Well it'd also be about story and exploration. Designing a game with no progression in terms of levels / skills means you can have progression via CONTENT, through elements of story, unlocks, achievements, and true character building in terms of reputation, infamy, that kind of stuff. It doesn't have to be about gear at all, but people do like their shiny epics so might as well throw them a bone, as gear progression in terms of power tiers is very popular and motivating for many a MMO gamers in both PvE and PvP.
Progression through content has always seemed to me to be the 'proper' metric to use. Level and/or gear progression should ultimately feed into progression through content. You level up and get new gear so you can attempt new content that might be more challenging or maybe just different. Doing the same content over and over except with each iteration you get better gear does not fell like fun to me.
Fair isn't even an issue, really. There is nothing that one player gets that the other one doesn't. The only place I could possibly see it not being 'fair' is if the game was a finite race to the level cap, at which point one has to wonder why the guy with only one hour a day entered in the first place.
-- Whammy - a 64x64 miniRPG - RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right? - FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
Originally posted by Torik Progression through content has always seemed to me to be the 'proper' metric to use. Level and/or gear progression should ultimately feed into progression through content. You level up and get new gear so you can attempt new content that might be more challenging or maybe just different. Doing the same content over and over except with each iteration you get better gear does not fell like fun to me.
I would agree, I enjoy progression through content.
The problem is, most MMOs use a false system of progression. Level / gear progression is a false system. All that really changes between level 2 and level 20 is the numbers used.
500 health and 100 damage becomes 5,000 health and 1,000 damage. Tier 1 gear with 50 health becomes Tier 2 gear with 75 health.
That's it. I call it numerical inflation.
Is this truly progression? I don't think it is.
To me, progression is more about... advancing something. Advancing a story, advancing a cause like a war/battle...
Unlocking new and different content to explore and experience, new and different battles and locations and environments... not just ones with bigger numbers.
levels are a stupid thing. if you are not having fun playing, not even in 8 sessions, maybe the game is not good. playing to achieve endgame, on games where only the endgame is fun could be good for powergamers, but I think is a bad deal for casuals. so get a better game.
Same situaiton for a use it to improve it skill game.
Yoou must swing your sword X times to raise a skill level in sword swinging. There is a cap on sword swinging skill. It takes about an hour to swing your sword x times, etc., etc.
You misunderstod me. I mean is bad for casuals to put the fun on level 80, an make so to achieve that level 80 you have to play 4 boring months. For casuals is better to just connect and have fun.
I probably share with you the opinion that having to swing a blade 4 boring months, till you have skill 120 and are able to have fun, is still a bad deal for casuals.
For powergamers could be different, since powergamers can delay satisfaction, to get a very good satisfaction product of playing really "expert" content. And to get expert you may need these 4 boring months .... 2 weeks for the powergamer.
Anyway, to reply your comment. Is also dumb to put a monster at level 4 that are unkillable by players of level 3 ( say... Shaiya). And make so players of level 4 can't play with players of level 6. Skillbased systems are more flexible and don't have this problems.
I think your wrong mate, and here's why...
you said "I mean is bad for casuals to put the fun on level 80"... WHY is the "fun" at lvl 80?
.. cause your perception of "fun" is being high lvl 1337 mofo, with uber gear... if you look back 6 months, wasn't 70 the "fun" part?.. and even longer back.. wasn't 60 the "fun" part?... så why aren't these areas "fun" anymore?.. they didn't change them....
It's not the game, it's the gamers understanding of "fun"... and everyone wants to be leet, and famous, and you can't be leet and famous in 70, when max is 80, now can ya?...
This might sound a little roleplay'ish... but players need to start enjoying the journey, and not rush for end game, dont think about the 20k others' who rush to end game.. to become e-famous... "worlds first" or w/e lame titles blizzard put in the game...
Now i dont play WoW... but i assume this is the game you were refering to... in the end it doesnt matter, cause it's basicly the same with every game.
play your games, enjoy them..! play them at your own pace..! and fu*k the race.....
Does it become unfair at some point, is the real question. Everyone can see waiting for a week. It seems like being really spoiled if you'[re going to complain about waiting a week to catch up with everyone else in the game.
The real point is that the game should be fun no matter what level you are at. Which is why I don't play WoW, because it wasn't for me.
This isn't about fair, this is about fun. Are you having fun? No, then don't play. Yes, then play. That is all you have to know. There is no fair.
When SC2 comes out, I will play and get my butt kicked by a bunch of Koreans. Is that fair? Doesn't matter, question is, am I having fun.
there is a HUGE differance between level cap and power tier. the level cap is where you can't advance your character anymore by training, the power tier is where your character doesn't get much stronger.
As a matter of fact I would consider it very good game design where a player got to the power tier in an "excessive" day. An example would be a skill bassed game where thre are 60 skills but to reach the power tier you just need 3 of those maxxed and know where to get the proper equipment(I'm sure you could do this with classed based games but you'd be beating around the bush for an effect that's not meant to be).
I don't really get it.
So you'd be max power, more or less in a day? The entire rest of the game, for 6 or 8 months (the average players stick around an MMO these days) would be End game?
What's your End GAme? Raiding, PvP, something else?
You "aren't" on the spot for declaring an endgame, why am I?
The only differance between your short term advancement and mine is that after everyone reaches the max powertier people can still unlock more utility and more "core skills" in a high max level, low power tier system. anything else carries over.
