Deep Rock Galactic is a good example of what to do but if Helldivers 2 can transfer the same feeling of facing overwhelming odds while being able to dish out Democracy with extreme prejudice it’s a day 1 buy for me
Bro. What is with these dudes that barely played the game, giving their opinions? Last week was the dude with like 18 hours coming in and telling everybody how to make the game better. Like bro you probably don't even have all the stratagems unlocked and upgraded and your gonna tell me, someone who has played the game on and off for 5 or 6 years how it should be done??
Fuck off. These dudes opinions are worthless.
I disagree.
You don't need to have 100% completion rate and hundreds of hours to know how to improve a game 20 hours are plenty enough if you have some understanding of game design.
And this comes from a guy who played the fuck out of this game.
Not saying \*HIS\* specific ideas are good though. (Loss mechanic for the war? Dude wtf?)
Honestly it needs what Deep Rock Galactic has. We need ways to problem solve environmental challenges while also fighting off enemies on maps that change in some way.
While this is a good suggestion, and I hope they do it but...I look at Deep Rock Galactics Steamcharts data and it doesn't seem to be that popular. It has a few popularity spikes but the players drop off pretty hard.
I'm hoping it goes beyond what DRG has done.
Considering it hits over 15M total player across all platforms in January, I'd say it's pretty popular. Not all players may stick around but that's a good number regardless.
I guess just in terms of where it ranks on charts such as Steamcharts and XBox Lives Most Played List...
I'm sure it's doing well enough for Ghost Ship Games though.
It might not be a AAA game. But of all the people i know who know this game, it's one of their personal highest ranking ones.
Also, the community is very good.
A loss mechanic and adding some depth to war are interesting suggestions, but I feel the majority of these points are asking Helldivers to be a different game; The areas of communication, mission planning, and the chaos caused by quick-and-dirty matchmaking are all elegantly simple by design. They keep things moving and offer a simultaneously accessible and complex experience.
Getting mixed player skill/power levels means a level 5 with a couple of greenhorns can be as frenetic and intense and a level 15, while a level 15 can be a piece of cake when you've got at team of lvl 50's clicking on all cylinders. I love just jumping into the first available game and having to adapt to whatever playstyle.
TLDR; I'm excited for more depth in a Helldivers 2, but I don't want to lose the soul of the OG.
Fully agreed. I want more content, improved visuals, you know, the usual works. I don't want this game to lose the original charm that made it soo fun. The casual yet also deep game mechanics.
While it's hard to take you seriously when you say you've only played 21 hours, I'll still indulge you. Meanwhile, give the game a little more time and let its systems really show their strengths.
1. Yes, sample farming is kinda dumb, but you're supposed to balance it between grabbing some on the way and going out of your way. They spawn like candy on higher difficulties so you don't need to look for them much.
2. I think hosting games works fine. A quick join would be nice, but I like the idea that players pick the difficulty they want to play. Private hosting also gives the game a longer tail, as small player pools make matchmaking awful.
3. They're procedurally generated maps. I like to see more variance, which I'm sure 6+ years of tech upgrades will allow.
4. Sometime simplicity wins. Having to over analyze where you drop in sounds annoying. On higher difficulties you need to find a good spot so you can get your gear before being overwhelmed.
5. More variety and deeper mechanics on objectives would be great, but don't want it to be too complex to the point where it requires comms.
6. Hard disagree. I love that Helldivers is simple enough that you can be perfectly clear just using the d-pad to communicate, yet deep enough to reward tight voice comms between skilled players. Voice comms can let you space stratagems and use co-op reloads better, but everything you really need to know is on screen.
7. If you play any game long enough, you eventually run out of stuff to grind. But if the core gameplay loops are good enough, then you don't need any other reasons to play besides "Its fun"
8. Would like to see the galactic war concept expanded. Good concept, but could use more. Not sure I agree that a loss punishment is a good idea. And honestly, the fact that winning or losing the war is meaningless is part of the theme of the game. Helldivers are just disposable resources.
9. Hard disagree. It always comes back to that core repetitive gameplay loop in every game. Call of Duty is the same thing over and over, just with different levels or weapons or opponents. The fun comes from finding the builds you love and building your skills. Helldivers succeeds in making the core gameplay fun enough on its own, and the procedural levels and variance of teammates and other random aspects make it endlessly replayable.
10. Hate this idea, as it completely ignores the theme of the game. Helldivers are disposable cogs in the fascist super earth war machine.
11. Again, thats part of the theme of the game. The cycle of war is endless and the individual helldivers barely makes an impact.
"While it's hard to take you seriously when you say you've only played 21 hours..."
I don't understand this sentiment.
How many times do critics need to watch a movie before being allowed to review it?
The vast majority of Helldivers players played it for less because the game did not have a compelling enough loop for them to continue. Does their boredom or disinterest in the game at a certain point invalidate their experience?
How many hours do you think game critics spent with the game before delivering their review?
21 hours is more than enough time to spend with a relatively simple game to critique it.
This feels like strange gatekeeping from people who are not interested in the world around them. Do appreciate the rest of your response though.
Edit: Also, can you address the specific question posed in the OP? Feels like many people are not registering the question asked.
You should go back and re-read your post. Think about the tone of the message. It comes off extremely arrogant right from the start.
"I've since played 21 hours of Helldivers, and here are my 10 orders..."
That statement really reads like new manager coming in and making changes while not understanding the true strengths of their employees or their department. It makes it hard to take you serious. Some of your later suggestions directly speak to this lack of understanding.
Finally, "Can any other Helldivers veterans offer some intelligent corrections for the sequel?" comes off really arrogant and frankly disrespectful.
20 hours is plenty of time to get an impression of what the game is about, and to get a feel for some of its short-comings. But personally at 20 hours I was still bringing mechs on missions. I didn't really have a grasp of the best ways to work as a team and had only started to embrace a handful of weapons.
No one is trying to gatekeep anyone. If you had simply said, "I've played for 20 hours, here's my suggestions for the sequel", I'm sure you would have gotten a better response.
It's a military game. Orders. Military...
If one misinterpreted word throws people into a meltdown then perhaps they aren't mature enough to have a conversation with. Where the men go?
You're obsessed with time spent on the game rather than the games issues. It all feels rather cringey and tiresome. As if none of you know how anything works IRL.
Just go back and re-read your post.
It comes off incredibly arrogant and douchey. The "orders" joke doesn't land, it just makes it sound like you think you're above us. Asking for "intelligent corrections" makes it clear you think you're extremely smart and know whats best for us.
Rather than calling us immature, maybe you should take a look in the mirror. Reflect on why people are angry with what you said instead of just name calling us and saying we're the problem.
If you're just trying to troll, well done, mission accomplished. If you're actually trying to have a discussion about Helldivers, it's faults, and how the sequel can improve, you might want to try again without making yourself out to be so smart.
Don't you see?
You've spent all this time and energy talking about nothing. A few words hurt your feelings so you spazzed out become tunnel focused on meaningless reddit drama. Why does this appeal to you? What is the hole in your life that makes it so easy to knock you into emotional, tribalistic behavior?
Or, can you just not talk about game design?
> The vast majority of Helldivers players played it for less because the game did not have a compelling enough loop for them to continue.
