Why people say its unfair that hardcore players get an advantage in games over casuals? well i would have thought since they spend more time in game, Weather it be pveing, pvping harvesting or the like. Of course Players who spend longer in game should definately reap more rewards then someone who plays a few hours a week. It seems illogical to me that casuals have equal benefits in a game as a hardcore player. For example, you have to people working the same job, but one works less hours, Should both employees be payed the same amount of money at the end of the week? Hell no.
/rant
If you do not understand the WHY,then you are not a true gamer that pays attention to what goes in in MMO gaming.
I won't write a book,because most do understand the WHY,so i'll use two examples that is pretty much the same amongst all games.
In games we play the economy is a HUGE factor and being the FIRST to get that new item is a HUGE factor.There is no secret players always spend retarded amounts of game currency on that newest item.So for example you are a hardcore player ,playing 8 hours a day,you are going to be first to have access to attaining the newest items,therefore selling those items at your disposal.You will be able to set the bar and sell them for ridiculous amounts.Once those same rare items are abundant on the server,the value drops quickly.
I will use FFXI as an example now from a crafting perspective.The market is a volatile one in this game and the people that can profit the most are those that are ahead of the pack.To make a profit in many crafts,you have to be many levels above that crafted level to HQ them.This means you make a larger profit and can control the market price.
Example a player that can HQ Sheihi can make 99 with one synth,where as a casual player can only make 33 with one synth.So their cost is more and they are not able to sell and make any profit because the hardcore player can afford to sell cheaper with a profit than the casual can break even.
Once we start talking about pvp and having better gear than the casual it is a no brainer as to the why.
I just wanted to add the analogy used is not a good one.In the work force yo uare being paiud,in gaming we are all paying the same amount.Actually the hardcore is getting the deal,because that type of player is eating up more bandwidth than the casual player.So shoudl soemone costing the developer more money and paying the same be given any benefits?of course not.
Using your same analogy,would be like saying the guy who worked 50 hours should get paid more for the time alone[which is what gaming is doing],but what if he took 50 hours to accomplish what the other person worked to accomplish in 30 hours?I think the boss might be looking to fire that 50 hour employee.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
A 40 hour character is the same as all 40 hour characters.
You can play that 40 hours in one week.
Or, one hour a month, so that it takes 3 and a half years to accumulate 40 hours.
IMO, those characters are EQUAL. They are both 40 hour characters.
On the other hand, some people view online characters, in terms of REAL LIFE TIME.
They expect all real life one month characters to be the same, regardless of time played in the game.
If you played one hour, and I played 120 hours, we should both be the same, because our characters are ONE MONTH OLD IN REAL TIME.
yup agree to the former ^^ the latter cannot work at extreme levels, there is a point where time investiment is required. if a player picks up a game and plays for 30 minutes in a month and another player invest say 60 hours in that same month, you cannot balance this. A good game will apply diminishing returns, but the bottom line is if you invest your real time elsewhere then you cannot have your cake and eat it. And even if you did, you wont enjoy it - its the journey that makes it worth the eating.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
As opposed to all the people making a huge positive impact on the economy by devoting lots of time and effort into video games?
Ouch, that was mean!
I'll have you know that MMORPG players are some of the most incredibly caring and charitable people in the world! Why, they're always buying special mounts so they can donate money to some charitable cause or another.
When people heard that NCSoft would be donating a month of profits to Japan, some people bought THREE accounts.
people hate facing their limits. its common human condition.
those below the average wish to be at least average. those above the average wish to remain there. reality is everyone wants to be higher.
happens hystorically all the time not just in MMOs. problem isnt people doing this. its normal for them. problem is the developers not realising this and giving in to them and thus alienating their most dedicated and loyal fans.
To be fair to game designers and investors etc, this is just good business sense. The "hardcore" crowd will always be in the minority. If you can appeal to 5000 people paying £10 a month, or 20,000 people paying £10 a month, which one would you go for?
Not arguing the whole casual/hardcore debate either way, but from a purely monetary perspective it makes sense, at least to me.
I think it's largely a difference in perception of your character.
