On deaf ears... [Archive] - Ubisoft Forums

mambonuts

06-12-2005, 09:30 AM

I don't know if the 'so called' patch will ever materialize, but it seems to me that the natives are very restless...

I've seen more people condemn this game, quit, and trash talk other players over the online problems, than ever before...

Ubisoft has got to do something very soon, and I do mean soon...or lose all faith from it's followers...

I barely give this game a glance anymore...

After all, GTA - San Andreas is out, and it is very fun...and you know what? No online b*llsh*t to contend with...

At least Ubi should give some sort of answer...

mambonuts

06-12-2005, 09:30 AM

kingsfan643

06-12-2005, 09:39 AM

There will be a patch, they had this same problem on pandora tomorrow and came out with i think 2 patches for that game

rikakiah

06-12-2005, 12:13 PM

Patches won't fix the biggest thing wrong with this game. As long as the majority of players want a Halo game with a twist, it's always going to suck. The only way to really make it better is to make it so spies can not, under any circumstances, kill a merc ("Deathmatch" mode would be excluded, of course). Once you do this, you won't be able to have spies get cheap wins with aggro tactics. Once this major problem is fixed (problem with players, not the game), then you can focus on the smaller problems of glitches that can be exploited. The major way to limit glitchers is to remove the reward for doing so--eliminate the ranking system and turn it into a straight "stats" page. You are no longer a level 6, but a spy with 17 objectives completed in 13 games, 5 deaths, 9 KO's, etc. And you are a merc with 40 kills in 10 games, 12 objectives lost, KO'd 3 times, and accuracy of 43%. This way, you know exactly what TYPE of player you're going against instead of simply how well they can manipulate a ranking system.

I think these two changes (I REALLY want the stats instead of rank bit) would deal with the root issues and advance the game better than some simple patches that do nothing to deal with the core problems.

BiG_FaT_SpErM

06-12-2005, 02:04 PM

I dont play Versus but totally agree with the changes mentioned by rikakiah. Especially the ranked system, just a stats page is good

Buder08

06-12-2005, 02:56 PM

A stats page would cause more problems by eliminating teamwork because they would want to get the kill or the objective, the game would become everyone for themselves and would suck.

Rhoulette

06-12-2005, 02:57 PM

<span class="ev_code_pink">A patch has been in the works for some time now. Don't worry. It'll get here. I will look to post an update about it's progress this coming week.</span>

HardToExist

06-12-2005, 03:38 PM

You're kidding about the not being able to kill a merc thing right? Because that's just outright ridiculous...while we're at it lets have it to where spies have to ask the mercs nicely if they can hack the objectives...ugh...

SkinsGamersp

06-12-2005, 03:38 PM

i completely agree with these posts. Ubi, you're probably going to keep your hardcore fans, but people who just picked up this game for xbox live are getting discouraged. When SC4 comes out and casual gamers have a choice between it and another game, they might not pick the game that had previously been full of bugs. I really suggest that more time goes into testing versus mode because some of these obvious bugs could have been avoided. How some of these things got by just boggles my mind. Splinter Cell is a great franchise and I want it to be successful but gamers are being turned away. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

routeone

06-12-2005, 07:14 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">You're kidding about the not being able to kill a merc thing right? Because that's just outright ridiculous...while we're at it lets have it to where spies have to ask the mercs nicely if they can hack the objectives...ugh... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I completely agree. There are times when playing Story mode that the spy has no option other then to try and kill the merc, and if you took that away then it would practically ruin the game.

p0intblank32

06-12-2005, 07:39 PM

Spies not being able to kill the Mercs? Now THAT is a joke. It is a joke, right? Seriously... talk about suddenly being unbalanced.

rikakiah

06-12-2005, 09:23 PM

Unbalanced how? Seriously. I said nothing about not allowing a merc to be knocked out, shocked, pass out from gas or smoke, hit and stunned, grabbed and choked to sleep, scared of shadows, or otherwise hindered in their efforts to track or attack spies in any way. They just can't die, and therefore cannot be focused on to create a win for the lazy spy.

The ability for a spy to make lots of noise, attract attention to himself, and then flash/smoke and kill a merc instead of attempting to sneak to the objective is what's unbalanced. If the spy is cornered, it's currently easier for him to simply incapacitate the merc anyway (and thus getting to his objective sooner). The extra time it takes to kill the merc is a waste of time. You could even make different attacks have different lengths of effect (say, a hit to the back of the neck keeps the merc out for 10 seconds while a grab and choke to sleep keeps him down for 15, etc). Please, seriously debate the "lack of fairness" here...

