PDA

View Full Version : Unlocks? Why or why not?



Dirtymurph
06-22-2014, 07:40 AM
Pest gave me permission to start a thread discussing unlock systems so here it is:p. I'd like to hear actual opinions for or against unlocks. This isn't a poll so saying "yes" or "no" isn't a real explanation. It would be nice to have a good discussion on this subject. I think it's fairly obvious that the game will have some kind of unlock system. Maybe we should keep the discussion centered around what 's "acceptable". If you are completely against unlocks then you are welcome here too.

TheCyrcus.TTV
06-23-2014, 03:34 AM
My opinion: Unlocks are great. Putting in that effort to get that weapon I wanted gives me a great sense of accomplishment. Same goes for ranking systems, it gives competitive gamers, such as myself, something to work for.

Real720
06-23-2014, 05:23 AM
In reality, counter-terrorists/terrorists don't "unlock" weapons and gear before entering the battlefield. I think weapon/gear unlocks should be applied to certain gameplay modes, to say the least.

Pest_AWC
06-23-2014, 05:35 AM
Luckily, you have over 1000 posts, so you have unlocked the ability to make posts without my permission. :cool:

I am 100% against any unlocks that affect Multiplayer at all. It's a cheap tactic to keep people playing when a good game with lots of depth will keep people playing without unlocks.

If you are unlocking cosmetics or something that doesn't affect gameplay, then fine.

Even something like unlocking a different type of sniper rifle with different stats means an experienced player has a tool that a newer player doesn't have to accomplish something and therefore has an advantage.

Look, video games did not invent competition and games. We have thousands of years of history to show that all competitive games and sports put all players on equal ground and let that players skill determine their success, and not some bonus for playing the game 100 times. As a matter of fact, it is easier to argue for the opposite, and have more experienced players play at a disadvantage so new players are not discouraged. Look at golf and bowling the way they work handicaps into the lower level competitions for examples. Look at how racing simulators and even mario-kart will artificially speed up the weaker players to keep them in the running with the skilled players.

What you are asking for by wanting unlocks, is asking that the players that have played more not only have the advantage of (hopefully) more skills but also more equipment. This leads to alienating many new players and creates a completely unrealistic scenario that I don't want any part of.

The same people that want extra advantages for doing nothing more than playing the game more than someone else are the same people that were raised getting trophies in 5th grade soccer just for playing. It's a very sad state of affairs that we are creating for the youth and it shows now in some that have become adults. You want something to show for participating without actually earning anything.

Now, if you are talking about unlocking stuff for completing tasks, like getting 5 kills in a row with a pistol, then I'm not even willing to debate how stupid that is for a competitive game. The first time I played a standard COD game and a team member was useless and wouldn't use his assault weapon because he needed to get 5 pistol kills was the moment I quit.

There are plenty of COD clones out there for all of you that love your unlocks, kill-streaks, and any other magical and unrealistic advantages you want to get your hands on. How about we allow one game out there to reward actual skill with victories and not follow the COD way?

Ubi-MoshiMoshi
06-23-2014, 06:10 PM
I'm with Pest_AWC, This is my own opinion; with multiplayer this should be an even field with no advantages. This ensures new players are not at a disadvantage.

Single Player however, you should be able to work towards unlocking things with skill, so many head-shots etc. This would also help build up skills in multiplayer.

TheCyrcus.TTV
06-24-2014, 03:47 AM
I respect your opinion on weapon unlocks. Honestly, to me, as long as there's some form of rewards, I'll be happy with it. Take LoL for example. Something as simple as getting that border for whatever rank I achieved is something that will keep me going.

BOTA-16
06-24-2014, 07:02 AM
Unlocks are bad from a MP point of view. IMO they are used as a "carrot on a stick" to mask deficiencies in game depth and replayability. Games no longer become about playing a game and competing against other players. It becomes about achievements, stats, and specific actions to unlock the next weapon only to rinse and repeat itself. The funnest I have ever had playing MP has been in Ravenshield. There were no unlocks. achievements, persistent stats, none of that stuff. Your stats only meant anything for a few moments between rounds when individual stats were shown on the after action report. There was usually a mix of congrats, ggz and trash talking about the last round. Once the countdown between rounds hit 0, none of that mattered and that 3 kill round you just had means absolutely nothing. Sure you do that with enough consistency, you get a reputation. But that reputation is from players whom you have actually played against, not because someone looked you up on a leaderboard and sees your KDR or sees you are ranked 99 a week from release.