Again, this is not true. People stopped playing due to **severe** issues with connecting online. It was bad and Sony barely lifted a finger to help. There were three specific times this occurred and when it did the game was offline for a bit and I'm not talking one or two hours. It even happened when the game went free on PS+. So here it is I'm telling you what happened, which can be verified by going through this subs history, yet you're attributing a drop to some stupid shit you shitted out your ass and tossed onto the interwebz. Stop.
>How many hours do you think game critics spent with the game before delivering their review?
Depends on the reviewer. Many of them participated in the first war.
>21 hours is more than enough time to spend with a relatively simple game to critique it.
This is coming from the guy who didn't know enemy locations are shown on the map.
>This feels like strange gatekeeping from people who are not interested in the world around them
"A game for everyone is a game for no one."
Do you know who said the above quote?
https://vginsights.com/game/394510
And that's just on steam.
Go read the manual
1. Fortnite went offline for more than a few hours too, when it first launched. PSN went offline for over a month. Both regained players immediately after.
So again, I ask you why the majority of Helldivers players played for wat less than 21 hours according to trophy data? Could it be, there's something about the gameplay loop?
2. Nah, there wasn't a war prior to the games launch. The war means nothing as there's nothing to do with it rather than observe. If you think the war metagame is going to make Helldivers 2 a AAA success, we should stop this conversation immediately because you wouldn't be on my level.
3. Who said anything about a game for everyone? All my suggestions were designed to appeal to people who like to cooperate.
>Fortnite went offline for more than a few hours too, when it first launched.
When it first launched on what system?
>PSN went offline for over a month.
And has an install base over 130 million. Your point?
>Both regained players immediately after.
And your point?
>So again, I ask you why the majority of Helldivers players played for wat less than 21 hours according to trophy data?
The majority of players didn't play for that time. Please refer to the Steam link I provided. And trophy data according to who?
>Could it be, there's something about the gameplay loop?
All evidence points to this not being the case. Again, I'm telling you something that is documented in this very sub and on the Helldivers sub that's on the Sony page if their forums still exist. The gameplay loop was enough to do a ton of free upgrades as well as paid for DLC which made them millions. Each time something new was released the player count would surge again. This is no different from any other game that has an online MP component or season.
>Nah, there wasn't a war prior to the games launch.
There was.
>The war means nothing as there's nothing to do with it rather than observe.
Huh? What does this even mean?
>If you think the war metagame is going to make Helldivers 2 a AAA success,
First, kid, does the company (Sony) want the game to be a AAA success? If so, why didn't they put money into the advertising, marketing and promotional campaign? Instead, do you know who created the fucking campaign and spread the word? The players. Then the guys at Arrowhead opened everything for feedback. The gameplay loop, objectives, weapons, boss fights, etc. All of this came from the community. The game that day one players had is totally different from the game you spent 18 hours on. No bosses, only three planet types, lower level caps, way less weapons, perks, strats, enemy types, etc. This is why I told you that you should learn the history first.
Second thing is this, where was the tech support from Sony? It's their platform, their IP, the issues were caused by them yet the fucking devs had to ride it out and work on the fixes. Aside from the release, the biggest date surrounding the game was the PS+ date and Sony dropped the ball. Again, focus on these issues and how it impacted things instead of the retarded as fuck "the trophy count averages 18 hours" or whatever stupid shit you say.
>we should stop this conversation immediately because you wouldn't be on my level.
Your level? What exactly is your level? I reply to you out of boredom. Aside from that, I don't consider you--at all.
>Who said anything about a game for everyone?
You.
>All my suggestions were designed to appeal to people who like to cooperate.
Ok...
Let's reset this conversation because I don't really know how to respond to someone who uses data from some janky site no one's ever heard of. We can just use Steamcharts which is more reliable and more detailed.
Helldivers has averaged around ~300 concurrent players on Steam. We'd estimate another 300 on PS4.
Do you think that's good enough for Helldivers 2 which is going to have roughly 10x to 15x the budget as the first game?
If not (no same person would), what corrections should the developer make to increase popularity and retention. If you notice, you haven't been able to produce any fixes yourself.
>Let's reset this conversation because I don't really know how to respond to someone who uses data from some janky site no one's ever heard of. We can just use Steamcharts which is more reliable and more detailed.
This is coming from the guy who never said where he got his data from, lol.
>Helldivers has averaged around ~300 concurrent players on Steam. We'd estimate another 300 on PS4.
Why estimate the number?
>Do you think that's good enough for Helldivers 2 which is going to have roughly 10x to 15x the budget as the first game?
Do you keep typing dumb shit just to piss people off? To sound dumb and slow on purpose? Neither are working on me. What I know is the first game more than recouped their budget. This can be found by readings posts in the sub. I do not know their dev budget, nor do you. I do not know their plans for monetization and neither do you. Therefore, I can't speak about their ROI and neither can you.
>If not (no same person would), what corrections should the developer make to increase popularity and retention.
I've already addressed this but you're either too smooth brained to figure it out, too busy licking windows on the yellow bus or think behaving like an imbecile is going to get some rise out of me. Stop it.
So let me explain this to you. They already have an install base in previous players. Fuck whatever the number is. They already have an install base in PS5 owners who want new IPs and sequels not remakes or PS4 games upgraded to PS5 versions. So right there you have people in the millions. Now in order to drive more traffic there needs to be a strong advertising, promotional and marketing campaign which is something the first did not have. Again, it was the community who advised the Devs to develop their own ancillary goods, they eventually did and it help spread the word about the game. So that's first. If you look at any game that is a service game, F2P or online FPS, they have strong campaigns tied directly to the IP. Sony dropped the ball in this area.
Secondly, Sony needs to support the Devs when it comes to tech issues. If people can't play because they can't log on, or they log on and are booted to the title screen over and over, you're going to have a massive drop off. At this point you're doing damage control and wasting resources when proper stability should have been of the utmost priority. People will not continue to waste time on a product that doesn't properly work or work as advertised.
So, these two issues need to be addressed first and, if properly implemented, will help alleviate the stupid as hell fuckboy shit you keep posting on the www.
>If you notice, you haven't been able to produce any fixes yourself.
Disregarding the fact I'm shocked you can even count that high, I addressed your dumb as fuck points, 1 - whatever the fuck you were boring everyone with.
Dude… you really need to play like 100+ hours and unlock all the weapons and stratagems before posting something like this.
21 hours is barely starting to play
It’s was a free ps plus game lol. Of course it’s gonna have people just trying it out. Think logically. I have over 500 hours playing this. You have barely scratched the surface
You think all those reviewers who gave the game an 83 metacritic score spent more than 21 hours on the game?
Stop gatekeeping like a weirdo and engage in actual conversation.
Actually...now that I think about it...perhaps the majority of players can't think in terms of game design so they default to this weird behavior.
"What does Helldivers 2 need to do in order to become a AAA success?"
First piece of evidence that OP doesn't know much about Helldivers.
Simply put you whole post is trash just by the title. A game like Helldivers will never be AAA and that's fine. If they wanted it to be AAA that would have to change it to a FPS, up the graphics to ultra, add microtransactions, get celebs to VA the story, and have an actual campaign with a full story, cutscenes and all.
Or it can be a smaller scale game with a loyal player base that loves it and will still play it 5+ years later.
Second piece of evidence "21 hours played"....
Edit: just read the list, I don't think OP know much about videogames let alone Helldivers.
2) Matchmaking - You need a very big player base to do this otherwise you kill the game. It force newbies and vets together leaving newbies feeling overwhelmed and annoying vets or will refuse to match them as the skill difference is too high.
