Jump to content

New Marker Feature  

122 members have voted

  1. 1. Should the new marker feature stay?

    • Yes
      60
    • No
      53
    • Maybe
      9


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, sightseeer said:

 

People argue and some of them argue with the poll of OP. I criticize the significance of the poll, some people ignore my points. So I give them the tools to look them up themselves. Now I even explained how the tools work so I did all I can do. No one can now use that poll in any argument without lying to himself.

We can now continue the discussion while ignoring the poll. At the same time we know that the people active in that forum are also the ones answering that poll, so we actually know the general opinion of the people posting here.

Yawn. Already stated I can choose 90% vs 95%. I have a 10% chance of being wrong. Whoop Dee Doo. So move along child. I took stats back in HS. But because you chose 95% your poll is superior? No it’s not. Just because 95% is more commonly used because people don’t want to be wrong doesn’t mean 90% is bad. You realize 75% CI is common too, but I didn’t decided to use that. Generally a 90% Ci would need a +-2.5% constant but I chose 3%. Anyone can throw info around and sound smart but in practicality you are forcing the numbers in your favor. 

Edited by ghostlife

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, ghostlife said:

Yawn. Already stated I can choose 90% vs 95%. I have a 10% chance of being wrong. Whoop Dee Doo. So move along child. I took stats back in HS. But because you chose 95% your poll is superior? No it’s not. Just because 95% is more commonly used because people don’t want to be wrong doesn’t mean 90% is bad. You realize 75% CI is common too, but I didn’t decided to use that. Generally a 90% Ci would need a +-2.5% constant but I chose 3%. Anyone can throw info around and sound smart but in practicality you are forcing the numbers in your favor. 

 

Watch the video. It clearly states that you can lower the CI if the values are not far away from each other. But our values are yes or no, so 0 and 1 on a 0 to 1 scale. They are as much apart from each other as you can possibly have them. Thus, 99% CI would be appropriate. You get 16k sample size needed for a 700k population. And stop the Ad Hominem, even a child can give valid arguments and even an adult can be an idiot.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, sightseeer said:

 

Watch the video. It clearly states that you can lower the CI if the values are not far away from each other. But our values are yes or no, so 0 and 1 on a 0 to 1 scale. They are as much apart from each other as you can possibly have them. Thus, 99% CI would be appropriate. You get 16k sample size needed for a 700k population. And stop the Ad Hominem, even a child can give valid arguments and even an adult can be an idiot.

I Can lower the CI as I please. I set the CI. I will still bet my life savings with a CI of 90% for this poll. Sure 95% or 99% might be more accurate but that doesn’t diminish the 90% CI. Also you started the shit with the insults so don’t Ad Hominem me.

Edited by ghostlife

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, ghostlife said:

I Can lower the CI as I please. I set the CI. I will still bet my life savings with a CI of 90% for this poll. Sure 95% or 99% might be more accurate but that doesn’t diminish the 90% CI. Also you started the shit with the insults so don’t Ad Hominem me.

 

Where did I insult you? Quote me; Where did I use Ad Hominem? Quote me.

But yes, ask 68 people to vote for 700 000, go do your thing man, you can make your own statistics, always, as I already said, but imo it will not serve a purpose.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Well I think the new marker is ass because it goes against what made PUBG interesting for me in the first place. The fact that pubg DIDN'T have such markers or enemy highlights or x-ray vision or stupid X hit marker is exactly why it appealed to me. 

 

I'll probably stop playing Squads if this is implemented on live servers. Not to protest, but simply because it ruins the immersive thriller part of the game. The marker breaks the 4th wall, it takes you out of the experience and replaces good communication skill with the press of a button. Me and my friends spent time learning how to communicate, and it was extremely rewarding when we learned how to do it. 

 

"But what about those who aren't good at communicating?" you might ask.

Well what about those who can't aim? Should we enable auto-aim or lock on?

What about those who have bad headsets? Should we enable wall-hacks for them? 

 

Less is more. Without 3D markers, players are forced to use fast critical thinking, while communicating, under pressure. The 3D marker removes this part of the game. 

 

edit: I actually just made an account on this forum just to say this. That should give an indication about how much I care about this. 

