Support NeoGAF

[Men_in_Boxes]

I sort of see your point: if they threw caution to the wind, they could have added at least one gadget and/or weapon per collaboration.

Are you getting the RPG from Ruckus? There are some other more unique mythics like The Dub (from Dummy) and the Boom Sniper (from Splode) that open up different and cheesy ways to eke out wins.

Based on the stuff you mentioned it sounds like you want a Fortnite without building lolol.

I actually think the building is the best thing about the game. It's why Fortnite is better than Warzone and Apex Legends. It makes each fight feel unique, and it lengthens gunfights considerably.

But I do wish it was a more strategic game. A lot of times we run into people we have zero chance at killing because their PC Mouse freaks.

I'vecalways advocated for builds to start at 50hp instead of 75hp. It would make ramp rushing more costly.

Oh and we cheese the F out of the game. Ruckus's Rocket is definitely the best for how we play. We've experimented and talked about all the other mythics.

 

[Hawks Eclipse]

I actually think the building is the best thing about the game. It's why Fortnite is better than Warzone and Apex Legends. It makes each fight feel unique, and it lengthens gunfights considerably.

But I do wish it was a more strategic game. A lot of times we run into people we have zero chance at killing because their PC Mouse freaks.

I'vecalways advocated for builds to start at 50hp instead of 75hp. It would make ramp rushing more costly.

Oh and we cheese the F out of the game. Ruckus's Rocket is definitely the best for how we play. We've experimented and talked about all the other mythics.

Well, couldn't help but notice all the items you mentioned previously were anti-builds at their core.

Building is definitely the main thing that sets Fortnite apart from the rest but sometimes I find myself thinking it's what makes endgames turn out very similarly. In the final few phases, the terrain doesn't seem to factor much unless it's full of water or steep inclines; the battle at that point is pretty much tunneling builds and attempting to gain high ground or cheese via attrition (storm damage, heals, yeeting opponents out into the storm).

I'd say the Storm Scout (from Lexa) provides a good avenue for strategy (in the actual sense of the word) because you get a forecast for the safe zone and can start preplanning.

And the sooner you come to terms with the fact that mechanical skill plays a part in Fortnite, the better. Almost any real-time game does, it's the nature of things. Any game that tries to gimp the mechanical aspect of it too hard to push the cerebral is always better off just being turn-based.

Haven't thought much about the starting hp of builds. My view is that it's always a trade off; trading ammo for enemy mats.

You pick the RPG as your must-have, then you say you want Epic to take risks but it seems to me like you just want more forgiving weaponry/gadgets. Which isn't wrong in itself, it's just not what I'd consider as risky. Though I suppose you think such weapons risk angering the sweaty playerbase. Truth be told, unless the weapon is an outright nuke, it'll almost always benefit the sweats more eventually, they just always take some time to adjust their mindset.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Well, couldn't help but notice all the items you mentioned previously were anti-builds at their core.

Building is definitely the main thing that sets Fortnite apart from the rest but sometimes I find myself thinking it's what makes endgames turn out very similarly. In the final few phases, the terrain doesn't seem to factor much unless it's full of water or steep inclines; the battle at that point is pretty much tunneling builds and attempting to gain high ground or cheese via attrition (storm damage, heals, yeeting opponents out into the storm).

I'd say the Storm Scout (from Lexa) provides a good avenue for strategy (in the actual sense of the word) because you get a forecast for the safe zone and can start preplanning.

And the sooner you come to terms with the fact that mechanical skill plays a part in Fortnite, the better. Almost any real-time game does, it's the nature of things. Any game that tries to gimp the mechanical aspect of it too hard to push the cerebral is always better off just being turn-based.

Haven't thought much about the starting hp of builds. My view is that it's always a trade off; trading ammo for enemy mats.

You pick the RPG as your must-have, then you say you want Epic to take risks but it seems to me like you just want more forgiving weaponry/gadgets. Which isn't wrong in itself, it's just not what I'd consider as risky. Though I suppose you think such weapons risk angering the sweaty playerbase. Truth be told, unless the weapon is an outright nuke, it'll almost always benefit the sweats more eventually, they just always take some time to adjust their mindset.

I think Fortnite is one of the best multiplayer games of all time because it introduced a level of strategy + creativity that we've never seen in the PvP space before.

To me, those core values are the future of what videogames will become (among others).

I can play any number of PvP games, and the vast majority of time I win or lose, is because either me or my opponent had faster reflexes and better aim. That, to me, gets old after you grow up on Goldeneye, Quake, Timesplitters, Counter Strike.

I've played Fortnite since release and, to this day, after me and my duo partner lose, we'll talk about why we lost and what we could have done differently. That discussion doesn't happen in the games I listed above. Those games essentially boil down to "If I hit more head shots I would have won", which is boring.

I always have a preference for Epic to stress the strategic aspects of Fortnite over the mechanical skill aspects. It's just more interesting and fun to me.

