Build ables

[Stop Mocking Me0]

Personally I didn't like all 4 having a build able wonder weapon. Made it sort of irrelevant as you would always take the OP weapon with a revive-tool over anything else.

[InfestLithium]

Y'all just hating on the lawn mower turret. 

[Stop Mocking Me0]

GOD  I hated that thing... You needed two buildables just to get it to work... 

[Ragdo11706]

 

GOD  I hated that thing... You needed two buildables just to get it to work... 

Only for it to shoot you in the ass & then die from it. 

Also lets not forget that AmaZing Electric Trap they decided to include.

[Stop Mocking Me0]

remember back when everyone thought that would kill the avagadro.... 

[Prince Lolz]

All this campaign team talk is irritating.. The only map they made was motd. Origins was classic team mostly. Anyway besides the point...

Buildables are great IMO im really happy the shield is back. I don't really see the swords being buildables, but I imagine there will be at least one other buildable item on SoE.

And to all the people saying no buildables in The Giant, I will be shocked if there isn't any. At the very least the shield will return. 

[InfestLithium]

In all seriousness, I don't actually think people are against the concept of buildables - just the unfortunate results of "prototypes". Treyarch came into new territory with them so it's not as if they were going to come out with 10/10 quality builds. Now they know what players liked, what they didn't like, and possible ideas for new buildables created by the community itself.

So far, the general consensus revolves around these main points:

• If a buildable requires another buildable to function, then it's not good.
• If a buildable hinders your progress throughout the map (i.e. cutting areas off in order to make you use that particular item), then it's not good.
• If a buildable purposefully friendly-fires/attacks you or your own teammates, then it's not good.
• If the pieces to a buildable - especially a considerably unimportant, non-EE one - are scattered across the map in various, always-changing locations, then it's not good.
• If a buildable's sole purpose is to power something or do something that previous maps have already done with simple action commands, then it's not good.
• If a buildable's parts can be picked up all in one go instead of one part per character, then it's good.
• If a buildable only has a one-time use throughout the entire game or lacks any true purpose, then it's not good. (Unless the original intent was for a "shits & giggles" moment, I'm all for that too.)
• If a buildable can be created at any "work station" in a given map, then it's good.

I have the utmost faith that Treyarch heard us the first time around. But if they decide to create Trample Steam 2.0, then...we'll see.

Edited July 17, 2015 by InfestLithium

[BEYOND]

All this campaign team talk is irritating.. The only map they made was motd. Origins was classic team mostly.

Mind if I ask where you heard this from? 

[yoyobobguy2]

i love the concept of buildables but wish they would make them more interesting. i imagine they could have like 20+ items on one map. then you could combine them together to make different items. you could make part of the easter egg figuring out what parts to build to unlock certain parts of a map, or use them to make various weapons\tools. what if instead of a stationary machine gun turret like in tranzit, you could use the fan and make it a rotating turret. what if you could have used the jet engine on the bus to make it go twice as fast... things like this.

[Lenne]

If buildables really have to return at least make them like in MotD and Origins where you can "carry" multiple parts of them at once.

I am also with @Matuzz on the staff building/upgrading part. It just takes way too long. 

 

[Stop Mocking Me0]

In all seriousness, I don't actually think people are against the concept of buildables - just the unfortunate results of "prototypes". Treyarch came into new territory with them so it's not as if they were going to come out with 10/10 quality builds. Now they know what players liked, what they didn't like, and possible ideas for new buildables created by the community itself.

So far, the general consensus revolves around these main points:

• If a buildable requires another buildable to function, then it's not good.
• If a buildable hinders your progress throughout the map (i.e. cutting areas off in order to make you use that particular item), then it's not good.
• If a buildable purposefully friendly-fires/attacks you or your own teammates, then it's not good.
• If the pieces to a buildable - especially a considerably unimportant, non-EE one - are scattered across the map in various, always-changing locations, then it's not good.
• If a buildable's sole purpose is to power something or do something that previous maps have already done with simple action commands, then it's not good.
• If a buildable's parts can be picked up all in one go instead of one part per character, then it's good.
• If a buildable only has a one-time use throughout the entire game or lacks any true purpose, then it's not good. (Unless the original intent was for a "shits & giggles" moment, I'm all for that too.)
• If a buildable can be created at any "work station" in a given map, then it's good.

I have the utmost faith that Treyarch heard us the first time around. But if they decide to create Trample Steam 2.0, then...we'll see.

Well... I kind of agree to that, but there are some build able scenarios I'd like to see in BO3 that weren't in BO2 that would be interesting: 

-A door that requires a few parts to open scattered across the map. -Supposedly PAP is on the other side. 

-A  tool that's used to open some doors and partways but ends up closing others. 

-Re-usable parts like the keys from Die-rise would be 1000 times more usable if they were a multi-use item. 

-Can a buildable be made with specific parts to build a different type of build able. Like say Piece A,B and C combine to make Buildable A+, but parts A,D, and B can be combined to make Buildable B+ and so on and so forth with each type of build able having a different use. 

[TimelordAlex]

I feel the WWs that BO2 bought were rather poor compared to what BO1 bought. And the idea of them being buildables was a joke. The Jet Gun is just ugh $hit, the Sliquifier is meh to me, id prefer it to chain much faster to other zombies, the blundergat i like even though i dont view it as a high up WW. The Paralyzer i like for its flying ability, and it is essentially how the jet gun should've been, i'd like it to have killed zombies a bit faster though. The staffs are considered OP by many but i consider them to be rather UP considering what you have to do to get them and upgrade them, its silly that you have to charge them for them to really do anything past round 25, i would've thought the wind stuff would act like a thundergun, but far from it. The only decent WW that BO2 bought was the RGM2 imo and its sad to me that it may not appear in BO3 when it deserves too.

[Ragdo11706]

I feel the WWs that BO2 bought were rather poor compared to what BO1 bought. And the idea of them being buildables was a joke. The Jet Gun is just ugh $hit, the Sliquifier is meh to me, id prefer it to chain much faster to other zombies, the blundergat i like even though i dont view it as a high up WW. The Paralyzer i like for its flying ability, and it is essentially how the jet gun should've been, i'd like it to have killed zombies a bit faster though. The staffs are considered OP by many but i consider them to be rather UP considering what you have to do to get them and upgrade them, its silly that you have to charge them for them to really do anything past round 25, i would've thought the wind stuff would act like a thundergun, but far from it. The only decent WW that BO2 bought was the RGM2 imo and its sad to me that it may not appear in BO3 when it deserves too.

Let's just wait & see how the RGM3 is.