"Game developers and designers understand game balance better than you do."
If this were true, then game developers would never use player feedback to tune their game. But they do. Often.
What do you think beta testing is for (or should be for, barring those who use it as a free trial)? Why do they read forums?
Anyway, you may hold developers up on a pedestal, but they can be just as shortsighted as players can. Both can suffer from bias, albeit in different ways. In the end, though, the developers need to satisfy the players. This does not mean that they should always listen to every player, as that would just cause chaos, but there is usually someone with something worthwhile to listen to that would enhance the game.
The statement is true. Of course the game system and dynamics won't be be perfect out of the gate and will need to be refined. But player feedback really holds very little weight when it comes to game balance. Beta testing is for discovering and fixing bugs.Please give a precised definition of "game balance" in measurable and concrete terms.
Game balance, to me, is insuring that all play methods are equally fun and rewarding for the player. Unfortunately, most people improperly extend this to mean that all players must have equal abilities.
It's not a bad thing to listen to your playerbase, as they are in some ways more in touch with the way the game plays than any dev can really be.
It is, however, a bad idea to put too much stock in what the howling masses on your forums are screaming about. Even once you get past the histrionics, every single person posting has an agenda. Take Warlocks in WoW. Thread, after thread, after thread, calling for nerfs to everything they have. Some of the most idiotic overexaggeration, and just flat out stupidity I've read in a while. And it all boiled down to: "I can't one shot Warlocks for free HK's anymore. That's not fair!".
While it is true that players rarely, if ever consider the big picture, I often think the developers get too wrapped up in the big picture, and lose sight of what is fun about the game. If they even have any idea what it is that the players find fun to begin with. Case in point, SWG. The perfect example of a group of developers, team leads, and management that had absolutely no idea why the players found any given thing fun.
There needs to be a balance, between whats fun, and what's for the good of the game. That balance is razor thin, and really damn hard to walk correctly. Very few, if any, MMOs get it right out of the gate, or 1, 2, or even 3+ years down the road.
You could also cite SWG as an example of the devs giving in to the "howling masses". Everybody wanted to be a Jedi and voila, a galaxy full of Jedis.
Some of it was capitulating to the yahoos that just wanted to be Jedi without putting forth any effort, or those complaining, and rightfully so, that the holocron crap was total stupidity, and certainly not the 'organic' method of attaining Jedihood that was promised us.
Some of it was just the devs throwing up their collective hands, and giving up.
The majority, I think, was management seeing the flagging sub numbers, and telling the devs to just open up jedi to anyone in an attempt to bring back vets that had given up, or burnt out on the holocube grind before finishing. Or to attract SW fans that might have played, but didn't because there were no jedi. As someone who burnt out doing the hologrind, when I heard they were just opening up jedi to any tom, dick, and mary, I thought it was a bit of a slap in the face. After requiring so much effort from those that wanted to be something supposedly unique, to just give it away to everyone shows a real lack of respect for their players on the part of management. It also shows just how clueless anyone was on how to deal with the game or it's fans. Something further proven by the CU, and NWG.
I didn't play SWG because you couldn't start as a Jedi. Very simple.
To me, it would be like purchasing an Formula Racing MMO and not being able to be a race car driver. Sure you could work in the pits or be the guy who waves the flag or perhaps the girl who is on the stand when the trophy is awarded. But then you have to work your way through all the jobs to become a race car driver. I was interested in racing cars not changing tires....
A better analogy would be passing on a Formula 1 racing game because you couldn't start as Mario Andretti. "I want to start with 4 championship trophies and the best available car."
Not going to flame you, no need as you pretty much burned yourself to cinders with your initial statement. I do have something for you to consider. I have on many many occasions seen nerf that were later "un-nerfed" with an added statement of "well we migth have taken it to far". Many many times nerfs are unintentional, as recent nerfs with damage in VG, they did indeed rectify this, these are changed or fixed, they are rarely if ever left in. But by your reasoning developers can do no wrong? Yet they do it often, both intentionally and un-intentionally. We should just take all changes lying down, never speak up? Even though years of experience shows us that yes, developers do indeed mess up on occasion? And that my friend, is why you are an idiot.
Since you seem to have taken personal offense to my statement, I'll assume you're one of those people who likes to whine about nerfing. Let me explain it for you.
The core mechanics of a game are hashed out for months before a proposal is even submitted to prospective funders. Usually the mechanics don't stray far from an existing proven formula. Once it it is approved, the programming begins and small refinements are made over the course of YEARS. It's still not perfect. But the snotty nosed kid from beta who whines in the forums usually doesn't know $hi*.
Think of game balance as an audio equalizer with 1000 switches. The devs are trying to find the perfect sound by periodically making minor adjustments to the switches, then listening some more. Then you have a set of people who have never even seen the equalizer. They've only listened to the music... in fact, they haven't even heard all the tracks. But they think they know better than the developers.
OP, you don't understand much about the MOTIVATION of players choosing a mmo-RPG over a FPS.
It is...the PROGRESSION. Any change that makes a player regresses is directly hurting that player motivation, the very reason he picks a mmo-RPG. Players don't want to regress, they want to progress. If a player kills X, he wants to kill X+1 next time, not X-2.
Game balancing is irrelevant if the progression is hurted. Just like socialisation is irrelevant to peoples who are starving/doesn't have a roof. The progression is the basic, the very foundation of the player motivation...harming the progression is very ill thinked.
Challenges and game balancing are...side orders. Not the main course. The main course, it is the progression. Thereby, any nerf is nearly always a mistake.
I agree with your post and understand it quite well. I'm in the very small minority, in that I don't play mmorpgs strictly for progression. I enjoy the immersion, the environments, rp'ing, the story (gasp!). If my attributes needed to be adjusted for the greater good of the game, no problem. I guess I'm just old.
Over and over on the forums I see people complaining about adjustments to character attributes, or so-called "nerfing". If you're one of those guys, here's why you're an idiot.
Game developers and designers understand game balance better than you do. It doesn't matter if you've played every race and class combination. These guys have been writing game code for years. If you perceive some sort of imbalance, it's probably because you're biased, or you just don't see the big picture. After all, nobody EVER says, "my class is too strong". You are not really a 12th level Paladin. If your feelings are hurt when your "Power Attack X" is reduced by X damage per second, some introspection is in order. Balancing the game is not a personal attack aimed at you. If you feel slighted because your on-screen persona was "nerfed" for the sake of game balance, it's time to grow up. Game balance does NOT mean that all players should be equally good at all things. To this end, developers go too far already to accommodate the mindless majority. "But my 10th level candle maker doesn't do as much damage as his 10th level barbarian! It's not fair!" Different classes have different strengths! The developers' only goal when searching for game balance should be to make all classes equally fun and rewarding to play! Imagine the character diversity we might unlock if we dispelled this moronic notion that all characters must be equal. Perhaps a Sage with little combat ability, but whose knowledge and information makes him invaluable. Or a Master Mechanic who helps smugglers evade the imperial star fleet (swg). No, instead we're reduced to 10 stereotypical look-a-likes who can all kill X of Y in Z seconds.
flame away.
Point 1 and 3 conflict. 1. If you think your character should be more powerful but game designers "just don't understand", you're probably an idiot.
3. If you think that all characters should be equally powerful, you're an idiot.
Does that clear it up for you? 1. This insinuates developers always know best, they see the 'big picture' and players are biased.
3. You give an opinion, which must be biased. You also say we're reduced to 10 stereotypical look -a-likes, which means you're dissatisfied with with usual developer design decisions that are contrary to your piece-of-a-picture opinion. 1. Yep, that's pretty much what I'm saying. Remember this post is targeted at those whiny kids who complain about nerfing.
3. Developers implement the feature set that is handed down to them. Designers try to be inventive, but generally are restricted to using a proven formula. It's not the developers fault if the core game mechanics suck. It's the developers fault if the game is buggy. You're straying off base from my original point. You basically accused everyone of being idiots asides from developers and having no idea of how to balance a game, yet went on to give your own assessment of what game balance is. You even went on to make comments such as the 'mindless majority' being listened to which implies there's some minority sect I assume you belong to that the designers SHOULD listen to.
Which is it? Are we all idiots and only the developers know best? Or could it be you yourself aren't above believing your own opinions are best just like every other subscriber to any game?
No need to be a hypocrite about it, just be fair. If you have an opinion of how things should be, other people will too.
P.S. There's been plenty of times when I've KNOWN my character class was too strong in games, and I participated in feedback to suggest ways of 'fixing' the class. If you ask me, acknowledging imbalances and working with developers if they so grace you with the ability to is a lot better than pretending your class isn't overpowered and then a nerf comes along you complain about having no say-so in.
You never heard anyone says that their class is too strong ? Have you never played a rogue in WOW ? Or a Shadow Priest ?
No, actually I haven't, but I presume it wasn't the rogues and shadow priests who started the uproar. 95% of nerf related complaints are "I want to be stronger" or "somebody else is too strong".
Over and over on the forums I see people complaining about adjustments to character attributes, or so-called "nerfing". If you're one of those guys, here's why you're an idiot.