A few seasons ago, can't remember which, I'd build a ramp 4 or 5 high, and put a launch pad on the end of it. Then I'd tuck a single C4 just past the launch pad, fly off into a bush or tree and wait for sweats to come by (positioning it mattered) and wait for them to jump before hitting trigger on C4. It worked flawlessly. I finally understood how Stephen Hawking felt living amongst mere mortals. Anything Epic can add to the game to bolster those types of things is great.

 

[Hawks Eclipse]

I think Fortnite is one of the best multiplayer games of all time because it introduced a level of strategy + creativity that we've never seen in the PvP space before.

To me, those core values are the future of what videogames will become (among others).

I can play any number of PvP games, and the vast majority of time I win or lose, is because either me or my opponent had faster reflexes and better aim. That, to me, gets old after you grow up on Goldeneye, Quake, Timesplitters, Counter Strike.

I've played Fortnite since release and, to this day, after me and my duo partner lose, we'll talk about why we lost and what we could have done differently. That discussion doesn't happen in the games I listed above. Those games essentially boil down to "If I hit more head shots I would have won", which is boring.

I always have a preference for Epic to stress the strategic aspects of Fortnite over the mechanical skill aspects. It's just more interesting and fun to me.

A few seasons ago, can't remember which, I'd build a ramp 4 or 5 high, and put a launch pad on the end of it. Then I'd tuck a single C4 just past the launch pad, fly off into a bush or tree and wait for sweats to come by (positioning it mattered) and wait for them to jump before hitting trigger on C4. It worked flawlessly. I finally understood how Stephen Hawking felt living amongst mere mortals. Anything Epic can add to the game to bolster those types of things is great.

Yea, it's not the first time you've claimed that your losses in other PVP games were due to being outplayed mechanically.

In any good PVP game, once the competition is all around a similar tier of mechanical skill, it's the mindgames that then sets them apart. You really think most of the winners in the majority of competitive games win purely because they're twitchier? If you think that, you've been conned by them. I suppose there's a meta around not revealing all your secrets to success.

I don't want to downplay what you did too much, but that's not exactly galaxy brain material. I was driving jeeps of C4 behind enemy lines in BF1942 almost two decades ago (first you crash, then you detonate, it's fun as fuck). Other times a whole platoon of us would squat on the wings of a bomber, thus bypassing imaginary passenger limits, fly over enemy territory and parachute in. Fortnite kind of had similar moments in 50v50 but that's been gone for years now.

Edit: *ahem* The ancestor of the Fortnite headbanger emote

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Yea, it's not the first time you've claimed that your losses in other PVP games were due to being outplayed mechanically.

In any good PVP game, once the competition is all around a similar tier of mechanical skill, it's the mindgames that then sets them apart. You really think most of the winners in the majority of competitive games win purely because they're twitchier? If you think that, you've been conned by them. I suppose there's a meta around not revealing all your secrets to success.

I don't want to downplay what you did too much, but that's not exactly galaxy brain material. I was driving jeeps of C4 behind enemy lines in BF1942 almost two decades ago (first you crash, then you detonate, it's fun as fuck). Other times a whole platoon of us would squat on the wings of a bomber, thus bypassing imaginary passenger limits, fly over enemy territory and parachute in. Fortnite kind of had similar moments in 50v50 but that's been gone for years now.

Strategy + creativity is certainly not exclusive to Fortnite, but it's without question the leader when it comes to PvP games.

And sure, strategy comes into play when you're evenly matched with your opponent, but all too often engagements boil down to "I needed to shoot him better" which is boring. I actually think Apex Legends has pretty solid matchmaking but all too often outcomes are "Did I shoot them good enough?"

The further we move on from that the better imo.

 

[Hawks Eclipse]

Strategy + creativity is certainly not exclusive to Fortnite, but it's without question the leader when it comes to PvP games.

And sure, strategy comes into play when you're evenly matched with your opponent, but all too often engagements boil down to "I needed to shoot him better" which is boring. I actually think Apex Legends has pretty solid matchmaking but all too often outcomes are "Did I shoot them good enough?"

The further we move on from that the better imo.

Are you implying that you are consistently performing well in Fortnite while missing the majority of your shots?

The really sweaty people who have the right mindset and practice are not losing to your off-meta tactics, I can assure you that (your previous encounter with not-Mongraal should tell you that too).

In other words, Fortnite still rewards mechanical skill, it just lets you think you're smart because it offers fun, typically non-standard items to use to thwart braindead sweats (eg. the ones who only learn to crank builds and neglected all other cerebral aspects of shooters). And yes, lots of these things are great fun when they work according to your unorthodox plan.

If anything, Overwatch rewards non-shooter skills far, far more than Fortnite does. Decision-making is king in that game. You don't get more aim-less than characters like Reinhardt and Winston, yet good tanks are vital for a team to push, hold and defend.