The only other way to make it more fair is to set the merc life limit about twice or more what the spies' are. Having 3 merc lives and 4 spy just encourages attacks on mercs...

Someone made a point about people trying to steal kills and objectives for stats, and that could also be a problem. It's not a completely error-free system, but I feel it does promote more fair play than a ranking system. Perhaps it could be team stats (whatever your partner gets, you get)...this brings up its own set of issues, but that's what R&D guys at game companies get paid for. I'm just saying it's worth a serious look.

HardToExist

06-12-2005, 09:48 PM

They give the spies four lives and the merc three because mercs have mines/frags/guns/etc that could kill a spy in one wrong step. Not being able to kill a merc would make the mercs fearless, who cares about being knocked out? I mean seriously, you sleep for like 3 seconds now and youre back up. Fear of dying and having to wait 15 seconds to respawn, not to mention the walk back to your post is what makes dying as a merc something you want to avoid. Now do you understand?

rikakiah

06-12-2005, 10:31 PM

I understand the point, but the system is flawed. Like I said, have them be knocked out for longer. Looking at a black screen for 15-20 seconds would make you want to avoid being bested by a spy as well. However, my point is, it's much too easy for spies to win by kills. That's counter to the original intent of the game. I still don't understand why mercs need fewer lives than spies. The spy should not be encouraged to make contact with a merc--it should be a very last resort. Games I play with friends are set with spies at 1-2 lives and mercs with 3-6 lives. You learn REALLY quickly that the objective is more important than trying to attack a merc. Mercs still get KO'd and killed on occaision, but it's not the aggro-kill-fest most every online game I've played has been. As a merc, I should NOT fear death--I've got a big gun, armor, and a bunch of anti-spy toys. What I fear as a merc is having an objective snagged out from under me. When spies learn to be invisible, this is a very real possibility.

HardToExist

06-13-2005, 01:45 AM

My point is, if you're careless and get grabbed then you should pay with your life. Looking at black screen for 15 seconds would make most people leave, especially if it happened twice in a row via sticky cam or smoke. The mercs have new moves to counter grabs now like Berserker and a more powerful charge, not to mention sound meters...Secondly, I've played this game since PT first came out, and in all my time playing I have never once lost because the spies took all my lives in a normal game. If this is happening to you then maybe you need to restrategize your merc tactics. No offense, that's just me. I'm done with this topic, I wish you the best. Peace...

SHNAG

06-13-2005, 08:12 AM

I don't seek to kill, but if the option appears i will. rikakiah has a point though, if you make a merc be knocked out as long as it is if he was killed it will add another layer to the game. And if the merc is knocked out, make it that he can't talk, so it would really increase communication between mercs. Of course, knock out times will have to be different, sticky cam the shortest, followed by gas gernade, then drop downs, then neck grabs. And isn't the spy NOT sussposed to kill? If he was wouldn't he have a gun, not a shocker?

The option to wake up the merc would still be there, but have it the merc has to more then just poke em, maybe have it take a couple seconds. This will cause one problem though, what about rail grabs? If you throw a merc over an edge, shouldn't he die?

XxTRIGGAHAPPYxX

06-13-2005, 12:07 PM

Spies 1-2 lives and Mercs 3-6 lives! Are you kidding me?!? Some people say that this game is unbalanced already, but of course it is not, IMO it is perfectly and evenly balanced, but having those life sets in ranking would be rediculous. Plain out rediculous. Mercs would win every round unless they are new people that bought the game 10 min. ago. I strongly disagree to this life set.

rikakiah

06-13-2005, 04:28 PM

First, Trigga, merc lives shouldn't really matter that much in a ranked game (obviously, 1-2 lives for any team wouldn't be smart for a standardized ranked game).

As to dying, no merc deaths IS a bit extreme, however I still feel it should be more difficult and/or have more disadvantages. Killed mercs should not only get a new full inventory (which they do now), but also get to use them. Stick with me, but there shouldn't be a limit placement on mines and such. Suicide and team killed mercs would NOT get a fresh inventory (they'd still have whatever they had before death).

