komikoza
"I am calling out what seems to be a hypocrisy moment in hopes to understand the kind of vision for the game you got there going, to see if there is common ground to stand on." Presumptuous of you, and somewhat rude, I feel.
"I don't think there is any though, I am just more and more confused as a result."
You don't think there is any vision for the game I have going? Also presumptuous and rude, keep going. Unless I misunderstood, and you're saying you don't think there is any hypocrisy; then I would agree, because of the points I numerated previously.
"At one hand you protect the original game design and dev vision, yet on the other you advocate for something that is not looking like it's intended at all."
- How do you expect to know what was intended? We aren't the developers. I might add, sometimes a game developer may see something happen with their design, and they might like it. So it becomes an accidental intention.
- I'm not "conservative"; meaning... I AM open to the game changing. I just don't want nerfs. Nerfs in gaming, from my perspective, tends to make games less fun. I'm open to the game changing in fun ways... Nerfs are not fun, in my opinion. It's also true that by nerfing a weapon that makes someone who is not good at the game win sometimes, they might take away from the excitement those people get when they play the game. I don't want that.
Maybe you don't understand, so let me repeat it, I'm not against all changes in the game design or vision. I don't protect the original in all instances. Life, like art, is nuanced. Not everything is all black, or all white. It's checkered.'
With both ending up in the "fun" argument that is the subjective vision you have for it based on the selectively picked things that you like, dismissing everything else.
I'm trying to put aside the fun argument and use other arguments now.
I will leave any personal arguments aside after I say the following:
So in other words, "I'll leave any personal arguments aside after I give you a personal argument". Classic.
**So far, you're giving me the impression that lord forbid the developers listen to these "whiners that have no concept of fun in their minds" and introduce at least a single change that is being asked for (even if it's a justified fix), you're going to bash them into oblivion for not having a backbone or something along the lines for ruining your fun. That is a dangerous territory to navigate. I hope I am mistaken, but if I hit close, please reconsider. **
Of course I'm not going to bash the developers. ONCE AGAIN SIR, you are being PRESUMPTUOUS, and RUDE.
Also, although I don't always say it, here are a few examples of instances where I have agreed with people's suggestions for change:
https://forum.partyanimals.com/d/572-make-account-merge-a-feature
https://forum.partyanimals.com/d/713-new-animals
https://forum.partyanimals.com/d/765-hollow-knight
https://forum.partyanimals.com/d/616-animals-that-you-want-added
https://forum.partyanimals.com/d/741-animal-request
https://forum.partyanimals.com/d/725-item-store-api
https://forum.partyanimals.com/d/884-vote-for-otta
https://forum.partyanimals.com/d/1030-smoke-while-running
https://forum.partyanimals.com/d/1028
https://forum.partyanimals.com/d/1072-a-rat-in-party-animals-real
https://forum.partyanimals.com/d/1179-friend-requests
https://forum.partyanimals.com/d/1138-a-map-idea-that-probably-shouldnt-get-added-to-the-game
https://forum.partyanimals.com/d/1172-allow-people-to-chat-while-dead-and-to-see-chats-from-afar
https://forum.partyanimals.com/d/1171-some-names-need-to-be-censored
https://forum.partyanimals.com/d/1242-new-last-stand
https://forum.partyanimals.com/d/1272-we-need-split-screen-online-capabilities
https://forum.partyanimals.com/d/1358-smart-gloves-power-up
https://forum.partyanimals.com/d/1368-batman-yurusa-skin
https://forum.partyanimals.com/d/1395-what-weapons-do-you-think-they-should-add
https://forum.partyanimals.com/d/1400-we-need-a-panda
https://forum.partyanimals.com/d/1138-a-map-idea-that-probably-shouldnt-get-added-to-the-game
The argument about the accessibility is true"
Yes
"but I am not worried about the execution of the "trick", even though the fact alone that you have to press 3 buttons that don't make sense to be used together is odd enough. It is the fact that the game won't tell or hint at anything like this, and people will definitely not know about its existence. It is the fact that this collides with multiple map designs, and Trebuchet really is the best example of it.
Besides trebuchet, which other map designs conflict with it? Name one. It works SPLENDIDLY with football, and makes it closer to actual football. As for trebuchet, this can be easily fixed by having the bombs only ignite from being launched from the trebuchet. However personally (get ready for a subjective opinion), I think it adds to the variety of the map if you can either throw bombs or launch them, and you can launch yourself with the trebuchet to punch anyone who tries to throw them.
"Imagine the tip screen being like:
Hey, you have to grab bombs and put them in the Trebuchet to then launch'em to the enemy base. This is how we designed the map. But you can also totally bypass the Trebuchet and use a combination of buttons that we never told you about so you can launch the bombs into the enemy base just with your character standing in one place cause it's fun, seeya!"
Perfect! I love it! Again, my subjective opinion, but I like that. Except one thing, they wouldn't say "that we never told you about" in that message, because they would have then told you about it. Maybe it's something the developers didn't know when they designed it, but not necessarily something that they would have to be against.
"I don't understand the "laws of physics" and "real life" arguments in this either, especially when it's applied to the game. Physics based engines and games are widely known for their exceptional erratic bugginess and difficulty in handling (there's bound to be issues), and why apply "real life" (like dropkicks killing people at the start) to a cute animal brawler game that is like the exact opposite of that? While also saying no justification is needed anywhere?
Boomerang launching people in space is very fun, why remove that? It's random and chaotic, perfectly aligning with the theme of the game, and hilarious when you see it the first time. Just throw it once and don't pick it up again the second time, it's that easy. /s
^ This is what it looks like from a side. I don't think anybody cares whether its "correct according to the laws of physics", you agree it is buggy so where does that leave us? It's easier for everybody to call that a "bug" rather than label it "a feature that is correct from the laws of physics standpoint but seems not intended and ruining games".
I knew you would say something like that, which is why I brought up the boomerang counterpoint to illustrate that there is a difference between finding out a way to leverage your character's joint positions, movement, and weight calibrations to get a larger output when you throw items, and actually encountering something that wouldn't even work in real life physics. There is a difference. I hope you can see that. I hope you also understand that I only brought that point upp to show you that not all physics based phenomena such as these are equal. Some totally work for the game. Others are more questionable. Personally, I love the boomerang surprise launch. It's funny! Others might call it a bug though.
They would be objectively more justified in doing so than you are to call this a bug. This is something that can be accomplished with actual laws of physics. That is not. There's the difference.
People should be able to throw things really far.
That works out REALLY well in BEAST Football. That isn't some ridiculous physics bending concept to get more leverage for your throw. It's just a little combo move to get more distance on your throw which can make passing in football a LOT more fun, ANNNNND, MAYBE
They might even be able to use that concept to create a BASKETBALL MAP!
"That being said, I stand my ground. The game is tons of fun, and its game modes are cleverly designed, to see that design being bypassed doesn't seem like fun to me, but that's just my take on it. I support the OP. "
Agree to disagree. I stand my ground, also. I do not support the OP. I support the person who discovered this amazing technique.
And I hope, and will request, that the developer considers creating a basketball map where we can make a lot more use out of this feature!