I never replied (only reacted) to your previous long posts because I foresaw this kind of discussion: your stubborn refusal to see that lots of shooters aren't won largely cause of good aim. It's like you want to keep convincing yourself that Fortnite is 9 parts brain, 1 part brawn whilst other shooters are the inverse.

In most cases when it comes to shootouts, if your question was "did I aim better than my opponent?", it usually means your past few (or many) steps leading to that moment were already wrong.

Imagine someone watched Rocky II and said to you: "Rocky won because he landed more solid punches!", ignoring all the training, conditioning, psychology and strategy leading up to the KO.

Still, the most important thing is that you enjoy the game. If you don't enjoy Apex or whatever other shooter, it's totally fine, I just find your reasoning for dismissing most shooters to be very offbase.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Are you implying that you are consistently performing well in Fortnite while missing the majority of your shots?

The really sweaty people who have the right mindset and practice are not losing to your off-meta tactics, I can assure you that (your previous encounter with not-Mongraal should tell you that too).

In other words, Fortnite still rewards mechanical skill, it just lets you think you're smart because it offers fun, typically non-standard items to use to thwart braindead sweats (eg. the ones who only learn to crank builds and neglected all other cerebral aspects of shooters). And yes, lots of these things are great fun when they work according to your unorthodox plan.

If anything, Overwatch rewards non-shooter skills far, far more than Fortnite does. Decision-making is king in that game. You don't get more aim-less than characters like Reinhardt and Winston, yet good tanks are vital for a team to push, hold and defend.

I never replied (only reacted) to your previous long posts because I foresaw this kind of discussion: your stubborn refusal to see that lots of shooters aren't won largely cause of good aim. It's like you want to keep convincing yourself that Fortnite is 9 parts brain, 1 part brawn whilst other shooters are the inverse.

In most cases when it comes to shootouts, if your question was "did I aim better than my opponent?", it usually means your past few (or many) steps leading to that moment were already wrong.

Imagine someone watched Rocky II and said to you: "Rocky won because he landed more solid punches!", ignoring all the training, conditioning, psychology and strategy leading up to the KO.

Still, the most important thing is that you enjoy the game. If you don't enjoy Apex or whatever other shooter, it's totally fine, I just find your reasoning for dismissing most shooters to be very offbase.

A few misunderstandings.

- Roughly 90 percent of the people we kill in Fortnite would beat us in Turtle Wars. Me and my partner only really defensive build and we can't edit fight. We don't have the quickness or precision that our opponents using KBM have.

- You can practice all you want but there's simply a massive innate skill gap in Fortnite. You can't outpractice LeBron James. I've played enough to know where my physical limitations are.

- Overwatch does not reward non shooter skills more than Fortnite. It rewards correct team composition mostly, and there are certainly a number of heroes like Winston, Symetra, Torb etc that don't lean on gunskill as much, but Fortnites advantage is that allows creativity to flourish. Me and my partner text little diagrams to eachother of specific traps we can set up. Overwatch doesn't lend itself to that level of strategy. Additionally, Fortnite frequently provides us questions to ask eachother during gameplay. Where do you want to go? What should we do? Do you see what I see? Etc... Overwatch is so hectic that communication drops considerably and once you pick a hero your role is pretty determined. Fortnite is Jazz.

- Fortnite gives you more meaningful choice pre engagement than Overwatch too. That's where the natural discussions come in mid match.

- You also seem to suggest that I believe only Fortnite is strategic and no other games are. In reality, it's all about levers, not switches. Fortnite is simply more strategic than all the other big PvP games out there. Fortnite is indeed the training, the eating, and everything else leading up to the fight. It does these things best.

 

[Hawks Eclipse]

A few misunderstandings.

- Roughly 90 percent of the people we kill in Fortnite would beat us in Turtle Wars. Me and my partner only really defensive build and we can't edit fight. We don't have the quickness or precision that our opponents using KBM have.

- You can practice all you want but there's simply a massive innate skill gap in Fortnite. You can't outpractice LeBron James. I've played enough to know where my physical limitations are.

- Overwatch does not reward non shooter skills more than Fortnite. It rewards correct team composition mostly, and there are certainly a number of heroes like Winston, Symetra, Torb etc that don't lean on gunskill as much, but Fortnites advantage is that allows creativity to flourish. Me and my partner text little diagrams to eachother of specific traps we can set up. Overwatch doesn't lend itself to that level of strategy. Additionally, Fortnite frequently provides us questions to ask eachother during gameplay. Where do you want to go? What should we do? Do you see what I see? Etc... Overwatch is so hectic that communication drops considerably and once you pick a hero your role is pretty determined. Fortnite is Jazz.

- Fortnite gives you more meaningful choice pre engagement than Overwatch too. That's where the natural discussions come in mid match.

- You also seem to suggest that I believe only Fortnite is strategic and no other games are. In reality, it's all about levers, not switches. Fortnite is simply more strategic than all the other big PvP games out there. Fortnite is indeed the training, the eating, and everything else leading up to the fight. It does these things best.

