better, for gameplay, no doubt about that. No doubt also that the devs are thoughtful, dedicated, and have an ear to the Tribes community. TV just seems like its become a game for twitchy smacktards who, as you say, just want to cowboy. The teamwork aspects of Tribes have been dumbed down with this game.

Blayze, go buy your school supplies. I think in 6th grade they let you use calculators, so get a good one.
 
It's a little hypocritical to call people children when you yourself are acting extremely immature with your responses to them. You could just ignore them, as a mature adult would do.

I find it interesting that you define the overall state of the game based on the removal of niche elements that you found entertaining from previous games.
 
eeyore said:
Blayze, go buy your school supplies. I think in 6th grade they let you use calculators, so get a good one.
Click to expand...

Why are you using such retarded insuilts? Making [strike]fun[/strike] trying to make (and I'm using the term trying loosely here) fun of someone's age just shows what a dickweed you are. Good job, buddy. And next time you write a shazbotty review of a game that has tribes in it don't type "tribes 2", please.
 
eeyore said:
wow. I see some of the 12 year olds aren't back in school yet. In 8th grade they will teach you bigger words than "moron" and "idiot" so don't worry. You might even start liking girls and play less video games.
Click to expand...
captatio benevolentiae
eeyore said:
As regards the non-smacktards who had intelligent replies to my post: I loved T1, and still play it. Not sure what people mean by what was removed from T1. The one thing that really bothered my was the removal of the deployable sensor jammer. One of the things I liked to do in T1 was hunt snipers; ON THE LARGE MAPS IT WAS A CHALLENGE (caps for TV devs).
Click to expand...
Show me 10 more guys who used the deployable sj on a regular basis. Sucks when you can't do something that only you used to do, but there's no need to fill up the game with useless stuff to please a handful of people.
eeyore said:
In T2 I like to shrike cap, and that is GONE. It was a rush, as any capper knows. Grapple capping is cute, but not a rush. BTW, I didn't like being a cloaker, I liked killing them. As a HOF, or doing base d, some of my best times were these contests with some very skilled cloakers. GONE. In T2, fast bomber capping was a blast. GONE. Yes, I hated small maps like minotaur, so I can see where people who like the deathmatch/ctf feel rather than the largescale/strategic/challenging aspects of Tribes (1 or 2) would disagree with me.
Click to expand...
As mentioned before, those things are only unique to Tribes 2 and not the whole franchise, and they're not essential to a good CTF game. If you like to do these things, do them in a game that already exists.
eeyore said:
I can see where the devs are trying to make a game that pulls people into the action and keeps them there. But like I said, I have UT2004 or quake for that.
Click to expand...
Except that T:V does so with keeping the importance of teamplay, something UT and Quake don't do.
eeyore said:
Tribes was something different. TV is a step backwards for the Tribes franchise. Just how rapidly the flaming started in response to my views is a good indicator of that. Twitchy smacktards will be in their glory with TV. Neat game, but no substance.
Click to expand...
I fail to see any cohesion between these sentences.
 
You're ignorant and it has nothing to do with your ideas. You come here posting your ideas then when people laugh or disagree you call them 8 year old smacktards. Welcome to the internet. Get off your high horse and stop taking everything so personally.
 
Teamwork has not been dumbed down at all, imo.

The game is just faster paced and roles have evolved to reflect that.

Change is good.
 
An interesting outlook.

However, what many people find to be some of the most frustrating things about T2 seem to be what you like the most:
Farming
Vehicles
Slow thouroughly planned play

I think for the most part people want to see the flags moving every minute, not have half hour long grinds between HoFs, farmers, snipers, vehicles, and backroute cappers. I don't like seeing that anyway.
 
eeyore said:
TV just seems like its become a game for twitchy smacktards who, as you say, just want to cowboy. The teamwork aspects of Tribes have been dumbed down with this game.
Click to expand...

They tried the forced teamwork thing with T2. It didn't work out. You want a successful multiplayer game you need to make it simple enough to get into with enough depth and options that will cause strats to develop with skilled and experienced players. Thats what they are doing with T:V.

And really you aren't coming across as mature at all.
 
yeah im sorry, cloacking wasnt over powered, infact it was quite amusing and fun. when i was a heavy defending the gens and i would suddenly hear a "wurr wurr" and spin around looking for the footsteps, or pull out my elf and find em :D. The shield pack better not suck, or someones going to die.

