It's not immature, but you are being unfair. Why should the person who has been progressing their character for many months be equal to a player who has just started?
And you aren't paying attention
No one is asking for EQUALITY, simply not as massive a gap
I don't care how long you play you should not be immune to a lower level, you should at least need to respond to them and interact to win
Massive gaps are necessary, and they are realistic.
Take some kid and stick him in a major league baseball game, he will never get a base hit. The gap is just huge. If he were pitching, he would never strike someone out. Same for any sport, because there is a gap in skill that is huge.
Go back to ancient times and stick someone who has never used a weapon into a battle with an experience warrior, the unexperienced person will be dead in seconds. The gap is huge.
Stop trying to be as good as the people who have played a game right when you show up. If you wanted to be as good as them right now, then you should have started playing earlier.
I made a longer post earlier which explains other reasons on why there needs to be a big gap, otherwise the game won't work.
The "power gap" is not the problem. It's the maturity gap.
The maturity gap is when someone logs on to a new game and expects their character to be as powerful as one that someone else has been improving on for 6 months to a year or more. Or else that they should be able to do in 3 days what took that guy six months.
Instead of settling in and improving their character the same way as that other guy did, the player with the maturity deficit demands the game be made easier and the whole playing field leveled so that the guy who has been playing for a year or more has nothing to show for it.
Now there are "buddy systems' and similar devices whereby players many levels apart can group together. That's fine. But suggesting that newbies should be on par with veterans of a game is just the latest iteration of "I don't want to play I just want everything handed to me now."
MMORPGs are not difficult, they cannot be made easier. They are just tedious. Tedious does not equal difficult. Playing Starcraft multiplayer against an equally skilled player is difficult. Computer programming can be difficult. Grinding orcs for 2 months is not difficult it is tedious.
You are literally doing the same thing over and over again. You are basically an assembly line worker. I do not think that asking that a game be made "fun" is immature.
reading this and your OP make me think that you don't actually enjoy MMORPG's & the mechanics that the genre brings. It's as if you like pop music but find yourself listening to jazz, making suggestions on how jazz should sound more "pop" like.
I think for a lot of mmorpg players the process of advancement, in a measurable and clearly defined way, is one of the fundamental points of an RPG, remove that and the game is no longer a real "rpg".
FPS games are much better at leveling the playing field. Well, the old ones were. Nowadays it's hard to find an RTS or Shooter game that doesn't have some sort of gear treadmill and thus, a power gap.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
It's not immature, but you are being unfair. Why should the person who has been progressing their character for many months be equal to a player who has just started?
And you aren't paying attention
No one is asking for EQUALITY, simply not as massive a gap
I don't care how long you play you should not be immune to a lower level, you should at least need to respond to them and interact to win
Massive gaps are necessary, and they are realistic.
Take some kid and stick him in a major league baseball game, he will never get a base hit. The gap is just huge. If he were pitching, he would never strike someone out. Same for any sport, because there is a gap in skill that is huge.
Go back to ancient times and stick someone who has never used a weapon into a battle with an experience warrior, the unexperienced person will be dead in seconds. The gap is huge.
Stop trying to be as good as the people who have played a game right when you show up. If you wanted to be as good as them right now, then you should have started playing earlier.
I made a longer post earlier which explains other reasons on why there needs to be a big gap, otherwise the game won't work.
History has shown that there are people who are just naturally good at certain things. It's not impossible for a youngster to hold his own in MLB. Not impossible for a kid to do well in battle. Look at how many children they are using in the war in the middle east. It may not be ancient times with swords and shields, but you can formulate that those kids don't have nearly as much military training as US soldiers.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
The "power gap" is not the problem. It's the maturity gap.
The maturity gap is when someone logs on to a new game and expects their character to be as powerful as one that someone else has been improving on for 6 months to a year or more. Or else that they should be able to do in 3 days what took that guy six months.
Instead of settling in and improving their character the same way as that other guy did, the player with the maturity deficit demands the game be made easier and the whole playing field leveled so that the guy who has been playing for a year or more has nothing to show for it.
Now there are "buddy systems' and similar devices whereby players many levels apart can group together. That's fine. But suggesting that newbies should be on par with veterans of a game is just the latest iteration of "I don't want to play I just want everything handed to me now."
Great post; This is why the OPs argument really does not hold up...
I just don't understand people who do not want to play games....
________________________________________________________ Sorcery must persist, the future is the Citadel
The "power gap" is not the problem. It's the maturity gap.
The maturity gap is when someone logs on to a new game and expects their character to be as powerful as one that someone else has been improving on for 6 months to a year or more. Or else that they should be able to do in 3 days what took that guy six months.
Instead of settling in and improving their character the same way as that other guy did, the player with the maturity deficit demands the game be made easier and the whole playing field leveled so that the guy who has been playing for a year or more has nothing to show for it.
Now there are "buddy systems' and similar devices whereby players many levels apart can group together. That's fine. But suggesting that newbies should be on par with veterans of a game is just the latest iteration of "I don't want to play I just want everything handed to me now."
Great post; This is why the OPs argument really does not hold up...
I just don't understand people who do not want to play games the way I do...
Fixed.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
I'm not saying that games with no level statification suffer more from this. I was using a specific example of what COULD happen in any game if there is some new, popular area, and everyone of every "level" was able to participate. If there were no level stratification or power gap, it would likely be worse. That's all I was saying.
Alright well, the problem would exist either way so what exactly does your point bring to the table? Your conclusion that "it would likely be worse" is completely theoretical and Creslin has already pointed out why it wouldn't necessarily work out that way and how, in a real example (UO), it worked perfectly fine with a game that has a much smaller power gap than the modern games of today.
At this point, you've devalued your own arguement in your responses trying to defend it and been proven wrong with a real example. Why can't you at least admit that you might be wrong? What are you people holding onto so dearly that you can't see this would help the genre? The way it is now is detrimental to the very idea of a social game. It's poor design.
Nobody is saying that doing this would be simple or easy, but it's certainly not impossible. It's been done before.
_________________________________ "Fixed it. Because that wall of text attacked me, killed me and looted my body..." -George "sniperg" Light
I'm not saying that games with no level statification suffer more from this. I was using a specific example of what COULD happen in any game if there is some new, popular area, and everyone of every "level" was able to participate. If there were no level stratification or power gap, it would likely be worse. That's all I was saying.