Game developers and designers understand game balance better than you do. It doesn't matter if you've played every race and class combination. These guys have been writing game code for years. If you perceive some sort of imbalance, it's probably because you're biased, or you just don't see the big picture. After all, nobody EVER says, "my class is too strong". You are not really a 12th level Paladin. If your feelings are hurt when your "Power Attack X" is reduced by X damage per second, some introspection is in order. Balancing the game is not a personal attack aimed at you. If you feel slighted because your on-screen persona was "nerfed" for the sake of game balance, it's time to grow up. Game balance does NOT mean that all players should be equally good at all things. To this end, developers go too far already to accommodate the mindless majority. "But my 10th level candle maker doesn't do as much damage as his 10th level barbarian! It's not fair!" Different classes have different strengths! The developers' only goal when searching for game balance should be to make all classes equally fun and rewarding to play! Imagine the character diversity we might unlock if we dispelled this moronic notion that all characters must be equal. Perhaps a Sage with little combat ability, but whose knowledge and information makes him invaluable. Or a Master Mechanic who helps smugglers evade the imperial star fleet (swg). No, instead we're reduced to 10 stereotypical look-a-likes who can all kill X of Y in Z seconds.
flame away.
Point 1 and 3 conflict. 1. If you think your character should be more powerful but game designers "just don't understand", you're probably an idiot.
3. If you think that all characters should be equally powerful, you're an idiot.
Does that clear it up for you? 1. This insinuates developers always know best, they see the 'big picture' and players are biased.
3. You give an opinion, which must be biased. You also say we're reduced to 10 stereotypical look -a-likes, which means you're dissatisfied with with usual developer design decisions that are contrary to your piece-of-a-picture opinion. 1. Yep, that's pretty much what I'm saying. Remember this post is targeted at those whiny kids who complain about nerfing.
3. Developers implement the feature set that is handed down to them. Designers try to be inventive, but generally are restricted to using a proven formula. It's not the developers fault if the core game mechanics suck. It's the developers fault if the game is buggy. You're straying off base from my original point. You basically accused everyone of being idiots asides from developers and having no idea of how to balance a game, yet went on to give your own assessment of what game balance is. You even went on to make comments such as the 'mindless majority' being listened to which implies there's some minority sect I assume you belong to that the designers SHOULD listen to.
Which is it? Are we all idiots and only the developers know best? Or could it be you yourself aren't above believing your own opinions are best just like every other subscriber to any game?
No need to be a hypocrite about it, just be fair. If you have an opinion of how things should be, other people will too.
P.S. There's been plenty of times when I've KNOWN my character class was too strong in games, and I participated in feedback to suggest ways of 'fixing' the class. If you ask me, acknowledging imbalances and working with developers if they so grace you with the ability to is a lot better than pretending your class isn't overpowered and then a nerf comes along you complain about having no say-so in. Let's not generalize. I'm not accusing "everyone of being idiots". I said there is a sect of mmorpg'ers who complain about nerfing. They constitute a portion of the communitiy. For the most part, they're idiots. Conservatively, let's say 95% of them.
Since I am a developer, there's really no hypocrisy here. I honestly believe that I understand balance better than most of these posters.
Over and over on the forums I see people complaining about adjustments to character attributes, or so-called "nerfing". If you're one of those guys, here's why you're an idiot.
Game developers and designers understand game balance better than you do. It doesn't matter if you've played every race and class combination. These guys have been writing game code for years. If you perceive some sort of imbalance, it's probably because you're biased, or you just don't see the big picture. After all, nobody EVER says, "my class is too strong". You are not really a 12th level Paladin. If your feelings are hurt when your "Power Attack X" is reduced by X damage per second, some introspection is in order. Balancing the game is not a personal attack aimed at you. If you feel slighted because your on-screen persona was "nerfed" for the sake of game balance, it's time to grow up. Game balance does NOT mean that all players should be equally good at all things. To this end, developers go too far already to accommodate the mindless majority. "But my 10th level candle maker doesn't do as much damage as his 10th level barbarian! It's not fair!" Different classes have different strengths! The developers' only goal when searching for game balance should be to make all classes equally fun and rewarding to play! Imagine the character diversity we might unlock if we dispelled this moronic notion that all characters must be equal. Perhaps a Sage with little combat ability, but whose knowledge and information makes him invaluable. Or a Master Mechanic who helps smugglers evade the imperial star fleet (swg). No, instead we're reduced to 10 stereotypical look-a-likes who can all kill X of Y in Z seconds.
flame away.
Point 1 and 3 conflict. 1. If you think your character should be more powerful but game designers "just don't understand", you're probably an idiot.
3. If you think that all characters should be equally powerful, you're an idiot.
Does that clear it up for you? 1. This insinuates developers always know best, they see the 'big picture' and players are biased.
3. You give an opinion, which must be biased. You also say we're reduced to 10 stereotypical look -a-likes, which means you're dissatisfied with with usual developer design decisions that are contrary to your piece-of-a-picture opinion. 1. Yep, that's pretty much what I'm saying. Remember this post is targeted at those whiny kids who complain about nerfing.
3. Developers implement the feature set that is handed down to them. Designers try to be inventive, but generally are restricted to using a proven formula. It's not the developers fault if the core game mechanics suck. It's the developers fault if the game is buggy. You're straying off base from my original point. You basically accused everyone of being idiots asides from developers and having no idea of how to balance a game, yet went on to give your own assessment of what game balance is. You even went on to make comments such as the 'mindless majority' being listened to which implies there's some minority sect I assume you belong to that the designers SHOULD listen to.
Which is it? Are we all idiots and only the developers know best? Or could it be you yourself aren't above believing your own opinions are best just like every other subscriber to any game?
No need to be a hypocrite about it, just be fair. If you have an opinion of how things should be, other people will too.
P.S. There's been plenty of times when I've KNOWN my character class was too strong in games, and I participated in feedback to suggest ways of 'fixing' the class. If you ask me, acknowledging imbalances and working with developers if they so grace you with the ability to is a lot better than pretending your class isn't overpowered and then a nerf comes along you complain about having no say-so in. Let's not generalize. I'm not accusing "everyone of being idiots". I said there is a sect of mmorpg'ers who complain about nerfing. They constitute a portion of the communitiy. For the most part, they're idiots. Conservatively, let's say 95% of them.
Since I am a developer, there's really no hypocrisy here. I honestly believe that I understand balance better than most of these posters. What MMOs have you developed, or otherwise games where you've had to balance classes for tens of thousands of players? If none, then you are no more qualified than anyone else.
Not to trivialize your career choice, but you'd agree that there's a difference between creating your own prestige classes for your D&D tabletop group and designing for an MMO. You might fall somewhere within the huge span between those two rungs; but you aren't up there.
How do you figure you understand game balance more than 95% of everyone else here? Convince me.
Over and over on the forums I see people complaining about adjustments to character attributes, or so-called "nerfing". If you're one of those guys, here's why you're an idiot.
Game developers and designers understand game balance better than you do. It doesn't matter if you've played every race and class combination. These guys have been writing game code for years. If you perceive some sort of imbalance, it's probably because you're biased, or you just don't see the big picture. After all, nobody EVER says, "my class is too strong". You are not really a 12th level Paladin. If your feelings are hurt when your "Power Attack X" is reduced by X damage per second, some introspection is in order. Balancing the game is not a personal attack aimed at you. If you feel slighted because your on-screen persona was "nerfed" for the sake of game balance, it's time to grow up. Game balance does NOT mean that all players should be equally good at all things. To this end, developers go too far already to accommodate the mindless majority. "But my 10th level candle maker doesn't do as much damage as his 10th level barbarian! It's not fair!" Different classes have different strengths! The developers' only goal when searching for game balance should be to make all classes equally fun and rewarding to play! Imagine the character diversity we might unlock if we dispelled this moronic notion that all characters must be equal. Perhaps a Sage with little combat ability, but whose knowledge and information makes him invaluable. Or a Master Mechanic who helps smugglers evade the imperial star fleet (swg). No, instead we're reduced to 10 stereotypical look-a-likes who can all kill X of Y in Z seconds.
flame away.
Point 1 and 3 conflict. 1. If you think your character should be more powerful but game designers "just don't understand", you're probably an idiot.
3. If you think that all characters should be equally powerful, you're an idiot.
Does that clear it up for you? 1. This insinuates developers always know best, they see the 'big picture' and players are biased.
3. You give an opinion, which must be biased. You also say we're reduced to 10 stereotypical look -a-likes, which means you're dissatisfied with with usual developer design decisions that are contrary to your piece-of-a-picture opinion. 1. Yep, that's pretty much what I'm saying. Remember this post is targeted at those whiny kids who complain about nerfing.
3. Developers implement the feature set that is handed down to them. Designers try to be inventive, but generally are restricted to using a proven formula. It's not the developers fault if the core game mechanics suck. It's the developers fault if the game is buggy. You're straying off base from my original point. You basically accused everyone of being idiots asides from developers and having no idea of how to balance a game, yet went on to give your own assessment of what game balance is. You even went on to make comments such as the 'mindless majority' being listened to which implies there's some minority sect I assume you belong to that the designers SHOULD listen to.
Which is it? Are we all idiots and only the developers know best? Or could it be you yourself aren't above believing your own opinions are best just like every other subscriber to any game?
