I completely agree, the journos are off the mark 100%.
OK, what part of the article in PC Gamer was factually wrong?
The reality for me as an individual is this: toxicity of Mordhau's community is not "driving players away from the game" - that was their chief statement, and it is factually wrong in that it insinuates toxicity to be the game's biggest problem.
The biggest mistake games journalists make is the incomprehensibly erroneous assumption that gamers care equally about social justice and politicking than they do about good damned game design. Breaking news: They do not. Gamers care about good game design first and foremost, and social responsibility second (if even that).
@Khakedais said:
Is no game free from the scourge of competetive play? I don't have any faith at all that this game has the same appeal as most big titles for being competetive titles. Ranked play and an increased focus on meta will only make the game more stale for the typical player who can't keep up with the meta. The game's learning curve is quite steep as is. As much as I despise how every game has to become an Esports-esque title, I'm split between thinking it'd benefit Mordhau or not. I lean towards not however.
I would never touch ranked gaming, but there definitely needs to be more game modes that people can just jump right into and have fun. Campaign maps from Rising Storm for example are pretty interesting.
@SWSeriousMike said:
Would you be fine if the default was female black and you had the option to enable and disable everything else?
yes, had the game not been set in medieval europe?
Yeah a fictional setting is obviously medieval Europe. Are you Mordhau's lore director? You seem to have information no one on the planet could possibly have.
Oh, my bad. I just assumed it would be medieval Europe by the fact that each and every, single (without so much as one exception save maybe the armour patterns) inclusion in Mordhau is Historically proven to have been invented, used, and recorded in Europe, around the medieval period.
This debate is hilariously unscientific. No one is saying that Mordhau is a one million percent true to life recreation of medieval warfare. It is a video game. But the fact that it is ROOTED in European medieval warfare presupposes and requires adherence in large part to European medieval warfare. It is 100% the reason that people have purchased the title- because they see swords, they see true-to-history armour, and the want to play the game on that basis.
Just full disclosure, I am not even in the "NO WAHMEN or POC" crowd, I don't care, it's more customisation for a game I love playing- I am just stating what I would think are obvious, and undeniable facts. Crush even stated in his original "toggle" post that according to him, a developer at Triternion, "The realism argument is valid" - and it would 100% not be valid, if this game is not set in Medieval Europe.
Give me a f* break. If you've ventured so far that you no longer believe Mordhau is being played out in Medieval Europe, you are so far beyond fact that further conversing is wholly pointless, so I'll take my well appreciated leave from this absolute and inane madness. Enjoy your screeching.
I watched this video before I made my own one- I completely agree, the journos are off the mark 100%. That being said, I do feel with Mordhau's particular circumstances, the player drop is a bit too stark. Upper Echelon for instance references Mortal Kombat, a game that sold so poorly that in its second day of release it had a $10 discount, basically right out the gate. Media coverage tends to state the game did really well, but no game that did well would discount itself so soon after release.
He also compares it to Rage, which is a single-player AAA game which is 100% designed just to "make the sale" - player count after that doesn't matter. Mostly, people will buy games like those, and play them at their leisure over the coming months, maybe in a long weekend or in the holidays. But with a multiplayer game like Mordhau, particularly one with such a great combat system and being that it takes time to master the mechanics, I think a lot of people who should be playing this game, arent. And that is what I try to remedy here.
I completely take your point though, the player count is far from being disastrous, and the journos are completely off the mark- as they usually are these days.
@Athos said:
When modding is added, anyone with enough time should be able to make their own game modes. It'll be interesting to see what gets popular. As others have said, forcing people to be in clans would split the player base.
That said, I think there's a lot of potential in 5v5/8v8/10v10 modes, especially if they are objective based.
Good points! Thanks for being one of the few comments on here that can be taken seriously.
@THE-REAL-WARSAW said:
so you want to further alienate those players by making a clan battle mode?
that's hilarious.
Mordhau is not a game for casual players. You are not 'further' alienating people who have already left/never bought the game to begin with. You are going to be catering to your core audience: hardcore medieval fighters.
@CatR said:
I came here to learn about the recent... 'Coverage' not to talk about some dumb competitive game mode! Where all tha coverage at?!
Also why are those people in that picture fighting each other when they're on the same team? Those guys in the background are also dressed the same and fighting each other. Is this just an issue of them all coming dressed as each other to the battle and the disagreement about who had to go back and change escalated into violence?