I find it amazing that by 2020 first world countries will be competing to get immigrants.
The real point is that the game should be fun no matter what level you are at. Which is why I don't play WoW, because it wasn't for me.
This isn't about fair, this is about fun. Are you having fun? No, then don't play. Yes, then play. That is all you have to know. There is no fair.
Well said.
But it doesn't really say anything or address the topic.
Many people complain that power leveling is unfair, and that the game is not fun for them because someone can play 24/7 since they have no other committments, while the casual gamer lags behind.
That was clearly stated in the OP, and the question is addressed to people that feel this way.
If it's a non issue for you, there's no need to post.
The real point is that the game should be fun no matter what level you are at. Which is why I don't play WoW, because it wasn't for me.
This isn't about fair, this is about fun. Are you having fun? No, then don't play. Yes, then play. That is all you have to know. There is no fair.
Well said.
But it doesn't really say anything or address the topic.
Many people complain that power leveling is unfair, and that the game is not fun for them because someone can play 24/7 since they have no other committments, while the casual gamer lags behind.
That was clearly stated in the OP, and the question is addressed to people that feel this way.
If it's a non issue for you, there's no need to post.
Well, no matter if one thinks it unfair or not, theres nothing that can be done... The only way to make it "fair" would be.....
To make it so that the game can only be played X hours a week... (X would be, what a casual would considers "Fair")
As i said earlier, it's not about others'!.. start thinking about having fun in your game, instead of thinking about how far you are behind... How is that importnant???
This whole subject is kinda stupid... people need to realise that being max level with uber gear is probably nice... but they dont have fun.. they are only after the E-fame... and casuals get jealous, and that is exactly why they do it... they need to feel they achieved something, and their e-peen grows, and they become, immature nerds...
Play your game, ENJOY it, at your own pace....
In the end, i'd like to ask these question instead :
"Why is it unfair that some people powerlevel?"
"Does it make you feel less leet?"
"Is it really cause your jealous that the PL'ers have more sparetime than you?"
.. Relax, play your game, enjoy it... don't go for e-fame...
You'll get to end game at some point... And besides, you can turn off your computer, go out spend 200 bucks on a night out drinking, og something else expensive, which in most cases the PL'er can't... Cause he/she doesn't have a job
Many people complain that power leveling is unfair, and that the game is not fun for them because someone can play 24/7 since they have no other committments, while the casual gamer lags behind.
Actually, I don't see too many people complaining about power gamers around here. I do remember that this discussion happened as a counter-point to RMT being perceived as unbalancing whereas power leveling wasn't. But most casuals don't mind the slow and steady path to the end.
The problem is that, in the past, most average gamers found themselves completely locked out of certain MMORPG content because they couldn't make the massive time commitments that were required by that content. Yes, I'm talking about epic gear that could only be unlocked doing forty man raids that lasted up to eight hours straight. And to twist the knife even further, the drops meant that you'd have to repeat that content, at that per session time investment, repeatedly in order to see highest level content at all. In fact, Final Fantasy XI had a boss that took over 18 hours to defeat.
Long story short, most average gamers started to say "fuck it" and pull their subscriptions which in turn caused most MMORPGs to turn it down a few notches. Now that things have come down to a more reasonable level, all that I ever hear about how "dumbed down" these games have become and how awful it is that a "n00b" can be running around with epic gear thus devaluing the power gamer's "accomplishements."
Many people complain that power leveling is unfair, and that the game is not fun for them because someone can play 24/7 since they have no other committments, while the casual gamer lags behind.
Actually, I don't see too many people complaining about power gamers around here. I do remember that this discussion happened as a counter-point to RMT being perceived as unbalancing whereas power leveling wasn't. But most casuals don't mind the slow and steady path to the end.
The problem is that, in the past, most average gamers found themselves completely locked out of certain MMORPG content because they couldn't make the massive time commitments that were required by that content. Yes, I'm talking about epic gear that could only be unlocked doing forty man raids that lasted up to eight hours straight. And to twist the knife even further, the drops meant that you'd have to repeat that content, at that per session time investment, repeatedly in order to see highest level content at all. In fact, Final Fantasy XI had a boss that took over 18 hours to defeat.
Long story short, most average gamers started to say "fuck it" and pull their subscriptions which in turn caused most MMORPGs to turn it down a few notches. Now that things have come down to a more reasonable level, all that I ever hear about how "dumbed down" these games have become and how awful it is that a "n00b" can be running around with epic gear thus devaluing the power gamer's "accomplishements."
Whatever....
I disagree. I have seen lots of complaints that P2P games are not fair, because people taht have more time to play can level or gain skill levels faster in terms of weeks nad months, than people that don't have as much time to play.
In any case, I'm in agreement with you about access to content. 2-3 hour blocks of time for play at a maximum seems reasonable, IMO.
As far as raiding goes, I wouldn't mind a game where there is no "raiding" per se, but rather the most required to access any content in the game would be an ordinary full group. No guild required.
I would not mind if acheiving a certain skill level, piece of gear, or special ability required completing a long series of quests, each of which required about 2 hours of game time, and a full group. Say, 10 such quests, where you recieve a small reward for each quest completed, and a big reward for completion of the entire series of quests.