Alright well, the problem would exist either way so what exactly does your point bring to the table? Your conclusion that "it would likely be worse" is completely theoretical and Creslin has already pointed out why it wouldn't necessarily work out that way and how, in a real example (UO), it worked perfectly fine with a game that has a much smaller power gap than the modern games of today.
At this point, you've devalued your own arguement in your responses trying to defend it and been proven wrong with a real example. Why can't you at least admit that you might be wrong? What are you people holding onto so dearly that you can't see this would help the genre? The way it is now is detrimental to the very idea of a social game. It's poor design.
Nobody is saying that doing this would be simple or easy, but it's certainly not impossible. It's been done before.
It's a discussion. I wasn't trying to say that everything I type is right. If you don't think my post has any value, fine. But I still think lag and server crashes is a big reason why developers prefer a large power gap. I actually agree that power gaps are a detriment to the community, I was simply trying to point out ONE reason why they still exist, and will likely continue to exist.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
The "power gap" is not the problem. It's the maturity gap.
The maturity gap is when someone logs on to a new game and expects their character to be as powerful as one that someone else has been improving on for 6 months to a year or more. Or else that they should be able to do in 3 days what took that guy six months.
Instead of settling in and improving their character the same way as that other guy did, the player with the maturity deficit demands the game be made easier and the whole playing field leveled so that the guy who has been playing for a year or more has nothing to show for it.
Now there are "buddy systems' and similar devices whereby players many levels apart can group together. That's fine. But suggesting that newbies should be on par with veterans of a game is just the latest iteration of "I don't want to play I just want everything handed to me now."
Great post; This is why the OPs argument really does not hold up...
I just don't understand people who do not want to play games....
Isane, snarlingwolf, nikoliath, other posters...Excellent work, misinterpreting the entire message that the OP was trying to send and then ignoring every reply that attempts to eloborate further for those of you that just don't understand what the hell is going on here. Your selective post replying is a work of art.
I swear to god you people see something that makes your "arguement" look childish and amateur at best and just decide "well, I'm going to pretend like I didn't read that because it totally blows my shit out of the water." Then you go on to post some assinine bullshit that doesn't even have to do with the topic.
I don't know why I even bother, I've been here for a long fucking time. I know that most of the people on here are too dense to get a good point across to them. For some reason, though, I find myself trying to reiterate the same simple principles over and over again.
It's obvious I give the lot of you way too much credit. I guess Creslin and PilnkPlonk are to blame for that for appearing like bright shining stars that articulate and interpret posts correctly and then take the time to explain to you the point that you are missing entirely while most of you slam on your keyboards "i smart, u dum. fire greatest achievement man ever make" like cavemen. I understand that the internet is full of retards spouting their opinions like facts, but this is ridiculous.
_________________________________ "Fixed it. Because that wall of text attacked me, killed me and looted my body..." -George "sniperg" Light
The main problem.. some mmos endorse the EPEEN factor, just like their gear carrot.. In fact they are related.. In my opinion those that want a huge power gap want to maintain the "my epeen is bigger then your epeen".. It's an ego problem, and one that devs try to tap in and promote.. It's also why most gamers are reluctant to switch games, just because they don't want to be a peon again, and spend countless months growing their epeens..
I really want to know why it's wrong for everyyone to play on the same level field.. Anyone? Anyone? Buehler?
I'm not saying that games with no level statification suffer more from this. I was using a specific example of what COULD happen in any game if there is some new, popular area, and everyone of every "level" was able to participate. If there were no level stratification or power gap, it would likely be worse. That's all I was saying.
Alright well, the problem would exist either way so what exactly does your point bring to the table? Your conclusion that "it would likely be worse" is completely theoretical and Creslin has already pointed out why it wouldn't necessarily work out that way and how, in a real example (UO), it worked perfectly fine with a game that has a much smaller power gap than the modern games of today.
At this point, you've devalued your own arguement in your responses trying to defend it and been proven wrong with a real example. Why can't you at least admit that you might be wrong? What are you people holding onto so dearly that you can't see this would help the genre? The way it is now is detrimental to the very idea of a social game. It's poor design.
Nobody is saying that doing this would be simple or easy, but it's certainly not impossible. It's been done before.
It's a discussion. I wasn't trying to say that everything I type is right. If you don't think my post has any value, fine. But I still think lag and server crashes is a big reason why developers prefer a large power gap. I actually agree that power gaps are a detriment to the community, I was simply trying to point out ONE reason why they still exist, and will likely continue to exist.
Okay, I'm not trying to be a dick or anything, but since that discussion lead to you confessing that a game WITH a large power gap HAS had that issue in the past (WoW) then why would that be the reason to continue having a large power gap? Are you following me here? The large power gap doesn't prevent that problem from occurring. It still happens with a large power gap and one could argue that it happens more so with one (and one has). So why then, would anyone fear straying from that paradigm to a new paradigm with (potentially as you say) the same problem but one that solves several other important issues (especially for a social game)?
_________________________________ "Fixed it. Because that wall of text attacked me, killed me and looted my body..." -George "sniperg" Light
I'm not saying that games with no level statification suffer more from this. I was using a specific example of what COULD happen in any game if there is some new, popular area, and everyone of every "level" was able to participate. If there were no level stratification or power gap, it would likely be worse. That's all I was saying.
Alright well, the problem would exist either way so what exactly does your point bring to the table? Your conclusion that "it would likely be worse" is completely theoretical and Creslin has already pointed out why it wouldn't necessarily work out that way and how, in a real example (UO), it worked perfectly fine with a game that has a much smaller power gap than the modern games of today.
At this point, you've devalued your own arguement in your responses trying to defend it and been proven wrong with a real example. Why can't you at least admit that you might be wrong? What are you people holding onto so dearly that you can't see this would help the genre? The way it is now is detrimental to the very idea of a social game. It's poor design.
Nobody is saying that doing this would be simple or easy, but it's certainly not impossible. It's been done before.
It's a discussion. I wasn't trying to say that everything I type is right. If you don't think my post has any value, fine. But I still think lag and server crashes is a big reason why developers prefer a large power gap. I actually agree that power gaps are a detriment to the community, I was simply trying to point out ONE reason why they still exist, and will likely continue to exist.