No need to be a hypocrite about it, just be fair. If you have an opinion of how things should be, other people will too.
P.S. There's been plenty of times when I've KNOWN my character class was too strong in games, and I participated in feedback to suggest ways of 'fixing' the class. If you ask me, acknowledging imbalances and working with developers if they so grace you with the ability to is a lot better than pretending your class isn't overpowered and then a nerf comes along you complain about having no say-so in. Let's not generalize. I'm not accusing "everyone of being idiots". I said there is a sect of mmorpg'ers who complain about nerfing. They constitute a portion of the communitiy. For the most part, they're idiots. Conservatively, let's say 95% of them.
Since I am a developer, there's really no hypocrisy here. I honestly believe that I understand balance better than most of these posters. What MMOs have you developed, or otherwise games where you've had to balance classes for tens of thousands of players? If none, then you are no more qualified than anyone else.
Not to trivialize your career choice, but you'd agree that there's a difference between creating your own prestige classes for your D&D tabletop group and designing for an MMO. You might fall somewhere within the huge span between those two rungs; but you aren't up there.
How do you figure you understand game balance more than 95% of everyone else here? Convince me. Perhaps I should draw you a venn diagram? Let's say 5% of the community here whines about nerfing. 95% of them are idiots. I claim to understand game balance better than MOST of these people. What portion of the entire community am I claiming to be more knowledgeable than? Hint: it's not 95%.
As a software developer, CS major, math minor, lifetime gamer, who's had an active interest in game design for the better part of 15 years, do you really think it's that big of a stretch?
Over and over on the forums I see people complaining about adjustments to character attributes, or so-called "nerfing". If you're one of those guys, here's why you're an idiot.
Game developers and designers understand game balance better than you do. It doesn't matter if you've played every race and class combination. These guys have been writing game code for years. If you perceive some sort of imbalance, it's probably because you're biased, or you just don't see the big picture. After all, nobody EVER says, "my class is too strong". You are not really a 12th level Paladin. If your feelings are hurt when your "Power Attack X" is reduced by X damage per second, some introspection is in order. Balancing the game is not a personal attack aimed at you. If you feel slighted because your on-screen persona was "nerfed" for the sake of game balance, it's time to grow up. Game balance does NOT mean that all players should be equally good at all things. To this end, developers go too far already to accommodate the mindless majority. "But my 10th level candle maker doesn't do as much damage as his 10th level barbarian! It's not fair!" Different classes have different strengths! The developers' only goal when searching for game balance should be to make all classes equally fun and rewarding to play! Imagine the character diversity we might unlock if we dispelled this moronic notion that all characters must be equal. Perhaps a Sage with little combat ability, but whose knowledge and information makes him invaluable. Or a Master Mechanic who helps smugglers evade the imperial star fleet (swg). No, instead we're reduced to 10 stereotypical look-a-likes who can all kill X of Y in Z seconds.
flame away.
Point 1 and 3 conflict. 1. If you think your character should be more powerful but game designers "just don't understand", you're probably an idiot.
3. If you think that all characters should be equally powerful, you're an idiot.
Does that clear it up for you? 1. This insinuates developers always know best, they see the 'big picture' and players are biased.
3. You give an opinion, which must be biased. You also say we're reduced to 10 stereotypical look -a-likes, which means you're dissatisfied with with usual developer design decisions that are contrary to your piece-of-a-picture opinion. 1. Yep, that's pretty much what I'm saying. Remember this post is targeted at those whiny kids who complain about nerfing.
3. Developers implement the feature set that is handed down to them. Designers try to be inventive, but generally are restricted to using a proven formula. It's not the developers fault if the core game mechanics suck. It's the developers fault if the game is buggy. You're straying off base from my original point. You basically accused everyone of being idiots asides from developers and having no idea of how to balance a game, yet went on to give your own assessment of what game balance is. You even went on to make comments such as the 'mindless majority' being listened to which implies there's some minority sect I assume you belong to that the designers SHOULD listen to.
Which is it? Are we all idiots and only the developers know best? Or could it be you yourself aren't above believing your own opinions are best just like every other subscriber to any game?
No need to be a hypocrite about it, just be fair. If you have an opinion of how things should be, other people will too.
P.S. There's been plenty of times when I've KNOWN my character class was too strong in games, and I participated in feedback to suggest ways of 'fixing' the class. If you ask me, acknowledging imbalances and working with developers if they so grace you with the ability to is a lot better than pretending your class isn't overpowered and then a nerf comes along you complain about having no say-so in. Let's not generalize. I'm not accusing "everyone of being idiots". I said there is a sect of mmorpg'ers who complain about nerfing. They constitute a portion of the communitiy. For the most part, they're idiots. Conservatively, let's say 95% of them.
Since I am a developer, there's really no hypocrisy here. I honestly believe that I understand balance better than most of these posters. What MMOs have you developed, or otherwise games where you've had to balance classes for tens of thousands of players? If none, then you are no more qualified than anyone else.
Not to trivialize your career choice, but you'd agree that there's a difference between creating your own prestige classes for your D&D tabletop group and designing for an MMO. You might fall somewhere within the huge span between those two rungs; but you aren't up there.
How do you figure you understand game balance more than 95% of everyone else here? Convince me. Perhaps I should draw you a venn diagram? Let's say 5% of the community here whines about nerfing. 95% of them are idiots. I claim to understand game balance better than MOST of these people. What portion of the entire community am I claiming to be more knowledgeable than? Hint: it's not 95%.
As a software developer, CS major, math minor, lifetime gamer, who's had an active interest in game design for the better part of 15 years, do you really think it's that big of a stretch?
Sure do.
You've said nothing to differentiate yourself from anything other than what's typical. You're a customer, a fan, a MMO subscriber. What makes you qualified to know more about balancing MMOs again?
It's easy to be a customer and a fan, but what have you produced that can validate your claim? If nothing; hint: You're probably just exhibiting anti-social behavior in believing your peers are idiots, rather than this post being some enlightening divine intervention in the industry you intended it to be.
Perhaps I should draw you a venn diagram? Let's say 5% of the community here whines about nerfing. 95% of them are idiots. I claim to understand game balance better than MOST of these people. What portion of the entire community am I claiming to be more knowledgeable than? Hint: it's not 95%.
As a software developer, CS major, math minor, lifetime gamer, who's had an active interest in game design for the better part of 15 years, do you really think it's that big of a stretch?
Then you would appreciate that even the most uneducated of people can tell when they aren't having fun. They can tell when they are killing things way too easily (which is not fun), or that their class feels like a totally dependent leper. Sure people don't control the game balance, the developers do, but don't expect them to just shut up and fund it if they are not having fun. Feedback is important.
You never heard anyone says that their class is too strong ? Have you never played a rogue in WOW ? Or a Shadow Priest ?
Why are rogues and shadowpriests 'overpowered'? i think to differ. Yes shadowpriests (shadow spec) WERE 'overpowered' they got NERFED because mages/warlocks were afraid shadowpriests would take their places in raids, though i can't see how that would ever happen. Nowadays shadowpriests suck balls holy/disc or disc/holy is the way to go. About rogues i have no clue since i never played 1.
And yes i do think game devs do 'listen' what their playerbase has to say, small example is how 'tigole/furor' took down a server because a paladin 'outtanked' their warriors, also the recent WoW nerfs are a sign there's some info about why/how on wowwiki or something with the whole story about their 'abuse'.
Game developers and designers understand game balance better than you do. It doesn't matter if you've played every race and class combination. These guys have been writing game code for years. If you perceive some sort of imbalance, it's probably because you're biased, or you just don't see the big picture. After all, nobody EVER says, "my class is too strong".
I'm sorry but this just is not true. In another game, City of Heroes, the lead designers (both Statesman, the original lead, and now Positron, the current lead) have time and again exhibited a complete and total lack of understanding of their own game design. Also, being able to balance the numbers on a spreadsheet does NOT automatically translate into turning the game into something players as a whole find fun to play. The evidence of this again from COH comes from how many massive changes were made, for example, to Controllers, who when the game launched had, for "balance" reasons, very good mob control and almost no way at all to do damage. Today, they can do lots of damage (almost as much as the damage-dealing classes under certain circumstances, particularly when soloing). This flies in the face of what these "learned designers" thought was "balanced" for well over a year, but it changed the Controllers in a way that made them more fun for players to play.
I didn't really follow Vanguard through beta so I am not going to speak about it but you are making generalizations about "all game designers" that simply are not true. Statesman himself, in many of his comments publicly, has shown a very distinct LACK of understanding about how to design a solid roleplaying game, and I am quite certain that someone who really knows something worth a damn, like E. Gary Gygax, would laugh at some of the things COH has done.
The reality is that in the old days, your statement may have been true, but today it isn't. In the old days designers came from a pen and paper game design background and understanding the fundamentals of RPGs was something true of many of them. But today they come from graphical design backgrounds and computer programming backgrounds and many of them have no idea how to balance a game.
And even if they did there is nothing to indicate that a balanced game is automatically "fun." After all there is no more balanced game in the world than Chess (the board game). There are computer chess games. How well do they sell compared to, oh, say, any other game on the market? And why? Because most people would agree that chess is balanced, but would not call it fun (and I say that as a former member of the Chess Team in high school who does enjoy chess... but I realize most other people in the world do not).