Anyone that wants to play the game could accomplish this over time, even if they couldn't do it in 2 or 3 days like some hard core power gamers.
Originally posted by Ihmotepp Does it become unfair at some point, is the real question. Everyone can see waiting for a week. It seems like being really spoiled if you'[re going to complain about waiting a week to catch up with everyone else in the game. What if it's one week, versus 7 weeks? What if it's one month versus 7 months?
There's nothing unfair with one player having more time than another to get through a game's content.
All that really matters to players is whether the content itself is engaging and fun.
If a game isn't fun, it doesn't matter if the total time required is 10 years or 10 minutes -- players aren't gonna have a good time. Likewise if a game is fun, players will continue playing for as long as the gameplay remains interesting.
Maybe it's due to not visiting the "Time played = Unfair" thread a few weeks back, but I've never heard anyone feel that time spent playing a game was unfair -- unless it was specifically a PVP-related discussion.
This is also a result of the vast majority of games having reasonably scaled advancement. If time investment doubled your characters strength for each successive hour you put into the game, then yes it would be unfair (even in PVE) because your character's strength would come almost solely from time investment. Actually "unfair" isn't really accurate. It's still fair; it's just not interesting.
Being able to invest in a character to make them grow stronger is actually one of the main traits of RPGs as a genre, and is intentionally designed to create a game where player skill isn't the primary determiner in combat; reducing the twitch skill demand in favor of other factors the player still has control over (such as investing more time into the game, or strategically choosing different talents, gear, and so on.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Does it become unfair at some point, is the real question. Everyone can see waiting for a week. It seems like being really spoiled if you'[re going to complain about waiting a week to catch up with everyone else in the game.
What if it's one week, versus 7 weeks?
What if it's one month versus 7 months?
There's nothing unfair with one player having more time than another to get through a game's content.
All that really matters to players is whether the content itself is engaging and fun.
If a game isn't fun, it doesn't matter if the total time required is 10 years or 10 minutes -- players aren't gonna have a good time. Likewise if a game is fun, players will continue playing for as long as the gameplay remains interesting.
Maybe it's due to not visiting the "Time played = Unfair" thread a few weeks back, but I've never heard anyone feel that time spent playing a game was unfair -- unless it was specifically a PVP-related discussion.
Being able to invest in a character to make them grow stronger is actually one of the main traits of RPGs as a genre, and is intentionally designed to create a game where player skill isn't the primary determiner in combat; reducing the twitch skill demand in favor of other factors the player still has control over (such as investing more time into the game, or strategically choosing different talents, gear, and so on.)
This was the main argument by supporters of RMT versus P2P games. Basically, P2P is unfair because those with more time will level or gain skill levels faster than those with less time.
Therefore, RMT makes the game more fair, because you can adjust for this time difference with money.
You can play the game 8 hours a day, because you don't have a life, etc., etc. However, I can buy xp potions in an RMT game, or an item that makes me regenrate mana faster, or a pet, etc. so I can play 1 hour a day and keep up with you. That's the RMT argument as I understand it from previous RMT threads.
The RMT supporters argued that indeed, the content was not fun. Basically, I don't want to kill 500 mobs to reach level 4, it's to repetitive. I should be able to adjust the rate so that I like it. I can buy items or xp potions, and maybe kill 200 mobs if that's the amount I think would be fun to reach level 4, etc.
Or, maybe I will kill the 500 mobs, but I dont' want to take 4 hours to do it. I'll buy items that help me do it faster so I can do it in 2 hours, etc.
This was the main argument by supporters of RMT versus P2P games. Basically, P2P is unfair because those with more time will level or gain skill levels faster than those with less time. Therefore, RMT makes the game more fair, because you can adjust for this time difference with money. You can play the game 8 hours a day, because you don't have a life, etc., etc. However, I can buy xp potions in an RMT game, or an item that makes me regenrate mana faster, or a pet, etc. so I can play 1 hour a day and keep up with you. That's the RMT argument as I understand it from previous RMT threads.
Which is an invalid argument becuase someone that plays 24 hrs a day AND has money will be so substantially above other players as to be ridiculous. Heck, even a casual player that only puts a little time in will ofther be massively ahead of serious non-RMT-buying players that do play for 24 hrs a day simply because certain RMT items (gear enchantments usually) are ridiculously overpowered.
levels are a stupid thing. if you are not having fun playing, not even in 8 sessions, maybe the game is not good. playing to achieve endgame, on games where only the endgame is fun could be good for powergamers, but I think is a bad deal for casuals. so get a better game.
Same situaiton for a use it to improve it skill game.
Yoou must swing your sword X times to raise a skill level in sword swinging. There is a cap on sword swinging skill. It takes about an hour to swing your sword x times, etc., etc.
You misunderstod me. I mean is bad for casuals to put the fun on level 80, an make so to achieve that level 80 you have to play 4 boring months. For casuals is better to just connect and have fun.
I probably share with you the opinion that having to swing a blade 4 boring months, till you have skill 120 and are able to have fun, is still a bad deal for casuals.
For powergamers could be different, since powergamers can delay satisfaction, to get a very good satisfaction product of playing really "expert" content. And to get expert you may need these 4 boring months .... 2 weeks for the powergamer.
Anyway, to reply your comment. Is also dumb to put a monster at level 4 that are unkillable by players of level 3 ( say... Shaiya). And make so players of level 4 can't play with players of level 6. Skillbased systems are more flexible and don't have this problems.