Dvsilverwing
06-24-2014, 07:50 AM
Unlocks are super satisfying to work towards and finally get as long as weapons are balanced and higher level weapons doesn't always mean better (not really an issue with realistic games considering the low shots to kill). Plus, from a business standpoint it's smart for a developer to put in, it gets more playtime out of players (which, essentially, adds value to the game, more playtime for the money).

shobhit7777777
06-24-2014, 08:49 AM
No unlocks

I'd like to have everything available from the get-go

Its Raiinbow Six - Chavez didn't have to kill 100 tangos with an MP-5 to unlock a red dot scope for his weapon.

Weapon customization is a tactical layer. If you don't have options - your tactical choice becomes a forced one. Besides, I don't have time to grind through the progression just to get a PEQ-15 or a tactical vest.

Dvsilverwing
06-24-2014, 02:58 PM
People seem to be ignoring the possibiliy of character cIustomization unlocks.

shobhit7777777
06-24-2014, 03:44 PM
People seem to be ignoring the possibiliy of character cIustomization unlocks.

Dunno about "people"...but I was also talking about character customization unlocks.

I'd like to be crystal clear - Everything. Unlocked. From. Day. One.

Of course....I'm pretty sure there will be unlocking and character progression....but I just want to voice my opinion.

Dvsilverwing
06-25-2014, 02:47 AM
Dunno about "people"...but I was also talking about character customization unlocks.

You mentioned what seems to be a laser sight, which I'd definitely consider a weapon attachment, and a tactical vest, which would most likely be a functional piece of gear. When people say character customization, they usually mean cosmetics and visuals, things that don't affect gameplay. Different skins for gear without stat changes, masks, color schemes, things like that.

aznassassin159
06-25-2014, 05:55 AM
When it comes to games like RB6, unlocks shouldn't exist. I like to keep my options open when playing and not have my equipment arbitrarily restricted just because the game says so. That's one of the reasons why Counterstrike and classic SOCOM were so bloody great.

But as Deadpool said in his game, "Progression in games is a must-have nowadays". In this modern industry, the unlock system is pretty much mandatory so I don't see it going away anytime soon.

BOTA-16
06-25-2014, 07:32 AM
Unlocks are super satisfying to work towards and finally get 1)as long as weapons are balanced and 2)higher level weapons doesn't always mean better (not really an issue with realistic games considering the low shots to kill). Plus, from a business standpoint it's smart for a developer to put in, it gets more playtime out of players (which, essentially, adds value to the game, more playtime for the money).

1) Why artificially balance them at all? Why not just pick a handful of weapons in each "class" and emphasize each particular weapons strength and weakness in the modeling and leave it at that. Let the players determine the "balance". When they artificially balance the guns, they become just re-skin jobs and rarely mimic their real life counterparts. So it become a mute point whether you choose any weapon within the same class because they are all "balanced".

2) What's the point of unlocks then? What's the purpose when you unlock something if you get no advantage from it? But they can't give using "unlocked" stuff an advantage because new players and players who seldom play would rage and not play. So then it goes back to why have unlocks at all. Let the players decide how they want to play.

The only way I would not be against unlocks when it comes to weapons/attachements/gadgets is if the player gets to choose what they unlock as they go instead of having an "unlock tree" and forcing a certain order you have to unlock them.

shobhit7777777
06-25-2014, 08:06 AM
You mentioned what seems to be a laser sight, which I'd definitely consider a weapon attachment, and a tactical vest, which would most likely be a functional piece of gear. When people say character customization, they usually mean cosmetics and visuals, things that don't affect gameplay. Different skins for gear without stat changes, masks, color schemes, things like that.

And in my second post, I clarify that as well - Everything unlocked


and a tactical vest, which would most likely be a functional

EVERYTHING should be functional.

Different skins, colour schemes etc. - this has me a bit concerned. I wouldn't mind personalizing your character if its done right and by 'right' I mean that it mirrors real life CT units.

I'd imagine that elite CT operators would have a lot of freedom in terms of gear but there is overall uniformity. So little things like Gloves and tactical vests and helmets (maybe eye protection and protective pads) should be customizable....but things like basic clothing and colour schemes should be limited and the colours available should be the basic military ones - tan, olive etc.