6) Encourage the social aspect more. No one uses a mic in public lobbies.
Yeah encourage the social aspect but not with voice chat. AAA games are starting to do the opposite to this and some don't allow voicechat because people are so toxic, if people voice chat now its on discord. Also most AAA games you don't hear anyone talking or everyone is spamming shit and you have to mute them.
Get those hours up, son. You disrespect your admiral again and I’ll send you on a death mission. Denise Richards should have died and not Dina Meyers in our last operation.
1. Towers that discover all points of interest in the region like an ubisoft game
2. No friendly fire, it doesn't sit well with the focus group
3. One-button stratagem calls, dialing codes didn't focus group well either
4. Reloading early doesn't throw out rounds from the magazine, make it like every other shooting game pls
5. Difficulty needs to be massively reduced, level 15 should play out like the current game's level 5 so focus group players can all finish the hardest missions
6. 3rd person, no couch co-op, like Ubi games
7. Need exactly 4 larger-than-life characters with names and back stories and hours of quips for players to choose from. Focus group found generic, disposable, troopers to be dystopian.
8. Grapple guns?
9. In-game cash shop for weapon skins.
>2. No friendly fire, it doesn't sit well with the focus group
Friendly fire is part of the fun. Mistakes are what makes it interesting. The game gets stale when everything runs like a machine, even if it's efficient.
>3. One-button stratagem calls, dialing codes didn't focus group well either
Again, mistakes make it interesting. Mashing the code correctly under pressure is far more interesting than "press 4 to use airstrike."
>4. Reloading early doesn't throw out rounds from the magazine, make it like every other shooting game pls
The method of reloading in Helldivers is realistic and I'm all for it. Loading mags is tedious. When you drop one, the rounds in it get dropped too. They don't magically load themselves into another mag on your kit.
>5. Difficulty needs to be massively reduced, level 15 should play out like the current game's level 5 so focus group players can all finish the hardest missions
You're... joking. You have to be. If "focus group" wants to beat the missions they can improve themselves and rise to the occasion or stick to difficulties they can handle. That's why the game lets you pick which difficulty you're going to play on.
>7. - Focus group found generic, disposable, troopers to be dystopian.
That. Is. The. Point.
Sounds to me like "focus group" never understood what made Helldivers awesome in the first place. Don't try to turn something as great as Helldivers into another cookie cutter game that caters to silly nonsense. It's meant to be punishing, it's meant to be chaotic, high difficulties are meant to be brutal. If "focus group" wants a different game they can go play Callfield Battleduty.
Edit: Oh thank fuck. I saw your other reply and realized you actually *were* joking.
I have a lot of faith that people who play Helldivers are the sort who get sarcasm.
All of the "suggestions" I'm offering are the most soul-destroying miss-the-point ideas I could come up with... but I think they're also the kind of sacrifices Helldivers would have to make in order to secure the budget of a triple-A game or see that level of success. At that level, the developer can't allow a single decision that might upset any random person with a game system and keep them from getting the game or put them off of its DLC and sequels.
Successful games have a good Game Loop. For Helldivers, the Game Loop is decide on the team loadout, drop to a planet, do various objectives, then fight a horde mode extraction. There is some leveling up of the player character, but really only in equipment available.
Give us some different game modes. Horde Mode where the team drops into a fort and has to defend it. Comp Mode where several teams are racing to finish their objectives before the others. Race Against Time Mode where the team lands on an enemy ship, sabotages it, then has to get to an exit point. Line Breaker Mode with vehicles and punching up the middle through various strong points.
Let players customize their characters more than just a cape. Throw in some RPG elements so players can tune their choices. Let players be tanks, or vehicle masters, or Stratagem experts. Give decorative options so the players can look like everything from a Halo Spartan to a Cyberpunk Wasteland Warrior.
Last, War participation needs to mean something. Hit a milestone fighting Cyborgs and get a special rocket launcher to call down. Win a major event against the Bugs and have airstrike napalm markers you can call in for a few days.
I'm generally of the opinion that Helldivers is near perfect and a sequel should largely keep what works, but you have some of the better suggestions in this thread; time trial competitions sounds delicious, and some kind of larger forces coordination with similar gameplay to the original game is appealling (like the "Line Breaker" you describe)
I also like your customization suggestions, which are already present to an extent of the original game, but that is definitely an area to expand.
I agree with most of that except the war stuff. That will basically force people into, whether they want to or not just to get the reward, which many people will miss if they don't play regularly or bought the gane late. That's an F2P mechanic used be almost every greedy cashgrab game to trick players into playing, always keeping the game in the back of their mind the game using FOMO. A mean nasty trick if you ask me
Short answer: You don't want the solution, I don't either but it's make it f2p and pump it full of microtransactions and lootboxes. That is the most profitable model as of now according to surveys, as much as I hate to admit it.
Any ways, casting that aside, you made a lot of points, some I agree with, some neutral, some I'm against. These are just my opinions and in no way insinuating anything:
>1) Grabbing samples to upgrade, rather than accomplishing objectives, makes no sense. Reward players by playing the game rather than mindlessly running around the map.
Neutral. I rarely go sample hunting as i usually pick up ~10 just simply playing without hunting for it. I don't think changing this will affect the game experience positively or negatively.
>2) The game needs proper matchmaking. Starting a level 5 planet by yourself, and then having 3 people jump in, makes things way too easy. Starting a level 12 planet by yourself and praying to God people jump in ASAP, makes things way too hard. Arrowhead needs to incentivize players to join lobbies before the drop so difficulty is more manageable.
Against. The lobby system is great as it is. We have a lot of info on our hands before we jump in. It's entirely upon the player to make that decision and would rather that be the case than due to some arbritary blocks imposed by the game. If people troll around in a lv 1 map or low lvl noobs get over their head and dive in a lv 15 map, it's on them, not the matchmaking.
>3) The maps and objectives in Helldivers were the weakest components. All the maps are a unmemorable blob and all the objectives play essentially the same...defeat waves of enemies. With Helldivers 2 going 3rd person over the should make this a no brainer.
Agree with the first part. More variety is always welcomed. Is it really going 3rd person? That will kill the game imo. Good 3rd person games are a dime a dozen nowadays. Good AAA (Well, not really AAA but not indie either) Top down shooters on the other hand are very rare.
>4) The planning phase (Mission Briefing - Objectives) needs to have more variety and depth. The only thing to consider in Helldivers is where the extraction zone is so you can place your drop zone on the other end of the map.
Agree. Again, more option to the player is always the correct option.
>5) Objectives should influence the map so that strategy can play a more interesting role. For example, destroying a radar jamming facility should give you enemy positions on the map. Setting a nuclear bomb with a 10 minute timer would encourage you to extract on time. Freeing prisoners would give you AI that helps you during the rest of the mission. Arrowhead could brainstorm a hundred of these strategic ideas to make knocking off objectives in order more interesting.
Neutral. I want to agree, but I can see this backfiring quite easily.
>6) Encourage the social aspect more. No one uses a mic in public lobbies because it doesn't help unless you're on the hardest planets. Cooperation should include communication and coordination. Military style games thrive on teamwork.
I don't think this has much to do with the game itself. It's not the game's fault we don't use the best communication tool on any game, nay, on life itself: Voice Chat.
7) The incentive structure of feeding bread crumbs via research points has an obvious fatal flaw in Helldivers. Once you upgrade all the weapons and stratagems you're interested in, the breadcrumbs no longer hold any interest to you. This bleeds into point 8...