I think your wrong mate, and here's why...
you said "I mean is bad for casuals to put the fun on level 80"... WHY is the "fun" at lvl 80?
.. cause your perception of "fun" is being high lvl 1337 mofo, with uber gear... if you look back 6 months, wasn't 70 the "fun" part?.. and even longer back.. wasn't 60 the "fun" part?... så why aren't these areas "fun" anymore?.. they didn't change them....
It's not the game, it's the gamers understanding of "fun"... and everyone wants to be leet, and famous, and you can't be leet and famous in 70, when max is 80, now can ya?...
This might sound a little roleplay'ish... but players need to start enjoying the journey, and not rush for end game, dont think about the 20k others' who rush to end game.. to become e-famous... "worlds first" or w/e lame titles blizzard put in the game...
Now i dont play WoW... but i assume this is the game you were refering to... in the end it doesnt matter, cause it's basicly the same with every game.
play your games, enjoy them..! play them at your own pace..! and fu*k the race.....
peace out
I think I agree. But today games are made so leveling is the main force. Are not "quest" games, but "levels" games. You don't kill 30 bears to get strong to stop some orcs, but to ding.
So we agree. My comment is against that design, that is anti-RPG.
This was the main argument by supporters of RMT versus P2P games. Basically, P2P is unfair because those with more time will level or gain skill levels faster than those with less time. Therefore, RMT makes the game more fair, because you can adjust for this time difference with money. You can play the game 8 hours a day, because you don't have a life, etc., etc. However, I can buy xp potions in an RMT game, or an item that makes me regenrate mana faster, or a pet, etc. so I can play 1 hour a day and keep up with you. That's the RMT argument as I understand it from previous RMT threads.
Which is an invalid argument becuase someone that plays 24 hrs a day AND has money will be so substantially above other players as to be ridiculous. Heck, even a casual player that only puts a little time in will ofther be massively ahead of serious non-RMT-buying players that do play for 24 hrs a day simply because certain RMT items (gear enchantments usually) are ridiculously overpowered.
What is this talk about FAIRNESS in a RPG? RPG's are not sports. Sports must be fairs, but RPG are like tales. The wolf vs red littel hod. Of course, the worlf is more powerfull that the littel girl. On most MMO's at level 1 a guy will have sword of +1, and other guy don't. I think is best to understand that there are, and never will be, a plain base for everybody. A guy will have more resolution, better ping, than other guy. And I repeat: RPG's are not sports, is not important if before the battle, a guy whas more strong. Because... we are living a tale, and on most tales, the hero fight imposible odds, so it make sense to fight stuff stronger than ourselves, and prevail.
Also RPG's are games, and exist to have fun. Whatever that make a game fun (like a item that can burn a whole town) is "fair", because is fun. If is fun, is fair, and is everything.
level should not raise strength, defense, hp but only new skills.
if its gonna raise strt, def, hp for each level up then it should only be in single player rpg. online competitive should not be level based.
mmorpg that raise strt, def, hp for each level up is kindda manipulation. it makes people go crazy wanting to beat someone so they play night and day. while at it making the company get money cause people will keep on playing it. do not lose to the manipulation of the mind. control it. dont let your ambition to be high lv to beat someone. dont get jealous of people being higher level. either quit or play your own pace without worrying about whos higher.
i play alot of non-mmo nowdays. i find it more fun and fair competitive. like sc4 online, sf4 online, midnight club la online, cod5 online, gta4 online, lotrconquest online ect..
i only play level based rpg when its a single player.
What is this talk about FAIRNESS in a RPG? RPG's are not sports. Sports must be fairs, but RPG are like tales. The wolf vs red littel hod. Of course, the worlf is more powerfull that the littel girl. On most MMO's at level 1 a guy will have sword of +1, and other guy don't. I think is best to understand that there are, and never will be, a plain base for everybody. A guy will have more resolution, better ping, than other guy. And I repeat: RPG's are not sports, is not important if before the battle, a guy whas more strong. Because... we are living a tale, and on most tales, the hero fight imposible odds, so it make sense to fight stuff stronger than ourselves, and prevail. Also RPG's are games, and exist to have fun. Whatever that make a game fun (like a item that can burn a whole town) is "fair", because is fun. If is fun, is fair, and is everything.
...took a minute to make sense out of this, but as I read it you're saying,
"It's perfectly OK for someone to dominate a game jsut because he has a credit card and money to burn."
No there's never going to be perfect equality in an MMO. Don't be stupid. I'd never suggest that. but at the same time, there is no reason why one player, by buying items in a mall, could be so completely more powerful than ev ery othre player in the game that there's absolutely no way anyone could come close to comparing! That's the point. Item mall items giving people an advantage? Fine. Givin them so MUCH of an advantage that the game is nigh-unplayable unless you buy items? Stupid.
What is this talk about FAIRNESS in a RPG? RPG's are not sports. Sports must be fairs, but RPG are like tales. The wolf vs red littel hod. Of course, the worlf is more powerfull that the littel girl. On most MMO's at level 1 a guy will have sword of +1, and other guy don't. I think is best to understand that there are, and never will be, a plain base for everybody. A guy will have more resolution, better ping, than other guy. And I repeat: RPG's are not sports, is not important if before the battle, a guy whas more strong. Because... we are living a tale, and on most tales, the hero fight imposible odds, so it make sense to fight stuff stronger than ourselves, and prevail. Also RPG's are games, and exist to have fun. Whatever that make a game fun (like a item that can burn a whole town) is "fair", because is fun. If is fun, is fair, and is everything.
