Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Padawan

Some minor improvements

21 posts in this topic

@devs

Here's my take on what to possibly improve upon after the latest MM update, there's some other threads about this but i think i have some specifics not mentioned before.

- Right now, when you receive your challenge you can either accept or decline, but you can't see who it is until you accept it. Pros: players can't 'back off' from playing certain people (maybe afraid to lose rating), Cons: Maybe you'd like to rematch vs a guy you just played and not vs some other player, or maybe you keep running into this player who disconnects halfway through the match. Personally i would like to know beforehand who i'm matched up against (and what his level is).

- After both players agreed to the challenge, the game automatically starts after 20 seconds. I think it would be better to have the game start automatically after 60 seconds or so, and that you can ready up earlier if you don't want to wait that long. Sometimes you run into a friendly player and it's nice to have a chat before playing or maybe your doorbell rings w/e and you can't make it back in time. Now there's no way to cancel or prolong the countdown and you will have to disconnect afaik.

- Besides having the MM levels such as gold, platinum, diamond etc. it would be nice to have a dedicated stats page a la QLStats where you can quickly see leaderboards and what ELO players have (with search function etc.) I'm sure this is already on the TO-DO list, but for many players this is a huge motivation to keep playing so it's probably good to work on this first.

- This one is requested alot: clean versions of maps and custom maps. Right now i'm being forced to play on for example vanilla 421, where i get spikes that drop my FPS to 30. I've heard other players with the same complaint.

- When 2 players each pick 1 (different) map, the server randomly chooses one of the two, so one player gets lucky with his pick and the other one doesn't (EDIT: i think? can someone confirm?). I think a possible solution for this would be to always pick a remaining unvoted map, or, the server can match you up for 2 matches in a row so you both can get a chance to play your map.

Edited by Padawan
atP and NicholasWalters like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Padawan said:

@devs

Here's my take on what to possibly improve upon after the latest MM update, there's some other threads about this but i think i have some specifics not mentioned before.

- Right now, when you receive your challenge you can either accept or decline, but you can't see who it is until you accept it. Pros: players can't 'back off' from playing certain people (maybe afraid to lose rating), Cons: Maybe you'd like to rematch vs a guy you just played and not vs some other player, or maybe you keep running into this player who disconnects halfway through the match. Personally i would like to know beforehand who i'm matched up against (and what his level is).

- After both players agreed to the challenge, the game automatically starts after 20 seconds. I think it would be better to have the game start automatically after 60 seconds or so, and that you can ready up earlier if you don't want to wait that long. Sometimes you run into a friendly player and it's nice to have a chat before playing or maybe your doorbell rings w/e and you can't make it back in time. Now there's no way to cancel or prolong the countdown and you will have to disconnect afaik.

- Besides having the MM levels such as gold, platinum, diamond etc. it would be nice to have a dedicated stats page a la QLStats where you can quickly see leaderboards and what ELO players have (with search function etc.) I'm sure this is already on the TO-DO list, but for many players this is a huge motivation to keep playing so it's probably good to work on this first.

- This one is requested alot: clean versions of maps and custom maps. Right now i'm being forced to play on for example vanilla 421, where i get spikes that drop my FPS to 30. I've heard other players with the same complaint.

- When 2 players each pick 1 (different) map, the server randomly chooses one of the two, so one player gets lucky with his pick and the other doesn't. I think a possible solution for this would be to always pick a remaining unvoted map, or, the server can match you up for 2 matches in a row so you both can get a chance to play your map.

- def. a big no

- yes

- to-do

- have i missed those requests? i haven't read nearly as much clean-map whining as i imagined tbh. a big no to clean-maps from me. To quote shooter: " should play and look good "

- i think it picks a random map out of the 3 ... in general i'm sure this whole voting system will get an overhaul anyways

 

also: 

 

Skaarj likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@A. Benz  Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, so i guess this will be a case of 'agree to disagree' but can you elaborate on point 4, about clean map versions? Because you are ruling out a lot of players from playing that map then, because 'play good' doesn't co-exist with framedrops and stutters thanks to a very demanding map like 421.

The reason people made those clean versions in the first place was to tackle the FPS issues many had with them... in either case imo for an arenaFPS it should be: fluidity > stutters/frame drops and visual clarity > visual clutter. I spoke to a guy with a 980 Ti (and a good CPU probably too) who experienced the same FPS drops on vanilla 421.

Much of that 'clean-map whining' happens off the grid though, during matches, just because it's not always posted on the forums here doesn't mean it's not there.

Pill_, lolograde and Grybzt like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Padawan said:

@A. Benz  Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, so i guess this will be a case of 'agree to disagree' but can you elaborate on point 4, about clean map versions? Because you are ruling out a lot of players from playing that map then, because 'play good' doesn't co-exist with framedrops and stutters thanks to a very demanding map like 421.