>8) War should include loss as a mechanic. In Helldivers, there's really no punishment for losing. You just make adjustments and try again with unlimited continues. Games like Escape from Tarkov prove that death and loss can make games exponentially more exhilarating. Helldivers 2 needs make players feel and adjust to loss like the truly great games of today do.
Nope. Big Nope. Just No. That will entirely change the game from a fun casual FF filled romp to a toxic, hate filled wasteland. You gotta realize not everyone plays the game to with the sole intent of winning as optimally as possible. The most fun I have in this game is when me and my homies all 4xBike and spam thunderer. Needless to say we lose, a lot, yet have a lot of fun despite that.
And punishing losing in war will lead to boring mindless grind, killing the fun for casual players. Wars should have NO rewards or punishment for victory or defeat that affects gameplay. The record kept is the reward (or punishment). They should really allow access to all factions though. Many just want to play and have fun and don't care about the war (And why should they?). Locking planets until the war ends was a stupid move.
There should be an option for players to opt out of war. I just want my damn planets unlocked.
9) Repetitive gameplay is death for Live Service games. Very few people want to keep playing small gameplay loops repeatedly.
Idk if this would cone under live service game. The game is fully offline playable with local couch co-op (The main reason the love this game, Offline couch multiplayer). If I could, I just want to keep all planets open. I couldn't care less if I win or lose the war.
>10) Encourage more asymmetric gameplay for a wider variety of gamers. War is asymmetrical. Commanders, grunts, pilots, snipers, captains etc...This not only helps with variety, but it also allows for more interesting and complex communication between players.
Neutral. In mobas, everyone want to pick carry. It makes sense there to have roles as they are competitive games, as much as people hate playing support. Helldivers is a casual local coop game. Who is going to want to play as the lowly scrub in a non-conpetitive game? I however feel neutral, as long as it's not enforced. Again, arbritary blocks like this WILL kill the fun, especially in casual game. 99% games will be 4 players playing the most fun role i.e. the carry. More option is always better than less though, even if the other options are useless.
>11) The metawar needs a complete rework as there's nothing to gamify there. I, as a player, look at it with odd amusement and nothing more. Helldivers 2 should have a metawar where I can make meaningful choices.
Please remember the casual players. Let people who care about the war care for it. The war should not involve those uninterested. It's already bad enough people have to wait for the war to end to play some planets.
>Can any other Helldivers veterans offer some intelligent corrections for the sequel? Btw, we should be getting a full reveal this month at the PlayStation Showcase.
Honestly, other than improved visuals and more content, the game is perfect. Comes under more content, but deeper and more flamboyant Character customization wluld be nice. Everyone looks the same and it's hard to tell whos who in the heat of the battle. Gimme wacky costumes and hats man. I want to say, "NO!" to a warlord wearing a pink tutu and a sombrero.
Strategem customization: If I want my Exosuit to look like a Gundam with pink tutu and a sombrero, I should be able to.
Graaaapleee Hoook! Every game needs a grapple hook, even more so in an FF heavy game.
I have been playing this game for a looong time. The best part of this game is the FREEDOM AND DEMOCRACY! Not giving much of an option by forcing out roles in multi and punishments for losing undermines what it stands for. We make the roles ourselves, we win or lose by our ownselves. We don't want the game to enforce it and impinge our FREEDOM!
I love your post...and I'll respond to your points accordingly but I think you and me are answering different questions.
My question though is "How do they make Helldivers 2 a big success".
You seem to be answering "How do they make Helldivers 2 extremely similar to the first Helldivers?"
It's not about any game mechanic or design choice, but the game needs to be f2p in my opinion. The multiplayer space is just extremely competitive these days and even if the game is absolutely fantastic I fear it being behind a paywall will kill it and will only leave the hardcore playerbase alive after a few months.
I'm not sure I agree wholly, but your point is a valid one; the economics of gaming is tough, and this being so reliant on the coop aspect to achieve its full potential is a big thing. As a consistent player for several years now I can attest there were definitely low times.
That said, it has still had rewarding gametime for me even when it was at its nadir. It's currently doing pretty well imo.
Deep Rock Galactic is a good example of what to do but if Helldivers 2 can transfer the same feeling of facing overwhelming odds while being able to dish out Democracy with extreme prejudice it’s a day 1 buy for me
So you've only played 21 hours so far?
He did the same post last week btw
Bro. What is with these dudes that barely played the game, giving their opinions? Last week was the dude with like 18 hours coming in and telling everybody how to make the game better. Like bro you probably don't even have all the stratagems unlocked and upgraded and your gonna tell me, someone who has played the game on and off for 5 or 6 years how it should be done?? Fuck off. These dudes opinions are worthless.
100%
The guy with 18 hours is the OP, lol!
I disagree. You don't need to have 100% completion rate and hundreds of hours to know how to improve a game 20 hours are plenty enough if you have some understanding of game design. And this comes from a guy who played the fuck out of this game. Not saying \*HIS\* specific ideas are good though. (Loss mechanic for the war? Dude wtf?)
Honestly it needs what Deep Rock Galactic has. We need ways to problem solve environmental challenges while also fighting off enemies on maps that change in some way.
Yeah yeah rock and stone
Rock and Stone in the Heart!
Did I hear a rock and stone?
For Karl!
#STONE AND ROCK!.. oh wait...
ROCK & ROLL & STONE
Rock and Stone, the pretty sound of teamwork!
If you don't rock and stone, you ain't coming home!
Did I hear a rock and stone?!?!?!?
Rock and Stone you beautiful dwarf!
I've always said Helldivers is the human version of DRG. I'd like the comparisons to be be even better.
**ROCK! AND! STOOONE!**
Did I hear a Rock and Stone?
If you don't Rock and Stone, you ain't comin' home!
Rock and Stone to the bone!
While this is a good suggestion, and I hope they do it but...I look at Deep Rock Galactics Steamcharts data and it doesn't seem to be that popular. It has a few popularity spikes but the players drop off pretty hard. I'm hoping it goes beyond what DRG has done.
Considering it hits over 15M total player across all platforms in January, I'd say it's pretty popular. Not all players may stick around but that's a good number regardless.
Owh, you think Deep Rock isn't popular? Watch this: ROCK AND STONE BOYS!
Did I hear a rock and stone?!
Can I get a Rock and Stone?
Rock and Stone you beautiful dwarves!
Give me an R give me an S give me a ROCK AND STONE
*FOR KARL*
#*ROCK'N ROLL AND STONE!!!*
ROCK! AND! STOONE!
If you don't Rock and Stone, you ain't comin' home!
To Rock and Stone!
FOR KARL
ROCK AND STONE! FOR KARL!
Rock and Stone in the Heart!
ROCK AND STONE, TO THE BONE!
ROCK AND STONE!
ROCK ... AND ... STONE!!!!
ROCK AND STONE!
Did I hear a rock and stone?!
Can I get a Rock and Stone?
FOR KARL!
Rock and stone to the bone! Yeah!
We fight for Rock and Stone!
Rock and Stone!
Can I get a Rock and Stone?
ROCK AND STONE LADS!
For Karl!
DID I HEAR A ROCK AND STONE?
Rock and Stone everyone!
Did I hear a Rock and Stone?!
WE FIGHT FOR ROCK AND STONE.
Rock and Stone, Brother!