Thanks for the clarifications, I think I understand your POV better now (though I'm probably wrong on that, and will be in some of my points below, hah).

Just a quick question: do you have a dedicated Edit button or are you using the "hold to edit" function?

I'll have to elaborate: When I said the good players wouldn't lose to your offmeta tactics I wasn't talking about mechanical skill. These players will check and be suspicious of everything and put themselves in the lowest risk situations.

Also, I don't think setting up C4 traps, fake loot ambushes, hiding in bushes/trees with minguns, crashing builds with helicopters etc. are highly cerebral. They are satisfying fun because they are subversive.

With regards to trying out new traps/builds in Fortnite, that's definitely a mark in its favour.

I don't fully agree with your Overwatch sentiment; it's true at the top levels that team composition matters heavily but otherwise, there's a good amount of flexibility, provided you're willing to swap heroes within your chosen role.

The issue I can see, is that unlike Fortnite where you can run duos with your bro in three modes (duos, trios, squad) and obtain reasonable success, in OW your success is more dependent on the other four randos, relative to Fortnite. And I just realized that might be an issue in Apex too, since it's built around trios.

It's strange to see you speak of OW as though it's Paladins. In OW knowing when and who to swap to midmatch is a thing.

When I play OW and FN with randos it's without voicechat, just ingame comms. Experienced and considerate players know how to engage in "Jolly Cooperation" and cover for one another, it does happen in Fortnite as well, but at a much lower frequency due to its design of not giving the player enough information.

In OW once the match begins I know who everyone is playing as and can start to make decisions based on that. Midmatch swaps on either team are also shown as long as I check the tab conscientiously.

This unspoken cooperation amongst teammates is one of my favourite things about team games online, though obviously it comes with bouts of *absolute frustration when I get the exact opposite type of player/s.

No, it's not that I think you see other games as having "no strategy", I think you over emphasize the role of aiming in those games to a huge degree, to the extent of making it seem like there are no smart decisions that need to be made before the firefights. At least, that's the example you always trot out: "When I think of what I could have done, the answer is always 'aim/shoot better'" (paraphrased). The Rocky II example was referring to you not seeing the cerebral work behind a lot of the engagements.

I don't know if I'd say Fortnite has more strategy than most PVP games: Can you give me examples of what you consider strategic decisions in Fortnite?

I will say that Fortnite's wide array of weapons and gadgets does allow for a lot of toy-like experimentation which OW doesn't offer.

*Off-tangent rant: Sigh, speaking of cooperation and opposites, I really, really hate it when I throw shields out for my random team mates and they pick it up and run around without shielding up. Or I intended it for the one rando who has no shield, and another one who's already shielded up hoards it -_-

P.S. Excuse my lack of quoting for the respective replies.

 

[Hestar69]

Fornite needs a revamp. They need to nerf building ALOT... Just won two games with a friend and we are not good and almost EVERY fight you shoot at someone turns into a build off/box fight...

people really like this? this is fucking boring! Fortnite used to be fun in the early seasons but they've only made it worse and the bloom is stil god awful.

PUBG > fortnite and it's not even close.

 

[Hawks Eclipse]

Fornite needs a revamp. They need to nerf building ALOT... Just won two games with a friend and we are not good and almost EVERY fight you shoot at someone turns into a build off/box fight...

people really like this? this is fucking boring! Fortnite used to be fun in the early seasons but they've only made it worse and the bloom is stil god awful.

PUBG > fortnite and it's not even close.

I can relate to the frustration of dealing with builds but it is what gives Fortnite its unique flavour. What do you have in mind when you want building to be nerfed a lot? Cause it is not in Epic's interest to have building be a negligible mechanic.

(At its most basic, a build will always need to function as constant, adhoc cover against suppressive fire from one cardinal direction as long as the builder has sufficient mats, any nerf that nullifies this will probably never come to pass).

You probably found Fortnite fun in the early seasons because building was new for most players and merely a distraction or a way to climb hills and buildings.

Nowadays, most of the people building single walls are AI bots, tryhards pretending to be bots or actual newbies.

So yea, if you cannot accept the idea that building is a required skill in this game, you'll have a better time playing something else. However, if you come to terms with using building to your advantage, both offensively and defensively, then you might find it fun and rewarding in its own way.

 

[The_Mike]

I'd assume it's just an LTM for a few days, max up to a week. Team Rumble is the only LTM that became a mainstay mode because it was popular for casual play. Every other mode has stayed true to being "limited time".

Still annoying that I'm forced to not bring able to have fun for a week.

I hope it won't become often.

 

[Hawks Eclipse]

Still annoying that I'm forced to not bring able to have fun for a week.

I hope it won't become often.

I get why its sudden absence is annoying.

Didn't have that much fun trying to snipe people in TR One Shot, but simply bounding around in low-grav was a hoot, so I guess that makes me neutral on it.