Okay, I'm not trying to be a dick or anything, but since that discussion lead to you confessing that a game WITH a large power gap HAS had that issue in the past (WoW) then why would that be the reason to continue having a large power gap? Are you following me here? The large power gap doesn't prevent that problem from occurring. It still happens with a large power gap and one could argue that it happens more so with one (and one has). So why then, would anyone fear straying from that paradigm to a new paradigm with (potentially as you say) the same problem but one that solves several other important issues (especially for a social game)?
A lot of games are launching with instanced tutorials and starter areas. Launch is the time when most people are on the same level playing field. And look how bad lag and server stability is in many launches over the years. My conclusion was such that by separating players, power gap being one way to do that, they are able to have better graphics and stability and less lag. It is one of the causes of player separation, power gap being one of the way to separate players.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Okay, I'm not trying to be a dick or anything, but since that discussion lead to you confessing that a game WITH a large power gap HAS had that issue in the past (WoW) then why would that be the reason to continue having a large power gap? Are you following me here? The large power gap doesn't prevent that problem from occurring. It still happens with a large power gap and one could argue that it happens more so with one (and one has). So why then, would anyone fear straying from that paradigm to a new paradigm with (potentially as you say) the same problem but one that solves several other important issues (especially for a social game)?
A lot of games are launching with instanced tutorials and starter areas. Launch is the time when most people are on the same level playing field. And look how bad lag and server stability is in many launches over the years. My conclusion was such that by separating players, power gap being one way to do that, they are able to have better graphics and stability and less lag. It is one of the causes of player separation, power gap being one of the way to separate players.
But these games require instanced starter zones because level stratification forces the players to all play in the same area when they first start...doesn't this once again show that having level stratification can increase zone over-crowding?
Anyway...I see what you're saying, and at first glance, your theory does seem to make sense. But I have played games without a power gap and zone over-crowding has never been a problem. In fact, the power gap games always seem to have a problem with zone over-crowding because the population of players is never evenly distributed through the levels.
In a power-gap game you are depending on an artifical measure to segregate your players. In a non power-gap game, you are depending on simply supply and demand to segregate your players. It's basically like a socialist system (the system decides where you go) versus a free-market system (you decide where you go).
History has shown that there are people who are just naturally good at certain things. It's not impossible for a youngster to hold his own in MLB. Not impossible for a kid to do well in battle. Look at how many children they are using in the war in the middle east. It may not be ancient times with swords and shields, but you can formulate that those kids don't have nearly as much military training as US soldiers.
I would be fully willing to bet you an insane amount of money that you could not find a "youngster who could hold his own in MLB" it will not happen. The lack of muscle size due to the kid not yet being fully grown will not allow him to do much of anything.
Modern warfare does not work in the same manner and there is a reason I didn't use it in my examples. Guns and explosives mean that anyone has the chance of getting lucky kills without skill. Yes the side without skill/training will suffer many times the deaths as the skilled opponent, but they will get some lucky shots in. Also you are comparing group fights to head to head fights as my example contained. The more people involved, the more likely the unskilled person will get a kill, due to the number of distractions. They get the opportunity to fire upon an enemy that is facing someone else.
This is even displayed in FPS games, someone can die 20 times in a row due to lack of skill, but then get a lucky grenade or headshot in and have a 1 and 20 k/d ratio.
A sword fight between two people does not have that same situation. You have to be in close, and know how to properly wield the weapon. If you have no training with the weapon it will be knocked out of your hand immediately and you will be killed.
Not that any of this is much on topic, but your counter examples were so wrong that I had to comment.
History has shown that there are people who are just naturally good at certain things. It's not impossible for a youngster to hold his own in MLB. Not impossible for a kid to do well in battle. Look at how many children they are using in the war in the middle east. It may not be ancient times with swords and shields, but you can formulate that those kids don't have nearly as much military training as US soldiers.
I would be fully willing to bet you an insane amount of money that you could not find a "youngster who could hold his own in MLB" it will not happen. The lack of muscle size due to the kid not yet being fully grown will not allow him to do much of anything.
Modern warfare does not work in the same manner and there is a reason I didn't use it in my examples. Guns and explosives mean that anyone has the chance of getting lucky kills without skill. Yes the side without skill/training will suffer many times the deaths as the skilled opponent, but they will get some lucky shots in. Also you are comparing group fights to head to head fights as my example contained. The more people involved, the more likely the unskilled person will get a kill, due to the number of distractions. They get the opportunity to fire upon an enemy that is facing someone else.
This is even displayed in FPS games, someone can die 20 times in a row due to lack of skill, but then get a lucky grenade or headshot in and have a 1 and 20 k/d ratio.
A sword fight between two people does not have that same situation. You have to be in close, and know how to properly wield the weapon. If you have no training with the weapon it will be knocked out of your hand immediately and you will be killed.
Not that any of this is much on topic, but your counter examples were so wrong that I had to comment.
Sure, if you disregard any example that destroys your arguement, then you have a good point.
Really though, are you saying that in every scenario that someone with far less experience would always be at the mercy of the experienced? So a young boy singing has no chance of being compared with an older pop star? They could never sing together harmoniously? Do you think there is not a single 18 year old that has ever existed that was a better singer than a veteran 30 year old pop star? What about dancing? Do you think "So you think you can dance" and "America's Best Dance Crew" is solely compromised of older dancers and that only the oldest dancer(s) wins?
If anything, the one example you legitimately argued against (the MLB one) in the post above is the least comparable because we don't necessarily have huge AGE differences in the games we play and since that's the one thing holding you back from believing it, it's not a very compelling arguement. You just completely disregarded what supported the idea you oppose.
Oh, why do I even bother. You'll just selectively choose not to reply to this post either.
_________________________________ "Fixed it. Because that wall of text attacked me, killed me and looted my body..." -George "sniperg" Light
It's not immature, but you are being unfair. Why should the person who has been progressing their character for many months be equal to a player who has just started?
And you aren't paying attention
No one is asking for EQUALITY, simply not as massive a gap
I don't care how long you play you should not be immune to a lower level, you should at least need to respond to them and interact to win
Massive gaps are necessary, and they are realistic.