Edited by ebbo
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, ebbo said:

The fact that pubg DIDN'T have such markers

 

 Not to protest, but simply because it ruins the immersive thriller part of the game. The marker breaks the 4th wall, it takes you out of the experience and replaces good communication skill with the press of a button. Me and my friends spent time learning how to communicate, and it was extremely rewarding when we learned how to do it. 

 

"But what about those who aren't good at communicating?" you might ask.

Well what about those who can't aim? Should we enable auto-aim or lock on?

What about those who have bad headsets? Should we enable wall-hacks for them? 

 

PUBG had markers. They just didn't have them show up in the the 3D space.

 

If you don't want to use them, don't use them, no one is stopping you. It's not like you can see other team's markers.

 

There is a HUGE difference between putting a marker down somewhere to giving someone "auto-aim". That the marker is only a stationary marker and doesn't help you do anything else. You still have to communicate why you are placing a marker.

 

You are conflating ideas. You and a lot of other people use this argument that a stationary marker in 3D space that you can see from anywhere on the map is some how anything like wallhack/ESP; not even close. The stationary marker is just that, stationary. If you see an enemy, you can mark the spot where you saw the enemy. Guess what, that enemy can move and now your marker is useless except for showing the last known position.

 

A marker is just a tool for better communication; It allows for information to be conveyed quicker and more accurately. This way you can skip all the "this/that" explaining where the enemy is and get down to talking about tactics to handle said enemy.

 

The ability mark a position is nothing like the ability in Blacklight. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Read this as if I'm trying to explain something. Not trying to dunk on you. 

 

>PUBG had markers. They just didn't have them show up in the the 3D space.

Yes and that's a huge difference. Pressing M makes you vulnerable, and it only shows location on a 2D plane. 

 

>If you don't want to use them, don't use them, no one is stopping you.

I actually planned on making a pre-response to this argument because it's so often used. I opted out but here we go.

A 3D marker is a tool given to everyone. It makes things easier. Yes I can choose to not use it, but that just leaves every other team with this new tool which makes it easier for them to spot my team. If I don't use it, I'm gimping myself. So if I want to win in squads I have to use every tool available, including 3D markers. If not, then my team will suffer because all the other teams use it. 

It's not whether or not I care to use it for myself. It's whether or not this tool exists in the game for anyone to use. 

 

>There is a HUGE difference between putting a marker down somewhere to giving someone "auto-aim".

Yes but both are assistance to the players. Look, Pubg is a game made up of games:

Aiming is a sub-game in pubg.

Planning your next steps and where to go is a sub-game in pubg.

Choosing proper weapons is a sub-game in pubg. 

Spotting enemies is a sub-game in pug.

Explaining where enemies are is a sub-game in pubg. 

Making tactical choices in how to engage the enemy is a sub-game in pubg. 

 

What have made pubg stand out from the rest of the industry is how many layers of games the players have to contend with. When 3D markers are introduced, the "Explaning where enemies are"-game is removed. It has been replaced by a button. That was a game the players learned to play over time. Direction, distance, description. The three D's. When done properly it's very efficient and it is extremely rewarding when the team has good communication. 

 

 Also the spotting-game is removed for the rest of the team. They used to have to listen to the one who spotted, parse the information, then peek and try and see where this enemy is. Now that's no longer necessary. That sub-game has been removed and replaced by a marker. 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, ebbo said:

Read this as if I'm trying to explain something. Not trying to dunk on you. 

 

>PUBG had markers. They just didn't have them show up in the the 3D space.

Yes and that's a huge difference. Pressing M makes you vulnerable, and it only shows location on a 2D plane. 

 

And I am just going to stop reading that here because the last wall of text I read from you was all garbage. Then I am going to quote another post i made prior in the thread.

 

On 8/2/2018 at 5:52 PM, NotABot said:

 

I will conceed to one point. That maybe it doesn't have to render on the HUD but would be find to just render on the map and minimap.

 

Thinking about it more, it's unnecessary for it to be shown as it is. The biggest thing for me is that being able to press a hotkey to place a marker based on where you are aiming is extremely important to communicating accurately. Having it show up in the hud is not.

 

It's really no different from opening the map and doing it manually. I think many people seem to just have a problem that it shows up in 3D space.

 

 

You missed your "dunk" and hit the floor, stay off my paint.

Edited by NotABot

Share this post


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

 

And I am just going to stop reading that here because the last wall of text I read from you was all garbage. Then I am going to quote another post i made prior in the thread.

