I think the problem GZ presents on consoles is the size. The map is massive and I dont know how to properlly explain this well, but it’s like it’s pushing the limits of the console in a badly optimized way. Anyway I understand what you mean.
2 Likes
The thing about many of the complaints is that they are features which were specifically requested!
For instance, GZ was called by some reviewers as the future of FPS games, since the missions offered you no help at all! The missions were put on the HUD because players requested it, and here we come to the nub of an idea which was great in theory, but simply hasn’t worked.
The theory was that the game should develop in conjunction with the player base. Unfortunately, it turns out that the player base (or perhaps rather the most vocal of the player-base) just wanted everything easier. So the missions are no longer a genuine puzzle, but simply a way of getting XP quickly.
Every single change that I can think of has made it easier to kill ordinary machines (XP helps you do this) and bumped up “Bosses”. I hate Bosses. I don’t mind hard missions - in fact I like them, but arbitrary Bosses is a different game and now it turns out, not such a good one.
If the player base was massively expanding, then fine - we’re wrong and the others are right. But it’s not!
Now you can argue that a perfectly effective marketing strategy is to recruit a player base and sell them new products on an ongoing basis, in which case give them anything they want to keep them playing. But for that you need paid DLC every six months at a minimum. Unfortunately the team is too small for that. So at this rate, the game will be abandoned in the next year or so.
Rivals, Reapers, Experimental Ammo, New Weapons, Experimental Weapons, Crafting, Base Building - all these things are gimmicks. Sweeties for the player base. But. The game is weaker now than when it started. They’ve added so much and ended up with less than they started with!
I can remember at the beginning, sorting through my stuff, wondering what to keep and what to drop (no Plundra!). I can remember standing in a Safe House and being horribly reluctant to step outside because it was scary out there.
It turns out that following the player base is an unworkable strategy. They want the game easier in every respect except a Boss-fight. Trouble is, there are heaps of games like that already, with bigger budgets. There was nothing like GZ.
What to do? As the Irish farmer said to the tourists asking for directions, “Dublin you want, is it? Well, I wouldn’t start from here!”
I’ve said it a lot of times: go back to the original strategy and stick with it.
5 Likes
You could almost say it’s…oversaturated mediocrity. Sorry it was cringe but I couldn’t help myself. No but for real. Doing the whole we will listen to wishlist and basically relying way to much on the loudest voices (cough cough it’s literally right here, that only shows us that they don’t have a vision and instead follow a loose plan. So many ideas and concepts are cool but arent fleshed out enough to be unique.
It’s so easy to think of ideas but even harder to come up with ones that could actually work.
As much as I agree and honestly want this to happen. I have very low expectations that it will ever happen. It’s clear that GZ is going into a new direction to appeal to anyone but us. That’s at least how I see it. I still want to love the game, but damn I cant do it anymore.
1 Like
Yes, it is right there. It sounds like a fab idea, but actually, all they want is sweeties and to make it easier. It turns out that it doesn’t make a good game. Who knew?
Nobody bothered to ask anyone what they thought needed adding to Half Life, or Portal. We played to find out what would arrive. That’s what works.
Making a super game is an act of complete creativity. It’s an art, and that’s why most people can’t do it.
2 Likes
Alpine Unrest (maybe not the cheesy writing) showed a glimpse of what GZ could be. The spooky at FOA4 and so much more, it’s more GZ than GZ.
3 Likes
I’m not really sure I want to tell them what I want from the game. I feel the requests made by various people in this forum already show wildly differing expectations, and that’s without even taking into account what’s being discussed on Youtube, Discord, Twitch, various subreddits, the Steam forums and what various professional reviewers had to say.
I’d like to see a roadmap of sorts, and maybe a feedback thread to proposed features.
My opinion on what’s here already:
-
Base game was great until FNIX Rising changed the map and lore. Sure, there’s a need to revisit the regions for improvements, but the basic structure was sound.
-
Alpine Unrest was more of the same but with way more polish. I’d love to see the same level of attention for further region revamps.
-
The Archipelago revamp seems to have been well-received (it came before I got the game, so I can’t really compare). I liked the small details they sprinkled all over the map.
-
Apparel Crafting - can’t really complain, but in my version the bonus is negligible, so I guess it’s not helping much.
-
Schweet, Blockbuster, Tubular vanity pack - they’re fine. They are there for those who want them, and some of them are neat enough I switch to them from time to time. They don’t alter the game in any way, and they allow for more individuality.