I view a character in an online game based on the HOURS PLAYED IN THE GAME.
From that point of view, there is no advantage in being hardcore, there is no disadvantage in being casual.
A 40 hour character is the same as all 40 hour characters.
You can play that 40 hours in one week.
Or, one hour a month, so that it takes 3 and a half years to accumulate 40 hours.
IMO, those characters are EQUAL. They are both 40 hour characters.
... and some people are just time limited, and can't spend 500 days worth of time in an MMORPG (I have a friend who sometime LAST year hit 500 days of gameplay in WoW. Days. Of GAMEPLAY.).
... so we're looking for a game with a relatively smaller ceiling for time, and a higher factor for skill and and talent.
Nothing wrong with that. Just means some people want a different thing out of their games. After all, even in oldschool P&P RPGs, most of them had a ceiling you could hit LONG before 100 days (As in 2400 hours) worth of tabletop playing.
The ceiling for 'time spent in game creating virtual improvements' in MMORPGs far exceeds any P&P RPG or CRPG. MMORPGs are the ultimate evolution of virtual improvement.
I think it should be apparant that you can't create a game that satisfies both players.
So you want to max leve in 100 days, regardless of how many hours you play.
Your friend wouldn't get in his 500 days of game play with that game design.
Both of you won't be happy playing the same game.
IMO, there is no way to design the game so taht you can have your max level in 100 days, without impacting your friends game play.
if you can max out in 100 days, so can he. Now his 500 day game is gone.
So I agree with you. there should be different games, for different players.
What is very WRONG, IMO, is when someone insists taht EVERYONE that doesn't like THEIR game is somehow flawed, or "jealous", or "lacks self discipline" or some other negative.
That you should just play the game they way THEY like it, and PRETEND you're playing a different game.
Why can't you play my casual game, and just not buy xp potions? Why can't you play my single player game, and just group if you want to? Why can't you play my non-perma death game, and just delete your character if you die? Why can't you play my non-FFA PvP game, and just flag yourself PvP? What's WRONG with you? Why won't you play MY game the way I like? It must be because you are flawed somehow. If you were not flawed, you would like MY game.
As opposed to all the people making a huge positive impact on the economy by devoting lots of time and effort into video games?
Ouch, that was mean!
I'll have you know that MMORPG players are some of the most incredibly caring and charitable people in the world! Why, they're always buying special mounts so they can donate money to some charitable cause or another.
When people heard that NCSoft would be donating a month of profits to Japan, some people bought THREE accounts.
Lol, sorry. That was meant tongue in cheek, honestly!
thinknig about this more, if the arguement is that casuals are just as skilled as players who invest mor time then games like wow should not need to nerf content, all they need to do is allow the game to extend the time at which instances reset to give casuals the bigger real time window. Wow does do this, so why nerf?
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
I think it should be apparant that you can't create a game that satisfies both players.
So you want to max leve in 100 days, regardless of how many hours you play.
...
...
...
I'm not advocating your imaginary 'Hit max level in amount of days you own a game' viewpoint. Nobody is.
Nobody.
Anywhere. Or if they are, they're an extreme minority. I'm still not sure where you got your weird idea of who the people disagreeing with you are.
It would be like if I said 'I think there's two kinds of players in the world. People who want games my specific way, and people who think that they should level up in games because of how many times they wet their bed'
I mean, sure, there may be people who think like the latter, but I wouldn't go so far as to characterize everybody who disagrees with me as belonging to the second camp. :P
I do agree with the part that people should have their own types of games.
... but hey, when people with a certain mindset for gameplaying win (The type of people who want to play WoW) and get most games made their way, you sure do hear a lot of complaining from the other people.
I dont like his analogy either. So lets just say someone who works 4-6 hours a day compared to someone who works 8-10 hours a day. If that person who worked less time produced / processed / or basically did the same amount of work or more compared to someone who did 8-10 hours, I would be damn pissed if I didnt get paid as much if not more than the other people.
I dont know how people tend to spend their time in MMO's they play, but if I know that I have only 4 hours a day to play then I'd be damn sure to put that time to use. Raids generally doesnt take more than 1 to 2 hours now days. Even a casual player can invest enough time to do 1 raid a day and then spend the rest of the time doing something else.