Kaiskune
06-25-2014, 04:57 PM
Ultimately it does depend on what in question is being unlocked

Weapons and game altering equipment
as has been said so far for competitive play every weapon should be unlocked and all attachments (if offered for use and option) should be available from the get go along with all gadgets,gizmos,super jackets and electromagnetic shields.
Nothing is worse for a shooter in my eyes is when every player is rushing to grind their way to rank X to get the big shooty dakka gun thats got more dakka then all others just so they can shove it everyone's face that they've got the shootiest gun on the game (forgive the Orkish... it seemed appropriate at the time)
its even more frustrating when you are someone like me who only really 'gels' with a few weapons on the game, the ones that often prove to be absolute pains to unlock (heres looking at you L85A2 of battlefield3)

If the game actually comes with a co-opertive side, so far the complete lack of infomation regarding a story mode is starting make me think they may have caught the titanfall infection and will pretty much omit the storymode completely.
For Co-op I'm a little torn between either side, I'm all for having all the weapons unlocked and the basic Attachments available (again if the attachment option is there) but i wouldn't turn my nose up at having alternative attachments as progressive unlocks. as a example an alternative to the standard red dot sight being the Russian Kobra.
my main hope with this system would be to ensure that no attachment makes an other obsolete. I'm going to refer to Future Soldier often, as it in my eyes is a major case of a game done WRONG in the sense of unlock progression and character customization. in this case Future Soldier's attachment unlocking path was a major case of the wrong way to do it. the order in which you unlocked those attachments was completely backwards, you unlocked the x6 scope 2-4 missions AFTER you unlocked the superior x12, the GRIPOD 3 missions before the angled foregrip, the list goes on.

Aesthetic character customization
on the other side of the coin I have no qualms about having to unlock character gear as long as it has no impact on the game play itself. Vegas 1 and to a lesser extend its successor did this masterfully. by having the Armour sets unlock in the Trio system, a higher up player had no distinct advantage over their lower ranked opponents and comrades if he/her was wearing armour unlocked at rank.. lets say 30, it was just as strong as the rank 1 equivalent. his/her only advantage was their experience
while in hind and fore sight Helmets should have an effect on the game,
in theory if a players P.E.C. stars off with a heavy, medium and light set or armour, they should also come with a unarmoured headdress (for example, a patrol cap), a light helmet and a military grade helmet from rank 1. using that theory then all the head wear options would then fit into each catagory like the starting 3
Unarmoured (Patrol cap, Beret, Boonie cap, backwards patrol cap for the kiddies)
Light (Light helmet, Rainbow operative helmet, Paratrooper helmet)
Military grade (standard helmet, riot helmet, improvised armoured helmet)

I'm as guilty as everyone for grinding a few levels for that pair of pants you like or that top you prefer over the other. wanting to look different is a fair reason to want to progress the ranks, everyone I know loved the beret, personally its not my taste but then... my perfect armour is not in the game
http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20120627205402/warhammer40k/images/e/ed/ElysianDropTrooper.jpg

xLOSTxAblomis
06-26-2014, 01:25 PM
IMHO Unlocks will not make sense for Rainbow Six series:

1) On the functional part it will not make sense for obvious reasons: the game is about tactics, and it should be an even field like many mentioned above.

2) On the cosmetic side it even makes less sense:
- unlock a Bolle X800 mask over X500? You will hardly see the difference and whats the point? Unlock a 5.11 belt? Too much hassle over nothing.
(Only hardcore geeks will value this and they are the minority)

- unlokcs of different skins for weapons? NO! NOOO! The game should not be a circus with people carrying "Tiger skinned M16".
It is not because it will be "not hardcore", you will lose the atmosphere.

Bottom line: why bother with something small and unnoticeable if making something bright is not an option.

Dirtymurph
06-26-2014, 03:37 PM
Luckily, you have over 1000 posts, so you have unlocked the ability to make posts without my permission. :cool:

I am 100% against any unlocks that affect Multiplayer at all. It's a cheap tactic to keep people playing when a good game with lots of depth will keep people playing without unlocks.

If you are unlocking cosmetics or something that doesn't affect gameplay, then fine.