SHNAG raises a good point also--if the purpose of the spies were to kill, they'd start with a gun. I also like the idea of waking them up taking a couple extra seconds.

Rail grabs would have to kill, based on height, perhaps.

Hard, you're missing the bit about different KO times for different moves--only a choked merc would have to stare at a blank screen for a long time. Anyway, here was more of a breakdown of what I was talking about:

Shocker: Same effect and time, except mercs can hear, but not talk.

Hit: Very limited damage to merc. Merc is dazed for a second or two longer than a shocker, has blurred/double vision and the movement controls are randomized (so he can move to possibly avoid a neck grab, but not effectively counter or attack a spy. Merc can hear and talk.

Sticky cam: Merc sleeps for the shortest amount of time, 5 seconds? Merc can't hear or talk.

Smoke grenade: Same as cam, but longer.

Grab & choke: Same as smoke, but longer.

Kills (ledge grab, neck break): Merc respawns in 0-5 seconds, but is back in his spawn point.

Jumping on a merc's head would have the same effect as a hit.

Perhaps on all the KO moves, the merc would be able to hear for the last couple of seconds he's out (sort of like he's slowly coming to...).

d3nial_

06-13-2005, 05:41 PM

Rikah, I totally agree with your post on a stats page. It would do wonders, but you need the killing of a merc always applicable. If not, you would always be running, and have no way to stop someone from killing your partner. Kills should stay, rank should go.

rikakiah

06-14-2005, 04:42 PM

Read my above post...multiple ways to effectively take out a merc for various time periods, with various effects with gameplay consequences (daze, KO, and kill). Kills would still be possible, just not as easy (only really effective ways are ledge grabs and neck grabs--hitting and dropping on heads would be much weaker, but have greater dazing effects) and so not as big a focus for many players.

SHNAG

06-16-2005, 07:58 PM

How about when your waking up your partner you can look up in one direction like the NPC's do?

rikakiah

06-16-2005, 08:05 PM

Not sure what you mean...more detail?

SHNAG

06-17-2005, 06:55 AM

When an NPC is knocked out and found, the other NPC squats above his body and starts shaking him with one arm, while looking up and around. If that happened in multiplayer a person could see in front of them, but not behind, helping balance things.

Just try it in single player and you'll see what i mean.

rikakiah

06-17-2005, 10:01 PM

Oh, you mean for the spies? The mercs already only see in one direction, no?

SHNAG

06-18-2005, 07:01 AM

Ture, but they can't rotate around while they are doing it. so they have to look in one direction. spies would be a different story.

black ops freak

06-18-2005, 10:11 AM

Are you saying that in multi-player, teamates would have to wake up eachother? I'm not getting what you're trying to say...

rikakiah

06-18-2005, 11:00 AM

So now, mercs CAN rotate around while waking a partner? If so, then I see your point and agree. Spies don't really have any opportunity to "wake" their buddy, but perhaps healing would take an extra second or two and they'd be locked into looking at their partner for that time (it'd still have to be 3rd person, but couldn't rotate)? I can agree with that--would be kind of a cool extra twist.

SHNAG

06-18-2005, 11:21 AM

Mercs can't rotate around right now, but all they gotta do is tap them on the shoulder, but if it took say, one second for every 5 (his knock out time), having a merc looking in one direction (insted of at his partner) might work.

rikakiah

06-18-2005, 10:08 PM

Ah, yeah, I can see both waking up (merc) and healing (spy) being 1-4 second activities. Probably 1-2 for a merc and 3-4 for a spy. Since the merc will be out in the open, he shouldn't be exposed for very long at all, or the game will be VERY unbalanced--just take out the one and wait for the other to help...boom, instant double kill. However, it would make the poison mines more effective if the spies had to get to a safe location (or risk being fragged together) before they can help each other.

Jed E3

06-21-2005, 08:37 AM

mambonuts

06-21-2005, 10:54 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Rhoulette:
<span class="ev_code_pink">A patch has been in the works for some time now. Don't worry. It'll get here. I will look to post an update about it's progress this coming week.</span> </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

We have been waiting for some time now... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

We are worried... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

When will it get here?... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/354.gif

I will look to see an answer this coming week...Oh,wait...That was two weeks ago... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1072.gif

Jed E3

06-21-2005, 12:11 PM

bump

sorry folks, I'm going to keep bumping this thread until we get SOME sort of response. This is by no means a knock on the CMs, but why do we have "community managers" when the community support is basically non-existent? I understand that relaying info from the devs to the fans is quite time-consuming, but there have been numerous posts asking about the new content over the last month and a half, and we still don't have any info, we're basically posting just to read our own words.