-
Bikes - I personally like them. They’re not that useful, but they add to the ‘teenager’ feeling. Riding a creaky gaspipe bike instead of an armored truck just feels appropriate, and ring-ring-ing the robots never gets old.
-
Rivals & Experimental Weapons - I’m torn. I love love love my PVG and Klaucke, but the guns need to be restricted to late-game content, because boy do they shift the balance. Until I got them, I was dead meat. As soon as I got my trusty boomstick, the robots were done for.
-
FNIX Rising - can’t really comment on the DLC itself, but the structures mess with the storyline. And as far as I’m concerned, I kinda wish FNIX would have less gaudy taste in architecture. I’d love some more hidden, camouflaged armaments, as lore-wise, FNIX presumably would like to avoid drawing attention (instead of erecting red searchlights on mountaintops).
-
US and Soviet Weapon pack - hmmmmmmm. Can’t tell how they are as I can’t use them, but I never felt I didn’t have enough guns in-game. I’m more of a ‘stick to what works for you’ kinda player, so slight variations on existing stuff don’t really bait me. Some seem to like them, but the Steam reviews are meh.
-
melee weapons - kinda pointless lore-wise. I can see how some people might want them in-game, but imagining a teenager beating a pickup truck sized machine with a stick makes this difficult.
-
base building - never tried it, but what I read and watched feels too restrictive, and branching out would alter the game on a massive scale. When they first announced it, I imagined ‘Fallout 4’-style build-your-own-bases. Some players obviously expected things more in line with Minecraft, Fortnite etc.
It’s been more than a year since various aspects of the game are in flux - I hope there’s some kind of dev feedback in the next months.
As an addendum - not sure if it can be incorporated: Add a ingame ‘gun’ of sorts, zero weight, DLC (if necessary for vetted users only) that allows for marking world bugs. I stumble over holes in the ground, texture issues, weirdly placed stuff all the time. Give me an in-game report button that allows for seamless tagging of issues without CTDs and sifting through screenshots.
7 Likes
Their general problem at least in my opinion is that their lore is on the store page, wich means there is no in game lore. Your character has the 3C tier versions already in the plundra (even on a fresh save file). So for many of us that already have the EXP guns and other stuff, grinding for the 5C tier versions feels kinda pointless and they aren’t really that great either.
It all comes back to that constant shortcuts, from a story perspective you’d think the weapons packs especially the US one would be a big plot point. Since it’s the first hint of outside help (aside from the Soviet on the base story), but that just gets the worst treatment possible. There is no real effort in giving the players a reason to care about the story, when again everything happens without you knowing it.
2 Likes
Yeah, I just took a look at the DLC descriptions, and I can see what you’re getting at. The story integration just isn’t there, aside from the marketing blurb.
For me, it’s more a question of function. I can dig the aesthetics or the lore behind the newer guns, I just don’t see much use for them. Want a sniper rifle → PVG, want a RPG → exp PVG, want a hunting rifle/SMG/AR → AG4/76, want a handgun → exp Klaucke. There’s nothing the lesser alternatives do outside of looking different. There are rare use cases for the shotguns, Magnus and RL, but they don’t help much in the grand scheme of things. I ‘raised’ various chars, equipping them with guns I usually don’t use, and walked away disappointed and/or annoyed. 2 shots with the 5* Möller to kill a lightbulb? Really? Give me a BB gun version of the MG42 while you’re at it…
1 Like
Precisely, even though there is a fair amount of guns at the endgame you’ll have figured out what’s best. So everything else feels useless because they don’t feel like they have a place in the meta. That’s why I’m so disappointed that they don’t put more effort into the presentation of the DLC guns.
It would have been nice if you could at least have worked for them while getting some new world-building in the game. Even if they would have been useless in the end I could at least appreciate the journey. But since that isn’t the case it’s grind grind grind. So the journey gets boring and stale.
So are you saying that Generation Zero isn’t a work of art? Or are you saying you personally think it’s not art, or think it is art, because to me it is one of the greatest games I ever played, I can’t wait to get back to it when new content arrives. To me it is still a work of art, sort off. The only thing that bugs me, is that the devs seemingly let people dictate them on how their game should be made. And by doing that give away their right to express their own creativity. I always grin when I read when devs say; Thank you for your feedback, even on really nasty feedback. Devs just can’t say what they really feel, because of the immense backlash it might give.
