[BorisBlade]

This is why you focus on gameplay, then losing may not be as fun as winning but you can atleast have a good time playing anyway. Putting in elements that are "fun" while not looking at it from a gameplay perspective is what makes losing suck to the point of quitting. For example, giving someone a gun that shoots OS'es is "fun" for that person, but those on the other side just get pissed off cause its complete bs. There should be solid gameplay on both sides from any weapon.

Take AV in ps1 for example, strikers and lancers provide good gameplay, with both sides of the AV/armor battle able to attack each other, the target can try to get cover or evade fire with evasive maneuvering and the shooter can use his own tactics as well. Lots of fun back and forth. Compare that to a phoenix which is totally one sided. Great as the shooter but as the target, you cant get cover, you cant maneuver away, you can rarely even attack back because the guy is often firing from inside the base walls or even from in the building itself and firing out the doors, or in an area you cant get too etc. Its pure frustration as the target because you cant do anything about it, bad gameplay.

The idea is simple and should be applied to every aspect of the game. Is it good for both sides gameplay wise, not just is it good for the guy doing the shooting. Honestly this is the biggest flaw by far i see in teh devs atm, they apply the "fun" aspect like most boring shooters do rather than teh far superior gameplay test to their choices.

In the end, gameplay means fun for everyone and for the longer term while "fun" is just for the shooter, while the target gets pissed off, and these positive moments for the shooter wear thin and only last short term. This means less time wanting to play for everyone. Long term positive gameplay oriented decisions are key to making a great game.