The reason people made those clean versions in the first place was to tackle the FPS issues many had with them... in either case imo for an arenaFPS it should be: fluidity > stutters/frame drops and visual clarity > visual clutter. I spoke to a guy with a 980 Ti (and a good CPU probably too) who experienced the same FPS drops on vanilla 421.

Much of that 'clean-map whining' happens off the grid though, during matches, just because it's not always posted on the forums here doesn't mean it's not there.

The answer is quite "simple":

Reflex was released on 4. Nov, 2014. I don't see the reason why a game released roughly over 2 years ago should run on hardware that already has problems with older games. 421 isn't a good example anyways. It drops my FPS to below 200 ... and i have a GTX 1060. Taking an extreme example just to prove a point doesn't work here.

Look at promeus' maps .... they look great and run well. 421 is trash and IMO should be removed anyways. It doesn't even play well, but that's another story.

I don't want to play clean maps. Why should i be forced to play clean maps, just because people try to run a 2014/2015 game on 2007 hardware? The devs put quite some effort into making the game look good and so do some mappers.

Another reason: the game needs to look good to the outside in order to attract more players. you won't achieve that by forcing people to play ugly maps just because "muh, my toaster doesn't run Reflex at 125fps". Hard reality is: you play on a PC. Advantage with PCs .... you can upgrade them. If a PC doesn't bring the performance you want/need -> you upgrade. If you don't want to upgrade in order to play the games you want, you should look at the console-fraction, they don't have these problems.

The game hasn't yet been fully optimized anyways. I guess @shooter could elaborate on how much optimization we could expect in the future.

Don't get me started about mappers that actually created clean versions .... i fear that might get me banned.

 

Regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Padawan, I was also having problems with huge frame drops on 421, however, I removed the lightmaps (r_lm_clear) and its fixed the problem for me. Dunno if it will work for you, but you should try it :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i dont know why people have problems getting high fps with all these super gpus, i have a 660gtx and get solid 250 pretty much everywhere (421 is maybe an exception, but i can still play there without getting stutters).

Warlord Wossman likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, dansen said:

i dont know why people have problems getting high fps with all these super gpus, i have a 660gtx and get solid 250 pretty much everywhere (421 is maybe an exception, but i can still play there without getting stutters).

I think problem is not that 421 performs badly, but fact that it is the only map that performs like that.

Performance inconsistency is huge in Reflex. Some maps are bare bone, some use lots of meshes, some use lots of brushes (421).

And people configure their games to perform good in most maps and 421 falls out of context with it's insane amounts of brushes that requires to calculate lots of collisions.

 

1) If most maps were as detailed as 421, that would be standard

2) If all brush work would be transformed in meshes, 421 would perform just as good as others.

 

So now you either configure your game accord to 1 map. Or you just avoid it.

FlabCaptain likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 17.1.2017 at 10:32 AM, Padawan said:

@A. Benz  Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, so i guess this will be a case of 'agree to disagree' but can you elaborate on point 4, about clean map versions? Because you are ruling out a lot of players from playing that map then, because 'play good' doesn't co-exist with framedrops and stutters thanks to a very demanding map like 421.

The reason people made those clean versions in the first place was to tackle the FPS issues many had with them... in either case imo for an arenaFPS it should be: fluidity > stutters/frame drops and visual clarity > visual clutter. I spoke to a guy with a 980 Ti (and a good CPU probably too) who experienced the same FPS drops on vanilla 421.

Much of that 'clean-map whining' happens off the grid though, during matches, just because it's not always posted on the forums here doesn't mean it's not there.

We don't live in 1996. This is 2017 and decent hardware isn't super expensive. This is a modern game and for it's age it even looks mediocore. It's normal that games have their hardware requirements and I don't think it's the right way to always brake progress of it's time and force all players to play badly detailed maps just because a small minority doesn't want to spend money on hardware. Seriously.. Reflex runs super fast and my PC is 6 years old. I feel like this game is affected way too much of it's legacy (unnecessarily lot tweaking for optimal experience, having to play bad looking maps because of people with shitty hardware, mappers reducing detail in their maps just because devs refuse to add real brightskins or outlines). Titanfall 2 has super detailed maps and perfect visibility because it has outlines + transparent fill of these outlines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, furyaxsfigkjhn said:

We don't live in 1996. This is 2017 and decent hardware isn't super expensive. This is a modern game and for it's age it even looks mediocore. It's normal that games have their hardware requirements and I don't think it's the right way to always brake progress of it's time and force all players to play badly detailed maps just because a small minority doesn't want to spend money on hardware.

It's not a matter of money but of principle. In competitive matchmaking, the better player should always win, no exceptions.To make an analogy with real sports, Mike Tyson shouldn't lose to a worse boxer because the other guy bought better gloves. Of course you can't completely nullify hardware advantages, but you can make an effort to make them smaller.

Chongus likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Pill_ said:

It's not a matter of money but of principle. In competitive matchmaking, the better player should always win, no exceptions.To make an analogy with real sports, Mike Tyson shouldn't lose to a worse boxer because the other guy bought better gloves. Of course you can't completely nullify hardware advantages, but you can make an effort to make them smaller.