You are not really a 12th level Paladin. If your feelings are hurt when your "Power Attack X" is reduced by X damage per second, some introspection is in order. Balancing the game is not a personal attack aimed at you. If you feel slighted because your on-screen persona was "nerfed" for the sake of game balance, it's time to grow up.
You're right, people need to stop taking it personally.
However, and this is a big however, if changes they made to the game nerfed people's FUN, then regardless of any other consideration, that is paramount. Again, I say this as someone who actually doesn't have a huge problem with whatever nerfs were made. I had only been playing the game for a week and a half before this publish and did not have a real sense of my characters beyond the starting stages. Things do seem harder now with my level 14 paladin but I can't say how much of that is due to it getting harder int he teens, and how much to the so-called "nerfs." I wasn't really paying attention to the numbers before, and even if I were, I do not care. My personal fun has not been reduced. However, if someone's fun HAS been reduced, then it is perfectly reasonable for him (or her) to complain. You may not agree that he should've been able to own four 3-dots at once without breaking a sweat (and I would be on your side) but you can't dictate fun to other people. This is something, by the way, that game designers seem not to understand. If I say, "what you have turned the game into is no longer fun for me," there is no such thing as an argument against that. Either it's fun for me or it isn't... and if it is not, you can't argue me into thinking that it is.
Again, I say this as someone whose fun has NOT been altered one bit... but I know there are many who feel their fun HAS been reduced, and you saying "it's for balance" reasons does not change that fact, and never will. Again this is a fundamental concept that escapes most developers.
Game balance does NOT mean that all players should be equally good at all things. To this end, developers go too far already to accommodate the mindless majority. "But my 10th level candle maker doesn't do as much damage as his 10th level barbarian! It's not fair!" Different classes have different strengths! The developers' only goal when searching for game balance should be to make all classes equally fun and rewarding to play! Imagine the character diversity we might unlock if we dispelled this moronic notion that all characters must be equal.
With this I completely agree. Classes being "balanced" does not mean "identical." It's not at all clear to me what that has to do with the rest of your points though.
Over and over on the forums I see people complaining about adjustments to character attributes, or so-called "nerfing". If you're one of those guys, here's why you're an idiot.
Game developers and designers understand game balance better than you do. It doesn't matter if you've played every race and class combination. These guys have been writing game code for years. If you perceive some sort of imbalance, it's probably because you're biased, or you just don't see the big picture. After all, nobody EVER says, "my class is too strong". You are not really a 12th level Paladin. If your feelings are hurt when your "Power Attack X" is reduced by X damage per second, some introspection is in order. Balancing the game is not a personal attack aimed at you. If you feel slighted because your on-screen persona was "nerfed" for the sake of game balance, it's time to grow up. Game balance does NOT mean that all players should be equally good at all things. To this end, developers go too far already to accommodate the mindless majority. "But my 10th level candle maker doesn't do as much damage as his 10th level barbarian! It's not fair!" Different classes have different strengths! The developers' only goal when searching for game balance should be to make all classes equally fun and rewarding to play! Imagine the character diversity we might unlock if we dispelled this moronic notion that all characters must be equal. Perhaps a Sage with little combat ability, but whose knowledge and information makes him invaluable. Or a Master Mechanic who helps smugglers evade the imperial star fleet (swg). No, instead we're reduced to 10 stereotypical look-a-likes who can all kill X of Y in Z seconds.
flame away.
Point 1 and 3 conflict. 1. If you think your character should be more powerful but game designers "just don't understand", you're probably an idiot.
3. If you think that all characters should be equally powerful, you're an idiot.
Does that clear it up for you? 1. This insinuates developers always know best, they see the 'big picture' and players are biased.
3. You give an opinion, which must be biased. You also say we're reduced to 10 stereotypical look -a-likes, which means you're dissatisfied with with usual developer design decisions that are contrary to your piece-of-a-picture opinion. 1. Yep, that's pretty much what I'm saying. Remember this post is targeted at those whiny kids who complain about nerfing.
3. Developers implement the feature set that is handed down to them. Designers try to be inventive, but generally are restricted to using a proven formula. It's not the developers fault if the core game mechanics suck. It's the developers fault if the game is buggy. You're straying off base from my original point. You basically accused everyone of being idiots asides from developers and having no idea of how to balance a game, yet went on to give your own assessment of what game balance is. You even went on to make comments such as the 'mindless majority' being listened to which implies there's some minority sect I assume you belong to that the designers SHOULD listen to.
Which is it? Are we all idiots and only the developers know best? Or could it be you yourself aren't above believing your own opinions are best just like every other subscriber to any game?
No need to be a hypocrite about it, just be fair. If you have an opinion of how things should be, other people will too.
P.S. There's been plenty of times when I've KNOWN my character class was too strong in games, and I participated in feedback to suggest ways of 'fixing' the class. If you ask me, acknowledging imbalances and working with developers if they so grace you with the ability to is a lot better than pretending your class isn't overpowered and then a nerf comes along you complain about having no say-so in. Let's not generalize. I'm not accusing "everyone of being idiots". I said there is a sect of mmorpg'ers who complain about nerfing. They constitute a portion of the communitiy. For the most part, they're idiots. Conservatively, let's say 95% of them.
Since I am a developer, there's really no hypocrisy here. I honestly believe that I understand balance better than most of these posters. What MMOs have you developed, or otherwise games where you've had to balance classes for tens of thousands of players? If none, then you are no more qualified than anyone else.
Not to trivialize your career choice, but you'd agree that there's a difference between creating your own prestige classes for your D&D tabletop group and designing for an MMO. You might fall somewhere within the huge span between those two rungs; but you aren't up there.
How do you figure you understand game balance more than 95% of everyone else here? Convince me. Perhaps I should draw you a venn diagram? Let's say 5% of the community here whines about nerfing. 95% of them are idiots. I claim to understand game balance better than MOST of these people. What portion of the entire community am I claiming to be more knowledgeable than? Hint: it's not 95%.
As a software developer, CS major, math minor, lifetime gamer, who's had an active interest in game design for the better part of 15 years, do you really think it's that big of a stretch?
Sure do.
You've said nothing to differentiate yourself from anything other than what's typical. You're a customer, a fan, a MMO subscriber. What makes you qualified to know more about balancing MMOs again?
It's easy to be a customer and a fan, but what have you produced that can validate your claim? If nothing; hint: You're probably just exhibiting anti-social behavior in believing your peers are idiots, rather than this post being some enlightening divine intervention in the industry you intended it to be. I claim to be more knowledgable than 4% of the community and we still have some contrarian who wants to put me below the 4th percentile. Unbelievable.
"You're probably just exhibiting anti-social behavior in believing your peers are idiots, rather than this post being some enlightening divine intervention in the industry you intended it to be."
Discussing the topic on a message board is actually a very social activity. The people I'm addressing are not my peers. They are idiots. I posted this to discuss something that bothers me... not sure what you mean about divine intervention.
Let me give you just one of many examples of a game where the devs are more ignorant than the players. Its called DAoC. It used to have 45K users online during peak hours. They came out with an expansion that made casters immeasurably more powerful. Melee toons became non-existant, because no one wanted to play a gimp toon. Now, there are less than 10k users online at peak hours with tons of clustered servers. In conclusion, I would strongly disagree with you that devs know best, and I blame you and the other ignorant fanbois that let the devs destroy good games. Thanks for being a mindless sheep.
Over and over on the forums I see people complaining about adjustments to character attributes, or so-called "nerfing". If you're one of those guys, here's why you're an idiot.
Didn't bother to read it past that. Immaturity, is the root of all evils....and boring threads.
People who have to create conspiracy and hate threads to further a cause lacks in intellectual comprehension of diversity.
I hope you are not suggesting that dummying down the game is good. Many people who were looking forward to Vanguard wanted a hardcore time investment challenging game. Double experience weekends and teleporting doesn't help progress the quality of Vanguard for the hardcore.
No I am not.
However, you can't make a player move backward. This is against the very motivation of this player. Add challenges, developps more, but never, never, never, take away from a player. A player solo a monster +5 levels, fine, make it so that the next real challenge is to take over monsters +6 levels.
See, "dumbing down" implies making it easy. Nope. However, in your quests to put challenges and stuff to overcome, never, never, never, removes a toy from a player. Players solo stuff they shouldn't? Well, fine, add something for the groupers now...don't remove the solo content. And so on. 1 class is too strong, well, improve all others, don't nerf them. Challenges can be added, if something is easy, don't change it, you manage to fails to do what you want, but never, never, never, remove anything from the players. Once they have, it is belonging to them.
Challenges are welcome IMO, not at the expense of everything else. Removing "easy content" to make it harder is not a solution; as you will invariably aggravated some players in the process, players who progress and now find themselves regressing...and are bitter about it, rightfully bitter...
Ah, but what if "losing a toy" could be part of some type of advancement? Or any kind of losing or failure as a basis for advancing a character.
