To Insomniac Games: Please fix the EXP System in Resistance 2

Letter to Insomniac Games:

Based on the current design of R2, the only way to earn EXP in competitive is by using the PLAY button (the ranked matches).  But after experimenting with this for quite some time since launch, I regret to inform you that this may be the biggest design flaw in R2.  No, this isn't just a personal gripe; this is a serious long-term issue that will limit community growth.

Please allow me to explain:

1) 60-players and EXP were the best addition to R2.  The 60-player upgrade was a very nice addition to the console gaming landscape (PC games have had it for a while).  However, the addition of the EXP system is perhaps the greatest addition to R2.  In the end, "60-players + EXP" is a winning formula, no matter how you look at it, and I do hope R2 becomes a big hit for you.

However, the current version of R2 does not offer the 60p+EXP experience.
Here's why:

2) The "Play" option in Competitive Mode is not perfect.  Well, I actually think that it is seriously flawed, and I know several others on the R2 forum agree.  The biggest problem is that Ranked games always end up being only 5v5, 7v7 or 15v15 AT BEST.  In fact, I can only recall one game where the total player count was above 20, and in most cases, I'm stuck playing with 13 or so people in the whole game (yes, that's an odd number).

To be blunt, if you want to earn EXP, you're stuck playing a CoD4/Halo3/GeoW2 clone.  And while there is nothing wrong with that, this is not enough to differentiate the game from its competition.  Frankly, I am already having enough difficulty convincing my friends to play this game with me, and the PLAY button might become the nail in the coffin (I am not telling them about this issue, of course).

I can try to guess why the PLAY button was implemented: you wanted to make sure that people didn't exploit the EXP system in competitive mode, and that each game is balanced.  But the outcome speaks for itself; the competitive mode itself is broken right now.  You can't EVER play 60-player matches, and the balancing is WORSE than in custom matches.

3) The Custom games offer the best gameplay experience.  And this is another example of user/self-regulation working its magic.  Users will always go and look for a well-populated game, and ensure that each team remains balanced in numbers.  You never see a situation where one team outnumbers the other by 4-5 people.  However, this happens all too often with the PLAY button. Again, the PLAY button defeats its own purpose of trying to be fair and balanced.

---

My suggestion to you is:

A) Allow custom games to earn EXP.  Whatever the reason behind limiting EXP to the PLAY mode, the algorithm behind the matchmaking system is NOT WORKING.  The magic of R2 was supposed to be the near laggless 60-player matches, but you simply cannot experience that unless you are willing to forego your EXP altogether and join a custom game.

or

B) Fix the PLAY button.  Either make it so that people are put into existing ranked games, or upgrade your matchmaking algorithm itself.  I really do not have a preference in how you do it. But make sure that people can consistently get into 60-player matches.  I've used the play button over 30 times in the past week, and have never even gotten close to a 60-player match, let alone a 40-player match.  Again, most end up being 10-15 player matches.

Remember, the ultimate goal is the make R2 what it was always intended to be: a 60-player slugfest where you can earn EXP for everything good you do.  It really is a winning formula, but as it is right now, the game does not offer this at all.

Personally, I think solution A makes the most sense and would be easier to implement.  So I would highly recommend changing your policy as soon as possible and allow those people in custom games to earn EXP.  Because, let's face it: even if there is a way to exploit the EXP system, there's no point in breaking the game itself in order to prevent it.

Thank you for reading, and I really hope this gets looked into.

[SilverKiller]

i like your point of view but maybe is happening the same that happen with resistance: fall of man, at the beginning it was so difficult to find a 40 player match because there were to few players 2 months later you found a lot because more people bought the game i think is matter of time before you start to see more people, a lot of them are playing the online cooperative modes now and i'm going to join you in resistance 2 this coming weekend :D

PSN: Zheth

[The Matrix]

Agreed. I played about 12 matches and looked at my record to find that I had been playing unranked games. Insomniac really needs to identify between ranked and unranked games.

[orakga]

Yeah, that's basically what most people are saying, but a few things don't make sense.

1) When you go through the matchmaking system (the "PLAY" button), the match only waits for 15 seconds before starting a game. And regardless of how many people are in the game after the 15 seconds, it'll start right anyway. I think if they increased that wait time to 60 seconds (like most other games), that alone could substantially increase the number of players in each game.

2) There are plenty of full 60-player games that happen on the "unranked" list of games, and supposedly already 500,000 copies of R2 sold. And all of my PS3-owning friends are already playing this game. So, it makes very little sense that you can only get into 5v5 matches right now. I highly doubt that the problem is the lack of people who own R2. 500,000 is already a pretty big player base, and even with co-op, there should be enough players who want to play competitive matches to support at least one or two 60-player games.

I'm just ranting, really...

[DERKADER]

I stopped playing R2 because of the ranked competitive games.4 vs 4 on a map designed for 60 is an epic game of hide and go seek where no one wins. Everything said in this article I completely agree with. This is a great game that isn't using its best selling point to its full advantage. I don't want to have to choose between full games and EXP.