Sorry, but by that logic the devs should remove everything that has a cost on performance on focus on an engine that runs great everywhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, A. Benz said:

Sorry, but by that logic the devs should remove everything that has a cost on performance on focus on an engine that runs great everywhere.

I'd much rather see that to be honest, yes, but I'm not an idiot. All I'm saying is that for comp matchmaking (and tourneys for that matter), clean maps should be the norm IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Pill_ said:

I'd much rather see that to be honest, yes, but I'm not an idiot. All I'm saying is that for comp matchmaking (and tourneys for that matter), clean maps should be the norm IMO.

I honestly think people are just spoiled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to me that the devs have made their decision regarding clean maps and we should respect that. The ideal solution would be for Steam Workshop itself to have some sort of 'clean' option, so the same map ID lets you switch to a performance version. That's unlikely to happen though, and I doubt the devs have time to work on that kind of system themselves (like a LOD system for each map). It'd probably require effort from the mapmakers themselves too. You can't please everyone especially in game development...!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Jaguar said:

It seems to me that the devs have made their decision regarding clean maps and we should respect that. The ideal solution would be for Steam Workshop itself to have some sort of 'clean' option, so the same map ID lets you switch to a performance version. That's unlikely to happen though, and I doubt the devs have time to work on that kind of system themselves (like a LOD system for each map). It'd probably require effort from the mapmakers themselves too. You can't please everyone especially in game development...!

The crux would be ensuring the geometry is identical and have the same coordinates, no?

Jaguar likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, lolograde said:

The crux would be ensuring the geometry is identical and have the same coordinates, no?

Of course, absolutely. That would be essential.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Pill_ said:

It's not a matter of money but of principle. In competitive matchmaking, the better player should always win, no exceptions.To make an analogy with real sports, Mike Tyson shouldn't lose to a worse boxer because the other guy bought better gloves. Of course you can't completely nullify hardware advantages, but you can make an effort to make them smaller.

I don't see how playing on maps with a higher level of detail deters from the best player winning in all honesty. If both players are playing the map it's a level playing field. Even with clean versions of maps you don't get around stuff like 144hz monitors and such, which I personally see as a bigger advantage than these clean versions provide (at least on my fairly old rig).
I also don't like promoting laziness in mapping and just resorting to making clean versions of maps instead of the mapper actively trying to fix and optimize their maps. There are examples of maps that NEED clean versions because their arted up counterparts run extremely poorly but those have been without exception bad optimization (or for teammode maps, the game engine, more on that)

There's obviously also the issue of how much reflex is optimized, but no matter how much optimization the devs put the game through, the newest grey dp4 will NOT perform well.
Inversely, Monolith with 8 people will not run well either before the game is optimized better (At least I firmly believe I've optimized the map as much as it is possible with the map editor) or if I resort to a clean version. which wont happen for any of my maps.

So to sum I suppose I just want to see mappers actively improving performance on their maps before the community draws the conclusion that we NEED clean versions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, promEUs said:

I don't see how playing on maps with a higher level of detail deters from the best player winning in all honesty. If both players are playing the map it's a level playing field. Even with clean versions of maps you don't get around stuff like 144hz monitors and such, which I personally see as a bigger advantage than these clean versions provide (at least on my fairly old rig).

It's about FPS. Personally, I don't actively notice an individual drop from 200 to 150 while I'm playing, but I do notice how much smoother the game feels overall on a clean map and that I hit harder. I do actively notice the difference between stable 125fps and stable 250fps, or even 200 vs 250. I don't know if 144hz is a much bigger advantage than stable framerate (I'm pretty ignorant about that kinda stuff), but again, I'm not saying the devs should strive to somehow completely nullify hardware advantages, just that they could make them smaller and if they did, it'd be a big improvement in the competitive integrity of the game in my eyes. 

Furioness likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Pill_ said:

It's about FPS. Personally, I don't actively notice an individual drop from 200 to 150 while I'm playing, but I do notice how much smoother the game feels overall on a clean map and that I hit harder. I do actively notice the difference between stable 125fps and stable 250fps, or even 200 vs 250. I don't know if 144hz is a much bigger advantage than stable framerate (I'm pretty ignorant about that kinda stuff), but again, I'm not saying the devs should strive to somehow completely nullify hardware advantages, just that they could make them smaller and if they did, it'd be a big improvement in the competitive integrity of the game in my eyes. 

I think we agree on the goal here, but I just don't think clean maps is a solution.
Probably since I'm so invested into making the game shine visually :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 20.1.2017 at 6:10 PM, promEUs said:

There's obviously also the issue of how much reflex is optimized, but no matter how much optimization the devs put the game through, the newest grey dp4 will NOT perform well.
 

e4c6a202efb6bb4b48e1bff276abbb43.png

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0