Not going to flame you, no need as you pretty much burned yourself to cinders with your initial statement. I do have something for you to consider. I have on many many occasions seen nerf that were later "un-nerfed" with an added statement of "well we migth have taken it to far". Many many times nerfs are unintentional, as recent nerfs with damage in VG, they did indeed rectify this, these are changed or fixed, they are rarely if ever left in. But by your reasoning developers can do no wrong? Yet they do it often, both intentionally and un-intentionally. We should just take all changes lying down, never speak up? Even though years of experience shows us that yes, developers do indeed mess up on occasion? And that my friend, is why you are an idiot.
Since you seem to have taken personal offense to my statement, I'll assume you're one of those people who likes to whine about nerfing. Let me explain it for you.
The core mechanics of a game are hashed out for months before a proposal is even submitted to prospective funders. Usually the mechanics don't stray far from an existing proven formula. Once it it is approved, the programming begins and small refinements are made over the course of YEARS. It's still not perfect. But the snotty nosed kid from beta who whines in the forums usually doesn't know $hi*.
Think of game balance as an audio equalizer with 1000 switches. The devs are trying to find the perfect sound by periodically making minor adjustments to the switches, then listening some more. Then you have a set of people who have never even seen the equalizer. They've only listened to the music... in fact, they haven't even heard all the tracks. But they think they know better than the developers.
That explains nothing in reagrds to my post.
Are you denying that that developers at times make misstakes and over nerf or more often un-intentionally affect one system when trying to fix another?
If you do then this conversation ends here because you have obviously never played one of these games.
But as they often do both of the above how are they supposed to know about it if no players speak up?
Without player feedback how can they know anything besides what this or that does on paper or in code?
Calling us idiots because we disagree with the developers or speak up in regards to different changes is kind of ironic dont you think?
To me the very definition of an idiot is someone who never questions anything and just walk around with their heads in up in clouds.
Forrest gump type intelligence if you will.
You may live your life as you wish of course but a friendly warning migth be in place, if you agree with everything that people who supposedly knows things better then you without question then you are a victim to anyone with even the sligthest bit of manipulating skill.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Originally posted by Jerek_
I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of facts. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Game developers and designers understand game balance better than you do."
If this were true, then game developers would never use player feedback to tune their game. But they do. Often.
What do you think beta testing is for (or should be for, barring those who use it as a free trial)? Why do they read forums?
Anyway, you may hold developers up on a pedestal, but they can be just as shortsighted as players can. Both can suffer from bias, albeit in different ways. In the end, though, the developers need to satisfy the players. This does not mean that they should always listen to every player, as that would just cause chaos, but there is usually someone with something worthwhile to listen to that would enhance the game.
The statement is true. Of course the game system and dynamics won't be be perfect out of the gate and will need to be refined. But player feedback really holds very little weight when it comes to game balance. Beta testing is for discovering and fixing bugs.Please give a precised definition of "game balance" in measurable and concrete terms.
Game balance, to me, is insuring that all play methods are equally fun and rewarding for the player. Unfortunately, most people improperly extend this to mean that all players must have equal abilities.That doesn't seem concrete and measurable but more just "wordy" explanation. Nor does that sound like balance to me at all, but rather an allowance of playstyles. Not even sure if all play styles can exist in a game as some may cancel each other out.
It's not a bad thing to listen to your playerbase, as they are in some ways more in touch with the way the game plays than any dev can really be.
It is, however, a bad idea to put too much stock in what the howling masses on your forums are screaming about. Even once you get past the histrionics, every single person posting has an agenda. Take Warlocks in WoW. Thread, after thread, after thread, calling for nerfs to everything they have. Some of the most idiotic overexaggeration, and just flat out stupidity I've read in a while. And it all boiled down to: "I can't one shot Warlocks for free HK's anymore. That's not fair!".
While it is true that players rarely, if ever consider the big picture, I often think the developers get too wrapped up in the big picture, and lose sight of what is fun about the game. If they even have any idea what it is that the players find fun to begin with. Case in point, SWG. The perfect example of a group of developers, team leads, and management that had absolutely no idea why the players found any given thing fun.
There needs to be a balance, between whats fun, and what's for the good of the game. That balance is razor thin, and really damn hard to walk correctly. Very few, if any, MMOs get it right out of the gate, or 1, 2, or even 3+ years down the road.
You could also cite SWG as an example of the devs giving in to the "howling masses". Everybody wanted to be a Jedi and voila, a galaxy full of Jedis.
Some of it was capitulating to the yahoos that just wanted to be Jedi without putting forth any effort, or those complaining, and rightfully so, that the holocron crap was total stupidity, and certainly not the 'organic' method of attaining Jedihood that was promised us.
Some of it was just the devs throwing up their collective hands, and giving up.
The majority, I think, was management seeing the flagging sub numbers, and telling the devs to just open up jedi to anyone in an attempt to bring back vets that had given up, or burnt out on the holocube grind before finishing. Or to attract SW fans that might have played, but didn't because there were no jedi. As someone who burnt out doing the hologrind, when I heard they were just opening up jedi to any tom, dick, and mary, I thought it was a bit of a slap in the face. After requiring so much effort from those that wanted to be something supposedly unique, to just give it away to everyone shows a real lack of respect for their players on the part of management. It also shows just how clueless anyone was on how to deal with the game or it's fans. Something further proven by the CU, and NWG.
I didn't play SWG because you couldn't start as a Jedi. Very simple.
To me, it would be like purchasing an Formula Racing MMO and not being able to be a race car driver. Sure you could work in the pits or be the guy who waves the flag or perhaps the girl who is on the stand when the trophy is awarded. But then you have to work your way through all the jobs to become a race car driver. I was interested in racing cars not changing tires....
A better analogy would be passing on a Formula 1 racing game because you couldn't start as Mario Andretti. "I want to start with 4 championship trophies and the best available car."No that would be a incorrect analogy. Sorry you are just wrong here.
Over and over on the forums I see people complaining about adjustments to character attributes, or so-called "nerfing". If you're one of those guys, here's why you're an idiot.
flame away.
Ah yes, the old "everyone that does not agree with me is an idiot" theme.
I just so much enjoy the posts made by the intellegencia....
Game developers and designers understand game balance better than you do. It doesn't matter if you've played every race and class combination. These guys have been writing game code for years. If you perceive some sort of imbalance, it's probably because you're biased, or you just don't see the big picture. After all, nobody EVER says, "my class is too strong".
I'm sorry but this just is not true. In another game, City of Heroes, the lead designers (both Statesman, the original lead, and now Positron, the current lead) have time and again exhibited a complete and total lack of understanding of their own game design. Also, being able to balance the numbers on a spreadsheet does NOT automatically translate into turning the game into something players as a whole find fun to play. The evidence of this again from COH comes from how many massive changes were made, for example, to Controllers, who when the game launched had, for "balance" reasons, very good mob control and almost no way at all to do damage. Today, they can do lots of damage (almost as much as the damage-dealing classes under certain circumstances, particularly when soloing). This flies in the face of what these "learned designers" thought was "balanced" for well over a year, but it changed the Controllers in a way that made them more fun for players to play.
I didn't really follow Vanguard through beta so I am not going to speak about it but you are making generalizations about "all game designers" that simply are not true. Statesman himself, in many of his comments publicly, has shown a very distinct LACK of understanding about how to design a solid roleplaying game, and I am quite certain that someone who really knows something worth a damn, like E. Gary Gygax, would laugh at some of the things COH has done.
The reality is that in the old days, your statement may have been true, but today it isn't. In the old days designers came from a pen and paper game design background and understanding the fundamentals of RPGs was something true of many of them. But today they come from graphical design backgrounds and computer programming backgrounds and many of them have no idea how to balance a game.
And even if they did there is nothing to indicate that a balanced game is automatically "fun." After all there is no more balanced game in the world than Chess (the board game). There are computer chess games. How well do they sell compared to, oh, say, any other game on the market? And why? Because most people would agree that chess is balanced, but would not call it fun (and I say that as a former member of the Chess Team in high school who does enjoy chess... but I realize most other people in the world do not).
You are not really a 12th level Paladin. If your feelings are hurt when your "Power Attack X" is reduced by X damage per second, some introspection is in order. Balancing the game is not a personal attack aimed at you. If you feel slighted because your on-screen persona was "nerfed" for the sake of game balance, it's time to grow up.
You're right, people need to stop taking it personally.
However, and this is a big however, if changes they made to the game nerfed people's FUN, then regardless of any other consideration, that is paramount. Again, I say this as someone who actually doesn't have a huge problem with whatever nerfs were made. I had only been playing the game for a week and a half before this publish and did not have a real sense of my characters beyond the starting stages. Things do seem harder now with my level 14 paladin but I can't say how much of that is due to it getting harder int he teens, and how much to the so-called "nerfs." I wasn't really paying attention to the numbers before, and even if I were, I do not care. My personal fun has not been reduced. However, if someone's fun HAS been reduced, then it is perfectly reasonable for him (or her) to complain. You may not agree that he should've been able to own four 3-dots at once without breaking a sweat (and I would be on your side) but you can't dictate fun to other people. This is something, by the way, that game designers seem not to understand. If I say, "what you have turned the game into is no longer fun for me," there is no such thing as an argument against that. Either it's fun for me or it isn't... and if it is not, you can't argue me into thinking that it is.