Take some kid and stick him in a major league baseball game, he will never get a base hit. The gap is just huge. If he were pitching, he would never strike someone out. Same for any sport, because there is a gap in skill that is huge.
Go back to ancient times and stick someone who has never used a weapon into a battle with an experience warrior, the unexperienced person will be dead in seconds. The gap is huge.
Stop trying to be as good as the people who have played a game right when you show up. If you wanted to be as good as them right now, then you should have started playing earlier.
I made a longer post earlier which explains other reasons on why there needs to be a big gap, otherwise the game won't work.
you're an idiot
what you are describing with your "reality" bs is a gap that still requires PAYING ATTENTION AND CHOOSING TO USE YOUR SKILLS WISELY
what I am describing is a problem gap where the higher level player for no reason whatsoever can IGNORE the lower level player and still be 100% immune
the solution: gaps in skill and experience should give advantange, variety and options far beyond the inexperienced, they should not be auto-pilot i-get to-kick-your-ass-while-im-sleeping-mode
What I am describing is realism to the degree that the more experienced player should have the tools to win but that he actually be required to use them
What you are describing is that the higher level person should win just for showing up
do you get it yet? or do you think you should win just for masturbating more often?
The main problem.. some mmos endorse the EPEEN factor, just like their gear carrot.. In fact they are related.. In my opinion those that want a huge power gap want to maintain the "my epeen is bigger then your epeen".. It's an ego problem, and one that devs try to tap in and promote.. It's also why most gamers are reluctant to switch games, just because they don't want to be a peon again, and spend countless months growing their epeens..
I really want to know why it's wrong for everyyone to play on the same level field.. Anyone? Anyone? Buehler?
Why is this a "problem"? If people like to play MMOs with EPEEN factor, that is their choice. There is nothing wrong if players don't want level playing fields between L1 and L80. There is also nothing wrong if somoen want the same level field. These are games, players should go to the style they want. If 99% of the players want the epeen factor, then it is what developers will endorse.
History has shown that there are people who are just naturally good at certain things. It's not impossible for a youngster to hold his own in MLB. Not impossible for a kid to do well in battle. Look at how many children they are using in the war in the middle east. It may not be ancient times with swords and shields, but you can formulate that those kids don't have nearly as much military training as US soldiers.
I would be fully willing to bet you an insane amount of money that you could not find a "youngster who could hold his own in MLB" it will not happen. The lack of muscle size due to the kid not yet being fully grown will not allow him to do much of anything.
Modern warfare does not work in the same manner and there is a reason I didn't use it in my examples. Guns and explosives mean that anyone has the chance of getting lucky kills without skill. Yes the side without skill/training will suffer many times the deaths as the skilled opponent, but they will get some lucky shots in. Also you are comparing group fights to head to head fights as my example contained. The more people involved, the more likely the unskilled person will get a kill, due to the number of distractions. They get the opportunity to fire upon an enemy that is facing someone else.
This is even displayed in FPS games, someone can die 20 times in a row due to lack of skill, but then get a lucky grenade or headshot in and have a 1 and 20 k/d ratio.
A sword fight between two people does not have that same situation. You have to be in close, and know how to properly wield the weapon. If you have no training with the weapon it will be knocked out of your hand immediately and you will be killed.
Not that any of this is much on topic, but your counter examples were so wrong that I had to comment.
pitiful excuse for an arguement
give a kid, any kid a gun and let him pull the trigger while its aimed at your head and you will die
try that in an mmo and the person who is "older" simply survives the bullet by being older, not because they did anything
in reality the older more experienced person needs to use their intuition, judgement and skill choices to avoid getting shot in the head by the child
in the power gap scenarios we are complaining about in-game the player can just let the child shoot him and it does nothing, ever
I'm not saying that games with no level statification suffer more from this. I was using a specific example of what COULD happen in any game if there is some new, popular area, and everyone of every "level" was able to participate. If there were no level stratification or power gap, it would likely be worse. That's all I was saying.
Alright well, the problem would exist either way so what exactly does your point bring to the table? Your conclusion that "it would likely be worse" is completely theoretical and Creslin has already pointed out why it wouldn't necessarily work out that way and how, in a real example (UO), it worked perfectly fine with a game that has a much smaller power gap than the modern games of today.
At this point, you've devalued your own arguement in your responses trying to defend it and been proven wrong with a real example. Why can't you at least admit that you might be wrong? What are you people holding onto so dearly that you can't see this would help the genre? The way it is now is detrimental to the very idea of a social game. It's poor design.
Nobody is saying that doing this would be simple or easy, but it's certainly not impossible. It's been done before.
It's a discussion. I wasn't trying to say that everything I type is right. If you don't think my post has any value, fine. But I still think lag and server crashes is a big reason why developers prefer a large power gap. I actually agree that power gaps are a detriment to the community, I was simply trying to point out ONE reason why they still exist, and will likely continue to exist.
Okay, I'm not trying to be a dick or anything, but since that discussion lead to you confessing that a game WITH a large power gap HAS had that issue in the past (WoW) then why would that be the reason to continue having a large power gap? Are you following me here? The large power gap doesn't prevent that problem from occurring. It still happens with a large power gap and one could argue that it happens more so with one (and one has). So why then, would anyone fear straying from that paradigm to a new paradigm with (potentially as you say) the same problem but one that solves several other important issues (especially for a social game)?
A lot of games are launching with instanced tutorials and starter areas. Launch is the time when most people are on the same level playing field. And look how bad lag and server stability is in many launches over the years. My conclusion was such that by separating players, power gap being one way to do that, they are able to have better graphics and stability and less lag. It is one of the causes of player separation, power gap being one of the way to separate players.
Power grind is purely for the carrot on a stick factor, always has been. Many people like that sort of play style because it is an easily measurable form of achievement that has a direct impact on gameplay. Considering it has existed since before online gaming...
Forever looking for employment. Life is rather dull without it.
The main problem.. some mmos endorse the EPEEN factor, just like their gear carrot.. In fact they are related.. In my opinion those that want a huge power gap want to maintain the "my epeen is bigger then your epeen".. It's an ego problem, and one that devs try to tap in and promote.. It's also why most gamers are reluctant to switch games, just because they don't want to be a peon again, and spend countless months growing their epeens..