I read a lot opinions about the game, some I can agree with of course, but most of the criticisms I feel are personal wants or dislikes, which I don’t recognise as troublesome issues when I play the game. I don’t care about guns much, but I still bought the packs. If I don’t like them I can stop using them. Griping about not fitting in the lore, is nitpicking, really.
So to me it’s is not so black and white, and I keep enjoying this great game that others shamefully call oversaturated mediocrity.
3 Likes
There are simply elemements that aren’t to great in gz, and they could be better.
1 Like
Here’s the thing, that is what they asked for. I showed this in my video but I’ll link it here. I agree that they should stick to their own vision, because relying on the loudest voices and going after the mainstream appeal is what, at least in my and many people’s opinion killing what made the game fun and unique.
Why? Genereration Zero when being advertised is always making a big deal about the lore. The story and setting is what made me interested in the game. If it wasn’t then I’d look away and see it as another generic open world game. So when it brings new items (that you pay for) that have a real impact on the games lore and worldbuilding, but they don’t have it. Then I think it is a reasonable criticism that they should have that. The lore is important, that is what gives people the reason to care and explore the world. If nothing makes sense then there is no reason to care.
You know what, you are dead wrong on that. “Shamefully call oversaturated mediocrity.”, did you even watch the video? I have spent 6 months on the video, even longer with other parts of it. You fail to understand why I even made that and the rest of the GZ videos I made. I made them because I was passionate about a game I loved. If I hated it, like really hated it, then I wouldn’t even bother.
I have done my very best to come up with reasonable feedback and criticism, while trying to come up with ideas on the game. They want our feedback and criticism and I gave my all in a reasonable manner. You don’t have to agree with anything I or anyone else say, I can respect your opinion. But you don’t have the right to call the video shameless.
Yes, they asked for (constructive) feedback, not destructive.
Here’s the thing, I never told them anything else then that I loved what they made. I let them explore their own path. And while you say you agree that they should stick to their own vision, you are constantly saying they do it wrong.
Why? Because it’s your personal dislike. Many people love to try some other guns, even without specific lore.
Of course I watched that. And I disliked it, it showed absolutely no love for the game, only for T-shirts. And I did not call the video shameless, but the act of placing Generation Zero together with ‘Oversaturated Mediocrity’ in the tittle of this topic.
3 Likes
@Gysbert @JoJo_the_memedealer This is a kind of ‘both sides are right’ situation. There is useless hating and bashing, but the video is neither. It respectfully discusses shortcomings of the game (with a stinger title) that haven’t been addressed for quite some time, and these should be discussed. It hurts seeing this game mocked or torn apart by players and critics, but in the end, it just means it wasn’t for them. I recommended it to a pal, he played it for a few hours, and then he went back to World of Warships and Dark Souls 3. It’s just the way it is.
The devs presented the game as described in the video - a not-early-access growing-along-the-playerbase game that will take the feedback of its community into account. They did so on many occasions. I honestly don’t know about either their expectations or if they’ve been met. I wished them all the success they had with Just Cause back when they announced the game. I just fear they banked on making the next Minecraft or Fortnite and barely got theHunter out of it. The game’s been too niche to attract a broad following, and going for the ‘mainstream appeal’ might lose the remaining players instead of attracting and retaining new ones.
There is nothing to be gained by incorporating the whims of every kind of player under the sun. There are Fortnite kids, girls (and boys) that love Barbie’s Horse Adventure, Souls-like aficionados, Tetris fiends, SpinTires nerds etc. By copying what made these games great, you’ll get pink horses, block-stacking, cryptic whispers by ghostly knights and neon-light Carlton dances during the machines’ invasion.
2 Likes
What makes it destructive to you? I think you’ve misunderstood me a little here. Yes, I do wish they would have stayed with the original tone and atmosphere the game was being advertised and was pre FNIX Rising. My point is that they relied on people simply asking for wishlists as the devs themselves stated in the link I provided, did you read that? So what happens is that many voices clash because everyone sees different things the game is and could be.
I’m coming from the perspective that they should stick to their own vision and commit instead of trying to please literally everyone. It’s like making a movie but every 10 minutes a new director comes with a brand new vision.
Yes, it is a personal dislike, that is my opinion of the weapon packs. The problem isn’t that I care about what others like to do with the guns, it’s that since I care about the story, that I dislike the direction of not properly using the gun’s existence to expand the worldbuilding and tie them into the game proper. If they want us to care about the story then there ought to be some effort put into it. Putting important plot points and events in the store page is downright lazy from a story telling perspective.
You focus way too much on the fact that you love the game and I don’t do it anymore. Instead of trying to look from another perspective, you’re focusing on the sole fact that I do not like something. I respect your opinions, but should I really if you cant respect mine? Or at least put the effort in to try understanding them? To me it seems that even before you watched it you were biased, and that is okay. But you greatly misunderstand my feelings on the game. If I hated the game, I wouldn’t spend time giving feedback or criticism. My video is harsh, yes that is a fact. But do you know why? If you love something you have to recognize the faults, nothing is perfect and it’s nigh impossible to achieve perfection but something can always be better or done differently. That is the purpose of feedback and criticism.
The purpose of my video was to look at various elements of Generation Zero and provide reasonable enough criticism and feedback from a storytelling perspective and game design perspective at the same time as trying to make them fit together. Nothing I say in it means my thoughts are better than others, it is simply just my thoughts. I always welcome others’ opinions instead of trashing them as if they are heresy.
As for the title, I honestly don’t see the problem with it. The video is called oversaturated mediocrity because that for me was the easier way to explain what I believe Generation Zero as a game suffers from. And of course, making the viewer ask themselves and perhaps they would watch it. Even if I titled the video differently people would complain. But I have to be honest.
You don’t have to agree with anything I say regarding feedback and criticism, but I’d rather wish you come with your own thoughts so that we could perhaps have a more civil discussion about something we both love(d) instead of you giving out baseless accusations without giving proper examples and explanations.
Well, you obviously like to discuss, but that’s not how I like to spend my time. I remember, you said something like; that your interest in the game was mostly gone. But I see the interest to keep hammering on about what you personally think what’s wrong with the game is booming. That’s imo what is so destructive, not be able to move on when a game (or discussion for that matter) is disappointing.
I have many games that I personally did not like, but I never even thought about it to spoil it for others by saying the game stinks. And why in heavens name, would anyone do that if they love the game? If I can’t enjoy a certain game, then it doesn’t mean that game isn’t enjoyable for others.
So with no interest in the game, why don’t you just move on?
2 Likes
Yeah, that’s fine with me. As I said, there’s nothing wrong with preferring the look and feel of the new additions, and I don’t really mind them at all. It’s just that they don’t add much to the game from a replayability standpoint. You can ‘farm’ them like the base game guns, but the story and way of obtaining them doesn’t change to accommodate their inclusion. I’d presumably get them just to try them, but they don’t work in older versions.
I’m mainly salty because for my playstyle, they don’t change the formula. As for others, they can do whatever they like. I won’t put my opinion before theirs.
3 Likes
Again you ignore everything I say. Re-read my respone or re-watch the video.
Then why bother even responding to me at all, why be here at the forum. The forum is meant for discussion, that is the definition of the word. Yes my interest to play the game is lost, but not talk about that. I’ve been trying to say that the entire time, you again you do not listen.
Is that what you honestly think I want? To ruin everyone’s fun? I’m not forcing people to watch my feedback, criticism and reviews of the game. It’s your and their choice, I’m just sharing my thoughts on the forum.
Like I said Re-read my previous response or re-watch the video. All the answers to your questions are there.
I’m on the forum to read about the game. It’s not that I’m against feedback. Far from that.
Well I initially did not respond to you, but to Booty. I do not care much for over and forth bickering about who is right. I do like to talk about the game which I am passionate about. So when you reacted to my post I returned the favor. The point I was making is that a game is never good or bad for everybody, it has a lot to do with what kind of gamer they are. E.g easily upset, quick to complain, rage quitters, nitpickers, easy going, going with the flow, bug resistant, robust, etc.
When Booty had it over “art”, I was not clear if he meant that GZ was not that. But to me GZ is a work of art. But it’s only art to me because I am a robust player, I don’t get upset when a game spawns a hunter in the house, I love it. If there are lore pieces missing I fill them in myself. I don’t care about weapons specs, I simply play with what the game give me.
I just finished playing Deathloop, another underrated game, but to me a wonderful game. Had great fun with it. I played this one about 65 hours, and I will probably don’t play it again, where with GZ I played 2240 hours. And I hoping for december for more new stuff.
3 Likes
Agree to disagree, guys. Or this discussion might just go on forever…
//Mod