Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Are LoTR and VG swapping?
rounner
Member UncommonPosts: 725
After the last LoTR patch, it is harder to level, and money is tighter than VG.
VG is going the other way with all of this double xp.
In six months will LoTR be hardcore while Vanguard is considered easy mode? 
Comments
Let's put it this way:
If a game is super fun, it does not matter much if the leveling is slow since players will keep forging ahead, and indeed it behooves the company to make it slow in order to maximize the amount of time a player plays the game before inevitably quitting.
If a game is dull, players are not so forgiving. They demand to see progress for their efforts.
I see this as Turbine striking a balance that maximizes the game in terms of subscription length. They probably feel they can squeeze more time out of each level than they currently are doing.
Sigil, on the other hand, well...who knows what the heck they are doing. Whatever it is, I would not follow it as the correct example.
P.S. I doubt any game will ever be dumb enough to try to be as hardcore as Vanguard claims to be, or at least claimed it was going to be.
They seem pretty lost to me. One of their devs is using forum feedback on Silky Venom to get some of their basic weapons graphics sorted out. Normally, listening to players would be a good thing, but this just shows how disorganized Sigil is right now. They're just throwing some stuff into patches with little or no testing and then relying on player feedback from paying subs to sort things out with the aid of mutliple hotfixes and corrections added to future patches. And because they don't have a centralized forum, devs who are relying on this feedback are having to check mutliple sites and are undoubtedly missing useful information.
What a mess.
http://www.silkyvenom.com/forums/showthread.php?t=14229
I miss DAoC
You have to take into consideration that it's also a beta.
Take the knowledge of a huge community at release coupled with the in-game resources they provide and you have yourself a game that is far easier than anything we are experiencing now.
I haven't seen the latest LOTRO patch, but I doubt money's tighter there. I can't believe how broke my Warrior in Vanguard is. Running around in equipment half my level, because repair costs are so out of whack, I can't afford anything decent. I'm ashamed to join groups, because of how gimped a tank is wearing beat-up old raggedy n00b armor, and then after an hour or two, it's down to 25% durability already, as if I weren't gimped enough already. And the nearest repair NPC is a half hour run away.
(edit)Oh yeah, plus they just nerfed my damage output AGAIN.
Is LOTRO kinda like that now?
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.
Let's put it this way:
If a game is super fun, it does not matter much if the leveling is slow since players will keep forging ahead, and indeed it behooves the company to make it slow in order to maximize the amount of time a player plays the game before inevitably quitting.
If a game is dull, players are not so forgiving. They demand to see progress for their efforts.
I see this as Turbine striking a balance that maximizes the game in terms of subscription length. They probably feel they can squeeze more time out of each level than they currently are doing.
Sigil, on the other hand, well...who knows what the heck they are doing. Whatever it is, I would not follow it as the correct example.
P.S. I doubt any game will ever be dumb enough to try to be as hardcore as Vanguard claims to be, or at least claimed it was going to be.
Hmmm I could be wrong but are you a LOTRO fan and VG hater?
"If a game is super fun" + "It does not matter if the leveling is slow" ( I'm guessing you enjoy LOTRO )
"If a game is dull" + "They demand to see progress for their efforts" ( I'm guessing you didn't/don't enjoy VG or are speculating )
The first two statements make sense.
The last two statements are both sweeping and completely wrong. If a game is dull people tend not to play it, why? Because they have choice. If they were handed a "dull game" and that was the only game they were allowed to play then your second statements wouldn't be so far off.
Surely this has to be the case? Don't miss understand me, YOU may well find game X dull and boring which is fine. That however does not mean others find it so, and so drawing the conclusion that people who play dull [in your opinion] games demand faster progression is wrong.
When I first started beta, you couldn't afford to repair, then they upped the money from quests, now they are lowering it.
They will get it adjusted before release.
You have to take into consideration that it's also a beta.
Take the knowledge of a huge community at release coupled with the in-game resources they provide and you have yourself a game that is far easier than anything we are experiencing now.
in all fairness yes the game did need some minor adjustments, key word was minor. They went overboard, way overboard, right now the fun factor went from a solid 10 down to a solid 3. If I want a grind, no progress and a character that plays like wimp there are other games to play. I went from fanboy to I won't play the game for free as it stands right now in one patch. Looking at the beta forums at least 85% of the testers agree with me. Seems as if most of the testrers over on the IGN LoTRO boards are also a bit upset.