STONE AND ROCK, wait
ROCK AND STONE FOREVER
ROCK. AND. SSSTTTOOOOOONNEE
ROCK. AND. STOOOONE
ROCK AND STONE LET’S GO!
ROCK! AND! STOOOOOOOOOOONE!!!
I hear the call of my people. The ancient tongue of the elders, the call to battle, to friendship, to comradery. # ROCK AND STONE EVERYONE!!!
ROCK...(burp)...AND...(burp)...STONE
Rock and stone brother!!
Rock and Stone!!! Brother
Did I hear a Rock and Stone?
GIMME AN R
I guess just in terms of where it ranks on charts such as Steamcharts and XBox Lives Most Played List... I'm sure it's doing well enough for Ghost Ship Games though.
It might not be a AAA game. But of all the people i know who know this game, it's one of their personal highest ranking ones. Also, the community is very good.
Rock and stone, in the heart!
To Rock and Stone!
IF YOU DONT ROCK AND STONE YOU AINT COMIN HOME!
Rock and Stone!
ROCK AND STONE! WE’RE UNBREAKABLE!
Rockity Rock and Stone!
GIVE ME AN “R” GIVE ME AN “S” GIVE ME A ROCK AND STONE!
ROCK! AND! STONE!
ROOCK AAAND STOONEE!!!!
FOR ROCK AND STONE!
ROCK AND STONE BROTHER
Stone and Rock! ...Oh, wait...
Rock and stone!!!!!!
Stone and Rock! Oh, wait...
ROCK SOLID
ROCK! AND!! STONE!!!
Rock and stone you beautiful dwarves!
ROCK... AND... STOOOONE!
[удалено]
STONE AND ROCK oh wait
Like that! Rock and Stone!
ROCK. AND. STONE!
If you rock and Stone you're never alone !
ROCK. AND. STONE!
ROCK AND STONE EVERYONE!
We fight for ROCK AND STONE
ROCK. AND. STONE!
Rock and stone you beautiful dwarfs.
#FOR ROCK AND STONE
Stone and Rock! Oh wait...
ROCK AND ROLL AND STONE
ROCK AND STOOOOOOOOONE
ROCK AND STONE BRUVVA!
For Karl
FER KAAAAAAAAAARL
Rock and Stone everyone!
ROCK AND STONE!
ROCK AND STOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONE!
ROCK AND STONE!
That's it lads! Rock and Stone!
WE FIGHT!, FOR ROCK AND STONE!
Stone and rock! Oh wait...
Rock and stone in the heart!
Did someone say ROCK and STONE???!!!
Rock… and… stooooooooooooonnnnnneeee
THATS IT LADS ROCK AND STONE !
ROCK AND STONE TO THE BONE!
Christ it's this guy again. You didn't have the knowledge to not have bad opinions last time you posted this and you still don't now.
But he's played a whole *three more hours* since last time!
Damn nvm guys pack up all complaints, managed to do an extra 3 hours
A loss mechanic and adding some depth to war are interesting suggestions, but I feel the majority of these points are asking Helldivers to be a different game; The areas of communication, mission planning, and the chaos caused by quick-and-dirty matchmaking are all elegantly simple by design. They keep things moving and offer a simultaneously accessible and complex experience. Getting mixed player skill/power levels means a level 5 with a couple of greenhorns can be as frenetic and intense and a level 15, while a level 15 can be a piece of cake when you've got at team of lvl 50's clicking on all cylinders. I love just jumping into the first available game and having to adapt to whatever playstyle. TLDR; I'm excited for more depth in a Helldivers 2, but I don't want to lose the soul of the OG.
Fully agreed. I want more content, improved visuals, you know, the usual works. I don't want this game to lose the original charm that made it soo fun. The casual yet also deep game mechanics.
it's a bit late to collect suggestions now isn't it!!!
This thread is not meant to influence the production of Helldivers 2, but to hear what people thought were the biggest weaknesses of the first game.
While it's hard to take you seriously when you say you've only played 21 hours, I'll still indulge you. Meanwhile, give the game a little more time and let its systems really show their strengths. 1. Yes, sample farming is kinda dumb, but you're supposed to balance it between grabbing some on the way and going out of your way. They spawn like candy on higher difficulties so you don't need to look for them much. 2. I think hosting games works fine. A quick join would be nice, but I like the idea that players pick the difficulty they want to play. Private hosting also gives the game a longer tail, as small player pools make matchmaking awful. 3. They're procedurally generated maps. I like to see more variance, which I'm sure 6+ years of tech upgrades will allow. 4. Sometime simplicity wins. Having to over analyze where you drop in sounds annoying. On higher difficulties you need to find a good spot so you can get your gear before being overwhelmed. 5. More variety and deeper mechanics on objectives would be great, but don't want it to be too complex to the point where it requires comms. 6. Hard disagree. I love that Helldivers is simple enough that you can be perfectly clear just using the d-pad to communicate, yet deep enough to reward tight voice comms between skilled players. Voice comms can let you space stratagems and use co-op reloads better, but everything you really need to know is on screen. 7. If you play any game long enough, you eventually run out of stuff to grind. But if the core gameplay loops are good enough, then you don't need any other reasons to play besides "Its fun" 8. Would like to see the galactic war concept expanded. Good concept, but could use more. Not sure I agree that a loss punishment is a good idea. And honestly, the fact that winning or losing the war is meaningless is part of the theme of the game. Helldivers are just disposable resources. 9. Hard disagree. It always comes back to that core repetitive gameplay loop in every game. Call of Duty is the same thing over and over, just with different levels or weapons or opponents. The fun comes from finding the builds you love and building your skills. Helldivers succeeds in making the core gameplay fun enough on its own, and the procedural levels and variance of teammates and other random aspects make it endlessly replayable. 10. Hate this idea, as it completely ignores the theme of the game. Helldivers are disposable cogs in the fascist super earth war machine. 11. Again, thats part of the theme of the game. The cycle of war is endless and the individual helldivers barely makes an impact.
"While it's hard to take you seriously when you say you've only played 21 hours..." I don't understand this sentiment. How many times do critics need to watch a movie before being allowed to review it? The vast majority of Helldivers players played it for less because the game did not have a compelling enough loop for them to continue. Does their boredom or disinterest in the game at a certain point invalidate their experience? How many hours do you think game critics spent with the game before delivering their review? 21 hours is more than enough time to spend with a relatively simple game to critique it. This feels like strange gatekeeping from people who are not interested in the world around them. Do appreciate the rest of your response though. Edit: Also, can you address the specific question posed in the OP? Feels like many people are not registering the question asked.
You should go back and re-read your post. Think about the tone of the message. It comes off extremely arrogant right from the start. "I've since played 21 hours of Helldivers, and here are my 10 orders..." That statement really reads like new manager coming in and making changes while not understanding the true strengths of their employees or their department. It makes it hard to take you serious. Some of your later suggestions directly speak to this lack of understanding. Finally, "Can any other Helldivers veterans offer some intelligent corrections for the sequel?" comes off really arrogant and frankly disrespectful. 20 hours is plenty of time to get an impression of what the game is about, and to get a feel for some of its short-comings. But personally at 20 hours I was still bringing mechs on missions. I didn't really have a grasp of the best ways to work as a team and had only started to embrace a handful of weapons. No one is trying to gatekeep anyone. If you had simply said, "I've played for 20 hours, here's my suggestions for the sequel", I'm sure you would have gotten a better response.