Again, I say this as someone whose fun has NOT been altered one bit... but I know there are many who feel their fun HAS been reduced, and you saying "it's for balance" reasons does not change that fact, and never will. Again this is a fundamental concept that escapes most developers.
Game balance does NOT mean that all players should be equally good at all things. To this end, developers go too far already to accommodate the mindless majority. "But my 10th level candle maker doesn't do as much damage as his 10th level barbarian! It's not fair!" Different classes have different strengths! The developers' only goal when searching for game balance should be to make all classes equally fun and rewarding to play! Imagine the character diversity we might unlock if we dispelled this moronic notion that all characters must be equal.
With this I completely agree. Classes being "balanced" does not mean "identical." It's not at all clear to me what that has to do with the rest of your points though.
My comments in purple.
C Thanks for the well thought-out reply.
As to the first point. I haven't played COH, but I'll take your word for it that there have been fundamental changes to the game mechanics. I think your main contention is that there are incompetent game designers. Like any profession, I'm sure this is true. However, on the whole, professional devs and designers have a better understanding of their game than the target of my initial post.
On the second point. Some people feel that their game experience is diminished when their characters abilities are adjusted. Other people don't. I'm in the latter group. These numbers that represent our characters skills are completely arbitrary and serve only to relate them to the challenges in the game, as well as the skills of other players. If the desired game dynamic wasn't achieved on the first try, then by all means, adjust it. Some people don't see it that way. They view their character as a collection of skills and loot. If you take something away from them, it somehow lessens their achievement. I guess it's just a philosophical difference... but their $15 is as good as mine, and they outnumber me, so game designers have to be very mindful of nerfing.
I agree that players know when something is not fun. However, the converse is not always true. Players don't always know what IS fun, even for them. It might sound crazy, but it's true. "This game isn't fun. If only I could be a Jedi, then it would be fun." Then you make 'em a Jedi, and guess what? It's no fun.
The way that the final point relates to the rest of the post is that some people claim imbalance because their skills aren't identical or equal to other players.
I claim to be more knowledgable than 4% of the community and we still have some contrarian who wants to put me below the 4th percentile. Unbelievable.
"You're probably just exhibiting anti-social behavior in believing your peers are idiots, rather than this post being some enlightening divine intervention in the industry you intended it to be."
Discussing the topic on a message board is actually a very social activity. The people I'm addressing are not my peers. They are idiots. I posted this to discuss something that bothers me... not sure what you mean about divine intervention.
You're assuming I ever agreed with the random percentages you spewed out. Every single one of my friends, family members and guildmates I've played these games with have -always- at some point complained about nerfing. It happens when you play these games for years and go through dozens of patches. So exactly why should I go along with your few percent figure of people who complain about nerfing?
I get that you're trying to minimize your generalization, but you needn't pull out baseless figures to prove how frivolous your assessment was in the first place. We already know just how much.
And I really could care less just how much you attempt to boil down the bunch you're deeming idiots, you're still a hypocrite in a lot of what you say. Particularly the notion that 'fun' is all developers should design for; it doesn't take being a 15-year aspiring-but-not-quite game developer to figure out what 'fun' is.
Like, come on. Say something deep; prove the difference between you and those you deem idiots. Merely slinging insults doesn't work to differentiate yourself. You can't complain about whiners then go on and whine about how all classes shouldn't be equal.
Or just continue to mitigate your original assessment even moreso, and come to a conclusion we already know; your opinion on game design weighs no more than any one else's.
That said, your opinion as a player just like every other player is important. You needn't bash others before making an opinion; it's no criteria in need of fulfillment before anyone can agree with you. I'll even agree with your point that the eternal pursuit of equalizing classes has gotten to be a pretty stale approach to game balancing for 'fun'.
Comments
Game balance, to me, is insuring that all play methods are equally fun and rewarding for the player. Unfortunately, most people improperly extend this to mean that all players must have equal abilities.
Some of it was capitulating to the yahoos that just wanted to be Jedi without putting forth any effort, or those complaining, and rightfully so, that the holocron crap was total stupidity, and certainly not the 'organic' method of attaining Jedihood that was promised us.
Some of it was just the devs throwing up their collective hands, and giving up.
The majority, I think, was management seeing the flagging sub numbers, and telling the devs to just open up jedi to anyone in an attempt to bring back vets that had given up, or burnt out on the holocube grind before finishing. Or to attract SW fans that might have played, but didn't because there were no jedi. As someone who burnt out doing the hologrind, when I heard they were just opening up jedi to any tom, dick, and mary, I thought it was a bit of a slap in the face. After requiring so much effort from those that wanted to be something supposedly unique, to just give it away to everyone shows a real lack of respect for their players on the part of management. It also shows just how clueless anyone was on how to deal with the game or it's fans. Something further proven by the CU, and NWG.
I didn't play SWG because you couldn't start as a Jedi. Very simple.
To me, it would be like purchasing an Formula Racing MMO and not being able to be a race car driver. Sure you could work in the pits or be the guy who waves the flag or perhaps the girl who is on the stand when the trophy is awarded. But then you have to work your way through all the jobs to become a race car driver. I was interested in racing cars not changing tires....
A better analogy would be passing on a Formula 1 racing game because you couldn't start as Mario Andretti. "I want to start with 4 championship trophies and the best available car."The core mechanics of a game are hashed out for months before a proposal is even submitted to prospective funders. Usually the mechanics don't stray far from an existing proven formula. Once it it is approved, the programming begins and small refinements are made over the course of YEARS. It's still not perfect. But the snotty nosed kid from beta who whines in the forums usually doesn't know $hi*.
Think of game balance as an audio equalizer with 1000 switches. The devs are trying to find the perfect sound by periodically making minor adjustments to the switches, then listening some more. Then you have a set of people who have never even seen the equalizer. They've only listened to the music... in fact, they haven't even heard all the tracks. But they think they know better than the developers.
3. If you think that all characters should be equally powerful, you're an idiot.
Does that clear it up for you? 1. This insinuates developers always know best, they see the 'big picture' and players are biased.
3. You give an opinion, which must be biased. You also say we're reduced to 10 stereotypical look -a-likes, which means you're dissatisfied with with usual developer design decisions that are contrary to your piece-of-a-picture opinion. 1. Yep, that's pretty much what I'm saying. Remember this post is targeted at those whiny kids who complain about nerfing.
3. Developers implement the feature set that is handed down to them. Designers try to be inventive, but generally are restricted to using a proven formula. It's not the developers fault if the core game mechanics suck. It's the developers fault if the game is buggy. You're straying off base from my original point. You basically accused everyone of being idiots asides from developers and having no idea of how to balance a game, yet went on to give your own assessment of what game balance is. You even went on to make comments such as the 'mindless majority' being listened to which implies there's some minority sect I assume you belong to that the designers SHOULD listen to.
Which is it? Are we all idiots and only the developers know best? Or could it be you yourself aren't above believing your own opinions are best just like every other subscriber to any game?
No need to be a hypocrite about it, just be fair. If you have an opinion of how things should be, other people will too.
P.S. There's been plenty of times when I've KNOWN my character class was too strong in games, and I participated in feedback to suggest ways of 'fixing' the class. If you ask me, acknowledging imbalances and working with developers if they so grace you with the ability to is a lot better than pretending your class isn't overpowered and then a nerf comes along you complain about having no say-so in.
3. If you think that all characters should be equally powerful, you're an idiot.
Does that clear it up for you? 1. This insinuates developers always know best, they see the 'big picture' and players are biased.
3. You give an opinion, which must be biased. You also say we're reduced to 10 stereotypical look -a-likes, which means you're dissatisfied with with usual developer design decisions that are contrary to your piece-of-a-picture opinion. 1. Yep, that's pretty much what I'm saying. Remember this post is targeted at those whiny kids who complain about nerfing.
3. Developers implement the feature set that is handed down to them. Designers try to be inventive, but generally are restricted to using a proven formula. It's not the developers fault if the core game mechanics suck. It's the developers fault if the game is buggy. You're straying off base from my original point. You basically accused everyone of being idiots asides from developers and having no idea of how to balance a game, yet went on to give your own assessment of what game balance is. You even went on to make comments such as the 'mindless majority' being listened to which implies there's some minority sect I assume you belong to that the designers SHOULD listen to.
Which is it? Are we all idiots and only the developers know best? Or could it be you yourself aren't above believing your own opinions are best just like every other subscriber to any game?
No need to be a hypocrite about it, just be fair. If you have an opinion of how things should be, other people will too.
P.S. There's been plenty of times when I've KNOWN my character class was too strong in games, and I participated in feedback to suggest ways of 'fixing' the class. If you ask me, acknowledging imbalances and working with developers if they so grace you with the ability to is a lot better than pretending your class isn't overpowered and then a nerf comes along you complain about having no say-so in. Let's not generalize. I'm not accusing "everyone of being idiots". I said there is a sect of mmorpg'ers who complain about nerfing. They constitute a portion of the communitiy. For the most part, they're idiots. Conservatively, let's say 95% of them.
Since I am a developer, there's really no hypocrisy here. I honestly believe that I understand balance better than most of these posters.
3. If you think that all characters should be equally powerful, you're an idiot.
Does that clear it up for you? 1. This insinuates developers always know best, they see the 'big picture' and players are biased.