...took a minute to make sense out of this, but as I read it you're saying,
"It's perfectly OK for someone to dominate a game jsut because he has a credit card and money to burn."
You still haven't made sense out of it.
How is that person 'dominating' the MMO? Is he winning the MMO? Is he playing against you? No, he's just playing the same game. He has the golden hat and the platinum sword... and that affects the fun you have in the game how?
-- Whammy - a 64x64 miniRPG - RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right? - FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
You still haven't made sense out of it. How is that person 'dominating' the MMO? Is he winning the MMO? Is he playing against you? No, he's just playing the same game. He has the golden hat and the platinum sword... and that affects the fun you have in the game how?
For one, PvP. That player will 1-shot people where someone else with the same level and class might take 5-6 hits to kill the same enemy..
Look, I'm not saying the person that has contributed more (either in time or money) shouldn't have an advantage to the ones that do not. I'm jsut saying that advantage should never be so much that no player without it could ever hope to compete. He gets all the kills, all the loot, all the rewards, wins all the events, murders everyone in pvp, all because he's rich and they're not.
Originally posted by Ihmotepp I disagree. I have seen lots of complaints that P2P games are not fair, because people taht have more time to play can level or gain skill levels faster in terms of weeks nad months, than people that don't have as much time to play.
If they're complaining, chances are the game is boring.
If the game is boring, why are we even discussing time investment when the root problem is the game isn't fun?
Originally posted by Ihmotepp In any case, I'm in agreement with you about access to content. 2-3 hour blocks of time for play at a maximum seems reasonable, IMO.
I agree with this as well.
I'm someone who can have 8+ hour windows of time to devote to gaming, but if it's group content I need to find group members to do this crap with me -- and if I'm asking them for a 4+ hour commitment they're very likely to not have enough time to come.
Personally I wish Scarlet Monastery (WOW) had been more of an eye-opener for Blizzard. They said "Oh, winged dungeons are popular", when it should've been "Oh, short instances are popular." So when their later dungeons were winged but required bigger timesinks they seemed a bit confused why these dungeons weren't as crazily popular.
Basically the ideal dungeon layout for me is many short-duration dungeons (20-45 mins) linked together to form an epic overarcing storyline. So when I want an epic dungeon run, I can run them one after another (ideally with some form of balanced reward making it profitable to do so) but because each individual dungeon is short I have less trouble finding enough players to make the run happen.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Comments
Progression through content has always seemed to me to be the 'proper' metric to use. Level and/or gear progression should ultimately feed into progression through content. You level up and get new gear so you can attempt new content that might be more challenging or maybe just different. Doing the same content over and over except with each iteration you get better gear does not fell like fun to me.
Fair isn't even an issue, really. There is nothing that one player gets that the other one doesn't. The only place I could possibly see it not being 'fair' is if the game was a finite race to the level cap, at which point one has to wonder why the guy with only one hour a day entered in the first place.
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
I would agree, I enjoy progression through content.
The problem is, most MMOs use a false system of progression. Level / gear progression is a false system. All that really changes between level 2 and level 20 is the numbers used.
500 health and 100 damage becomes 5,000 health and 1,000 damage. Tier 1 gear with 50 health becomes Tier 2 gear with 75 health.
That's it. I call it numerical inflation.
Is this truly progression? I don't think it is.
To me, progression is more about... advancing something. Advancing a story, advancing a cause like a war/battle...
Unlocking new and different content to explore and experience, new and different battles and locations and environments... not just ones with bigger numbers.
Same situaiton for a use it to improve it skill game.
Yoou must swing your sword X times to raise a skill level in sword swinging. There is a cap on sword swinging skill. It takes about an hour to swing your sword x times, etc., etc.
You misunderstod me. I mean is bad for casuals to put the fun on level 80, an make so to achieve that level 80 you have to play 4 boring months. For casuals is better to just connect and have fun.
I probably share with you the opinion that having to swing a blade 4 boring months, till you have skill 120 and are able to have fun, is still a bad deal for casuals.
For powergamers could be different, since powergamers can delay satisfaction, to get a very good satisfaction product of playing really "expert" content. And to get expert you may need these 4 boring months .... 2 weeks for the powergamer.
Anyway, to reply your comment. Is also dumb to put a monster at level 4 that are unkillable by players of level 3 ( say... Shaiya). And make so players of level 4 can't play with players of level 6. Skillbased systems are more flexible and don't have this problems.
I think your wrong mate, and here's why...
you said "I mean is bad for casuals to put the fun on level 80"... WHY is the "fun" at lvl 80?
.. cause your perception of "fun" is being high lvl 1337 mofo, with uber gear... if you look back 6 months, wasn't 70 the "fun" part?.. and even longer back.. wasn't 60 the "fun" part?... så why aren't these areas "fun" anymore?.. they didn't change them....
It's not the game, it's the gamers understanding of "fun"... and everyone wants to be leet, and famous, and you can't be leet and famous in 70, when max is 80, now can ya?...