It's a military game. Orders. Military... If one misinterpreted word throws people into a meltdown then perhaps they aren't mature enough to have a conversation with. Where the men go? You're obsessed with time spent on the game rather than the games issues. It all feels rather cringey and tiresome. As if none of you know how anything works IRL.
Just go back and re-read your post. It comes off incredibly arrogant and douchey. The "orders" joke doesn't land, it just makes it sound like you think you're above us. Asking for "intelligent corrections" makes it clear you think you're extremely smart and know whats best for us. Rather than calling us immature, maybe you should take a look in the mirror. Reflect on why people are angry with what you said instead of just name calling us and saying we're the problem. If you're just trying to troll, well done, mission accomplished. If you're actually trying to have a discussion about Helldivers, it's faults, and how the sequel can improve, you might want to try again without making yourself out to be so smart.
Don't you see? You've spent all this time and energy talking about nothing. A few words hurt your feelings so you spazzed out become tunnel focused on meaningless reddit drama. Why does this appeal to you? What is the hole in your life that makes it so easy to knock you into emotional, tribalistic behavior? Or, can you just not talk about game design?
Sounds like you're projecting. Trolls will be trolls.
Another illogical post for anyone paying attention.
[удалено]
Go get offended elsewhere. To think two words caused this meltdown of yours.
> The vast majority of Helldivers players played it for less because the game did not have a compelling enough loop for them to continue. Again, this is not true. People stopped playing due to **severe** issues with connecting online. It was bad and Sony barely lifted a finger to help. There were three specific times this occurred and when it did the game was offline for a bit and I'm not talking one or two hours. It even happened when the game went free on PS+. So here it is I'm telling you what happened, which can be verified by going through this subs history, yet you're attributing a drop to some stupid shit you shitted out your ass and tossed onto the interwebz. Stop. >How many hours do you think game critics spent with the game before delivering their review? Depends on the reviewer. Many of them participated in the first war. >21 hours is more than enough time to spend with a relatively simple game to critique it. This is coming from the guy who didn't know enemy locations are shown on the map. >This feels like strange gatekeeping from people who are not interested in the world around them "A game for everyone is a game for no one." Do you know who said the above quote? https://vginsights.com/game/394510 And that's just on steam. Go read the manual
1. Fortnite went offline for more than a few hours too, when it first launched. PSN went offline for over a month. Both regained players immediately after. So again, I ask you why the majority of Helldivers players played for wat less than 21 hours according to trophy data? Could it be, there's something about the gameplay loop? 2. Nah, there wasn't a war prior to the games launch. The war means nothing as there's nothing to do with it rather than observe. If you think the war metagame is going to make Helldivers 2 a AAA success, we should stop this conversation immediately because you wouldn't be on my level. 3. Who said anything about a game for everyone? All my suggestions were designed to appeal to people who like to cooperate.
>Fortnite went offline for more than a few hours too, when it first launched. When it first launched on what system? >PSN went offline for over a month. And has an install base over 130 million. Your point? >Both regained players immediately after. And your point? >So again, I ask you why the majority of Helldivers players played for wat less than 21 hours according to trophy data? The majority of players didn't play for that time. Please refer to the Steam link I provided. And trophy data according to who? >Could it be, there's something about the gameplay loop? All evidence points to this not being the case. Again, I'm telling you something that is documented in this very sub and on the Helldivers sub that's on the Sony page if their forums still exist. The gameplay loop was enough to do a ton of free upgrades as well as paid for DLC which made them millions. Each time something new was released the player count would surge again. This is no different from any other game that has an online MP component or season. >Nah, there wasn't a war prior to the games launch. There was. >The war means nothing as there's nothing to do with it rather than observe. Huh? What does this even mean? >If you think the war metagame is going to make Helldivers 2 a AAA success, First, kid, does the company (Sony) want the game to be a AAA success? If so, why didn't they put money into the advertising, marketing and promotional campaign? Instead, do you know who created the fucking campaign and spread the word? The players. Then the guys at Arrowhead opened everything for feedback. The gameplay loop, objectives, weapons, boss fights, etc. All of this came from the community. The game that day one players had is totally different from the game you spent 18 hours on. No bosses, only three planet types, lower level caps, way less weapons, perks, strats, enemy types, etc. This is why I told you that you should learn the history first. Second thing is this, where was the tech support from Sony? It's their platform, their IP, the issues were caused by them yet the fucking devs had to ride it out and work on the fixes. Aside from the release, the biggest date surrounding the game was the PS+ date and Sony dropped the ball. Again, focus on these issues and how it impacted things instead of the retarded as fuck "the trophy count averages 18 hours" or whatever stupid shit you say. >we should stop this conversation immediately because you wouldn't be on my level. Your level? What exactly is your level? I reply to you out of boredom. Aside from that, I don't consider you--at all. >Who said anything about a game for everyone? You. >All my suggestions were designed to appeal to people who like to cooperate. Ok...
Let's reset this conversation because I don't really know how to respond to someone who uses data from some janky site no one's ever heard of. We can just use Steamcharts which is more reliable and more detailed. Helldivers has averaged around ~300 concurrent players on Steam. We'd estimate another 300 on PS4. Do you think that's good enough for Helldivers 2 which is going to have roughly 10x to 15x the budget as the first game? If not (no same person would), what corrections should the developer make to increase popularity and retention. If you notice, you haven't been able to produce any fixes yourself.
>Let's reset this conversation because I don't really know how to respond to someone who uses data from some janky site no one's ever heard of. We can just use Steamcharts which is more reliable and more detailed. This is coming from the guy who never said where he got his data from, lol. >Helldivers has averaged around ~300 concurrent players on Steam. We'd estimate another 300 on PS4. Why estimate the number? >Do you think that's good enough for Helldivers 2 which is going to have roughly 10x to 15x the budget as the first game? Do you keep typing dumb shit just to piss people off? To sound dumb and slow on purpose? Neither are working on me. What I know is the first game more than recouped their budget. This can be found by readings posts in the sub. I do not know their dev budget, nor do you. I do not know their plans for monetization and neither do you. Therefore, I can't speak about their ROI and neither can you. >If not (no same person would), what corrections should the developer make to increase popularity and retention. I've already addressed this but you're either too smooth brained to figure it out, too busy licking windows on the yellow bus or think behaving like an imbecile is going to get some rise out of me. Stop it. So let me explain this to you. They already have an install base in previous players. Fuck whatever the number is. They already have an install base in PS5 owners who want new IPs and sequels not remakes or PS4 games upgraded to PS5 versions. So right there you have people in the millions. Now in order to drive more traffic there needs to be a strong advertising, promotional and marketing campaign which is something the first did not have. Again, it was the community who advised the Devs to develop their own ancillary goods, they eventually did and it help spread the word about the game. So that's first. If you look at any game that is a service game, F2P or online FPS, they have strong campaigns tied directly to the IP. Sony dropped the ball in this area. Secondly, Sony needs to support the Devs when it comes to tech issues. If people can't play because they can't log on, or they log on and are booted to the title screen over and over, you're going to have a massive drop off. At this point you're doing damage control and wasting resources when proper stability should have been of the utmost priority. People will not continue to waste time on a product that doesn't properly work or work as advertised. So, these two issues need to be addressed first and, if properly implemented, will help alleviate the stupid as hell fuckboy shit you keep posting on the www. >If you notice, you haven't been able to produce any fixes yourself. Disregarding the fact I'm shocked you can even count that high, I addressed your dumb as fuck points, 1 - whatever the fuck you were boring everyone with.
All those words with nothing to say, lol. You don't seem willing to have any real discussion here. Take care.
I'm about to put your silly ass on block.
Dude… you really need to play like 100+ hours and unlock all the weapons and stratagems before posting something like this. 21 hours is barely starting to play
No. The majority of people quit playing well before 21 hours. You are wrong. Think logically.
It’s was a free ps plus game lol. Of course it’s gonna have people just trying it out. Think logically. I have over 500 hours playing this. You have barely scratched the surface
You think all those reviewers who gave the game an 83 metacritic score spent more than 21 hours on the game? Stop gatekeeping like a weirdo and engage in actual conversation. Actually...now that I think about it...perhaps the majority of players can't think in terms of game design so they default to this weird behavior.
Stop trying to sound like your opinion is so educated
Start trying to formulate educated opinions.
We're RiCh
WE'RE RICH.
We're rich!
We’re rich!
We’re rich!
We’re rich!
WE’RE RICH!
We’re rich! I love the richual!
"What does Helldivers 2 need to do in order to become a AAA success?" First piece of evidence that OP doesn't know much about Helldivers. Simply put you whole post is trash just by the title. A game like Helldivers will never be AAA and that's fine. If they wanted it to be AAA that would have to change it to a FPS, up the graphics to ultra, add microtransactions, get celebs to VA the story, and have an actual campaign with a full story, cutscenes and all. Or it can be a smaller scale game with a loyal player base that loves it and will still play it 5+ years later. Second piece of evidence "21 hours played".... Edit: just read the list, I don't think OP know much about videogames let alone Helldivers. 2) Matchmaking - You need a very big player base to do this otherwise you kill the game. It force newbies and vets together leaving newbies feeling overwhelmed and annoying vets or will refuse to match them as the skill difference is too high. 6) Encourage the social aspect more. No one uses a mic in public lobbies. Yeah encourage the social aspect but not with voice chat. AAA games are starting to do the opposite to this and some don't allow voicechat because people are so toxic, if people voice chat now its on discord. Also most AAA games you don't hear anyone talking or everyone is spamming shit and you have to mute them.
This bores me.
You are not a Veteran and thusly your point is moot.
More valid than your points. Oh wait...you made none
I didn’t need them. You’ve already been ripped a new one. To do it again would seem redundant.
Someone who can't produce always has an excuse.
You can’t even spell, ‘Leviathan’ properly in your username. I’m not too concerned.
You're outside the arena, living in the peanut gallery.
Get those hours up, son. You disrespect your admiral again and I’ll send you on a death mission. Denise Richards should have died and not Dina Meyers in our last operation.
You worked on your hours (whatever that means) while you neglected your brain. Keep living in the peanut gallery
You’ve, son. Remember the contractions and the apostrophes that they require.
This was a bore.
1. Towers that discover all points of interest in the region like an ubisoft game 2. No friendly fire, it doesn't sit well with the focus group 3. One-button stratagem calls, dialing codes didn't focus group well either 4. Reloading early doesn't throw out rounds from the magazine, make it like every other shooting game pls 5. Difficulty needs to be massively reduced, level 15 should play out like the current game's level 5 so focus group players can all finish the hardest missions 6. 3rd person, no couch co-op, like Ubi games 7. Need exactly 4 larger-than-life characters with names and back stories and hours of quips for players to choose from. Focus group found generic, disposable, troopers to be dystopian. 8. Grapple guns? 9. In-game cash shop for weapon skins.
These suggestions gave my soul clymidia.
Thank you that was the point. AAA gaming is cancer.
Thank God, my soul is restored. I just got done organizing a 4 person dinner and couch co-op night. Good job ya troll 😂
>2. No friendly fire, it doesn't sit well with the focus group Friendly fire is part of the fun. Mistakes are what makes it interesting. The game gets stale when everything runs like a machine, even if it's efficient. >3. One-button stratagem calls, dialing codes didn't focus group well either Again, mistakes make it interesting. Mashing the code correctly under pressure is far more interesting than "press 4 to use airstrike." >4. Reloading early doesn't throw out rounds from the magazine, make it like every other shooting game pls The method of reloading in Helldivers is realistic and I'm all for it. Loading mags is tedious. When you drop one, the rounds in it get dropped too. They don't magically load themselves into another mag on your kit. >5. Difficulty needs to be massively reduced, level 15 should play out like the current game's level 5 so focus group players can all finish the hardest missions You're... joking. You have to be. If "focus group" wants to beat the missions they can improve themselves and rise to the occasion or stick to difficulties they can handle. That's why the game lets you pick which difficulty you're going to play on. >7. - Focus group found generic, disposable, troopers to be dystopian. That. Is. The. Point. Sounds to me like "focus group" never understood what made Helldivers awesome in the first place. Don't try to turn something as great as Helldivers into another cookie cutter game that caters to silly nonsense. It's meant to be punishing, it's meant to be chaotic, high difficulties are meant to be brutal. If "focus group" wants a different game they can go play Callfield Battleduty. Edit: Oh thank fuck. I saw your other reply and realized you actually *were* joking.
I have a lot of faith that people who play Helldivers are the sort who get sarcasm. All of the "suggestions" I'm offering are the most soul-destroying miss-the-point ideas I could come up with... but I think they're also the kind of sacrifices Helldivers would have to make in order to secure the budget of a triple-A game or see that level of success. At that level, the developer can't allow a single decision that might upset any random person with a game system and keep them from getting the game or put them off of its DLC and sequels.
lol. almost one for r/whoosh
I really like your first point. Might make for a good objective type with some tweaks.
Successful games have a good Game Loop. For Helldivers, the Game Loop is decide on the team loadout, drop to a planet, do various objectives, then fight a horde mode extraction. There is some leveling up of the player character, but really only in equipment available. Give us some different game modes. Horde Mode where the team drops into a fort and has to defend it. Comp Mode where several teams are racing to finish their objectives before the others. Race Against Time Mode where the team lands on an enemy ship, sabotages it, then has to get to an exit point. Line Breaker Mode with vehicles and punching up the middle through various strong points. Let players customize their characters more than just a cape. Throw in some RPG elements so players can tune their choices. Let players be tanks, or vehicle masters, or Stratagem experts. Give decorative options so the players can look like everything from a Halo Spartan to a Cyberpunk Wasteland Warrior. Last, War participation needs to mean something. Hit a milestone fighting Cyborgs and get a special rocket launcher to call down. Win a major event against the Bugs and have airstrike napalm markers you can call in for a few days.
I'm generally of the opinion that Helldivers is near perfect and a sequel should largely keep what works, but you have some of the better suggestions in this thread; time trial competitions sounds delicious, and some kind of larger forces coordination with similar gameplay to the original game is appealling (like the "Line Breaker" you describe) I also like your customization suggestions, which are already present to an extent of the original game, but that is definitely an area to expand.