3. You give an opinion, which must be biased. You also say we're reduced to 10 stereotypical look -a-likes, which means you're dissatisfied with with usual developer design decisions that are contrary to your piece-of-a-picture opinion. 1. Yep, that's pretty much what I'm saying. Remember this post is targeted at those whiny kids who complain about nerfing.
3. Developers implement the feature set that is handed down to them. Designers try to be inventive, but generally are restricted to using a proven formula. It's not the developers fault if the core game mechanics suck. It's the developers fault if the game is buggy. You're straying off base from my original point. You basically accused everyone of being idiots asides from developers and having no idea of how to balance a game, yet went on to give your own assessment of what game balance is. You even went on to make comments such as the 'mindless majority' being listened to which implies there's some minority sect I assume you belong to that the designers SHOULD listen to.
Which is it? Are we all idiots and only the developers know best? Or could it be you yourself aren't above believing your own opinions are best just like every other subscriber to any game?
No need to be a hypocrite about it, just be fair. If you have an opinion of how things should be, other people will too.
P.S. There's been plenty of times when I've KNOWN my character class was too strong in games, and I participated in feedback to suggest ways of 'fixing' the class. If you ask me, acknowledging imbalances and working with developers if they so grace you with the ability to is a lot better than pretending your class isn't overpowered and then a nerf comes along you complain about having no say-so in. Let's not generalize. I'm not accusing "everyone of being idiots". I said there is a sect of mmorpg'ers who complain about nerfing. They constitute a portion of the communitiy. For the most part, they're idiots. Conservatively, let's say 95% of them.
Since I am a developer, there's really no hypocrisy here. I honestly believe that I understand balance better than most of these posters. What MMOs have you developed, or otherwise games where you've had to balance classes for tens of thousands of players? If none, then you are no more qualified than anyone else.
Not to trivialize your career choice, but you'd agree that there's a difference between creating your own prestige classes for your D&D tabletop group and designing for an MMO. You might fall somewhere within the huge span between those two rungs; but you aren't up there.
How do you figure you understand game balance more than 95% of everyone else here? Convince me.
3. If you think that all characters should be equally powerful, you're an idiot.
Does that clear it up for you? 1. This insinuates developers always know best, they see the 'big picture' and players are biased.
3. You give an opinion, which must be biased. You also say we're reduced to 10 stereotypical look -a-likes, which means you're dissatisfied with with usual developer design decisions that are contrary to your piece-of-a-picture opinion. 1. Yep, that's pretty much what I'm saying. Remember this post is targeted at those whiny kids who complain about nerfing.
3. Developers implement the feature set that is handed down to them. Designers try to be inventive, but generally are restricted to using a proven formula. It's not the developers fault if the core game mechanics suck. It's the developers fault if the game is buggy. You're straying off base from my original point. You basically accused everyone of being idiots asides from developers and having no idea of how to balance a game, yet went on to give your own assessment of what game balance is. You even went on to make comments such as the 'mindless majority' being listened to which implies there's some minority sect I assume you belong to that the designers SHOULD listen to.
Which is it? Are we all idiots and only the developers know best? Or could it be you yourself aren't above believing your own opinions are best just like every other subscriber to any game?
No need to be a hypocrite about it, just be fair. If you have an opinion of how things should be, other people will too.
P.S. There's been plenty of times when I've KNOWN my character class was too strong in games, and I participated in feedback to suggest ways of 'fixing' the class. If you ask me, acknowledging imbalances and working with developers if they so grace you with the ability to is a lot better than pretending your class isn't overpowered and then a nerf comes along you complain about having no say-so in. Let's not generalize. I'm not accusing "everyone of being idiots". I said there is a sect of mmorpg'ers who complain about nerfing. They constitute a portion of the communitiy. For the most part, they're idiots. Conservatively, let's say 95% of them.
Since I am a developer, there's really no hypocrisy here. I honestly believe that I understand balance better than most of these posters. What MMOs have you developed, or otherwise games where you've had to balance classes for tens of thousands of players? If none, then you are no more qualified than anyone else.
Not to trivialize your career choice, but you'd agree that there's a difference between creating your own prestige classes for your D&D tabletop group and designing for an MMO. You might fall somewhere within the huge span between those two rungs; but you aren't up there.
How do you figure you understand game balance more than 95% of everyone else here? Convince me. Perhaps I should draw you a venn diagram? Let's say 5% of the community here whines about nerfing. 95% of them are idiots. I claim to understand game balance better than MOST of these people. What portion of the entire community am I claiming to be more knowledgeable than? Hint: it's not 95%.
As a software developer, CS major, math minor, lifetime gamer, who's had an active interest in game design for the better part of 15 years, do you really think it's that big of a stretch?
3. If you think that all characters should be equally powerful, you're an idiot.
Does that clear it up for you? 1. This insinuates developers always know best, they see the 'big picture' and players are biased.
3. You give an opinion, which must be biased. You also say we're reduced to 10 stereotypical look -a-likes, which means you're dissatisfied with with usual developer design decisions that are contrary to your piece-of-a-picture opinion. 1. Yep, that's pretty much what I'm saying. Remember this post is targeted at those whiny kids who complain about nerfing.
3. Developers implement the feature set that is handed down to them. Designers try to be inventive, but generally are restricted to using a proven formula. It's not the developers fault if the core game mechanics suck. It's the developers fault if the game is buggy. You're straying off base from my original point. You basically accused everyone of being idiots asides from developers and having no idea of how to balance a game, yet went on to give your own assessment of what game balance is. You even went on to make comments such as the 'mindless majority' being listened to which implies there's some minority sect I assume you belong to that the designers SHOULD listen to.
Which is it? Are we all idiots and only the developers know best? Or could it be you yourself aren't above believing your own opinions are best just like every other subscriber to any game?
No need to be a hypocrite about it, just be fair. If you have an opinion of how things should be, other people will too.
P.S. There's been plenty of times when I've KNOWN my character class was too strong in games, and I participated in feedback to suggest ways of 'fixing' the class. If you ask me, acknowledging imbalances and working with developers if they so grace you with the ability to is a lot better than pretending your class isn't overpowered and then a nerf comes along you complain about having no say-so in. Let's not generalize. I'm not accusing "everyone of being idiots". I said there is a sect of mmorpg'ers who complain about nerfing. They constitute a portion of the communitiy. For the most part, they're idiots. Conservatively, let's say 95% of them.
Since I am a developer, there's really no hypocrisy here. I honestly believe that I understand balance better than most of these posters. What MMOs have you developed, or otherwise games where you've had to balance classes for tens of thousands of players? If none, then you are no more qualified than anyone else.
Not to trivialize your career choice, but you'd agree that there's a difference between creating your own prestige classes for your D&D tabletop group and designing for an MMO. You might fall somewhere within the huge span between those two rungs; but you aren't up there.
How do you figure you understand game balance more than 95% of everyone else here? Convince me. Perhaps I should draw you a venn diagram? Let's say 5% of the community here whines about nerfing. 95% of them are idiots. I claim to understand game balance better than MOST of these people. What portion of the entire community am I claiming to be more knowledgeable than? Hint: it's not 95%.
As a software developer, CS major, math minor, lifetime gamer, who's had an active interest in game design for the better part of 15 years, do you really think it's that big of a stretch?
Sure do.
You've said nothing to differentiate yourself from anything other than what's typical. You're a customer, a fan, a MMO subscriber. What makes you qualified to know more about balancing MMOs again?
It's easy to be a customer and a fan, but what have you produced that can validate your claim? If nothing; hint: You're probably just exhibiting anti-social behavior in believing your peers are idiots, rather than this post being some enlightening divine intervention in the industry you intended it to be.
Which Final Fantasy Character Are You?
Final Fantasy 7
Why are rogues and shadowpriests 'overpowered'? i think to differ. Yes shadowpriests (shadow spec) WERE 'overpowered' they got NERFED because mages/warlocks were afraid shadowpriests would take their places in raids, though i can't see how that would ever happen. Nowadays shadowpriests suck balls holy/disc or disc/holy is the way to go. About rogues i have no clue since i never played 1.
And yes i do think game devs do 'listen' what their playerbase has to say, small example is how 'tigole/furor' took down a server because a paladin 'outtanked' their warriors, also the recent WoW nerfs are a sign there's some info about why/how on wowwiki or something with the whole story about their 'abuse'.
C
3. If you think that all characters should be equally powerful, you're an idiot.
Does that clear it up for you? 1. This insinuates developers always know best, they see the 'big picture' and players are biased.
3. You give an opinion, which must be biased. You also say we're reduced to 10 stereotypical look -a-likes, which means you're dissatisfied with with usual developer design decisions that are contrary to your piece-of-a-picture opinion. 1. Yep, that's pretty much what I'm saying. Remember this post is targeted at those whiny kids who complain about nerfing.
3. Developers implement the feature set that is handed down to them. Designers try to be inventive, but generally are restricted to using a proven formula. It's not the developers fault if the core game mechanics suck. It's the developers fault if the game is buggy. You're straying off base from my original point. You basically accused everyone of being idiots asides from developers and having no idea of how to balance a game, yet went on to give your own assessment of what game balance is. You even went on to make comments such as the 'mindless majority' being listened to which implies there's some minority sect I assume you belong to that the designers SHOULD listen to.
