Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


BATTLE BEARS ZOMBIES iOS 11 update with new AR mode is available now
Join the OFFICIAL Battle Bears Discord server hosted by SkyVuBen:
Battle Bears Gold: -:- Battle Bears Overclock:

AbsoluteZero Noble

The state of this activity is honestly more sad than the state of the rest of the forums. Mostly just the same few forumers making mindless posts. Perhaps some of us could reintroduce some of the quality here? Activity was often the most fun part of the forums and it's the part that COULD still be active. It's not battle bears focused like the threads mostly are. We're friends, we can stay in touch here right? Whatever. Sad as it is i don't think this place is ever coming back.


Last Active
Member, SkyVu Beta Tester
Zor was here
44 and S8
BBG Nickname
BBO Nickname
  • Re: What should we NOT include in the BBG Revamp?

    since BBG born,i've wished a gamemode where you can do Teamwork with other players,for example fighting a boss(only an example uh)just add a gamemode with more teamwork :smile:

    Adding more gamemodes will simply divert the playerbase into different modes, making it harder to find a game.

    We should only consider adding more modes when the playerbase becomes much larger.
  • Re: What should we NOT include in the BBG Revamp?

    One thing that I've always been against but haven't talked about much in BBG is actually loadouts, and the lack of loadouts is one of the things I prefer about BBU. I know this is probably an unpopular opinion but please hear me out on why I think this way.

    The reason I don't like loadouts is because they decrease variety of gameplay and the strategy behind specific characters/weapons. Now I know that most people would argue with me on this and say that loadouts increase variety of gameplay as people can change characters each time they die, and there is some truth to that. However, most people will not use every loadout every game and additionally most people will switch to characters based on the map they are in. Before loadouts, if you were playing Astoria on Huggable Factory, you were stuck playing Astoria. You couldn't switch to a class more suited to the map. As a result we actually saw a greater variety in chatacters, as each map tends to be more suited towards certain playstyles and some characters would not normally get chosen for those maps. Now that we have loadouts, how often do you see Astorias on Huggable Factory? Or Spaceship? Not very often. And it's because people can switch away from her after their first death. While loadouts do give players more options, certain options are superior situationally and people will tend to choose the best option given the circumstances, leaving the other options almost unused. This means that each map has a lower diversity of gameplay.

    Another benefit of not having loadouts is that it forces players to rethink how they are using a certain weapon. When a player does poorly with a particular character, it's easy for them to switch to another character instead. However if there are no loadouts, they must instead rethink their strategy with the set they are already using. This forces players to be more creative in their playstyles and work harder to mitigate their weaknesses.

    Sometimes people want their private matches to only have one character (sniper duals, or huggy matches). But this can often be ruined by loadout shenanigans. There should be an ability to disable loadouts for private matches.

    I feel that my opinion is likely unpopular in this instance, and admittedly loadouts are less relevant in private matches as people can see the map they will play on and will preemptively pick an ideal set. But I still don't like loadouts particularly for autoplay and I think we should at least have the ability to disable them for private matches.
  • Re: Why has SkyVu given up BBO???

    BBR always had a special charm to it. It wasn't even a particularly great game conceptually, it was good but it wasn't unique and it had a bit of an archaic feel to it acommpanied with poor balance. Many weapons were borderline unusable or inferior to others, and several weapons were broken throughout it's history as a game. Some classes were alltogether terrible for a while (huggable, demo). It wasn't a great game conceptually, but a good game with great details that made it great overall.

    The entire game had an overwhelming abundance of jokes and humor, which made even the boring parts of the game fun at times (the jokes at the waiting screen, ect.) Additionally, gameplay was great fun because of the uniqueness of most of the weapons, which made it easy to pick favorites. Characters had quotes that gave each of the characters notable personalities with very few actual details about them. Team speak also made the game very enjoyable (espeically back when it could be used more liberally). The games slow pace combined with it's humor gave it a huge niche compared to other games of its type, as a slow paced, quirky shooter that was generally relaxing and fun to play. BBR was never particularly innovative, unique, or incredible in its core gameplay. It's a game that excelled because of the details.

    This is the main reason why BB0 suffers in comparison. The games personality suffers from a lack of humor, and the characters personality is almost completely exclusive to short descriptions of them. Team speech, memorable quotes, and jokes are mostly absent from the game. Additionally, fun and unique weapons were instead replaced by more traditional weapons. The different weapons isn't actually an issue. A different style could and honestly should be used, but it needs to have more of a BBF or BB:-1 feel. Semi-serious weapons and gameplay, accompanied by characters with fleshed out personalities and jokes. BB:0 is missing the signiture Battle Bears charm and it suffers as a result.