 

Too bad because you missed the most important part then. I'm talking about a couple of thinks you don't seem to realize exist. 

Share this post


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

Too bad because you missed the most important part then. I'm talking about a couple of thinks you don't seem to realize exist. 

 

Nope, I just read through it and it's more garbage. You still have to communicate why you placed the marker.

Share this post


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

 

Nope, I just read through it and it's more garbage. You still have to communicate why you placed the marker.

 

Okay:

 

"Enemy."

*places marker* 

 

???

 

Whoah impressive. Now look at how it has been done for the last year:

 

"Enemy south west in the compound across the field, 2nd building from the left, 2nd floor."

 

See the difference? You're arguing that markers makes it easy. Yes, it does. However some of us don't want easy. For us with friends or no fear of talking to strangers it's actually a fun part of the game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, ebbo said:

However some of us don't want easy. For us with friends or no fear of talking to strangers it's actually a fun part of the game. 

 

Then don't use it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be okay with it being tweaked, but I would be extremely disappointed if they remove this feature. Placing markers like this makes actually applying tactics so much more viable. Considering the game is rather fast paced (once you're in combat, that is) you don't have the time in many fights to explain in detail where an enemy is, and you can't apply any advanced tactics if your teammates aren't aware of where enemies are. But marking locations means you can quickly communicate to your teammates about where enemies are, and more importantly, quickly suggest tactics for attacking them.

 

And this wouldn't replace callouts anyway. If you can explain where the enemies is in simple detail, then a callout is still a lot faster. And context is also very important. You can place a marker to indicate where someone is, but that doesn't give any indication about what the enemy is doing (which is extremely important to note), so communication is still key.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, NotABot said:

Then don't use it.

Contrary to your name you're realy just a bot, repeating himself over and over again without listening to what other have to say.

Share this post


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

Contrary to your name you're realy just a bot, repeating himself over and over again without listening to what other have to say.

 

First, how do you "listen" to words typed on a screen?

 

 I am pretty sure he was referring to himself and his friends not wanting to use the feature so his friends would talk to him. It's simple. You just don't use it. There is no one forcing you to use it. If I am repeating myself it's because what I am saying still applies and other people aren't reading anything or simply not using logic in their statements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My immediate reaction to the new marking system was positive but after getting a better understanding I think it goes a step too far.  I don't think the onscreen marker is good for the game.  Restricting it to minimap and compass seems to be a good compromise that many people have already suggested.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pros of the new system:
1) It really helps if you're playing with randoms.
2) It really helps if you're playing with retards. 
3) It's a free rangefinder.
Cons:
1) This game isn't meant to be played with randoms.
2) This game isn't meant to be played with retards.
3) It lowers the skill ceiling significantly. 

As we can clearly see it has no place in this game. Casuals, though, can keep it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, ForOne815 said:

Pros of the new system:
1) It really helps if you're playing with randoms.
2) It really helps if you're playing with retards. 
3) It's a free rangefinder.
Cons:
1) This game isn't meant to be played with randoms.
2) This game isn't meant to be played with retards.
3) It lowers the skill ceiling significantly. 

As we can clearly see it has no place in this game. Casuals, though, can keep it. 

 

Can you make some better pros/cons.. The only ones that really work

 

Pros- #1 and #3

Cons- #3

 

The game is meant to be played with randoms with the option to be played with friends. You aren't required to have a team as that is unrealistic. The game is a casual game or we would have Unranked and Ranked modes. You say "We can clearly see it has no place in this game" but that is simply not true. It was created for this game and it's very useful to the game. What isn't useful are comments like Cons - #1 and #2.

 

So, if you want to make a point maybe come up with something logical like many people have to support and oppose it. I wouldn't exactly say "it lowers the skill ceiling" as it just sort of makes other skills more useful than your personal ability to put words together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 часов назад, NotABot сказал:

The game is meant to be played with randoms

You have single/duo option, therefore it's not meant to be played with randoms. Playing with premade team gives you significant advantage. There is no additional system that separates random teams and premades therefore it's meant to be played with premades. 

 

16 часов назад, NotABot сказал:

The game is a casual game or we would have Unranked and Ranked modes.

We have TPP/FPP.

 

16 часов назад, NotABot сказал:

I wouldn't exactly say "it lowers the skill ceiling" as it just sort of makes other skills more useful than your personal ability to put words together.