This might sound a little roleplay'ish... but players need to start enjoying the journey, and not rush for end game, dont think about the 20k others' who rush to end game.. to become e-famous... "worlds first" or w/e lame titles blizzard put in the game...
Now i dont play WoW... but i assume this is the game you were refering to... in the end it doesnt matter, cause it's basicly the same with every game.
play your games, enjoy them..! play them at your own pace..! and fu*k the race.....
peace out
Of course it's fair that the power gamer caps first. I'm not really sure why this is even a question..
Joined 2004 - I can't believe I've been a MMORPG.com member for 20 years! Get off my lawn!
The real point is that the game should be fun no matter what level you are at. Which is why I don't play WoW, because it wasn't for me.
This isn't about fair, this is about fun. Are you having fun? No, then don't play. Yes, then play. That is all you have to know. There is no fair.
When SC2 comes out, I will play and get my butt kicked by a bunch of Koreans. Is that fair? Doesn't matter, question is, am I having fun.
I don't really get it.
So you'd be max power, more or less in a day? The entire rest of the game, for 6 or 8 months (the average players stick around an MMO these days) would be End game?
What's your End GAme? Raiding, PvP, something else?
You "aren't" on the spot for declaring an endgame, why am I?
The only differance between your short term advancement and mine is that after everyone reaches the max powertier people can still unlock more utility and more "core skills" in a high max level, low power tier system. anything else carries over.
I find it amazing that by 2020 first world countries will be competing to get immigrants.
Only the weak cry about things being fair. The strong just move on.
When a piscating wizard floods every thread I can understand why people leave.
Well said.
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
Well said.
But it doesn't really say anything or address the topic.
Many people complain that power leveling is unfair, and that the game is not fun for them because someone can play 24/7 since they have no other committments, while the casual gamer lags behind.
That was clearly stated in the OP, and the question is addressed to people that feel this way.
If it's a non issue for you, there's no need to post.
Well said.
But it doesn't really say anything or address the topic.
Many people complain that power leveling is unfair, and that the game is not fun for them because someone can play 24/7 since they have no other committments, while the casual gamer lags behind.
That was clearly stated in the OP, and the question is addressed to people that feel this way.
If it's a non issue for you, there's no need to post.
Well, no matter if one thinks it unfair or not, theres nothing that can be done... The only way to make it "fair" would be.....
To make it so that the game can only be played X hours a week... (X would be, what a casual would considers "Fair")
As i said earlier, it's not about others'!.. start thinking about having fun in your game, instead of thinking about how far you are behind... How is that importnant???
This whole subject is kinda stupid... people need to realise that being max level with uber gear is probably nice... but they dont have fun.. they are only after the E-fame... and casuals get jealous, and that is exactly why they do it... they need to feel they achieved something, and their e-peen grows, and they become, immature nerds...
Play your game, ENJOY it, at your own pace....
In the end, i'd like to ask these question instead :
.. Relax, play your game, enjoy it... don't go for e-fame...
You'll get to end game at some point... And besides, you can turn off your computer, go out spend 200 bucks on a night out drinking, og something else expensive, which in most cases the PL'er can't... Cause he/she doesn't have a job
Peace out
Player A player 10 hours of Starcraft 2.
Player B plays 500 hours of Starcraft 2.
They play head to head online. .
Player B wins. Was that fair? Yes
But player A has less time time to play and has a job, wife and kids. How is this fair?
Ok, it's fair because while player B can beat player A in a game, player A probably makes more money and has a better sex life. That's why it's fair.
Got it?
Many people complain that power leveling is unfair, and that the game is not fun for them because someone can play 24/7 since they have no other committments, while the casual gamer lags behind.
Actually, I don't see too many people complaining about power gamers around here. I do remember that this discussion happened as a counter-point to RMT being perceived as unbalancing whereas power leveling wasn't. But most casuals don't mind the slow and steady path to the end.
The problem is that, in the past, most average gamers found themselves completely locked out of certain MMORPG content because they couldn't make the massive time commitments that were required by that content. Yes, I'm talking about epic gear that could only be unlocked doing forty man raids that lasted up to eight hours straight. And to twist the knife even further, the drops meant that you'd have to repeat that content, at that per session time investment, repeatedly in order to see highest level content at all. In fact, Final Fantasy XI had a boss that took over 18 hours to defeat.
Long story short, most average gamers started to say "fuck it" and pull their subscriptions which in turn caused most MMORPGs to turn it down a few notches. Now that things have come down to a more reasonable level, all that I ever hear about how "dumbed down" these games have become and how awful it is that a "n00b" can be running around with epic gear thus devaluing the power gamer's "accomplishements."
Whatever....
Many people complain that power leveling is unfair, and that the game is not fun for them because someone can play 24/7 since they have no other committments, while the casual gamer lags behind.
Actually, I don't see too many people complaining about power gamers around here. I do remember that this discussion happened as a counter-point to RMT being perceived as unbalancing whereas power leveling wasn't. But most casuals don't mind the slow and steady path to the end.
The problem is that, in the past, most average gamers found themselves completely locked out of certain MMORPG content because they couldn't make the massive time commitments that were required by that content. Yes, I'm talking about epic gear that could only be unlocked doing forty man raids that lasted up to eight hours straight. And to twist the knife even further, the drops meant that you'd have to repeat that content, at that per session time investment, repeatedly in order to see highest level content at all. In fact, Final Fantasy XI had a boss that took over 18 hours to defeat.