I really want to know why it's wrong for everyyone to play on the same level field.. Anyone? Anyone? Buehler?
Why is this a "problem"? If people like to play MMOs with EPEEN factor, that is their choice. There is nothing wrong if players don't want level playing fields between L1 and L80. There is also nothing wrong if somoen want the same level field. These are games, players should go to the style they want. If 99% of the players want the epeen factor, then it is what developers will endorse.
You must be new to some mmos.. I remember back in the day when a level 59 epeen wasn't that inferior to a level 60 epeen.. But todays gap is growing wider and wider with every yell of the epeen envy person.. As for the "if most want it" then let them have it excuse, that is truely sad.. I frown upon that type of thinking and discourage it within my family.. The my boat is better then your boat, or my house is better then your house, or my job pays more then your job mentality is what is wrong with society anymore..
Where I come from, when a person says "keep up with the joneses", we say it as a derogative statement demostrating socio-economic or cultural "inferiority".. I don't view that in a positive light.. However, it looks like that is status quo for most mmos these days..
what you are describing with your "reality" bs is a gap that still requires PAYING ATTENTION AND CHOOSING TO USE YOUR SKILLS WISELY
what I am describing is a problem gap where the higher level player for no reason whatsoever can IGNORE the lower level player and still be 100% immune
the solution: gaps in skill and experience should give advantange, variety and options far beyond the inexperienced, they should not be auto-pilot i-get to-kick-your-ass-while-im-sleeping-mode
What I am describing is realism to the degree that the more experienced player should have the tools to win but that he actually be required to use them
What you are describing is that the higher level person should win just for showing up
do you get it yet? or do you think you should win just for masturbating more often?
Hate to break it to you but real life isn't any more fair then a game. Yes people do win just for showing up. If you put the Red Sox team against a high school baseball team, they've won before they stepped on the field. Sure they have to play it out to show it, but there is no doubt that the moment they've shown up they've already won. There's no person on the sidelines thinking "Man those kids have a shot at this."
When the US declares war on Iraq, they've already won. Yes they have to go through the time of getting 100-1 or 1000-1 kills to every US soldier death and completely destroying the country and then dealing with the aftermath of not wanting to just jump ship once they've killed Saddam and destabilized the country, but they've already won, everyone knows they've already won as soon as war is declared. There's no one sitting there going, man I think Iraq can pull this off.
You want to show up new to a game and suddenly be on par with characters that have been around, that is both pathetic and ridiculous. Those characters have leveled up, earned their gear, raised their skills ets. So yes they've already beat you when you try to fight them. Stop being the kid who wants to have what everyone else has the moment you decide to start playing, and instead be the mature minded individual who realizes that those people spent the time, worked for, and earned their advantage over the brand new player. Maybe your parents forgot to teach you this lesson, but you have to work for what you want in life. Not sit around and have it handed to you because you cry about it. This isn't an FPS game where any gun could get a kill because of a lucky headshot. These are tick based/dice roll games. There is a major difference in functionality and differences between leveled up and new players. The fact that you can't grasp that, and just want to cry and moan and call everyone, especially those who realizes that you are the moron, an idiot shows how sad this who whine fest is.
what you are describing with your "reality" bs is a gap that still requires PAYING ATTENTION AND CHOOSING TO USE YOUR SKILLS WISELY
what I am describing is a problem gap where the higher level player for no reason whatsoever can IGNORE the lower level player and still be 100% immune
the solution: gaps in skill and experience should give advantange, variety and options far beyond the inexperienced, they should not be auto-pilot i-get to-kick-your-ass-while-im-sleeping-mode
What I am describing is realism to the degree that the more experienced player should have the tools to win but that he actually be required to use them
What you are describing is that the higher level person should win just for showing up
do you get it yet? or do you think you should win just for masturbating more often?
Hate to break it to you but real life isn't any more fair then a game. Yes people do win just for showing up. If you put the Red Sox team against a high school baseball team, they've won before they stepped on the field. Sure they have to play it out to show it, but there is no doubt that the moment they've shown up they've already won. There's no person on the sidelines thinking "Man those kids have a shot at this."
When the US declares war on Iraq, they've already won. Yes they have to go through the time of getting 100-1 or 1000-1 kills to every US soldier death and completely destroying the country and then dealing with the aftermath of not wanting to just jump ship once they've killed Saddam and destabilized the country, but they've already won, everyone knows they've already won as soon as war is declared. There's no one sitting there going, man I think Iraq can pull this off.
You want to show up new to a game and suddenly be on par with characters that have been around, that is both pathetic and ridiculous. Those characters have leveled up, earned their gear, raised their skills ets. So yes they've already beat you when you try to fight them. Stop being the kid who wants to have what everyone else has the moment you decide to start playing, and instead be the mature minded individual who realizes that those people spent the time, worked for, and earned their advantage over the brand new player. Maybe your parents forgot to teach you this lesson, but you have to work for what you want in life. Not sit around and have it handed to you because you cry about it. This isn't an FPS game where any gun could get a kill because of a lucky headshot. These are tick based/dice roll games. There is a major difference in functionality and differences between leveled up and new players. The fact that you can't grasp that, and just want to cry and moan and call everyone, especially those who realizes that you are the moron, an idiot shows how sad this who whine fest is.
Actually if you understood the analogy he was trying to make at all, you would understand that a comparable situation to a modern MMORPG would be if the professional team showed up and won without swinging a bat or even attempting to play defense. It is not the same, the highschool team will clearly lose because the professional team understands the game more and when they perform skillfully they will come out on top. It still takes effort. If the professional team does nothing, they will lose. That scenario doesn't play out the same in a modern MMO.
Yeah, it's clear that a super-power is going to win in a war against a smaller country, but the super-power still has to put forth tons of effort to win that war to come out on top as much as expected. Especially in the case with war, performing their best and really thinking about everything they do is important because, if they don't people will die.
By the way, incase you hadn't heard. The U.S. lost to Vietnam. Lulz, there goes your entire arguement. Try telling me you think Vietnam was comparable to the U.S. at the time.