[xhairs9]

Sucks for you then.

[motts]

Amen

I was excited to see matchmaking in beta, and figured they would actually fill up games when its used, but i guess not. Hopefully they fix that. Even expanding matchmaking would be great, so you can choose what type of game you want to be ranked in. Halo 3 matchmaking is amazing, R2 needs something like it

[Gun_Senshi]

its not out in europe yet -_-'

[orakga]

What do you mean by that? (i.e. "it's not out in Europe yet") You don't mean that the matchmaking issues will be resolved once the game is out in Europe, do you? (forgive me if I misunderstood you)

The EU release will not help, for the following two reasons:

1) The current ranked games only hold about 10 people per game. That's 10/60. And with the EU market actually being smaller than the US, there is no way the games will suddently fill up even with those new users joining the community.

2) Although R2 allows for people to join from different countries, each region/country *should* be self-sufficient enough to host their own 60-player games. It is not ideal for an FPS to have to rely on users from all around the world to host a full game.

Again, I apologize if I misunderstood your comment.

[bigman7387]

My bet is that he just meant he hasn't played in yet because he lives in Europe and doesn't have access to it.

Just a guess though.

[orakga]

I was kind of hoping for that too, actually. But I had to say what I did because it's one of the responses from the R2 forum, which made me sort of scratch my head... =D

[SilverKiller]

well in any case i'm going to have the game on Friday so i'm going to give it a try on the weekend. i'm going to finish the 1rst player campaing over the weekend and then i'm going to start playing the co-op online, i want to finish one class at least once and then i can focus on ranking online modes :P i hopa that is enough time for Insomniac to fix the match making issues

[cicadess]

They will be joining several http://www.wowlevelingus.co... Canadian and American teams that

include Gravitas Gaming , Evil Geniuses USA and Evil Geniuses Canada.
The Extreme Masters Global http://www.iwpls.com Challenge will feature top international wow gold

— World of Warcraft: EM Montreal Viewers Guide Counter-Strike teams such as SK Gaming, Fnatic

and Made

[ER1X]

I assume all of you are searching the specific mode you want to play? You're NEVER going to find a 60p deathmatch or core control in ranked R2. These modes are not designed for 60 players. TDM and Skirmish, you will, eventually.

If you are not choosing the match type you want before you "start matchmaking" you're rolling the dice at all available game modes and you're never going to get a 60p deathmatch or core control. The maps don't even offer that many players for these game modes. So, right off the bat, there is a 50% chance you WILL NOT have a chance at playing 60p.

I didn't expect to play 60p matches all the time, nor do I want too. But, if you played enough R:FoM you know that 40p matches were not the norm.

The "Competitive" options are pretty self-explanatory. Play is ranked, Find Game is custom, aka unranked, and create-a-game is...well, duh. It even tells you what each option is at the bottom of the competitive main menu (it scrolls along the bottom). If you want XP in unranked games then it has to be separate from ranked XP (as it was in R:FoM). Leveling up in unranked games at the same multiplier as ranked would not only be retarded, it would be taken advantage of.

Unranked games are so popular right now for a couple of reasons. One, people are having a horrible time finding a ranked game. And, when they do...they are often getting disco'd or their stats are not counting. Insomniac is having serious server issues and this is just another reason why you are not getting into big ranked games. Two, the game is not even 2 weeks old. Many people play unranked to get the "feel" of the game, weapons, maps, etc before they jump into ranked games.

I do agree with you 100% on round balancing. They added this feature with a patch to R:FoM and it made sure games would not start if teams were uneven, numbers wise. I have NO IDEA why they did not put this in right off the bat with R2. Inexcusable. I was so pumped for this game and logged thousands of hours on Fall of Man...but, R2, to this point has been a big letdown.

[xhairs9]

I think some of it has to do with the fact that people just don't even realize they're not getting xp when they play custom games. I think they like having the ability to find a game and join it already and are afraid of the auto-find feature of the play button. In all my days so far of playing competitive last night was the worst. I got into a 5v5 which was alright even though it was my team (we only had 4) and they had 5...but they were a clan. It was beautiful because even before the timer ran out, 1 guy left because he knew he couldn't face a clan of 5...so we loaded up 3v5, and before the other guy even shot a bullet he was gone because the teams were uneven, so it dropped down to 2v5...and needless to say I stayed for the whole first half and about 3/4 of the second half before I couldn't stand being shot by 5 marksmans in a row to die.

It still amazes me today how I could shoot one guy 4 times with the marksman and he wont die but yet I get shot twice and I'm dead....I guess I don't know how to use the gun but I figured it wouldn't be as OP as it is...

Anyways, this is a big concern is starting the match with uneven teams or little to not even close to full games. I feel that's a drag and it should be fixed. My only other concern is that when you set the filters...they should probably work.