    My personal belief is that Battle Bears succeeded because of it's personality and communication. The Battle Bears Charm was everywhere, the forums had weekly blogs which incorporated that same charm (thanks to Lt. Action), and Skyvu members were a very common sight on the forums and in the community. The result was a fun, warm, welcoming game and community.

    Going forward, BBG should seek a return to its former charm. New games should stick more to the older Battle Bears style imo, not in terms of gameplay but aesthetics. Darker, more serious artwork but keeping the classic Battle Bears humor (think BB:F and BB:-1 especially). I personally prefer the older artwork, but the personality should be present in every game.

    Another emphasis is quality. More time should be spent on fixing bugs and server issues. I know it can be very difficult, and on occasion they aren't an issue. But especially on release, their should not be bugs omnipresent throughout the game.

    And finally, communication is hugely important. Skyvu members should spend more time on the forums, we should get more frequent updates. Their is no excuse for Skyvu members to be gone for months, it does not take much effort to log on to the forums every now and then, read a couple things and maybe post a comment or two. I understand that time is an important resources to a company but a nightly visit to the forums can be over in less than ten minutes (five in the forums current state). The old weekly blogs were great and i think they are severely underrated looking back. They kept hype for new updates and games constant, while still being entertaining and fun to keep up with.

    TL:DR the three most important things Battle Bears lacks now that it had before are personality, consistent quality, and communication.

    Gameplay is important, but those three aspects of the games should not be ignored. Another thing is that BB:0 had some mechanics that were ultimately toxic to the games reputation and competitive setting and are nigh impossible to change moving forwards. If anyone wants to know what I am talking about I can elaborate in another post but this one is long enough as is.

    Also, a retro feel isn't necessarily a bad thing in a game, which I can also elaborate on later.

    I know this isn't the topic of the thread but people were talking about these sorts of things so I felt it appropriate to post this here. I am also going to summon @Skyvu_Ben. I know that you may not want to read this as it is long, but if you are interested in feedback I have this post here.

    I may continue in another post later.
  • Re: I'm leaving BBO

    If you came here for pity or sorrow you will be disappointed.
  • Re: SMG's, Wil-Unbalanced: Also Objective Gamemodes

    Alucard wrote: »
    @LiveFire @AbsoluteZero

    >When talking about a game automatically turns into some childish "prove your worth" exchange

    >Blame the Mail Man for defending himself personally when AZ has thrown an ad hominem to SM's SUBJECTIVE opinion that he felt absolutely insulted by (lol?)

    I don't really understand either of you most of the time.

    -Dead game

    -Poorly made


    -Broken mechanics

    -Some glitches

    -Pay to win



    This game takes no skill.

    This is so uninformed. The game isn't completely dead, it is definitely not pay to win (as the chest system all but guarantees you can't get what you want), you go on about how SM was subjective, and then counter with an even more subjective opinion such as the game mechanics are broken. You clearly have played this game far too little to understand pretty much anything about it.

    Your own ignorance blinds you Alucard. You know almost nothing about this game and yet you are willing to argue with me about it. What i did to SM was no different from you are doing to me Alucard, you want to defend your friends? So be it, for i am doing the same.

    I used to be great friends with the two of you. And i believe liveFire still is. Did you consider that maybe if we are willing to turn on our friends to prove a point, that it has gotten out of hand?

    You speak to me of being Arrogant and Vain. But i am willing to admit that i have these problems. I know they exist. But do you see what i am saying? Do you know what my points are? Or are you reading something different. What you say ignores any logic that i can possibly find.
    Alucard wrote: »
    @AbsoluteZero Let me also add in that the fact with how you acted before doesn't change a thing if it happened a "long time ago" as you purport. You've already made yourself a reputation and it's irresponsible for you to create an excuse. Why if that logic actually worked I would be an MVP RIGHT NOW with no one giving a crap about my old warning history

    Except you act like this Alucard.

    You are blinded by your own ignorance and temper. It pains me to speak this way to you two, for i generally do like ya'll. But you are acting like a child right now. You have barely played this game and you are willing to debate with me about it. You get all upset when i defend my friends, but its ok for you to do the same thing. Talk about double standards, seesh