PC Gaming News
Page 18 of 30 FirstFirst ... 814151617181920212228 ... LastLast
Results 171 to 180 of 299
  1. #171
    GWOnline Content Team
    GWOnline Site Pal
    Achievements:
    Social10 PostsVeteranCreated Blog entry10K Posts
    Alaris's Avatar
    Server

    Kaineng
    Guild

    The Order of Dii [Dii]
    Posts

    22,615
    A few random comments:

    I like the rez system as is.

    The death penalty (armor damage) is a step up from most MMOs where armor gets damaged per hit.

    The death penalty is also a step up from most MMOs that debuff you for a duration.

    I admit that there is room for improvement regarding the death penalty. It's not perfect.

    I'd prefer a system that makes it harder to progress. Getting stuck is not fun, but learning to play to get unstuck is what makes games the most fun.
    == Alaris & clone ==
    Proud Officer of The Order Of Dii [Dii] - join us
    You can tell the quality of life of people by what they complain about

  2. #172
    Quote Originally Posted by Alaris View Post
    A few random comments:

    I like the rez system as is.

    The death penalty (armor damage) is a step up from most MMOs where armor gets damaged per hit.

    The death penalty is also a step up from most MMOs that debuff you for a duration.

    I admit that there is room for improvement regarding the death penalty. It's not perfect.

    I'd prefer a system that makes it harder to progress. Getting stuck is not fun, but learning to play to get unstuck is what makes games the most fun.
    So what you really mean is that you like the rez system as-is without any reason for it, nor any reason for why the obviously superior system would not be an improvement?

    And that it's ok that people are allowed to just pay their way past obstacles instead of being forced to play better? (even though you admit that you'd like it the other way around?)

    I mean do you have any reason except pure hypocrisy?

  3. #173
    GWOnline Content Team
    GWOnline Site Pal
    Achievements:
    Social10 PostsVeteranCreated Blog entry10K Posts
    Alaris's Avatar
    Server

    Kaineng
    Guild

    The Order of Dii [Dii]
    Posts

    22,615
    Quote Originally Posted by raspberry jam View Post
    I mean do you have any reason except pure hypocrisy?
    Get off your high horse, and realize that difficulty and gameplay are different things. Let me give you an example:

    We're comparing being able to rez without interruption, vs being able to rez but getting interrupted. In both cases, damage is applied if you get hit, the only difference is that the former can get the rez even under pressure.

    Your flawed conclusion that the former is easier rests on the false assumption that the devs would not increase the difficulty accordingly. But let's say they do... and I think it's a fair assumption. They make death less punishing each time it happens, but make death more likely to happen in the first place. They tweak the numbers so that likelihood of failure is equal in both cases.

    The former is a more gradual failure, the latter is a more all-or-nothing event. The former gives you more place to realize you're doing things wrong, and more chance to turn around and fix it. If you do, you might succeed. Also, it allows devs to put you at a higher risk knowing you have more chances of climbing your way out. The latter is more unforgiving, and so they need to dumb down the game in order for people to be able to succeed.

    Also, you learn more if you are closer to the fail/succeed line. In GW1, you'd go around plowing through enemies, then sometimes failed unexpectedly without being given a good look at what was killing you. If the failure is more gradual you have better chances to learn from it.

    tl;dr: I think the current system gives more place for learning, for balancing at a more challenging level without becoming overwhelming, and provides for more epic turning-the-tides moment.

    And don't you dare say that I don't give well thought-out reasons without first addressing those properly, you hypocrit.
    == Alaris & clone ==
    Proud Officer of The Order Of Dii [Dii] - join us
    You can tell the quality of life of people by what they complain about

  4. #174
    Quote Originally Posted by Alaris View Post
    ... they need to dumb down the game in order for people to be able to succeed.
    Explain why this would be necessary, and we're talking.

    What you say about learning more if you are closer to the fail/succeed line is true, but where you go from that is wrong. In GW1, you were basically always deep in success territory and then suddenly you dropped out, that is why you didn't have time to see what hit you (if you're slow-witted). You were not kept on your toes, thus you were often in lazy clicking mode instead of in learning mode, unless you kept yourself up, which most players won't bother with.

    It's a game designer's job to help their players out. Provide the right amount of challenge. When that challenge looks impossible at first sight but actually is possible to beat with good play, the resulting feeling instilled in the players is one of amazement, the thrill of victory.
    Last edited by raspberry jam; 22-02-2012 at 17:06.

  5. #175
    When a player is defeated, and not just downed, a random piece of their armor will be damaged. When a piece of armor is damaged, it imparts no penalty but serves as a warning. If a player is defeated while all of their armor is damaged, then a random piece of armor will break. When armor breaks, it ceases to provide any benefit to the player and must be repaired by visiting an armor-repair NPC in town. This NPC will charge a small sum of coins to repair any broken pieces of armor, and will repair any damaged armor as well. Having thus transferred the coin cost to the armor-repair NPC, we removed the multiplier on the cost of traveling to a waypoint when defeated.
    in that last sentence.....it means that when we're defeated wo don't rez at a waypoint? Where do we rez then??
    I don't think I go that exactly. Please explain someone.