Long story short, most average gamers started to say "fuck it" and pull their subscriptions which in turn caused most MMORPGs to turn it down a few notches. Now that things have come down to a more reasonable level, all that I ever hear about how "dumbed down" these games have become and how awful it is that a "n00b" can be running around with epic gear thus devaluing the power gamer's "accomplishements."
Whatever....
I disagree. I have seen lots of complaints that P2P games are not fair, because people taht have more time to play can level or gain skill levels faster in terms of weeks nad months, than people that don't have as much time to play.
In any case, I'm in agreement with you about access to content. 2-3 hour blocks of time for play at a maximum seems reasonable, IMO.
As far as raiding goes, I wouldn't mind a game where there is no "raiding" per se, but rather the most required to access any content in the game would be an ordinary full group. No guild required.
I would not mind if acheiving a certain skill level, piece of gear, or special ability required completing a long series of quests, each of which required about 2 hours of game time, and a full group. Say, 10 such quests, where you recieve a small reward for each quest completed, and a big reward for completion of the entire series of quests.
Anyone that wants to play the game could accomplish this over time, even if they couldn't do it in 2 or 3 days like some hard core power gamers.
There's nothing unfair with one player having more time than another to get through a game's content.
All that really matters to players is whether the content itself is engaging and fun.
If a game isn't fun, it doesn't matter if the total time required is 10 years or 10 minutes -- players aren't gonna have a good time. Likewise if a game is fun, players will continue playing for as long as the gameplay remains interesting.
Maybe it's due to not visiting the "Time played = Unfair" thread a few weeks back, but I've never heard anyone feel that time spent playing a game was unfair -- unless it was specifically a PVP-related discussion.
This is also a result of the vast majority of games having reasonably scaled advancement. If time investment doubled your characters strength for each successive hour you put into the game, then yes it would be unfair (even in PVE) because your character's strength would come almost solely from time investment. Actually "unfair" isn't really accurate. It's still fair; it's just not interesting.
Being able to invest in a character to make them grow stronger is actually one of the main traits of RPGs as a genre, and is intentionally designed to create a game where player skill isn't the primary determiner in combat; reducing the twitch skill demand in favor of other factors the player still has control over (such as investing more time into the game, or strategically choosing different talents, gear, and so on.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
There's nothing unfair with one player having more time than another to get through a game's content.
All that really matters to players is whether the content itself is engaging and fun.
If a game isn't fun, it doesn't matter if the total time required is 10 years or 10 minutes -- players aren't gonna have a good time. Likewise if a game is fun, players will continue playing for as long as the gameplay remains interesting.
Maybe it's due to not visiting the "Time played = Unfair" thread a few weeks back, but I've never heard anyone feel that time spent playing a game was unfair -- unless it was specifically a PVP-related discussion.
Being able to invest in a character to make them grow stronger is actually one of the main traits of RPGs as a genre, and is intentionally designed to create a game where player skill isn't the primary determiner in combat; reducing the twitch skill demand in favor of other factors the player still has control over (such as investing more time into the game, or strategically choosing different talents, gear, and so on.)
This was the main argument by supporters of RMT versus P2P games. Basically, P2P is unfair because those with more time will level or gain skill levels faster than those with less time.
Therefore, RMT makes the game more fair, because you can adjust for this time difference with money.
You can play the game 8 hours a day, because you don't have a life, etc., etc. However, I can buy xp potions in an RMT game, or an item that makes me regenrate mana faster, or a pet, etc. so I can play 1 hour a day and keep up with you. That's the RMT argument as I understand it from previous RMT threads.
The RMT supporters argued that indeed, the content was not fun. Basically, I don't want to kill 500 mobs to reach level 4, it's to repetitive. I should be able to adjust the rate so that I like it. I can buy items or xp potions, and maybe kill 200 mobs if that's the amount I think would be fun to reach level 4, etc.
Or, maybe I will kill the 500 mobs, but I dont' want to take 4 hours to do it. I'll buy items that help me do it faster so I can do it in 2 hours, etc.
Which is an invalid argument becuase someone that plays 24 hrs a day AND has money will be so substantially above other players as to be ridiculous. Heck, even a casual player that only puts a little time in will ofther be massively ahead of serious non-RMT-buying players that do play for 24 hrs a day simply because certain RMT items (gear enchantments usually) are ridiculously overpowered.
Same situaiton for a use it to improve it skill game.
Yoou must swing your sword X times to raise a skill level in sword swinging. There is a cap on sword swinging skill. It takes about an hour to swing your sword x times, etc., etc.
You misunderstod me. I mean is bad for casuals to put the fun on level 80, an make so to achieve that level 80 you have to play 4 boring months. For casuals is better to just connect and have fun.
I probably share with you the opinion that having to swing a blade 4 boring months, till you have skill 120 and are able to have fun, is still a bad deal for casuals.
For powergamers could be different, since powergamers can delay satisfaction, to get a very good satisfaction product of playing really "expert" content. And to get expert you may need these 4 boring months .... 2 weeks for the powergamer.
Anyway, to reply your comment. Is also dumb to put a monster at level 4 that are unkillable by players of level 3 ( say... Shaiya). And make so players of level 4 can't play with players of level 6. Skillbased systems are more flexible and don't have this problems.
