|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
|
|
Thread Tools |
Rating:
|
Display Modes |
|
#13
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Why does everyone hate this game so much?
Quote:
Scoring frisbees was incentivized well, I agree, but that's also because it de-incentivized the other 2/3 of the game: a) 2/3 level climbing was severely under-rewarded b) defense was difficult/heavily penalized (namely through safe zones) Essentially 2013 became about how quickly and consistently you could score frisbees in the high goal, which is a perfectly valid game. Straight shoot-outs were high-scoring, easy to understand for an observer and easy to referee (see FLL). I can understand people describing 2013 as 'the best game ever'. It had few issues/controversies. It gave every robot an opportunity to show off. Better robots won out. For the most part, a single match was entertaining to watch. Every game should have these qualities. But the depth of gameplay was quite shallow. The rules reduced 90% of robots to play one strategy: cycle + 10pt hang. Aerial Assist is a lot braver. It wants to be dynamic and versatile. It wants more teams to think, talk and coordinate before and during a match (at least more than picking which feeder station to use). It wants to be more like a real team sport. Most teams sports have only one game-piece in play at a time as they cater for both defense and offense. That's what I believe Aerial Assist is trying to do. There are two veins of criticism: criticism of the intent and criticism of the execution. Ultimate Ascent was executed very well, partially because the intent was simpler to execute. But as a fan of team sports, I personally welcome the direction the GDC are trying to take. Last edited by George Nishimura : 25-03-2014 at 08:49. |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|