_________________________________ "Fixed it. Because that wall of text attacked me, killed me and looted my body..." -George "sniperg" Light
Hate to break it to you but real life isn't any more fair then a game. Yes people do win just for showing up. If you put the Red Sox team against a high school baseball team, they've won before they stepped on the field. Sure they have to play it out to show it, but there is no doubt that the moment they've shown up they've already won. There's no person on the sidelines thinking "Man those kids have a shot at this."
When the US declares war on Iraq, they've already won. Yes they have to go through the time of getting 100-1 or 1000-1 kills to every US soldier death and completely destroying the country and then dealing with the aftermath of not wanting to just jump ship once they've killed Saddam and destabilized the country, but they've already won, everyone knows they've already won as soon as war is declared. There's no one sitting there going, man I think Iraq can pull this off.
You want to show up new to a game and suddenly be on par with characters that have been around, that is both pathetic and ridiculous. Those characters have leveled up, earned their gear, raised their skills ets. So yes they've already beat you when you try to fight them. Stop being the kid who wants to have what everyone else has the moment you decide to start playing, and instead be the mature minded individual who realizes that those people spent the time, worked for, and earned their advantage over the brand new player. Maybe your parents forgot to teach you this lesson, but you have to work for what you want in life. Not sit around and have it handed to you because you cry about it. This isn't an FPS game where any gun could get a kill because of a lucky headshot. These are tick based/dice roll games. There is a major difference in functionality and differences between leveled up and new players. The fact that you can't grasp that, and just want to cry and moan and call everyone, especially those who realizes that you are the moron, an idiot shows how sad this who whine fest is.
Hahah yeah man! Like when the fledging thirteen colonies rebelled against the British empire, one of the largest empires in history they obviously already lost! Or when three hundred Spartans faced off against a massive Persian army, they clearly had to chance of delaying them!
Oh oh! When the US hockey team faced off against the Soviet hockey team in the 1980 Olympics, the US had no chance haha! When Japan declared war on Russia in 1905, the Japanese had no chance! Russia is so much bigger and more powerful!
When the US declares war on Iraq, they've already won. Yes they have to go through the time of getting 100-1 or 1000-1 kills to every US soldier death and completely destroying the country and then dealing with the aftermath of not wanting to just jump ship once they've killed Saddam and destabilized the country, but they've already won, everyone knows they've already won as soon as war is declared. There's no one sitting there going, man I think Iraq can pull this off.
By the way, incase you hadn't heard. The U.S. lost to Vietnam. Lulz, there goes your entire arguement.
I think the quotes take care of that one by itself, I don't even have to remark on how the US losing in Vietnam does not destroy my argument involving the US declaring war on Iraq.
Actually if you understood the analogy he was trying to make at all, you would understand that a comparable situation to a modern MMORPG would be if the professional team showed up and won without swinging a bat or even attempting to play defense. It is not the same, the highschool team will clearly lose because the professional team understands the game more and when they perform skillfully they will come out on top. It still takes effort. If
Actually if you understood the analogies correctly, a higher level character can't win in an MMO without swinging their weapon or casting a spell, just like the Red Sox can't beat the high school team without swinging a bat. Once the Red Sox start swinging their bats, or the higher level toon starts swinging his weapon at the lower level one, the outcome is definite.
Actually if you understood the analogy he was trying to make at all, you would understand that a comparable situation to a modern MMORPG would be if the professional team showed up and won without swinging a bat or even attempting to play defense. It is not the same, the highschool team will clearly lose because the professional team understands the game more and when they perform skillfully they will come out on top. It still takes effort. If
Actually if you understood the analogies correctly, a higher level character can't win in an MMO without swinging their weapon or casting a spell, just like the Red Sox can't beat the high school team without swinging a bat. Once the Red Sox start swinging their bats, or the higher level toon starts swinging his weapon at the lower level one, the outcome is definite.
Actually if you had a working knowledge of commonly implemented game mechanics you would understand that almost every game ever with a targetting system and auto-attack has your character automagically attack back when you get attacked. So, no the higher level character actually doesn't have to do anything because the game will take care of it for them once they start getting attacked and their stats will dictate the winner of the fight. Even in the case where this doesn't happen, the higher level character will not lose because the low level character can't hit him accuractely enough or for enough damage to outdamage his regeneration if it's even possible to damage him at all.
Where as in the baseball scenario, the highschool team can simply throw more strikes then balls and score a single run to win the game. If the pitcher on the professional team doesn't pitch to the other team after 20 seconds of receiving the ball, the umpire rules a ball which will inevitably cause a run if the pitcher continues to do that instead of actually playing. Delaying this game will also inevitably lead to a win for the highschool team or a forfeit from the professional team for delaying the game intentionally.
Thanks for trying.
_________________________________ "Fixed it. Because that wall of text attacked me, killed me and looted my body..." -George "sniperg" Light
Comments
Massive gaps are necessary, and they are realistic.
Take some kid and stick him in a major league baseball game, he will never get a base hit. The gap is just huge. If he were pitching, he would never strike someone out. Same for any sport, because there is a gap in skill that is huge.
Go back to ancient times and stick someone who has never used a weapon into a battle with an experience warrior, the unexperienced person will be dead in seconds. The gap is huge.
Stop trying to be as good as the people who have played a game right when you show up. If you wanted to be as good as them right now, then you should have started playing earlier.
I made a longer post earlier which explains other reasons on why there needs to be a big gap, otherwise the game won't work.
FPS games are much better at leveling the playing field. Well, the old ones were. Nowadays it's hard to find an RTS or Shooter game that doesn't have some sort of gear treadmill and thus, a power gap.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
History has shown that there are people who are just naturally good at certain things. It's not impossible for a youngster to hold his own in MLB. Not impossible for a kid to do well in battle. Look at how many children they are using in the war in the middle east. It may not be ancient times with swords and shields, but you can formulate that those kids don't have nearly as much military training as US soldiers.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Great post; This is why the OPs argument really does not hold up...
I just don't understand people who do not want to play games....
________________________________________________________
Sorcery must persist, the future is the Citadel
Fixed.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Alright well, the problem would exist either way so what exactly does your point bring to the table? Your conclusion that "it would likely be worse" is completely theoretical and Creslin has already pointed out why it wouldn't necessarily work out that way and how, in a real example (UO), it worked perfectly fine with a game that has a much smaller power gap than the modern games of today.