 

[chorizosausage#3774]

I can relate to the frustration of dealing with builds but it is what gives Fortnite its unique flavour. What do you have in mind when you want building to be nerfed a lot? Cause it is not in Epic's interest to have building be a negligible mechanic.

(At its most basic, a build will always need to function as constant, adhoc cover against suppressive fire from one cardinal direction as long as the builder has sufficient mats, any nerf that nullifies this will probably never come to pass).

You probably found Fortnite fun in the early seasons because building was new for most players and merely a distraction or a way to climb hills and buildings.

Nowadays, most of the people building single walls are AI bots, tryhards pretending to be bots or actual newbies.

So yea, if you cannot accept the idea that building is a required skill in this game, you'll have a better time playing something else. However, if you come to terms with using building to your advantage, both offensively and defensively, then you might find it fun and rewarding in its own way.

All they'd need to do is slow panel switching after say three or four placements.

I can't build for toffee, I respect those that can and enjoy plenty of wins; but maybe balance that aspect more.

 

[Hawks Eclipse]

All they'd need to do is slow panel switching after say three or four placements.

I can't build for toffee, I respect those that can and enjoy plenty of wins; but maybe balance that aspect more.

Would be cool if they had it in some kind of PTR (Public Test Realm) like Blizzard does; it'd need lots of playtesting with all skill levels in all configurations (solos, duos, trios, squads) to fathom the ramifications.

Anyway, how would you determine what counts as 3-4 consecutive placements to begin with?

3-4 pieces within the space of 250ms? 150ms? Or will it be based on the player's input of holding down the build button until 3-4 pieces are placed? What if the player spams each input individually to bypass said system?

 

[IbizaPocholo]

 

[Hestar69]

I can relate to the frustration of dealing with builds but it is what gives Fortnite its unique flavour. What do you have in mind when you want building to be nerfed a lot? Cause it is not in Epic's interest to have building be a negligible mechanic.

(At its most basic, a build will always need to function as constant, adhoc cover against suppressive fire from one cardinal direction as long as the builder has sufficient mats, any nerf that nullifies this will probably never come to pass).

You probably found Fortnite fun in the early seasons because building was new for most players and merely a distraction or a way to climb hills and buildings.

Nowadays, most of the people building single walls are AI bots, tryhards pretending to be bots or actual newbies.

So yea, if you cannot accept the idea that building is a required skill in this game, you'll have a better time playing something else. However, if you come to terms with using building to your advantage, both offensively and defensively, then you might find it fun and rewarding in its own way.

I would nerf building to 100 mats for each type. every games the same. Shoot at someone andddd they build a huge tower. box fight! this is BORING and face it's boring as most popular streamers play COD over this.

I was shooting at a guy with rockets spamming them and he was just able to keep building. I finally said screw it rushed him and shotgunned him.

Building is the WORST part of fortnite.How is this fun. Every fight is the same. box fights....yawn....

Old school fortnite was the best because people didn't build these huge towers and just hide in them.

Everything about fortnite is good.Minus the building and the bloom on your shots.

If only PUBG devs would update their game like epic does maybe it wouldn't be dead.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Drop starting mat health to 50hp (currently 75hp). This would make ramp rushing slightly costlier.

Reduce run speed while mats are out to 20 percent. This would make ramp rushing slightly costlier.

Start adding interesting items back into the game. (Hello Guided Missile)

Fortnites at it's best when it's about choices, not twitch skill.

 

[Hawks Eclipse]

I would nerf building to 100 mats for each type. every games the same. Shoot at someone andddd they build a huge tower. box fight! this is BORING and face it's boring as most popular streamers play COD over this.

I was shooting at a guy with rockets spamming them and he was just able to keep building. I finally said screw it rushed him and shotgunned him.

Building is the WORST part of fortnite.How is this fun. Every fight is the same. box fights....yawn....

Old school fortnite was the best because people didn't build these huge towers and just hide in them.

Everything about fortnite is good.Minus the building and the bloom on your shots.

If only PUBG devs would update their game like epic does maybe it wouldn't be dead.

100 of each type is probably too little, especially considering how difficult it is to get metal ever since land vehicles can be driven.

As for boxfights and building, like I said previously, if you won't accept that it's a fundamental core of the game, you won't enjoy it and that's fine. It's like ranting about fireballs in Street Fighter, it won't be removed or nullified completely.

I do agree that Epic could probably try some new, radical ideas to liven up the game, as opposed to just putting in more items about circumventing builds.

Eg. Having elemental weapons to counter build types, which is a thing in STW but they never fully transplanted it to BR: fire destroys wood, water dissolves brick, electricity conducts through electricity.

 

[Hawks Eclipse]

Drop starting mat health to 50hp (currently 75hp). This would make ramp rushing slightly costlier.

Reduce run speed while mats are out to 20 percent. This would make ramp rushing slightly costlier.

Start adding interesting items back into the game. (Hello Guided Missile)

Fortnites at it's best when it's about choices, not twitch skill.

I don't think this is "slightly costlier". Your change would result in a trade of 150 (up from 100) mats per AR clip (30 bullets).

If you mean reduce runspeed to 20% when blueprints are out. You're basically forcing even more defensive play than normal.

Bouncing off your idea: maybe the amount of mats you carry can be tied to movement speed, so someone who's carrying a total of 500 mats would move faster than someone who's carrying >2000.

The one with less mats gets to go on the attack or escape more while the one with more mats can either dump some mats or play more defensively.

In a way, it's sort of like that with shockwave nades occupying one slot (bouncers have always been poorly implemented btw) but tying it to builds would definitely have more impact.

About interesting items...I think Epic is purposely drip feeding stuff instead of chucking them in warp speed like before. Basically a way to prolong the game cause if they get players used to the high frequency of changes again it's hard to wean them off it without another chapter reset.

 

[Hestar69]

100 of each type is probably too little, especially considering how difficult it is to get metal ever since land vehicles can be driven.

As for boxfights and building, like I said previously, if you won't accept that it's a fundamental core of the game, you won't enjoy it and that's fine. It's like ranting about fireballs in Street Fighter, it won't be removed or nullified completely.

I do agree that Epic could probably try some new, radical ideas to liven up the game, as opposed to just putting in more items about circumventing builds.

Eg. Having elemental weapons to counter build types, which is a thing in STW but they never fully transplanted it to BR: fire destroys wood, water dissolves brick, electricity conducts through electricity.

Fortnite is a dying game,they NEEED to do something.There's a reason streamers don't play it anymore and hardly anyone talks about it..

FIX the building,FIX the gun bloom. How is it 2021 and bullets are RNG in a shooter. I really hope spell break gets bigger and/or another shooter comes along and kills this game off completely.

 

[Hawks Eclipse]

Fortnite is a dying game,they NEEED to do something.There's a reason streamers don't play it anymore and hardly anyone talks about it..

FIX the building,FIX the gun bloom. How is it 2021 and bullets are RNG in a shooter. I really hope spell break gets bigger and/or another shooter comes along and kills this game off completely.

Maybe you're right that it's dying but none of your reasons are compelling enough to convince me. Part of that is because I'm disconnected from streamer culture, I mainly watch the uploaded videos on YouTube (and usually not in full) but I only tune in to streams for Twitch drops that I want, lol.

I certainly wouldn't mind if Epic started injecting some brand new gameplay stuff into the game though.

And yea, Spellbreak is great fun even though I haven't played it much. I hope they do well.

 

[Ailynn]

If Epic doesn't add SAMUS ARAN to Fortnite in a season about bounty hunters from different realities, after already having added Master Chief and Kratos...then I guess someone has to do it.

Here's my updated attempt.

Outfit: DYNAMO DANCER
Suit pattern: BIONIC FORGE
Head style: HAIRSTYLE B
Eye mask / Belt: OFF
Primary material: METALIC / SKY BLUE
Secondary material: METALIC / BLUE
Hair tint color: MUSTARD
Sticker: CYCLO SWIRL

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Fortnite is a dying game,they NEEED to do something.There's a reason streamers don't play it anymore and hardly anyone talks about it..

FIX the building,FIX the gun bloom. How is it 2021 and bullets are RNG in a shooter. I really hope spell break gets bigger and/or another shooter comes along and kills this game off completely.

It's still the most played game on XBox Live and a few months ago Epic revealed it had 25 million daily active users.

I think it's dying like Minecraft and League of Legends were "dying" a few years back.

 

[bargeparty]

I dunno why this guy stans for fortnite so much. The game is full of problems, all of which they can correct. They just keep keep that that item store and those collabs to keep the kids happy and spending money.

You want to box fight all day go play a specific mode for that, the main game needs to be revamped. It's not the core of fortnite it's just what happens when the devs don't give a shit. Same thing that would happen to the meta in overwatch.

And update the fucking map already.

 

[Hawks Eclipse]

If Epic doesn't add SAMUS ARAN to Fortnite in a season about bounty hunters from different realities, after already having added Master Chief and Kratos...then I guess someone has to do it.

Here's my attempt.

Personally I'd swap the glider out for Rox's glider. Besides that, I can see the logic behind the choice of cosmetics. Your emote selection baffles me though, loool.

I think it's most likely that Nintendo is the one rejecting Epic's proposal, assuming it ever took place.

But yea, I assume the long awaited Nintendo Direct has sparked up your Hope Engine. Let us hope for a good show later.

 

[Ailynn]

Personally I'd swap the glider out for Rox's glider. Besides that, I can see the logic behind the choice of cosmetics. Your emote selection baffles me though, loool.

I think it's most likely that Nintendo is the one rejecting Epic's proposal, assuming it ever took place.

But yea, I assume the long awaited Nintendo Direct has sparked up your Hope Engine. Let us hope for a good show later.

Actually I did trade out for Rox's glider shortly after posting! It was a great fit for her! The emotes were actually from another preset- Still need to choose some that make sense for Samus.

I still think there's a good chance Samus will release for Fortnite, because Donald Mustard has been on record as a big Super Metroid fan.

 

[Hawks Eclipse]

Actually I did trade out for Rox's glider shortly after posting! It was a great fit for her! The emotes were actually from another preset- Still need to choose some that make sense for Samus.

I still think there's a good chance Samus will release for Fortnite, because Donald Mustard has been on record as a big Super Metroid fan.

As you can see, I came from the future

Can't say I can think of any emotes that would fit Samus off the top of my head. Oh wait, maybe that Loserfruit emote, just pretend the strawberry is the baby Metroid haha.

Didn't know about Mustard's Metroid Mania but can't say I'm too surprised. He sort of said he developed an obsession with masked figures ever since Snake Eyes, so Samus totally fits the bill.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

This song is unironically dope.

 

[NickFire]

Actually I did trade out for Rox's glider shortly after posting! It was a great fit for her! The emotes were actually from another preset- Still need to choose some that make sense for Samus.

I still think there's a good chance Samus will release for Fortnite, because Donald Mustard has been on record as a big Super Metroid fan.

They must have something fairly significant left for this season. There's still another month and the level 101-150 tier rewards don't look too exciting (IMO). A Nintendo crossover would make a lot of sense after the Halo one.

 

[Hawks Eclipse]

This song is unironically dope.

I was wondering why the lyrics referenced chapter 1 locations, turns out this parody song is two years old.

 

[Hawks Eclipse]

Hair tint color: MUSTARD

Codename: DONALD

You should probably make a new post for the updated attempt, didn't notice until I randomly scrolled up.

 

[Ailynn]

Codename: DONALD

You should probably make a new post for the updated attempt, didn't notice until I randomly scrolled up.

Ha! I should've included that!

Also, thanks! Here's the update for those that missed it:

Outfit: DYNAMO DANCER
Suit pattern: BIONIC FORGE
Head style: HAIRSTYLE B
Eye mask / Belt: OFF
Primary material: METALIC / SKY BLUE
Secondary material: METALIC / BLUE
Hair tint color: (Donald) MUSTARD
Sticker: CYCLO SWIRL

 

[NickFire]

Ha! I should've included that!

Also, thanks! Here's the update for those that missed it:

Outfit: DYNAMO DANCER
Suit pattern: BIONIC FORGE
Head style: HAIRSTYLE B
Eye mask / Belt: OFF
Primary material: METALIC / SKY BLUE
Secondary material: METALIC / BLUE
Hair tint color: (Donald) MUSTARD
Sticker: CYCLO SWIRL

Seven emotes and not one of them is Gangnam Style????????

I don't know if we can be friends anymore.

JK.

 

[Hawks Eclipse]

Ha! I should've included that!

Also, thanks! Here's the update for those that missed it:

Outfit: DYNAMO DANCER
Suit pattern: BIONIC FORGE
Head style: HAIRSTYLE B
Eye mask / Belt: OFF
Primary material: METALIC / SKY BLUE
Secondary material: METALIC / BLUE
Hair tint color: (Donald) MUSTARD
Sticker: CYCLO SWIRL

I can't help but think of Donald everytime Mustard gets mentioned haha.

Also, thank you so much for the (undeserved) GG, you know what it stands for

MRW I open my gaf tab and realize what happened:

 

[Hestar69]

Maybe you're right that it's dying but none of your reasons are compelling enough to convince me. Part of that is because I'm disconnected from streamer culture, I mainly watch the uploaded videos on YouTube (and usually not in full) but I only tune in to streams for Twitch drops that I want, lol.

I certainly wouldn't mind if Epic started injecting some brand new gameplay stuff into the game though.

And yea, Spellbreak is great fun even though I haven't played it much. I hope they do well.

They need to do something honestly. playing it for a few days more and EVERY fight in the same. shoot someone,they build a huge tower with a pool and its a box fight....shit is so boring and takes no skill. Funny when these kids can't build and its shooting only they get destroyed.

Ohh and also getting shot through walls that are BUILT is lovely... This game is a mess I honestly don't get how people like it.

 

[Hestar69]

It's still the most played game on XBox Live and a few months ago Epic revealed it had 25 million daily active users.

I think it's dying like Minecraft and League of Legends were "dying" a few years back.

LOL! it won't die just like roblox because kids like you keep it alive and think it's good. I mean,you think that 8mile fortnite song is good. Very cringey. I hope you hit puberty soon and like better games

 

[Hawks Eclipse]

They need to do something honestly. playing it for a few days more and EVERY fight in the same. shoot someone,they build a huge tower with a pool and its a box fight....shit is so boring and takes no skill. Funny when these kids can't build and its shooting only they get destroyed.

Ohh and also getting shot through walls that are BUILT is lovely... This game is a mess I honestly don't get how people like it.

Hence my original reply to you, if you're struggling to enjoy it, don't force yourself. Some things in life can't be enjoyed until we're in the right mindset, forcing ourselves just makes it worse all round.

And while I too think that Epic could (and probably should) try some more radical changes, I really don't see building going away. To give another example, it's like if you expected Splatoon to deviate from the inking concept, it's not going to happen.

Getting shot through builds is an unfortunate netcode issue I believe. Funnily enough, it wouldn't matter that much if your proposed building nerfs made it through since you'd run out of mats super quick anyway.

 

[JeremyEtcetera]

Has there been any dev talk about improving Save the World? I don't even want anything big, I just want them to add trading lobbies. It's gotten to a point where 1-2 people will immediately leave a match(which difficulty is set for 4 players) if no one agrees to trade with them, and it happens more often than it should.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Street Fighters Ryu is the next addition.

 

[splattered]

Street Fighters Ryu is the next addition.

Needs more Ken

 

[Late Stage Marxist]

Guile would make more sense.

 

[JeremyEtcetera]

Guile would make more sense.

I also thought Jak or Ratchet would have made more sense than Kratos.

 

[Ailynn]

I'm loving all the skins they've been adding, and yeah...I've pretty much been buying them all.

I just...please...
Nintendo PLEASE...

Allow Donald Mustard to put Samus Aran in.

 

[ManaByte]

I'll get Ryu.

Didn't get The Flash because it's the TV version. Would rather have the comic one, or even the Ezra one (with a chokeslam emote).

 

[Hawks Eclipse]

Has there been any dev talk about improving Save the World? I don't even want anything big, I just want them to add trading lobbies. It's gotten to a point where 1-2 people will immediately leave a match(which difficulty is set for 4 players) if no one agrees to trade with them, and it happens more often than it should.

"Unfortunately, their (Epic's) stealth mode is really effective."

For the added functionality that you're suggesting, I wouldn't keep my hopes up, so I'd suggest you report them, Epic does actually look into these reports and takes appropriate action.

Then again, I don't think the difficulty actually stays that way? If you're not entering the 4-men missions (the ones with four dolls on the icon) and Evacuate The Shelter missions, the player counts don't really matter. You do get some stat and XP adjustments per added/subtracted member but I think enemies don't.

 

[Hawks Eclipse]

Ryu and Chun-Li being added is actually friggin' huge.

Not because Street Fighter is the ultimate crossover, but because this is the first Japanese one; every other skin collab up till now has been with a Western franchise.

In other words, the floodgates for the Hero Hunter and History's Coolest Toaster to be added in the distant future have been opened.

 

[bender]

I'm loving all the skins they've been adding, and yeah...I've pretty much been buying them all.

I just...please...
Nintendo PLEASE...

Allow Donald Mustard to put Samus Aran in.

I don't play Fortnite but I need those skins.

 

[IbizaPocholo]

 

[JeremyEtcetera]

"Unfortunately, their (Epic's) stealth mode is really effective."

For the added functionality that you're suggesting, I wouldn't keep my hopes up, so I'd suggest you report them, Epic does actually look into these reports and takes appropriate action.

Then again, I don't think the difficulty actually stays that way? If you're not entering the 4-men missions (the ones with four dolls on the icon) and Evacuate The Shelter missions, the player counts don't really matter. You do get some stat and XP adjustments per added/subtracted member but I think enemies don't.

I should have been more specific. I mainly meant missions like the 4 skull missions and shelter ones, or when an ally sets the difficulty higher(like to 3 or 4 player difficulty) before starting the mission and then that person or others decide to leave. Once they leave, especially at higher level zones, it gets way, way more difficult to actually complete, especially if it's a multiple atlas mission. It's one reason I came to dislike atlas missions because at higher levels they require people be at their best/most coordinated or everyone fails.

I once had a 3+ Atlas 4 skull mission in a level 40+ zone that I simply had to give up on because too many people left(once again because they were only there to trade) and I couldn't keep up with the extreme amount of assaults(meant for 4 players) in such a wide span area. I wasted way too many materials, bullets, and traps on it, so much so that I ended up having to stop playing the game for a bit and cool down out of full on frustration.

 

[Hawks Eclipse]

I should have been more specific. I mainly meant missions like the 4 skull missions and shelter ones, or when an ally sets the difficulty higher(like to 3 or 4 player difficulty) before starting the mission and then that person or others decide to leave. Once they leave, especially at higher level zones, it gets way, way more difficult to actually complete, especially if it's a multiple atlas mission. It's one reason I came to dislike atlas missions because at higher levels they require people be at their best/most coordinated or everyone fails.

Assuming you didn't vote for the difficulty increase, that means at least one of the leavers voted for it, in those cases I'm quite sure your reports will fly, just make sure to include those details.

ETS is an interesting one, in that it's best to have only one person enter and trigger the starting event; the initial number of husks scales according to how many people are in the game, and not lobby, upon the event trigger.