The video linked covers that in more detail, and regarding the image: That sounds... plausible, let's go with that! Lol, just a random image search!
I'm not punting my own content without adding value, so please read this thread and give me your feedback on the suggestion herein. And no, the journos aren't right. Mordhau can do a few things to get the playerbase up, but community moderation should hardly be a priority at this stage.
Competitive incentive, however, should be. This is not a game for casuals, but because the game is lacking a competitive incentive, it is also not a game for non-casuals, which I believe is the biggest explanation for the player drop recently. After having some fun in the combat, people simply get bored and go back to their usual Battle Royales and Mobas. It's not that they dislike the game, it's just that they probably feel they've gotten their time's worth. From my side: I have been playing competitive games for 17 years- I have been playing general games daily for 21 years, and been analysing them for as long as I can remember. I solo queued to Global Elite in Counter Strike, Grandmaster in Overwatch, and Divine in DotA (neither the best nor worst by a long shot, but good enough at a wide variety of games to feel like I can put some ideas out there).
So how do we solve the problem, and get those bloody peasants back on the battlefield? Obviously, this is just my opinion, but here's my suggestion:
deviantart: luulala
Clann Battle Mode
For a competitive mode, consider something down the lines of a "Clann Battle" mode. It would consist of three phases:
The Arming Phase
The Battle Phase,
The Scoring Phase
This mode would ideally consist of anywhere between 5 and 10 players a side (decided by playtesting), and determine a winner on a best of X round basis. My intuition guides me towards Elimination Mode for maximum competitiveness.
For the Clann Battle Mode, the general 16-point player-restriction will be eliminated in favour of a team-wide point system called the Arming System. For instance, 16 points per player = 80 points clannwide in a 5v5 match up, and 160 points clannwide for a 10v10 match up.
Arming Phase:
Here, both teams or "clanns" are given a combined number of "Points" to "Purchase" armor, weapons, and perks to arm their side with. For this, there would need to be a Captain. You can therefore have a number of support players who require less Points to be effective with perhaps only a spear, or a longbow, leaving more points to buff up your "star players" like "carries" with 3/3/3/Zweihander/Bloodlust for a wopping 25 point cost for instance. This would introduce an entirely new layer of competitive complexity and would instantaneously create an evolving meta. This is why the "best of X" rounds is important, so that you can adapt in your next round's arming phase if, for instance, Spears are a big problem for your lineup.
The equipping of these items would then be done via a screen before the combat phase, with every player selecting the loadout created for them by the captain. Much like "Captain's Phase" in mobas where the players select the heroes chosen for them by the captain. Bonus complexity: include a perk/weapon ban system with each captain being given 1 or 2 bans to further raise the stakes.
Combat Phase:
In this phase, obviously, combat plays out. This would just work like a regular elimination mode where the players spawn in on different sides of an ideally symmetrical map and fight it out. Cavalry and stationary weapons will be disabled in Clann Battle Mode to place maximum emphasis on strategy and individual skill.
Bonus complexity: create a few different strategic spawning positions that the Captain can click and drag fighters to, to have them spawn in particular positions. These can then also have 'costs' associated with them. For instance, you can spawn a player behind enemy lines for a cost of 5 points, or a bit closer to the enemy for 2-3 points, etc. Just a bit of a loose cannon idea :)
Scoring Phase:
In this phase, rounds are scored. You gain 1 point for every opponent your team dispatched, and you lose one point for every fighter you lost in doing so. The team to whom the last man standing belongs (or the team who traditionally 'won' the battle by eliminating the opponents) will get an extra point or two for winning the round. Team with the most score after X rounds win the game, with sudden death tiebreakers simply being played out for as long as is necessary after the X rounds have been scored.
This system is best of both TDM and Elimination in that if you lose two rounds in a row but you killed 90% of the enemy team, you still have a fighting chance at the trophy if you score well in the final round, instead of instantly losing.
Bonus incentives to play Clann Battle Mode:
Banner and Team Colours Customisation
Publicly accessible Rank system so lesser-warriors will fear you
Rank-based unlocks in the form of exclusive cosmetics: Helmet adornments, additional colors to customize gear with, custom voice-lines and added patterns. Triternion can also, at its discretion, consider adding Microtransaction COSMETIC items to keep the income up, and to incentivize players to bring their A-game (and A-outfits) to the Clann Battlefield.
With all the back and forth on this, I thought I'd make a video on it.
Clickbaity thumbnail aside: no the journos arent right. There are things Mordhau can do to improve, like any game, but toxicity is not the cause of Mordhau's player drop. If it were, DotA, CS:GO and Overwatch (which is a fairly diverse game) wouldn't have been as successful as they are.
Then take OW who completely borked their competitive system: whoops, game's dead. Diversity and inclusivity aside, apparently gamers care about good game design, first and foremost. Shocking.
You can watch the video here, would love to hear your thoughts everyone.
Already some back and forth in the comments and it's only got a few views.
- 1
11 Jul
Whitefox_YTYou know what, nevermind
11 Jul
Whitefox_YTThe reality for me as an individual is this: toxicity of Mordhau's community is not "driving players away from the game" - that was their chief statement, and it is factually wrong in that it insinuates toxicity to be the game's biggest problem.
The biggest mistake games journalists make is the incomprehensibly erroneous assumption that gamers care equally about social justice and politicking than they do about good damned game design. Breaking news: They do not. Gamers care about good game design first and foremost, and social responsibility second (if even that).
11 Jul
Whitefox_YTReally fresh perspective- thanks so much.
- 1
10 Jul
Whitefox_YTOh, my bad. I just assumed it would be medieval Europe by the fact that each and every, single (without so much as one exception save maybe the armour patterns) inclusion in Mordhau is Historically proven to have been invented, used, and recorded in Europe, around the medieval period.
This debate is hilariously unscientific. No one is saying that Mordhau is a one million percent true to life recreation of medieval warfare. It is a video game. But the fact that it is ROOTED in European medieval warfare presupposes and requires adherence in large part to European medieval warfare. It is 100% the reason that people have purchased the title- because they see swords, they see true-to-history armour, and the want to play the game on that basis.
Just full disclosure, I am not even in the "NO WAHMEN or POC" crowd, I don't care, it's more customisation for a game I love playing- I am just stating what I would think are obvious, and undeniable facts. Crush even stated in his original "toggle" post that according to him, a developer at Triternion, "The realism argument is valid" - and it would 100% not be valid, if this game is not set in Medieval Europe.
Give me a f* break. If you've ventured so far that you no longer believe Mordhau is being played out in Medieval Europe, you are so far beyond fact that further conversing is wholly pointless, so I'll take my well appreciated leave from this absolute and inane madness. Enjoy your screeching.
10 Jul
Whitefox_YTI watched this video before I made my own one- I completely agree, the journos are off the mark 100%. That being said, I do feel with Mordhau's particular circumstances, the player drop is a bit too stark. Upper Echelon for instance references Mortal Kombat, a game that sold so poorly that in its second day of release it had a $10 discount, basically right out the gate. Media coverage tends to state the game did really well, but no game that did well would discount itself so soon after release.
He also compares it to Rage, which is a single-player AAA game which is 100% designed just to "make the sale" - player count after that doesn't matter. Mostly, people will buy games like those, and play them at their leisure over the coming months, maybe in a long weekend or in the holidays. But with a multiplayer game like Mordhau, particularly one with such a great combat system and being that it takes time to master the mechanics, I think a lot of people who should be playing this game, arent. And that is what I try to remedy here.
I completely take your point though, the player count is far from being disastrous, and the journos are completely off the mark- as they usually are these days.
9 Jul
Whitefox_YTyes, had the game not been set in medieval europe?
9 Jul
Whitefox_YTGood points! Thanks for being one of the few comments on here that can be taken seriously.
9 Jul
Whitefox_YTThanks for the comment! It's definitely not perfect!
9 Jul
Whitefox_YTMordhau is not a game for casual players. You are not 'further' alienating people who have already left/never bought the game to begin with. You are going to be catering to your core audience: hardcore medieval fighters.
- 1
9 Jul
Whitefox_YTThe video linked covers that in more detail, and regarding the image: That sounds... plausible, let's go with that! Lol, just a random image search!
- 1
9 Jul
Whitefox_YTWatch my video for comments on the coverage:
https://youtu.be/W96CiG36-8U
I'm not punting my own content without adding value, so please read this thread and give me your feedback on the suggestion herein. And no, the journos aren't right. Mordhau can do a few things to get the playerbase up, but community moderation should hardly be a priority at this stage.
Competitive incentive, however, should be. This is not a game for casuals, but because the game is lacking a competitive incentive, it is also not a game for non-casuals, which I believe is the biggest explanation for the player drop recently. After having some fun in the combat, people simply get bored and go back to their usual Battle Royales and Mobas. It's not that they dislike the game, it's just that they probably feel they've gotten their time's worth. From my side: I have been playing competitive games for 17 years- I have been playing general games daily for 21 years, and been analysing them for as long as I can remember. I solo queued to Global Elite in Counter Strike, Grandmaster in Overwatch, and Divine in DotA (neither the best nor worst by a long shot, but good enough at a wide variety of games to feel like I can put some ideas out there).
So how do we solve the problem, and get those bloody peasants back on the battlefield? Obviously, this is just my opinion, but here's my suggestion:
Clann Battle Mode
For a competitive mode, consider something down the lines of a "Clann Battle" mode. It would consist of three phases:
This mode would ideally consist of anywhere between 5 and 10 players a side (decided by playtesting), and determine a winner on a best of X round basis. My intuition guides me towards Elimination Mode for maximum competitiveness.
For the Clann Battle Mode, the general 16-point player-restriction will be eliminated in favour of a team-wide point system called the Arming System. For instance, 16 points per player = 80 points clannwide in a 5v5 match up, and 160 points clannwide for a 10v10 match up.
Arming Phase:
Here, both teams or "clanns" are given a combined number of "Points" to "Purchase" armor, weapons, and perks to arm their side with. For this, there would need to be a Captain. You can therefore have a number of support players who require less Points to be effective with perhaps only a spear, or a longbow, leaving more points to buff up your "star players" like "carries" with 3/3/3/Zweihander/Bloodlust for a wopping 25 point cost for instance. This would introduce an entirely new layer of competitive complexity and would instantaneously create an evolving meta. This is why the "best of X" rounds is important, so that you can adapt in your next round's arming phase if, for instance, Spears are a big problem for your lineup.
The equipping of these items would then be done via a screen before the combat phase, with every player selecting the loadout created for them by the captain. Much like "Captain's Phase" in mobas where the players select the heroes chosen for them by the captain. Bonus complexity: include a perk/weapon ban system with each captain being given 1 or 2 bans to further raise the stakes.
Combat Phase:
In this phase, obviously, combat plays out. This would just work like a regular elimination mode where the players spawn in on different sides of an ideally symmetrical map and fight it out. Cavalry and stationary weapons will be disabled in Clann Battle Mode to place maximum emphasis on strategy and individual skill.
Bonus complexity: create a few different strategic spawning positions that the Captain can click and drag fighters to, to have them spawn in particular positions. These can then also have 'costs' associated with them. For instance, you can spawn a player behind enemy lines for a cost of 5 points, or a bit closer to the enemy for 2-3 points, etc. Just a bit of a loose cannon idea :)
Scoring Phase:
In this phase, rounds are scored. You gain 1 point for every opponent your team dispatched, and you lose one point for every fighter you lost in doing so. The team to whom the last man standing belongs (or the team who traditionally 'won' the battle by eliminating the opponents) will get an extra point or two for winning the round. Team with the most score after X rounds win the game, with sudden death tiebreakers simply being played out for as long as is necessary after the X rounds have been scored.
This system is best of both TDM and Elimination in that if you lose two rounds in a row but you killed 90% of the enemy team, you still have a fighting chance at the trophy if you score well in the final round, instead of instantly losing.
Bonus incentives to play Clann Battle Mode:
- 2
9 Jul
Whitefox_YTWith all the back and forth on this, I thought I'd make a video on it.
Clickbaity thumbnail aside: no the journos arent right. There are things Mordhau can do to improve, like any game, but toxicity is not the cause of Mordhau's player drop. If it were, DotA, CS:GO and Overwatch (which is a fairly diverse game) wouldn't have been as successful as they are.
Then take OW who completely borked their competitive system: whoops, game's dead. Diversity and inclusivity aside, apparently gamers care about good game design, first and foremost. Shocking.
You can watch the video here, would love to hear your thoughts everyone.
Already some back and forth in the comments and it's only got a few views.