At this point, you've devalued your own arguement in your responses trying to defend it and been proven wrong with a real example. Why can't you at least admit that you might be wrong? What are you people holding onto so dearly that you can't see this would help the genre? The way it is now is detrimental to the very idea of a social game. It's poor design.
Nobody is saying that doing this would be simple or easy, but it's certainly not impossible. It's been done before.
_________________________________
"Fixed it. Because that wall of text attacked me, killed me and looted my body..."
-George "sniperg" Light
It's a discussion. I wasn't trying to say that everything I type is right. If you don't think my post has any value, fine. But I still think lag and server crashes is a big reason why developers prefer a large power gap. I actually agree that power gaps are a detriment to the community, I was simply trying to point out ONE reason why they still exist, and will likely continue to exist.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Isane, snarlingwolf, nikoliath, other posters...Excellent work, misinterpreting the entire message that the OP was trying to send and then ignoring every reply that attempts to eloborate further for those of you that just don't understand what the hell is going on here. Your selective post replying is a work of art.
I swear to god you people see something that makes your "arguement" look childish and amateur at best and just decide "well, I'm going to pretend like I didn't read that because it totally blows my shit out of the water." Then you go on to post some assinine bullshit that doesn't even have to do with the topic.
I don't know why I even bother, I've been here for a long fucking time. I know that most of the people on here are too dense to get a good point across to them. For some reason, though, I find myself trying to reiterate the same simple principles over and over again.
It's obvious I give the lot of you way too much credit. I guess Creslin and PilnkPlonk are to blame for that for appearing like bright shining stars that articulate and interpret posts correctly and then take the time to explain to you the point that you are missing entirely while most of you slam on your keyboards "i smart, u dum. fire greatest achievement man ever make" like cavemen. I understand that the internet is full of retards spouting their opinions like facts, but this is ridiculous.
_________________________________
"Fixed it. Because that wall of text attacked me, killed me and looted my body..."
-George "sniperg" Light
The main problem.. some mmos endorse the EPEEN factor, just like their gear carrot.. In fact they are related.. In my opinion those that want a huge power gap want to maintain the "my epeen is bigger then your epeen".. It's an ego problem, and one that devs try to tap in and promote.. It's also why most gamers are reluctant to switch games, just because they don't want to be a peon again, and spend countless months growing their epeens..
I really want to know why it's wrong for everyyone to play on the same level field.. Anyone? Anyone? Buehler?
Okay, I'm not trying to be a dick or anything, but since that discussion lead to you confessing that a game WITH a large power gap HAS had that issue in the past (WoW) then why would that be the reason to continue having a large power gap? Are you following me here? The large power gap doesn't prevent that problem from occurring. It still happens with a large power gap and one could argue that it happens more so with one (and one has). So why then, would anyone fear straying from that paradigm to a new paradigm with (potentially as you say) the same problem but one that solves several other important issues (especially for a social game)?
_________________________________
"Fixed it. Because that wall of text attacked me, killed me and looted my body..."
-George "sniperg" Light
A lot of games are launching with instanced tutorials and starter areas. Launch is the time when most people are on the same level playing field. And look how bad lag and server stability is in many launches over the years. My conclusion was such that by separating players, power gap being one way to do that, they are able to have better graphics and stability and less lag. It is one of the causes of player separation, power gap being one of the way to separate players.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
But these games require instanced starter zones because level stratification forces the players to all play in the same area when they first start...doesn't this once again show that having level stratification can increase zone over-crowding?
Anyway...I see what you're saying, and at first glance, your theory does seem to make sense. But I have played games without a power gap and zone over-crowding has never been a problem. In fact, the power gap games always seem to have a problem with zone over-crowding because the population of players is never evenly distributed through the levels.
In a power-gap game you are depending on an artifical measure to segregate your players. In a non power-gap game, you are depending on simply supply and demand to segregate your players. It's basically like a socialist system (the system decides where you go) versus a free-market system (you decide where you go).
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
I would be fully willing to bet you an insane amount of money that you could not find a "youngster who could hold his own in MLB" it will not happen. The lack of muscle size due to the kid not yet being fully grown will not allow him to do much of anything.
Modern warfare does not work in the same manner and there is a reason I didn't use it in my examples. Guns and explosives mean that anyone has the chance of getting lucky kills without skill. Yes the side without skill/training will suffer many times the deaths as the skilled opponent, but they will get some lucky shots in. Also you are comparing group fights to head to head fights as my example contained. The more people involved, the more likely the unskilled person will get a kill, due to the number of distractions. They get the opportunity to fire upon an enemy that is facing someone else.
This is even displayed in FPS games, someone can die 20 times in a row due to lack of skill, but then get a lucky grenade or headshot in and have a 1 and 20 k/d ratio.
A sword fight between two people does not have that same situation. You have to be in close, and know how to properly wield the weapon. If you have no training with the weapon it will be knocked out of your hand immediately and you will be killed.
Not that any of this is much on topic, but your counter examples were so wrong that I had to comment.
Sure, if you disregard any example that destroys your arguement, then you have a good point.
Really though, are you saying that in every scenario that someone with far less experience would always be at the mercy of the experienced? So a young boy singing has no chance of being compared with an older pop star? They could never sing together harmoniously? Do you think there is not a single 18 year old that has ever existed that was a better singer than a veteran 30 year old pop star? What about dancing? Do you think "So you think you can dance" and "America's Best Dance Crew" is solely compromised of older dancers and that only the oldest dancer(s) wins?
If anything, the one example you legitimately argued against (the MLB one) in the post above is the least comparable because we don't necessarily have huge AGE differences in the games we play and since that's the one thing holding you back from believing it, it's not a very compelling arguement. You just completely disregarded what supported the idea you oppose.
Oh, why do I even bother. You'll just selectively choose not to reply to this post either.
_________________________________
"Fixed it. Because that wall of text attacked me, killed me and looted my body..."