Initially when the news was released about new content, every single site I checked (IGN, Gamespot, the official Xbox site) stated that Squat would be available at the end of May, and the two co-op maps would follow shortly after. Did all three just fabricate the date, or was this the official word from UbiSoft?

Jed E3

06-22-2005, 08:54 AM

Bump #2

scworld

06-22-2005, 09:50 AM

As you said yourself: if it isnt on UbiSoft's site, it is not official.

MentalMars

06-22-2005, 11:13 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Initially when the news was released about new content, every single site I checked (IGN, Gamespot, the official Xbox site) stated that Squat would be available at the end of May, and the two co-op maps would follow shortly after. Did all three just fabricate the date, or was this the official word from UbiSoft? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Also the official Splintercell website reported those dates.
Only when they knew they didnt gonna make it they changed the news post into coming in a few weeks instead of coming end of may

Rhoulette

06-22-2005, 12:14 PM

<span class="ev_code_pink">I'm still here and I'm still trying to figure out what's up with the patch. I have no official word for you all, but I have my personal suspicions about why this process has gotten more muddled and confused than normal.

The last I heard is that the patch was submitted and set for approval but the devs pulled it back because they found more fixes they could include.

I am being diligent and I appreciate that you all are keeping the faith, but patience will be our best friend in this case.</span>

Jed E3

06-22-2005, 12:55 PM

Thanks for the update.

artofdecay

06-22-2005, 01:23 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">but I have my personal suspicions about why this process has gotten more muddled and confused than normal. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

From every UBI console game I've played, confusion, delay, and lack of communication seem to be par for the course. I have yet to see 1 prompt patch for a Clancy game.

Rainbow Six 3, Rainbow Six 3 BA, Ghost Recon 2, Splinter Cell PT, and now CT. Never make their own deadlines, never tell the consumer anything, and in the cases of at least two of these games...never even got a patch out that works properly (red x on Recon anyone?). Did anybody really expect this patch or DLC on time? The patch will be out next year sometime...it will be called Splinter Cell 4.

Rhoulette

06-22-2005, 02:08 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by artofdecay:
[ Never make their own deadlines, never tell the consumer anything... Did anybody really expect this patch or DLC on time? The patch will be out next year sometime...it will be called Splinter Cell 4. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

<span class="ev_code_pink">We are constantly trying to get better about our post-support practices and in this case, you guys, the community, have helped immensely to provide the necessary feedback to make glitches and exploits known to the developers. But do not make the mistake of assuming the patch process is an easy one. As with any sort of development it is a fluid and ever-changing evolution of the code; new problems and solutions crop up along the way. "On Time" is a relatively fictional deadline considering that only the developers would ever be able to say when, realistically, a patch could be expected in the first place.

There will be a patch and I will be giving updates as frequently as possible. Right now I'm trying to get clarification about what bugs have been fixed.</span>

SHNAG

06-22-2005, 02:50 PM

SC doesn't have a big as fan base as Halo. So they can't risk ****ing around.

GameNeo2007

06-22-2005, 06:02 PM

It seems to me that ubisoft is doing the same thing over again with chaos theory. What I mean is in pt look how long it took to patch the Shock/double jump kill combo. Im just saying I dont want to have wait that long cause by then sc4 will be nearer and people will forget about scct because of the hype of sc4.

artofdecay

06-23-2005, 10:00 AM

("On Time" is a relatively fictional deadline considering that only the developers would ever be able to say when)

That's to be expected. However, they always seem to leak a "official" date out, either through the Xbox site, newsletters, and sometimes even their own site and their community managers that they are never able to meet. That's where the lack of communication comes into play and not organizing efficiently to make sure everyone is on the same page. Also, even though making a patch is a dynamic process, it doesn't have any magical properties that prevent you from letting the customer know what is going on. We really don't mind being bothered with boring technical mumbo jumbo to tell us what stage the patch is in, what has been fixed, and we won't get angry with a moving timeline. Even though Bungie is slow as molasses too, they updated their customers on their site on a WEEKLY basis.