  6. #176
    GWOnline Content Team
    GWOnline Site Pal
    Achievements:
    Social10 PostsVeteranCreated Blog entry10K Posts
    Alaris's Avatar
    Server

    Kaineng
    Guild

    The Order of Dii [Dii]
    Posts

    22,615
    Quote Originally Posted by raspberry jam View Post
    Explain why this would be necessary, and we're talking.
    You're asking why it's necessary for people to succeed?

    Sales.

    People don't like to fail, so they don't tend to buy games that makes them fail. People want to be challenged without failing. Or at least, they don't like hitting their head on a wall, or against a challenge that is unforgiving, and does not give them much hope that they will be able to solve it either.

    Now let's put the sarcasm aside, and ask ourselves... is it possible to make a game where people can learn to play and improve and yet not fail so bad that they get stuck and quit? This is what I think ANet is trying to do, by providing players more opportunities to recognize their mistakes and learn from them.
    == Alaris & clone ==
    Proud Officer of The Order Of Dii [Dii] - join us
    You can tell the quality of life of people by what they complain about

  7. #177
    Achievements:
    10 PostsVeteranBlogger1,000 Posts10000 Experience Points
    Lensor's Avatar
    Guild

    The Order Of Dii [Dii]
    Posts

    5,209
    Quote Originally Posted by D E A T H L I F E View Post
    in that last sentence.....it means that when we're defeated wo don't rez at a waypoint? Where do we rez then??
    I don't think I go that exactly. Please explain someone.
    They used to have it so that if ressing at waypoint after defeat, the normal travel cost would double. Now it is the same cost as normal travel. So to answer your question, yes we will still res at waypoint after defeat.
    IGN Bark N Mad. Officer in The Order of Dii [Dii]

  8. #178
    GWOnline Site Pal Achievements:
    10 PostsVeteranBlogger10000 Experience Points6 months registered
    sorudo's Avatar
    Server

    far shiverpeak
    Guild

    the legendary alterans
    Posts

    9,553
    so at the end of the day, we pay more with this system then the old one but the old one didn't have the added disadvantage.
    kinda contradicts the whole point of learning to play when you can't even afford better armor later on.
    it's alive but cannot be living, it's dead but lives a mortal life.

    sorudo.9054

  9. #179
    GWOnline Content Team
    GWOnline Site Pal
    Achievements:
    Social10 PostsVeteranCreated Blog entry10K Posts
    Alaris's Avatar
    Server

    Kaineng
    Guild

    The Order of Dii [Dii]
    Posts

    22,615
    sorudo... you got it all wrong

    Before you paid extra to waypoint nearby. Now you pay extra to get your armor fixed. The cost is probably similar on a per-death basis, except that before you could choose to waste time instead.

    Also, unless you are really terrible (even with vampire gaze, I doubt you'd be that terrible), I still wager that you can make a decent income. The point isn't to stop you from earning money, but rather to give you an incentive to learn to play. Even a 10% loss of money is a good incentive.
    == Alaris & clone ==
    Proud Officer of The Order Of Dii [Dii] - join us
    You can tell the quality of life of people by what they complain about

  10. #180
    GWOnline.Net Member Achievements:
    Social10 PostsVeteranBlogger6 months registered
    Simply Kedde's Avatar
    Posts

    5,558
    Quote Originally Posted by Alaris View Post
    You're asking why it's necessary for people to succeed?

    Sales.

    People don't like to fail, so they don't tend to buy games that makes them fail. People want to be challenged without failing. Or at least, they don't like hitting their head on a wall, or against a challenge that is unforgiving, and does not give them much hope that they will be able to solve it either.

    Now let's put the sarcasm aside, and ask ourselves... is it possible to make a game where people can learn to play and improve and yet not fail so bad that they get stuck and quit? This is what I think ANet is trying to do, by providing players more opportunities to recognize their mistakes and learn from them.
    As long as they can attract enough other players, those are the kind of players the rest of the playerbase realistically don't want to team up with to play with. Given AI is still restricted to challenge you through gimmicks, if you can't figure out how to beat a gimmick after a series of attempts, then why again are you playing?

    Success all the way through the game isn't supposed to be a given, not for everyone or it's way too easy. Like Aoi mentioned a properly challenging game is supposed to continously challenge every player to learn all the way throughout the game. Unless there's enough difficulty that the players who need to learn will actually be forced to adapt and learn, the system is flawed. You don't challenge yourself if you're not even slightly in danger of ever failing to achieve your goals, that by the definition of a challenge just isn't one.

    Is it possible to find an equilibrium? Probably not as with most idealized concepts. It then becomes a question of whether you try and build your game to cater to the people that often aren't very involved with the game regardless or whether you aim for making the better designed game that might win awards for innovation and will keep your more dedicated playerbase content.

Posting Permissions

Posting Permissions

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off