I think your wrong mate, and here's why...
you said "I mean is bad for casuals to put the fun on level 80"... WHY is the "fun" at lvl 80?
.. cause your perception of "fun" is being high lvl 1337 mofo, with uber gear... if you look back 6 months, wasn't 70 the "fun" part?.. and even longer back.. wasn't 60 the "fun" part?... så why aren't these areas "fun" anymore?.. they didn't change them....
It's not the game, it's the gamers understanding of "fun"... and everyone wants to be leet, and famous, and you can't be leet and famous in 70, when max is 80, now can ya?...
This might sound a little roleplay'ish... but players need to start enjoying the journey, and not rush for end game, dont think about the 20k others' who rush to end game.. to become e-famous... "worlds first" or w/e lame titles blizzard put in the game...
Now i dont play WoW... but i assume this is the game you were refering to... in the end it doesnt matter, cause it's basicly the same with every game.
play your games, enjoy them..! play them at your own pace..! and fu*k the race.....
peace out
I think I agree. But today games are made so leveling is the main force. Are not "quest" games, but "levels" games. You don't kill 30 bears to get strong to stop some orcs, but to ding.
So we agree. My comment is against that design, that is anti-RPG.
Which is an invalid argument becuase someone that plays 24 hrs a day AND has money will be so substantially above other players as to be ridiculous. Heck, even a casual player that only puts a little time in will ofther be massively ahead of serious non-RMT-buying players that do play for 24 hrs a day simply because certain RMT items (gear enchantments usually) are ridiculously overpowered.
What is this talk about FAIRNESS in a RPG? RPG's are not sports. Sports must be fairs, but RPG are like tales. The wolf vs red littel hod. Of course, the worlf is more powerfull that the littel girl. On most MMO's at level 1 a guy will have sword of +1, and other guy don't. I think is best to understand that there are, and never will be, a plain base for everybody. A guy will have more resolution, better ping, than other guy. And I repeat: RPG's are not sports, is not important if before the battle, a guy whas more strong. Because... we are living a tale, and on most tales, the hero fight imposible odds, so it make sense to fight stuff stronger than ourselves, and prevail.
Also RPG's are games, and exist to have fun. Whatever that make a game fun (like a item that can burn a whole town) is "fair", because is fun. If is fun, is fair, and is everything.
If you have kids, wife, work, and can only play half an hour every week... don't play an MMO.
level should not raise strength, defense, hp but only new skills.
if its gonna raise strt, def, hp for each level up then it should only be in single player rpg. online competitive should not be level based.
mmorpg that raise strt, def, hp for each level up is kindda manipulation. it makes people go crazy wanting to beat someone so they play night and day. while at it making the company get money cause people will keep on playing it. do not lose to the manipulation of the mind. control it. dont let your ambition to be high lv to beat someone. dont get jealous of people being higher level. either quit or play your own pace without worrying about whos higher.
i play alot of non-mmo nowdays. i find it more fun and fair competitive. like sc4 online, sf4 online, midnight club la online, cod5 online, gta4 online, lotrconquest online ect..
i only play level based rpg when its a single player.
...took a minute to make sense out of this, but as I read it you're saying,
"It's perfectly OK for someone to dominate a game jsut because he has a credit card and money to burn."
No there's never going to be perfect equality in an MMO. Don't be stupid. I'd never suggest that. but at the same time, there is no reason why one player, by buying items in a mall, could be so completely more powerful than ev ery othre player in the game that there's absolutely no way anyone could come close to comparing! That's the point. Item mall items giving people an advantage? Fine. Givin them so MUCH of an advantage that the game is nigh-unplayable unless you buy items? Stupid.
...took a minute to make sense out of this, but as I read it you're saying,
"It's perfectly OK for someone to dominate a game jsut because he has a credit card and money to burn."
You still haven't made sense out of it.
How is that person 'dominating' the MMO? Is he winning the MMO? Is he playing against you? No, he's just playing the same game. He has the golden hat and the platinum sword... and that affects the fun you have in the game how?
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
For one, PvP. That player will 1-shot people where someone else with the same level and class might take 5-6 hits to kill the same enemy..
Look, I'm not saying the person that has contributed more (either in time or money) shouldn't have an advantage to the ones that do not. I'm jsut saying that advantage should never be so much that no player without it could ever hope to compete. He gets all the kills, all the loot, all the rewards, wins all the events, murders everyone in pvp, all because he's rich and they're not.
I agree with this as well.
I'm someone who can have 8+ hour windows of time to devote to gaming, but if it's group content I need to find group members to do this crap with me -- and if I'm asking them for a 4+ hour commitment they're very likely to not have enough time to come.
Personally I wish Scarlet Monastery (WOW) had been more of an eye-opener for Blizzard. They said "Oh, winged dungeons are popular", when it should've been "Oh, short instances are popular." So when their later dungeons were winged but required bigger timesinks they seemed a bit confused why these dungeons weren't as crazily popular.
Basically the ideal dungeon layout for me is many short-duration dungeons (20-45 mins) linked together to form an epic overarcing storyline. So when I want an epic dungeon run, I can run them one after another (ideally with some form of balanced reward making it profitable to do so) but because each individual dungeon is short I have less trouble finding enough players to make the run happen.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver