MS "Highly Suggests" different player pools for M&KB vs gamepad

  • Shuoink
    Master
    Insider

    Few people are talking about the recent article released where its being made known that keyboard and mouse support are coming to xbox, and it will end the crossplay debate...
    No, it wont.. but thats another story, I want to talk about the part in the article that states

    "Microsoft would leave this up to individual developers, but it "highly suggested" developers have separate matchmaking pools for players using a keyboard and mouse versus those using a gamepad"

    I find it a bit humorous and contradictory that they would push so hard for crossplay between platforms, and then turn around and say this. Advantage is obvious. Giving xbox players the option, is nice, but not everyone can use a mouse and keyboard while sitting on the couch, or even want to. MS suggesting themselves that there should be two different player pools, if anything, will only ignite the debate.
    I think the crossplay functionality is great for the people that want to use it, but there is no reason it isnt optional. The "community will shrink and game will die" is the dumbest and only argument that seems to be able to be made. The community wont shrink, game wouldnt die, you would just lose your advantage that makes you think your better. I play on both and it should be optional. with 16 ppl on a server you wouldnt even notice except for fighting more evenly matched players in pvp.
    Before all you start chirping "oh look another one", well the mega thread is closed for crossplay or id post it in there...so.... if the mods want to open it back up and move this over, fine by me.

    ANYWHO, im more interested in talking about the statement that MS themselves is suggesting different player pools for games than the whole specific PC vs xbox side.

    What are YOUR thoughts on the ARTICLE and the MS statement that there SHOULD be different player pools? Should there? Or will it only cause more division? what about a few years down the road/next gen consoles, will the game pad even be a thing? will it all be mouse and keyboard? where will the rabbit hole take us?

    (PS your dang right ima try and hook up a mouse and keyboard to my xbox when I am able)

  • Zaloguj się, aby odpowiedzieć
    13
    Posty
    11.6k
    Wyświetlenia
  • PSK76

    My thought on the subject is the following;

    If it was a competetive game, Yes. But since SoT is mainly a social game with no competetive progress it doesn't really matter. Dying doesn't really matter. At least not for me.

    I play on Xbox by the way.

  • LogansDadToo
    Founder

    Yes, an interesting statement there from MS!
    It is widely known that kb+m users fair better in any form of FPS, so the pools should be kept separate or at least the players should be given the option to choose.
    The debate will go on & on, even though EVERY other FPS crossplay title already does this & SOT is the ONLY game that FORCES players from different formats or using different input devices together!
    KB+M support on Xbox1 only solves part of the issue, as only a small percentage of players will actually purchase & use them!
    Most will want to stick to what they are used to & what every other console player uses (apart from xim cheaty users & the likes!).

    Now MS have stated crossplay 'pooling' is the devs choice, does that mean it was RARE's decision to force a disadvantage onto it's console users??

  • Nightmare247365
    Master
    Insider
    Founder

    @shuoink said in MS "Highly Suggests" different player pools for M&KB vs gamepad:

    I think the crossplay functionality is great for the people that want to use it, but there is no reason it isnt optional. The "community will shrink and game will die" is the dumbest and only argument that seems to be able to be made. The community wont shrink, game wouldnt die, you would just lose your advantage that makes you think your better. I play on both and it should be optional. with 16 ppl on a server you wouldnt even notice except for fighting more evenly matched players in pvp.

    ANYWHO, im more interested in talking about the statement that MS themselves is suggesting different player pools for games than the whole specific PC vs xbox side.

    There are actually quite a few reasons it is not optional:

    1. Microsoft does not want it to be optional. They can make a suggestion - like the article points out, but many times in games like COD I get "Suggested" to go F myself or suggested that my mom is a lady of the night. Neither of these suggestions account for anything and I won't be taking up the offer. More so they are just suggestions meaning that I don't have to take that suggestion.
    2. This game was very heavily sold on be cross-platform. It does not say in any marketing, advertisement, terms and conditions, forum posting, news from the devs, youtube videos etc that this game came with or will offer "OPTIONAL" Crossplay. To do so would completely go against the grain that the Devs have set. (BTW, the stance on MS and MS Studio game produced by Rare, can be different too) The devs want this game to be all-inclusive - that means anyone playing can play how they see fit. State of Decay 2 (another MS game) allows cross-platform play too!
    3. While your argument about not seeing a difference in the amount of players on a server you cannot see a difference now in the game with Mouse and Keyboard or controller. The only ways you can see a difference is "Typing" and if you hear the player clacking away on a keyboard or outright ask them. Otherwise, you can only "assume" someone is playing on M&K.

    What are YOUR thoughts on the ARTICLE and the MS statement that there SHOULD be different player pools? Should there? Or will it only cause more division? what about a few years down the road/next gen consoles, will the game pad even be a thing? will it all be mouse and keyboard? where will the rabbit hole take us?

    Again gaming is meant for everyone. There is too much separation already in gaming. Gamers many many times exclude female gamers. As a guy, I don't see this much, but there are multiple reports saying women are harassed constantly in gaming. This is part of the community separating itself. You have fanbois of one game versus another arguing and battling it out over which COD or BF series is better. Then you have PC vs PS vs Switch vs Xbox all arguing over which is better. While conversation is healthy the common ground is games. We all enjoy them, we all play them, or we would not be having this discussion on a forum at this point. My point is everyone should be included. PC and Xbox can live in the same world. I want more games to be cross-platform because that is only a win/win scenario. It is a win for console gamers as that opens up the library of the vast amount of games that are available. That opens PC players up for console only games too! (I'm looking at you RDR). It opens up technology upgrades for both systems. DISCORD is now on Xbox...who would have thought that ever happening. Switch and Xbox are now playing games like Minecraft and Fortnite together!

    At the heart of it Gender different, Racially different, a method of play different, locationally different, and age different we all want what is best for games. Cross-Platform is what is best for games.

  • Evidently Evil
    Ship Mate

    I play on both "Game-pad" and KnM, of course KnM has an advantage but I hate when people make it seem like its such a huge advantage that you have no chance when playing on controller, I could at least understand if it was on a highly competitive, for laid back games such as SoT I personally don't notice a big enough difference in this game to make such a complaint, only thing you're really losing is being able to mouse flick blunderbuss, so no there is not a big enough difference in game play for them to waste time changing servers i'd much rather them work on content and performance.

  • Gloog
    Master
    Founder

    @psk76 said in MS "Highly Suggests" different player pools for M&KB vs gamepad:

    If it was a competetive game, Yes. But since SoT is mainly a social game with no competetive progress it doesn't really matter. Dying doesn't really matter. At least not for me.

    If you can lose your progress to another player with advantages, then the game is competitive enough to warrant discussion on it.
    I play on PC and don't really care either way but, 'its not competitive' just makes no sense.

    @shuoink said in MS "Highly Suggests" different player pools for M&KB vs gamepad:

    What are YOUR thoughts on the ARTICLE and the MS statement that there SHOULD be different player pools?

    I think specific to each and every game i.e. its dependent on how big the advantage disparity is between the two methods. For SoT, there are other ways to balance the advantages outside of removing crossplay.

  • A Cranky Eskimo
    Master
    Insider
    Founder

    @gloog said in MS "Highly Suggests" different player pools for M&KB vs gamepad:

    @psk76 said in MS "Highly Suggests" different player pools for M&KB vs gamepad:

    If it was a competetive game, Yes. But since SoT is mainly a social game with no competetive progress it doesn't really matter. Dying doesn't really matter. At least not for me.

    If you can lose your progress to another player with advantages, then the game is competitive enough to warrant discussion on it.
    I play on PC and don't really care either way but, 'its not competitive' just makes no sense.

    @shuoink said in MS "Highly Suggests" different player pools for M&KB vs gamepad:

    What are YOUR thoughts on the ARTICLE and the MS statement that there SHOULD be different player pools?

    I think specific to each and every game i.e. its dependent on how big the advantage disparity is between the two methods. For SoT, there are other ways to balance the advantages outside of removing crossplay.

    Yet when they tried them the pc community cried more than the Xbox one does about optional crossplay lol, and they gave them high sensitivity settings instead of the intended balance of having a slow eye of reach and slower flintlock and blunderbuss, the cap was the same across both platforms, and now pc players can quick scope and use doubleshoot macros with one click which makes aiming easier than timing two clicks, especially when using a joystick rather than an already advantageous mouse. They need to fix things like that which only pc can do, and should have stuck to their guns on stuff like the sensitivity caps (like myself and others suggested as pioneers) and it would be balanced enough. As is, to want optional crossplay is pretty much common sense from an Xbox perspective.

  • Vexed Anemone

    @psk76 said in MS "Highly Suggests" different player pools for M&KB vs gamepad:

    My thought on the subject is the following;

    If it was a competetive game, Yes. But since SoT is mainly a social game with no competetive progress it doesn't really matter. Dying doesn't really matter. At least not for me.

    I play on Xbox by the way.

    I simply don't understand how people can say it's not competitive when you can play for a few hours and see all your progression removed, due to the influence of input controls.

    Also, no competitive progress? It seems to me that people compete quite strongly to become a Pirate Legend.
    And clearly progression was on Rare's mind when they supported closed crews, at the expense of the casual gamer and player with no crew.

  • PomalotacusMk3
    Master

    Well its been a few weeks since the mega thread was locked and archived. "We are looking at feedback, internal data, and are taking the topic very seriously " or words to that effect were used when @LogansDadToo had his thread locked. Maybe Rare should expand on what that means already?

  • KattTruewalker
    Vanguard
    Insider
    Founder
    Deckhand

    @pomalotacusmk3 I think it means exactly that, with the strength of feeling, the numerous posts on the topic, Rare are likely doing some in depth analysis of the data for different encounters in game and trying to determine if and what effect there is and discussing the impact and consequences?

  • LogansDadToo
    Founder

    @katttruewalker
    I hope you are right katt ;)
    I feel bad for always moaning about crossplay, especially as i know you & a lot of players who i have shared some of my most memorable SOT times with are PC players.
    You know i have much love for the game & don't have any ill feeling towards pc players at all.
    I just want the experience & game what RARE told us we were going to get & that was an even playing field, no advantages, everyone equal.

  • PSK76

    @vexed-anemone

    I simply don't understand how people can say it's not competitive when you can play for a few hours and see all your progression removed, due to the influence of input controls.

    It's MAINLY not a competetive game. It's MORE social. That's what I meant. :)

    Also, no competitive progress? It seems to me that people compete quite strongly to become a Pirate Legend.
    And clearly progression was on Rare's mind when they supported closed crews, at the expense of the casual gamer and player with no crew.

    How can you say you compete against other players. Since there are no leaderboards it's really no competition. Of course there are players who only aim for Pirate Legend but it's also those who are most disappointed when they reach it. To a casual player I think reaching Pirate Legend is secondary and having fun the primary objective. In that perspective it's no competition and it really doesn't matter if you loose all your gold from time to time as long as you're having fun playing the game.

  • Vexed Anemone

    @psk76

    I would agree with you there. It is mainly social and the reason I love it. The minority play exclusively to become a PL.

    Though I did. And I'm delighted to get there. I can now help others because I reached my competitive goal.

    Players still compete. Either in game or with friends through achievements.
    The lack of in-game leaderboards doesn't mean a game isn't competitive.
    It just means the game isn't based on competition.

    I used to play CS at a competitive level, but when I now play COD i play as hard but don't look at the leaderboards.

    Another example is the football (soccer) genre. Which is super competitive and for years never even had leaderboards.

    There are now leaderboards for certain modes but most people don't even know they exist.
    If you look at Ultimate Team or MyClub (the most popular modes), people play weekly tournaments (on and offline) that aim to progress the team/their status, rather than an online ranking.

    That's similar to SOT, where a chest increases your progress. And remember, this is MS, who have always backed achievements. Something Sony have now implemented. Competition sells, no matter how subtle.

    There are many other examples of it being competitive, I'll use two, cheaters and the anti-PVE only servers, therefore to say people don't compete against others is wrong.

Zaloguj się, aby odpowiedzieć
13
Posty
11.6k
Wyświetlenia
1 z 13