Which is it? Are we all idiots and only the developers know best? Or could it be you yourself aren't above believing your own opinions are best just like every other subscriber to any game?
No need to be a hypocrite about it, just be fair. If you have an opinion of how things should be, other people will too.
P.S. There's been plenty of times when I've KNOWN my character class was too strong in games, and I participated in feedback to suggest ways of 'fixing' the class. If you ask me, acknowledging imbalances and working with developers if they so grace you with the ability to is a lot better than pretending your class isn't overpowered and then a nerf comes along you complain about having no say-so in. Let's not generalize. I'm not accusing "everyone of being idiots". I said there is a sect of mmorpg'ers who complain about nerfing. They constitute a portion of the communitiy. For the most part, they're idiots. Conservatively, let's say 95% of them.
Since I am a developer, there's really no hypocrisy here. I honestly believe that I understand balance better than most of these posters. What MMOs have you developed, or otherwise games where you've had to balance classes for tens of thousands of players? If none, then you are no more qualified than anyone else.
Not to trivialize your career choice, but you'd agree that there's a difference between creating your own prestige classes for your D&D tabletop group and designing for an MMO. You might fall somewhere within the huge span between those two rungs; but you aren't up there.
How do you figure you understand game balance more than 95% of everyone else here? Convince me. Perhaps I should draw you a venn diagram? Let's say 5% of the community here whines about nerfing. 95% of them are idiots. I claim to understand game balance better than MOST of these people. What portion of the entire community am I claiming to be more knowledgeable than? Hint: it's not 95%.
As a software developer, CS major, math minor, lifetime gamer, who's had an active interest in game design for the better part of 15 years, do you really think it's that big of a stretch?
Sure do.
You've said nothing to differentiate yourself from anything other than what's typical. You're a customer, a fan, a MMO subscriber. What makes you qualified to know more about balancing MMOs again?
It's easy to be a customer and a fan, but what have you produced that can validate your claim? If nothing; hint: You're probably just exhibiting anti-social behavior in believing your peers are idiots, rather than this post being some enlightening divine intervention in the industry you intended it to be. I claim to be more knowledgable than 4% of the community and we still have some contrarian who wants to put me below the 4th percentile. Unbelievable.
"You're probably just exhibiting anti-social behavior in believing your peers are idiots, rather than this post being some enlightening divine intervention in the industry you intended it to be."
Discussing the topic on a message board is actually a very social activity. The people I'm addressing are not my peers. They are idiots. I posted this to discuss something that bothers me... not sure what you mean about divine intervention.
People who have to create conspiracy and hate threads to further a cause lacks in intellectual comprehension of diversity.
No I am not.
However, you can't make a player move backward. This is against the very motivation of this player. Add challenges, developps more, but never, never, never, take away from a player. A player solo a monster +5 levels, fine, make it so that the next real challenge is to take over monsters +6 levels.
See, "dumbing down" implies making it easy. Nope. However, in your quests to put challenges and stuff to overcome, never, never, never, removes a toy from a player. Players solo stuff they shouldn't? Well, fine, add something for the groupers now...don't remove the solo content. And so on. 1 class is too strong, well, improve all others, don't nerf them. Challenges can be added, if something is easy, don't change it, you manage to fails to do what you want, but never, never, never, remove anything from the players. Once they have, it is belonging to them.
Challenges are welcome IMO, not at the expense of everything else. Removing "easy content" to make it harder is not a solution; as you will invariably aggravated some players in the process, players who progress and now find themselves regressing...and are bitter about it, rightfully bitter...
Ah, but what if "losing a toy" could be part of some type of advancement? Or any kind of losing or failure as a basis for advancing a character.
The core mechanics of a game are hashed out for months before a proposal is even submitted to prospective funders. Usually the mechanics don't stray far from an existing proven formula. Once it it is approved, the programming begins and small refinements are made over the course of YEARS. It's still not perfect. But the snotty nosed kid from beta who whines in the forums usually doesn't know $hi*.
Think of game balance as an audio equalizer with 1000 switches. The devs are trying to find the perfect sound by periodically making minor adjustments to the switches, then listening some more. Then you have a set of people who have never even seen the equalizer. They've only listened to the music... in fact, they haven't even heard all the tracks. But they think they know better than the developers.
That explains nothing in reagrds to my post.
Are you denying that that developers at times make misstakes and over nerf or more often un-intentionally affect one system when trying to fix another?
If you do then this conversation ends here because you have obviously never played one of these games.
But as they often do both of the above how are they supposed to know about it if no players speak up?
Without player feedback how can they know anything besides what this or that does on paper or in code?
Calling us idiots because we disagree with the developers or speak up in regards to different changes is kind of ironic dont you think?
To me the very definition of an idiot is someone who never questions anything and just walk around with their heads in up in clouds.
Forrest gump type intelligence if you will.
You may live your life as you wish of course but a friendly warning migth be in place, if you agree with everything that people who supposedly knows things better then you without question then you are a victim to anyone with even the sligthest bit of manipulating skill.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Jerek_
I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of facts.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Game balance, to me, is insuring that all play methods are equally fun and rewarding for the player. Unfortunately, most people improperly extend this to mean that all players must have equal abilities.That doesn't seem concrete and measurable but more just "wordy" explanation. Nor does that sound like balance to me at all, but rather an allowance of playstyles. Not even sure if all play styles can exist in a game as some may cancel each other out.
Some of it was capitulating to the yahoos that just wanted to be Jedi without putting forth any effort, or those complaining, and rightfully so, that the holocron crap was total stupidity, and certainly not the 'organic' method of attaining Jedihood that was promised us.
Some of it was just the devs throwing up their collective hands, and giving up.
The majority, I think, was management seeing the flagging sub numbers, and telling the devs to just open up jedi to anyone in an attempt to bring back vets that had given up, or burnt out on the holocube grind before finishing. Or to attract SW fans that might have played, but didn't because there were no jedi. As someone who burnt out doing the hologrind, when I heard they were just opening up jedi to any tom, dick, and mary, I thought it was a bit of a slap in the face. After requiring so much effort from those that wanted to be something supposedly unique, to just give it away to everyone shows a real lack of respect for their players on the part of management. It also shows just how clueless anyone was on how to deal with the game or it's fans. Something further proven by the CU, and NWG.
I didn't play SWG because you couldn't start as a Jedi. Very simple.
To me, it would be like purchasing an Formula Racing MMO and not being able to be a race car driver. Sure you could work in the pits or be the guy who waves the flag or perhaps the girl who is on the stand when the trophy is awarded. But then you have to work your way through all the jobs to become a race car driver. I was interested in racing cars not changing tires....
A better analogy would be passing on a Formula 1 racing game because you couldn't start as Mario Andretti. "I want to start with 4 championship trophies and the best available car."No that would be a incorrect analogy. Sorry you are just wrong here.Ah yes, the old "everyone that does not agree with me is an idiot" theme.
I just so much enjoy the posts made by the intellegencia....
Sounds about right.C Thanks for the well thought-out reply.
As to the first point. I haven't played COH, but I'll take your word for it that there have been fundamental changes to the game mechanics. I think your main contention is that there are incompetent game designers. Like any profession, I'm sure this is true. However, on the whole, professional devs and designers have a better understanding of their game than the target of my initial post.
On the second point. Some people feel that their game experience is diminished when their characters abilities are adjusted. Other people don't. I'm in the latter group. These numbers that represent our characters skills are completely arbitrary and serve only to relate them to the challenges in the game, as well as the skills of other players. If the desired game dynamic wasn't achieved on the first try, then by all means, adjust it. Some people don't see it that way. They view their character as a collection of skills and loot. If you take something away from them, it somehow lessens their achievement. I guess it's just a philosophical difference... but their $15 is as good as mine, and they outnumber me, so game designers have to be very mindful of nerfing.
I agree that players know when something is not fun. However, the converse is not always true. Players don't always know what IS fun, even for them. It might sound crazy, but it's true. "This game isn't fun. If only I could be a Jedi, then it would be fun." Then you make 'em a Jedi, and guess what? It's no fun.
The way that the final point relates to the rest of the post is that some people claim imbalance because their skills aren't identical or equal to other players.
I get that you're trying to minimize your generalization, but you needn't pull out baseless figures to prove how frivolous your assessment was in the first place. We already know just how much.
And I really could care less just how much you attempt to boil down the bunch you're deeming idiots, you're still a hypocrite in a lot of what you say. Particularly the notion that 'fun' is all developers should design for; it doesn't take being a 15-year aspiring-but-not-quite game developer to figure out what 'fun' is.
Like, come on. Say something deep; prove the difference between you and those you deem idiots. Merely slinging insults doesn't work to differentiate yourself. You can't complain about whiners then go on and whine about how all classes shouldn't be equal.
Or just continue to mitigate your original assessment even moreso, and come to a conclusion we already know; your opinion on game design weighs no more than any one else's.
That said, your opinion as a player just like every other player is important. You needn't bash others before making an opinion; it's no criteria in need of fulfillment before anyone can agree with you. I'll even agree with your point that the eternal pursuit of equalizing classes has gotten to be a pretty stale approach to game balancing for 'fun'.