Just to be clear I was more or less referring to unlocks that don't affect gun play or give advantages in the other thread. While I don't particularly like the majority of current unlock systems in games I think there is ways to do one right. I feel the same way when it comes to challenges like you mentioned with the pistol. Those tend to be just a tad ridiculous. Headshot challenges in CoD brought out all of the worst types of players in that game. You can't forget the multikill challenges for the explosives either! Who doesn't want teammates using Javelins or RPGs the whole match to try and kill people.

Dvsilverwing
06-27-2014, 12:48 AM
1) Why artificially balance them at all? Why not just pick a handful of weapons in each "class" and emphasize each particular weapons strength and weakness in the modeling and leave it at that. Let the players determine the "balance". When they artificially balance the guns, they become just re-skin jobs and rarely mimic their real life counterparts. So it become a mute point whether you choose any weapon within the same class because they are all "balanced".

2) What's the point of unlocks then? What's the purpose when you unlock something if you get no advantage from it? But they can't give using "unlocked" stuff an advantage because new players and players who seldom play would rage and not play. So then it goes back to why have unlocks at all. Let the players decide how they want to play.

The only way I would not be against unlocks when it comes to weapons/attachements/gadgets is if the player gets to choose what they unlock as they go instead of having an "unlock tree" and forcing a certain order you have to unlock them.

You are putting words in my mouth that I did not say, I didn't say to artificially balance them. When I say that they need to be balanced and higher level weapons aren't superior, I mean they can't be direct upgrades of each other. For example, if you unlock the G36c by default and the G36e at say, level 20, you can't have the G36e have statistically superior accuracy and less recoil with the same damage model and fire rate or it isn't balanced, and nobody will be using the G36c as soon as they unlock the G36e and the person with the G36e will almost always come out on top in an engagement with an equally skilled opponent. Or, for another example, if the HK416 is the last rifle in the game you unlock at level X, it can't be the weapon that has the best accuracy, stability, mobility, and damage in the game, otherwise that high level rifle is giving a blatant advantage over every other lower level rifle, and so is unbalanced.

The weapons cannot be upgrades, they have to be sidegrades, weapons that are different but viable in their own respect.


2) On the cosmetic side it even makes less sense:
- unlock a Bolle X800 mask over X500? You will hardly see the difference and whats the point? Unlock a 5.11 belt? Too much hassle over nothing.
(Only hardcore geeks will value this and they are the minority)

What is the point? The point is to have variation to keep things fresh and a little different, to cater to each individuals taste while still remaining realistic. Also, as for the hardcore geek comment, I think you'll find the opposite to be quite true in the Rainbow Six community, there are a lot of people that like seeing all the minor details of a player model.

xLOSTxAblomis
06-27-2014, 08:10 AM
Look, dvsilverwing
i see nothing wrong with "small unlocks" e.g. Blood patch an the knee, probable some "special" equipmnet (e.g. velcro tapes tatched to the helmet, etc). But it will be really hard to balance two things:
- make them noticeable enough
- avoid circus
The ideal sweet spot would be to have a picture like in Black Hawk Down, or Lone Survivor - different gear and customization but still looking serious and distinctive.

but:
1) This small unlocks should not be level-based - only achievement based (e.g. 100 headshots, etc)
2) I'm totally not sure about wepaon sidegrades, its just makes so much of battlefield. I would lean towards SWAT 4: with all weapons being distinctive and available, so that you can master whatever you want.

Pest_AWC
06-27-2014, 11:19 PM
but:
1) This small unlocks should not be level-based - only achievement based (e.g. 100 headshots, etc)
2) I'm totally not sure about wepaon sidegrades, its just makes so much of battlefield. I would lean towards SWAT 4: with all weapons being distinctive and available, so that you can master whatever you want.

THERE SHOULD BE NO ACHIEVEMENT BASED ANYTHING IN THIS GAME!!!!!!!!!!!!! At All!!!!!

The last thing we need is people ignoring smart team play becuase they are trying to get 100 headshots or 10 pistol kills!

There is no way to justify that and I would love to see you try.

xLOSTxAblomis
06-28-2014, 11:38 PM
THERE SHOULD BE NO ACHIEVEMENT BASED ANYTHING IN THIS GAME!!!!!!!!!!!!! At All!!!!!

The last thing we need is people ignoring smart team play becuase they are trying to get 100 headshots or 10 pistol kills!

There is no way to justify that and I would love to see you try.