Verbal skills are essential for life itself, y'know. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ForOne815 said:

You have single/duo option, therefore it's not meant to be played with randoms. Playing with premade team gives you significant advantage. There is no additional system that separates random teams and premades therefore it's meant to be played with premades. 

 

We have TPP/FPP.

 

Those aren't arguments.

 

Solo/Duo/Squad/TPP/FPP are modes. These are not the differences between ranked and unranked. They are different ways to play the game. You can still queue in one by yourself.

 

4 hours ago, ForOne815 said:

Verbal skills are essential for life itself, y'know. 

 

No they're not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 час назад, NotABot сказал:

You can still queue in one by yourself.

And you'll be at a significant disadvantage doing so. 

 

1 час назад, NotABot сказал:

No they're not.

They are. If you have bad verbal skills you're gonna be poor and it's the best way to have a bad time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ForOne815 said:

And you'll be at a significant disadvantage doing so. 

 

No, you won't. You won't be at a disadvantage queuing up alone and you won't be at an advantage queuing up with a party. Your randoms could be better than you, your party could be worse than randoms.

 

 

3 minutes ago, ForOne815 said:

They are. If you have bad verbal skills you're gonna be poor and it's the best way to have a bad time.

 

No, they're not. It depends on your other circumstances in your life. Other than that, you can live perfectly healthy and happy without being able to speak to anyone.

 

 

You aren't basing your claims in reality and you aren't providing any evidence to support your claims.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 минут назад, NotABot сказал:

You won't be at a disadvantage queuing up alone

Yes, you will. Cuz: A)Normal people don't play with randoms. 
B)Various communication issues.

 

31 минуту назад, NotABot сказал:

you won't be at an advantage queuing up with a party

Yes, you will. Cuz you can actively chose your teammates and have proper communication. 

 

33 минуты назад, NotABot сказал:

It depends on your other circumstances in your life.

You won't make even $80k a year if you can't communicate properly. 

 

33 минуты назад, NotABot сказал:

you can live perfectly healthy and happy without being able to speak to anyone.

Happy? May be, probably not. Healthy - no for sure, if you can't/don't want to speak you're defective in one way or another. 

 

36 минут назад, NotABot сказал:

You aren't basing your claims in reality and you aren't providing any evidence to support your claims.

So are you. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Essentially, all I'm seeing is what-if scenarios and a lot of philosophizing, but since we are all able to test this feature, why not talk about how much it's changed the way the game is played.

 

I've played in the Test Server with my actual squad, with randoms, with 3-man squads, and with 2-man squads. I must say, it hasn't changed much at all. In fact, the marking feature only seemed to cause confusion. It even caused a loss for us at one point, because someone said, "it was marked," but it had disappeared and no one had called out where the person actually was, just that "he's on blue." I'm pretty sure the blue mark had already disappeared because it disappears after a few seconds, and there were markers all over the place.

 

But here's my 'what-if' proposition based on experience: without the markers, that whole fiasco wouldn't have gone down the way it did, and we surely would've won that particular game.

 

I think we need to be talking about you guys' experience with it, instead of being so ethereal about it. Would it actually change the game in a way that truly makes it too "easy."

Edited by noofy
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ForOne815 said:

Yes, you will. Cuz: A)Normal people don't play with randoms. 
B)Various communication issues.

 

Wrong, on so levels that I don't even care to discuss any of them. Arguing with you is like fighting an unarmed man chained to a post when I have a machine gun with unlimited ammo.

 

2 minutes ago, ForOne815 said:

Yes, you will. Cuz you can actively chose your teammates and have proper communication. 

 

Wrong, just because you can choose doesn't mean they will be available or of equal or higher skill level.

 

4 minutes ago, ForOne815 said:

You won't make even $80k a year if you can't communicate properly. 

 

Happy? May be, probably not. Healthy - no for sure, if you can't/don't want to speak you're defective in one way or another. 

 

You will be healthy. "Proper communication" doesn't mean anything in this context. You can make plenty of money without speaking to anyone; More than $100K a year.

 

There are plenty of people who cannot speak who live perfectly happy and healthy lives.

 

6 minutes ago, ForOne815 said:

So are you. 

 

Burden Of Proof is on you not on me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

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

Create an account

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

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×