I know all you guys are pro-vengeance and quite frankly im looking forward to it as well. But it IS a step down on the team combat ladder, theres will be alot less people playing in each server. You wont see a hobo come flying across and bomb you back to kingdom come. Tribes:V is a diffrent game, its not Tribes:2. Just as tribes1 wasnt tribes2 :p Get over it. I am going to miss certain aspects of all the other games, and it does seem like they've toned the amount of player roles down alot and the strategy involved to get rid of all the diffrent "player classes". But they will still be getting my money either way because I'm deeply in love with tribes and I'm hoping for a whole new gameplay experience, because quite frankly if you didnt want something new, you wouldnt have even bothered trying tribes:v.
 
Last edited:
eeyore said:
TV just seems like its become a game for twitchy smacktards who, as you say, just want to cowboy. The teamwork aspects of Tribes have been dumbed down with this game.
Click to expand...

One of the things that we did with T:V was to make the game more accessible for first time players. So in that sense, it may appear to the casual eye that teamwork was made less important. However, I don't think you've had the opportunity to play organized matches yet, which is a shame, as that would probably demonstrate the clear need for teamwork in any of the game modes.
 
eeyore said:
The one thing that really bothered my was the removal of the deployable sensor jammer. One of the things I liked to do in T1 was hunt snipers; ON THE LARGE MAPS IT WAS A CHALLENGE (caps for TV devs).
Click to expand...

Is this for real? Seriously. Deployable sensor jammer's were/are totally useless and have no gameplay value. And hunting snipers just proves that you're a retarded fraghunting hack.
 
Plague said:
I think the problem you have with the game, that you aren't properly addressing, isn't that the game's combat and movement are too slow, or that your favorite vehicles are gone, it's that you don't like how everything is so compact that there's relatively little to do in comparison to past titles other than fight.

With the maps being as small as they are, and vehicles sponsoring a nonessential cowboy philosophy rather than T1's team-necessity or T2's service role philosophy, as well as the nuetering of the support deployables, T:V flourishes an even flow of design. This is designed for the purpose of accessibility, although this in turn makes the game too fast in terms of the roles it dictates and not in terms of how fast it moves physically.

In Tribes 1 and even 2, everything was very team-oriented - all concepts were formulated to necessitate this. The vehicles often were useless without a teammate, speeds were regulated by massive terrain that thinned as player numbers increased, and objectives were inaccessible to solitary players because they funneled players through enemies.

While T:V obviously has teamplay in mind, there's a greater mindset that's influenced its development, and that is the mentality that the core gameplay is still under revision. How the player skis, how the packs work, how fast and heavily armored all the players are - these are the things that T:V has adjusted. However, with the focus resting on the player, not the game, we end up with a superior first person shooter. Sounds good, right? Not necessarily.

When the game is balanced to focus on how players combat one another, you end up with the mentality of the game falling into what you're doing, not what's going on around you. That's why you'll hear some people cry foul and claim the game resembles UT or Quake, since the game itself is centrical to the player and equipment and not the surroundings.
Click to expand...


This was an excellent post, and it highlights a worrying issue. Will T:V result in a game entirely dominated by skilled individuals as opposed to well-organised teams?
 
the cohesion is this: TV is a game that lacks depth or substance, and as such it will appeal to those who just like to run around blowing stuff up. This is not a bad thing, its just different. As I said, I enjoy it myself for about 20 minutes or so at a time.

I guess a good place to take the conversation would be matchplay vs. pubs. In any pub you can get just a free for all, even with T1 and T2, but matches are a different level of playing. Even in matchplay TV is a dumbed down game, geared much more toward infantry fighting. Vehicle based strats will be impacted, certainly, if used at all. Vehicles took effort to kill in T2,not so in TV.

As far as my invective (big word, means: verbal sparring) in these forums, when in Rome, do as the Romans do. Smacktards will and should be treated like smacktards. But actually, I do believe I am dealing with pre-teens here, or at least very immature teens, so there is basis in fact with my invective. And they really should be out buying their school supplies, especially Blayze.
 
Last edited:
eeyore said:
the cohesion is this: TV is a game that lacks depth or substance, and as such it will appeal to those who just like to run around blowing stuff up. This is not a bad thing, its just different. As I said, I enjoy it myself for about 20 minutes or so at a time.

I guess a good place to take the conversation would be matchplay vs. pubs. In any pub you can get just a free for all, even with T1 and T2, but matches are a different level of playing. Even in matchplay TV is a dumbed down game, geared much more toward infantry fighting. Vehicle based strats will be impacted, certainly, if used at all. Vehicles took effort to kill in T2,not so in TV.

As far as my invective (big word, means: verbal sparring) in these forums, when in Rome, do as the Romans do. Smacktards will and should be treated like smacktards. But actually, I do believe I am dealing with pre-teens here, or at least very immature teens, so there is basis in fact with my invective.
Click to expand...


And you know this because of all the T:V matches you've played?
 
Back
Top