Ok, i must admit you are right;)

No need to panic though:p

BIAk_SHREDIT
07-01-2014, 11:41 AM
There should be no unlocks that affect gameplay in competitive multiplayer.
Cosmetic unlocks are a different story. New morale patches, weapon cammos, boots, gloves, etc. Don't care much. They give players that want a little bit of that carrot on a stick something to chase, and those that don't want it are none the fouled. Also, customizing your character can add a degree of personal attachment to it. I can dig that.

The game should stand on its own merits. It shouldn't need unlockable weapons to pull people in and keep them there. And with every shooter on the planet now having progression schemes, if R6S really wants to turn heads (and tell the world it is confident and welcoming a change), it will do away with it.

Rank is fine... so long as it scales and is used for better matchmaking with teammates (i.e - rank goes up with better performance against similarly ranked opponents, goes down with poor performance against those of a similar or lower rank). Just having a number next to your name is a waste of time. CSGO got this right. The priority is on becoming a better player and a better asset for your team (else your rank goes down), not grinding away hours of play or camping to get 100 head shots.

If Ubi wants the game to PLAY the same way they showed it off in their little trailer, they need to put the systems in place that reward that kind of team work and communication. Having personal ranking systems and unlocks run counter to this idea. You're rewarded for grinding out time in the game - regardless of performance or teamwork - rewarded for personal performance rather than the achievements of your team.

Everyone lambastes CoD every year for being the same. If R6S wants to compete in a crowded shooter market and deliver a product that feels new, the dev team and the publisher supporting them are going to have to grow a pair and actually do something new. Get rid of the progression scheme.

Dome500
07-01-2014, 04:13 PM
Unlocks ?

Well...

If it's simply cosmetic unlocks like new rank badges, slightly changed gear design, different uniform colors (of course 2 different teams should not have the same colors and uniforms available), weapon camos, etc it's okay.
And ranks are also 100% okay as long as they only show the experience of the player and don't give you any advantages.

But if it's unlocks which actually give you an advantage - then NO.


The game should stand on its own merits. It shouldn't need unlockable weapons to pull people in and keep them there. And with every shooter on the planet now having progression schemes, if R6S really wants to turn heads (and tell the world it is confident and welcoming a change), it will do away with it.


Everyone lambastes CoD every year for being the same. If R6S wants to compete in a crowded shooter market and deliver a product that feels new, the dev team and the publisher supporting them are going to have to grow a pair and actually do something new. Get rid of the progression scheme.

This.

xLOSTxAblomis
07-07-2014, 07:18 PM
The further i look into this the more i understand that any kind of unlocks will just not work:

1) It will be ANOTHER game to grind for, with most of the customer base already having BF4/ COD with their unlocks
2) If the unlocks are cosmetic it will make even less sense: imagine you earning 10 000 points, getting through 25 matches just to get... what... new knee pads? I'm not sure that casual gamers will be happy.

I believe UBI have to think BF4 has this, CoD has this. Do we want to do the same? Why? What it will bring?

P.S. SWAT 4 was a great tactical game and it was played beautifully without unlocks.

Dome500
07-09-2014, 12:38 AM
2) If the unlocks are cosmetic it will make even less sense: imagine you earning 10 000 points, getting through 25 matches just to get... what... new knee pads? I'm not sure that casual gamers will be happy.


Well, I would be happy.
And gamers in CoD are also proud of their Golden AK or Camo patterns, so it's not like this is absurd. It shows waht you have achieved, that you are a pro/veteran. It's more a matter of pride, like a medal. You achieved something beyond of what others have, you completed a challenge which not every noob can just do very easily.

Think about it. Everyone ranks up no matter if you win or loose. But those achievements, those special things you have to do to get those colors, camo patterns, badges, titles, they are a real challenge, they are not easily done, they are only achieved if you are GOOD.

If those achievements/challenges are then focused on team-play and tacics-related action you could even motivate players to play clever and teach them teamwork.

xLOSTxAblomis
07-09-2014, 09:50 AM
Well, i think its less about the unlock but more about the unlocking system.

I believe Ubi should think out-of-the-box on this:
- voting system for the best players?
- reputation level instead of constant ranks? The better you play higher it is, but it can drop if you play like a d*ckhead?
- special benefits for the pro players out there who deliver constant performance?
I dunno, just brainstorming

The "make 100 headshots" stuff looks old and sad today. The same as the xp grinding..

It is not like i want to convince you or something, just thinking out loud.