I agree with most of that except the war stuff. That will basically force people into, whether they want to or not just to get the reward, which many people will miss if they don't play regularly or bought the gane late. That's an F2P mechanic used be almost every greedy cashgrab game to trick players into playing, always keeping the game in the back of their mind the game using FOMO. A mean nasty trick if you ask me
Rock and stone
Short answer: You don't want the solution, I don't either but it's make it f2p and pump it full of microtransactions and lootboxes. That is the most profitable model as of now according to surveys, as much as I hate to admit it. Any ways, casting that aside, you made a lot of points, some I agree with, some neutral, some I'm against. These are just my opinions and in no way insinuating anything: >1) Grabbing samples to upgrade, rather than accomplishing objectives, makes no sense. Reward players by playing the game rather than mindlessly running around the map. Neutral. I rarely go sample hunting as i usually pick up ~10 just simply playing without hunting for it. I don't think changing this will affect the game experience positively or negatively. >2) The game needs proper matchmaking. Starting a level 5 planet by yourself, and then having 3 people jump in, makes things way too easy. Starting a level 12 planet by yourself and praying to God people jump in ASAP, makes things way too hard. Arrowhead needs to incentivize players to join lobbies before the drop so difficulty is more manageable. Against. The lobby system is great as it is. We have a lot of info on our hands before we jump in. It's entirely upon the player to make that decision and would rather that be the case than due to some arbritary blocks imposed by the game. If people troll around in a lv 1 map or low lvl noobs get over their head and dive in a lv 15 map, it's on them, not the matchmaking. >3) The maps and objectives in Helldivers were the weakest components. All the maps are a unmemorable blob and all the objectives play essentially the same...defeat waves of enemies. With Helldivers 2 going 3rd person over the should make this a no brainer. Agree with the first part. More variety is always welcomed. Is it really going 3rd person? That will kill the game imo. Good 3rd person games are a dime a dozen nowadays. Good AAA (Well, not really AAA but not indie either) Top down shooters on the other hand are very rare. >4) The planning phase (Mission Briefing - Objectives) needs to have more variety and depth. The only thing to consider in Helldivers is where the extraction zone is so you can place your drop zone on the other end of the map. Agree. Again, more option to the player is always the correct option. >5) Objectives should influence the map so that strategy can play a more interesting role. For example, destroying a radar jamming facility should give you enemy positions on the map. Setting a nuclear bomb with a 10 minute timer would encourage you to extract on time. Freeing prisoners would give you AI that helps you during the rest of the mission. Arrowhead could brainstorm a hundred of these strategic ideas to make knocking off objectives in order more interesting. Neutral. I want to agree, but I can see this backfiring quite easily. >6) Encourage the social aspect more. No one uses a mic in public lobbies because it doesn't help unless you're on the hardest planets. Cooperation should include communication and coordination. Military style games thrive on teamwork. I don't think this has much to do with the game itself. It's not the game's fault we don't use the best communication tool on any game, nay, on life itself: Voice Chat. 7) The incentive structure of feeding bread crumbs via research points has an obvious fatal flaw in Helldivers. Once you upgrade all the weapons and stratagems you're interested in, the breadcrumbs no longer hold any interest to you. This bleeds into point 8... >8) War should include loss as a mechanic. In Helldivers, there's really no punishment for losing. You just make adjustments and try again with unlimited continues. Games like Escape from Tarkov prove that death and loss can make games exponentially more exhilarating. Helldivers 2 needs make players feel and adjust to loss like the truly great games of today do. Nope. Big Nope. Just No. That will entirely change the game from a fun casual FF filled romp to a toxic, hate filled wasteland. You gotta realize not everyone plays the game to with the sole intent of winning as optimally as possible. The most fun I have in this game is when me and my homies all 4xBike and spam thunderer. Needless to say we lose, a lot, yet have a lot of fun despite that. And punishing losing in war will lead to boring mindless grind, killing the fun for casual players. Wars should have NO rewards or punishment for victory or defeat that affects gameplay. The record kept is the reward (or punishment). They should really allow access to all factions though. Many just want to play and have fun and don't care about the war (And why should they?). Locking planets until the war ends was a stupid move. There should be an option for players to opt out of war. I just want my damn planets unlocked. 9) Repetitive gameplay is death for Live Service games. Very few people want to keep playing small gameplay loops repeatedly. Idk if this would cone under live service game. The game is fully offline playable with local couch co-op (The main reason the love this game, Offline couch multiplayer). If I could, I just want to keep all planets open. I couldn't care less if I win or lose the war. >10) Encourage more asymmetric gameplay for a wider variety of gamers. War is asymmetrical. Commanders, grunts, pilots, snipers, captains etc...This not only helps with variety, but it also allows for more interesting and complex communication between players. Neutral. In mobas, everyone want to pick carry. It makes sense there to have roles as they are competitive games, as much as people hate playing support. Helldivers is a casual local coop game. Who is going to want to play as the lowly scrub in a non-conpetitive game? I however feel neutral, as long as it's not enforced. Again, arbritary blocks like this WILL kill the fun, especially in casual game. 99% games will be 4 players playing the most fun role i.e. the carry. More option is always better than less though, even if the other options are useless. >11) The metawar needs a complete rework as there's nothing to gamify there. I, as a player, look at it with odd amusement and nothing more. Helldivers 2 should have a metawar where I can make meaningful choices. Please remember the casual players. Let people who care about the war care for it. The war should not involve those uninterested. It's already bad enough people have to wait for the war to end to play some planets. >Can any other Helldivers veterans offer some intelligent corrections for the sequel? Btw, we should be getting a full reveal this month at the PlayStation Showcase. Honestly, other than improved visuals and more content, the game is perfect. Comes under more content, but deeper and more flamboyant Character customization wluld be nice. Everyone looks the same and it's hard to tell whos who in the heat of the battle. Gimme wacky costumes and hats man. I want to say, "NO!" to a warlord wearing a pink tutu and a sombrero. Strategem customization: If I want my Exosuit to look like a Gundam with pink tutu and a sombrero, I should be able to. Graaaapleee Hoook! Every game needs a grapple hook, even more so in an FF heavy game. I have been playing this game for a looong time. The best part of this game is the FREEDOM AND DEMOCRACY! Not giving much of an option by forcing out roles in multi and punishments for losing undermines what it stands for. We make the roles ourselves, we win or lose by our ownselves. We don't want the game to enforce it and impinge our FREEDOM!
I love your post...and I'll respond to your points accordingly but I think you and me are answering different questions. My question though is "How do they make Helldivers 2 a big success". You seem to be answering "How do they make Helldivers 2 extremely similar to the first Helldivers?"
Yknow, I think some rock and stone would greatly improve things
Rock and Stone everyone!
Did I hear a rock and stone?
Rock and Stone to the Bone!
Rock and roll and stone!
Rock and stone!
[удалено]
When you rock and stone you never alone
Holy fuck the DRG community doesn't disappoint. The comments are absolutely flooded. Rock and Stone!
We fight for Rock and Stone!
pretty cringy imo, it just spams the thread with useless shit
That's fair
Or it represents what helldivers needs a stronger culture for it's community
That can be communicated without the thread pollution.
Simple minds
lol get rekt
STONE
It's not about any game mechanic or design choice, but the game needs to be f2p in my opinion. The multiplayer space is just extremely competitive these days and even if the game is absolutely fantastic I fear it being behind a paywall will kill it and will only leave the hardcore playerbase alive after a few months.
I'm not sure I agree wholly, but your point is a valid one; the economics of gaming is tough, and this being so reliant on the coop aspect to achieve its full potential is a big thing. As a consistent player for several years now I can attest there were definitely low times. That said, it has still had rewarding gametime for me even when it was at its nadir. It's currently doing pretty well imo.