-George "sniperg" Light
you're an idiot
what you are describing with your "reality" bs is a gap that still requires PAYING ATTENTION AND CHOOSING TO USE YOUR SKILLS WISELY
what I am describing is a problem gap where the higher level player for no reason whatsoever can IGNORE the lower level player and still be 100% immune
the solution: gaps in skill and experience should give advantange, variety and options far beyond the inexperienced, they should not be auto-pilot i-get to-kick-your-ass-while-im-sleeping-mode
What I am describing is realism to the degree that the more experienced player should have the tools to win but that he actually be required to use them
What you are describing is that the higher level person should win just for showing up
do you get it yet? or do you think you should win just for masturbating more often?
Why is this a "problem"? If people like to play MMOs with EPEEN factor, that is their choice. There is nothing wrong if players don't want level playing fields between L1 and L80. There is also nothing wrong if somoen want the same level field. These are games, players should go to the style they want. If 99% of the players want the epeen factor, then it is what developers will endorse.
pitiful excuse for an arguement
give a kid, any kid a gun and let him pull the trigger while its aimed at your head and you will die
try that in an mmo and the person who is "older" simply survives the bullet by being older, not because they did anything
in reality the older more experienced person needs to use their intuition, judgement and skill choices to avoid getting shot in the head by the child
in the power gap scenarios we are complaining about in-game the player can just let the child shoot him and it does nothing, ever
Power grind is purely for the carrot on a stick factor, always has been. Many people like that sort of play style because it is an easily measurable form of achievement that has a direct impact on gameplay. Considering it has existed since before online gaming...
Forever looking for employment. Life is rather dull without it.
You must be new to some mmos.. I remember back in the day when a level 59 epeen wasn't that inferior to a level 60 epeen.. But todays gap is growing wider and wider with every yell of the epeen envy person.. As for the "if most want it" then let them have it excuse, that is truely sad.. I frown upon that type of thinking and discourage it within my family.. The my boat is better then your boat, or my house is better then your house, or my job pays more then your job mentality is what is wrong with society anymore..
Where I come from, when a person says "keep up with the joneses", we say it as a derogative statement demostrating socio-economic or cultural "inferiority".. I don't view that in a positive light.. However, it looks like that is status quo for most mmos these days..
Hate to break it to you but real life isn't any more fair then a game. Yes people do win just for showing up. If you put the Red Sox team against a high school baseball team, they've won before they stepped on the field. Sure they have to play it out to show it, but there is no doubt that the moment they've shown up they've already won. There's no person on the sidelines thinking "Man those kids have a shot at this."
When the US declares war on Iraq, they've already won. Yes they have to go through the time of getting 100-1 or 1000-1 kills to every US soldier death and completely destroying the country and then dealing with the aftermath of not wanting to just jump ship once they've killed Saddam and destabilized the country, but they've already won, everyone knows they've already won as soon as war is declared. There's no one sitting there going, man I think Iraq can pull this off.
You want to show up new to a game and suddenly be on par with characters that have been around, that is both pathetic and ridiculous. Those characters have leveled up, earned their gear, raised their skills ets. So yes they've already beat you when you try to fight them. Stop being the kid who wants to have what everyone else has the moment you decide to start playing, and instead be the mature minded individual who realizes that those people spent the time, worked for, and earned their advantage over the brand new player. Maybe your parents forgot to teach you this lesson, but you have to work for what you want in life. Not sit around and have it handed to you because you cry about it. This isn't an FPS game where any gun could get a kill because of a lucky headshot. These are tick based/dice roll games. There is a major difference in functionality and differences between leveled up and new players. The fact that you can't grasp that, and just want to cry and moan and call everyone, especially those who realizes that you are the moron, an idiot shows how sad this who whine fest is.
Actually if you understood the analogy he was trying to make at all, you would understand that a comparable situation to a modern MMORPG would be if the professional team showed up and won without swinging a bat or even attempting to play defense. It is not the same, the highschool team will clearly lose because the professional team understands the game more and when they perform skillfully they will come out on top. It still takes effort. If the professional team does nothing, they will lose. That scenario doesn't play out the same in a modern MMO.
Yeah, it's clear that a super-power is going to win in a war against a smaller country, but the super-power still has to put forth tons of effort to win that war to come out on top as much as expected. Especially in the case with war, performing their best and really thinking about everything they do is important because, if they don't people will die.
By the way, incase you hadn't heard. The U.S. lost to Vietnam. Lulz, there goes your entire arguement. Try telling me you think Vietnam was comparable to the U.S. at the time.
_________________________________
"Fixed it. Because that wall of text attacked me, killed me and looted my body..."
-George "sniperg" Light
Hahah yeah man! Like when the fledging thirteen colonies rebelled against the British empire, one of the largest empires in history they obviously already lost! Or when three hundred Spartans faced off against a massive Persian army, they clearly had to chance of delaying them!
Oh oh! When the US hockey team faced off against the Soviet hockey team in the 1980 Olympics, the US had no chance haha! When Japan declared war on Russia in 1905, the Japanese had no chance! Russia is so much bigger and more powerful!
...In reality, nothing is ever certain.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
I think the quotes take care of that one by itself, I don't even have to remark on how the US losing in Vietnam does not destroy my argument involving the US declaring war on Iraq.
Actually if you understood the analogies correctly, a higher level character can't win in an MMO without swinging their weapon or casting a spell, just like the Red Sox can't beat the high school team without swinging a bat. Once the Red Sox start swinging their bats, or the higher level toon starts swinging his weapon at the lower level one, the outcome is definite.
Actually if you had a working knowledge of commonly implemented game mechanics you would understand that almost every game ever with a targetting system and auto-attack has your character automagically attack back when you get attacked. So, no the higher level character actually doesn't have to do anything because the game will take care of it for them once they start getting attacked and their stats will dictate the winner of the fight. Even in the case where this doesn't happen, the higher level character will not lose because the low level character can't hit him accuractely enough or for enough damage to outdamage his regeneration if it's even possible to damage him at all.
Where as in the baseball scenario, the highschool team can simply throw more strikes then balls and score a single run to win the game. If the pitcher on the professional team doesn't pitch to the other team after 20 seconds of receiving the ball, the umpire rules a ball which will inevitably cause a run if the pitcher continues to do that instead of actually playing. Delaying this game will also inevitably lead to a win for the highschool team or a forfeit from the professional team for delaying the game intentionally.
Thanks for trying.
_________________________________
"Fixed it. Because that wall of text attacked me, killed me and looted my body..."
-George "sniperg" Light