I set it to TDM/Small every time, and about the 3rd time I clicked play it pops me into a 60 player game with 40 people. I could have sworn I clicked small....but I guess small = 60 now days.

[orakga]

I realize that I can't expect "my type of game" to be available at 60p all the time. Of course not.

But when Ted Price repeatedly advertised R2 as having "'unprecedented' 60-player online play" and that people would be "grouped into squads of 5 (i.e. Skirmish)", I don't think it's unreasonable for me to expect to play 60p Skirmish matches when I want to.

But as it stands right now, the biggest ranked skirmish match had 15 players in it. 15!! On a 60 player map!!!

And here I was thinking that R2 would kick Gears 2's ass because there would be so many more ppl in each game, but the joke is really on me now...

I'm going to wait for a patch. If this game doesn't get fixed within the month, I'm selling both copies that I own, and quite possibly my 2nd PS3 as well.

[xhairs9]

ofcourse the joke is on you, it beats gears 2's ass not because of the 60 player online, that's just a bonus. Look at this feature rich game for what it is. 8 player co-op with NUMEROUS missions in each stage. 60 player competitive, sure sometimes you dont' get 60 but they never told you in the first place you would be gaining exp in only ranked servers, does it really matter that much to you that you want to gain xp? Hell I see people on here of rank 2 and 3 that are still dominating without the obvious xp.

Open your eyes a little and if its not your cup of tea, don't complain there are enough complainers out there already.

[orakga]

"Open your eyes a little and if its not your cup of tea, don't complain there are enough complainers out there already."

I bought two copies of this game. Pre-ordered. Because Ted Price went around to every tradeshow this year promising this as a "60-player games with EXP". Now, THAT is EXACTLY my cup of tea, and the sole reason why I invested my hard-earned cash on this game.

But that turned out to be $130 spent on a game that isn't working AS PROMOTED. So, I believe I have the right AND responsibility spread this information.

It's not a matter of preference.
It's a matter of getting what I was promised I would get.
Totally different issue.

[xhairs9]

erm...I think ya got me. No, no wait, you didn't.

Error Correction:

#1 he did not parade around telling everyone that there would be FULL 60 Player Online Ranked Matches 24/7. #2 -- He did EMPHASIZE that you could played 60 player matches, AND 60 player ranked matches. But for him to PROMISE something like that is complete idiocy..why? Because in order for him to promise that to you, he would have to force 59 other people to play constantly.

You might seem to forget that most people are afraid of that play button, they don't know hwo to use it, they don't understand xp, maybe they just don't want to play ranked? I don't know, but plain and simple there is so much other online stuff to be played in Resistance 2, that if you don't get into a ranked 60 player match, it should be expected.

[SilverKiller]

i'm agree i in RE FOM i barely played ranked games because it was more funny to play unranked custom games :P at the end the important thing is to play with friends and have fun

[orakga]

"#1 he did not parade around telling everyone that there would be FULL 60 Player Online Ranked Matches 24/7."

Wow, THIS is how you're going to defend him?
Jesus christ...

Look, I'm not complaining that I didn't get into a full 60-player ranked game 24/7 now. I'm complaining that the only ranked games that work are 10-player games, and you NEVER even get 30 players in a game. I'm not asking for it to be perfect here. I just want some resemblance of a working matchmaking system, and I'm not alone with this point of view.

[xhairs9]

Why didn't you say that in the first place then? I agree wholeheartedly with that, but to shun the game because it was lacking a full 60 player matchmaking system is what I was understanding to be your point.

I only play in the small games but I have noticed at times it will throw me into a 40 player match or even a 60 player match sometimes. But it kills me because there aren't a full 40 or 60 players and I clicked small, which evidently has no precedence in the matchmaking filter.

However I do know that there are usually a fair amount in the 40 player games (36 or so at most) and in the 60 player games sometimes it's only 10 people which sucks. My only real concern is that games now should start a penalty system for those who enter a ranked game and quit right when they die.

I noticed this happening a LOT yesterday, not just on my team but even on the opposing team. At least make it so when they quit their character still respawns and just sits there so he can rack up the deaths since he felt like quitting early. It's as simple as pressing circle before the map starts, OR even not clicking on the play option.

[DreamcastFanboy]

I agree i hate the lack of Ranked 60 players matches.

[ned_76]

ur right, but evry time i hit the PLAY button it keeps saying no matches found (something like that).... so i hve to keep playing co-op to gain xp with my buddies

[kesvalk]

you guys can kill me, but this remembers me of Smash Bros Brawl multiplayer, it was so hyped, and when you try to get on, you can't find a game, and even if by a miracle you find one, it's laggy as hell...

i know how you guys are feeling, i brought a wireless router only to play brawl, and when i setup everything, the multiplayer isn't what i was hoping...

[SinnedNogara]

There is always Resistance 3 (2010 hopefully). They better not end Resistance at Resistance 3.