I miss DAoC
Let's put it this way:
If a game is super fun, it does not matter much if the leveling is slow since players will keep forging ahead, and indeed it behooves the company to make it slow in order to maximize the amount of time a player plays the game before inevitably quitting.
If a game is dull, players are not so forgiving. They demand to see progress for their efforts.
I see this as Turbine striking a balance that maximizes the game in terms of subscription length. They probably feel they can squeeze more time out of each level than they currently are doing.
Sigil, on the other hand, well...who knows what the heck they are doing. Whatever it is, I would not follow it as the correct example.
P.S. I doubt any game will ever be dumb enough to try to be as hardcore as Vanguard claims to be, or at least claimed it was going to be.
Hmmm I could be wrong but are you a LOTRO fan and VG hater?
"If a game is super fun" + "It does not matter if the leveling is slow" ( I'm guessing you enjoy LOTRO )
"If a game is dull" + "They demand to see progress for their efforts" ( I'm guessing you didn't/don't enjoy VG or are speculating )
The first two statements make sense.
The last two statements are both sweeping and completely wrong. If a game is dull people tend not to play it, why? Because they have choice. If they were handed a "dull game" and that was the only game they were allowed to play then your second statements wouldn't be so far off.
Surely this has to be the case? Don't miss understand me, YOU may well find game X dull and boring which is fine. That however does not mean others find it so, and so drawing the conclusion that people who play dull [in your opinion] games demand faster progression is wrong.
Nope, I have never played LotRO and probably never will, because I think the game looks pretty dull, and reports have confirmed how generic it is - I am waiting on WAR, personally. I may try LotRO if a friend gets it, but right now am certainly not a fan, nor a hater. As for 'hating' Vanguard, I hate how people make it seem as though disliking a game is a crime.
If you are asking me if I think Vanguard is a poor example of a MMORPG, then my answer is yes. If you are asking if I have some unfounded hatred for it, then my answer is no. Then again, I do have the naughty human desire to see Brad's game fail simply because Brad hyped it to such an extreme level, but that only came after I was exposed to its horror.
As for dullness, you are not thinking in the relative terms in which that statement was intended to be interpreted. Grinds are called grinds for a reason - they are not a hell of a lot of fun. I played Vanguard and the grind was dull, but that does not mean the game is all bad. Perhaps the grind will be worth it? That is an example of where the dullness will not necessarily remove one from the game, as there may be incentive to get past it.
You are forgetting what some people turn MMORPGs into - fun is not the only motivation for playing. Do you think that freak Polkadots who got to level 50 by playing 16+ hours per day had fun the whole way through? I doubt he had any fun during the ascent. I am willing to bet the only fun he had came from being the first to hit 50.
So, no, I disagree that a dull game (or part of it being dull, as I should have said from the beginning) will make people put down a game and change. I also therefore reiterate that making the dullness...less dull...is a good and necessary step.
It might not actually be that the XP is in a reduced state right now - perhaps the XP before was inflated simply to allow people in beta and the stress test to level faster and give Turbine a greater-level-range player-base for their tweaking and bug fixing. Can't really iron out bugs for the lvl 50s if no-one reaches level 50.
Of course, if XP has been cut in half, that might become a bit tiresome! But if it has merely been reduced a little, then I am happy with that (based only on my stress test experience), as it will give me more time to enjoy the immersion I was feeling without feeling like I have been shuffled off to the next place prematurely.
I miss DAoC
CONTRIBUTE INTO THE GAMING INDUSTRY! STOP PAYING FOR BORING COPYCATS, UNFINISHED BUGFESTS AND CRANKY JUNKWARE. BE A RESPONSIBLE GAMER!
But I can still hazard a guess: if the game, in beta, was a bit too easy and needed tweaking, and now is at the stage where it is quite the opposite situation, then I hope that is only because, while testing, Turbine wanted to go from one extreme to the other. This way they will be able to hopefully find the proper medium. It is not at all unexpected that people playing beta will not have the best experience, so that by the time the game is released to all, problems like this have been smoothed out. Of course, I have no evidence to prove any of this. My logic could easily be at fault.
LOTRO was positioned as the most simple/accessible solo-ing/casual MMO produced recently. Quick levelling, simple gameplay, small world.
VanGuard was positioned as the most in depth/expansive MMO out of recent years. Longer levelling, complex gameplay variety, vast world.
I'm rather of the opinion they should try and appeal to their relevant demographics, rather than water themselves down.