There is only one HARDCORE type of gameplay. Everything else is funneling you into that one type of gameplay. People who arent interested in that will be a casual player of the game. If there were other types of hardcore gameplay, you would have more hardcore players. The game itself makes people hardcore. If they love it, they'll find time to play.
If there is only one type of game, there is only one type of hardcore player.
See you in the dream.. The Fires from heaven, now as cold as ice. A rapid ascension tolls a heavy price.
Originally posted by Bladestrom I also did not say it was the deciding factor.
Neither I say you did. You still seem to miss the point though because
Originally posted by Bladestrom If a casual player plays for 1 hour then they should get 1 hour's worth of 'reward' if they play 2 then they should get 2 hours with. That seems totally fair.
it is not fair and the point of the objection against time constraint related mechanics.
Originally posted by Bladestrom Lol in fact, can you imagine what would happen if a 100 meter part time sprinter who was beaten in a race by a professional sprinter demanded to get a medal as well, because he doesnt have time to practice as much..
Your analogy is wrong.
Correct analogy would be that you would not be allowed on race because you did not train enough, despite you are faster than anyone else.
tldr: Stop rewarding players for how much time they spent in the game but how they spend it.
I think it should be apparant that you can't create a game that satisfies both players.
So you want to max leve in 100 days, regardless of how many hours you play.
Your friend wouldn't get in his 500 days of game play with that game design.
Both of you won't be happy playing the same game.
I don't agree. The problem usually is that certain aspects of a game is funnier than the rest. If the entire game is as fun to play it shouldn't matter if you played 100 or 1000 hours of it, you still have a great time.
The MMO devs need to look on all aspects of the game and try to make the less fun better, that way all players can enjoy the games, not only casuals or hardcore.
Neither I say you did. You still seem to miss the point though because
Originally posted by Bladestrom
If a casual player plays for 1 hour then they should get 1 hour's worth of 'reward' if they play 2 then they should get 2 hours with. That seems totally fair.
it is not fair and the point of the objection against time constraint related mechanics.
Originally posted by Bladestrom
Lol in fact, can you imagine what would happen if a 100 meter part time sprinter who was beaten in a race by a professional sprinter demanded to get a medal as well, because he doesnt have time to practice as much..
Your analogy is wrong.
Correct analogy would be that you would not be allowed on race because you did not train enough, despite you are faster than anyone else.
tldr:
Stop rewarding players for how much time they spent in the game but how they spend it.
thats exactly how it does work, if you are not good enough to get into the final, you dont get to race in it. You dont add an extra lane on the track so he can get to race anyway (or indeed make the race half as long to make it easier for you). Asside from this, since time is not a factor, and casual players are just as skiiled as players who have played for longer, why nerf content for casual players? the casual player can play the same contet over a longer period of time.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
There is only one HARDCORE type of gameplay. Everything else is funneling you into that one type of gameplay. People who arent interested in that will be a casual player of the game. If there were other types of hardcore gameplay, you would have more hardcore players. The game itself makes people hardcore. If they love it, they'll find time to play.
If there is only one type of game, there is only one type of hardcore player.
Many people have both work and kids, there is no way they can balance in being a hardcore gamer with that.
I agree that some games are fun to play hardcore if you have the time, but you can't assume that all people can take themselves time no matter how much they want to, the world just doesn't work like that (and it probably is a good thing too, the world would collapse because no one worked or did anything besides gaming otherwise).
Asside from this, since time is not a factor, and casual players are just as skiiled as players who have played for longer, why nerf content for casual players? the casual player can play the same contet over a longer period of time.
The reason for that is that they really nerf the games for bad players. There are both hardcore and casual players that suck but it sounds kinda rude for a company to say that they make the game easier for people that suck.
I actually know some really good casual players in Guildwars, and we all know some people that are constantly logged in but still suck.
Originally posted by Gdemami Correct analogy would be that you would not be allowed on race because you did not train enough, despite you are faster than anyone else.
thats exactly how it does work, if you are not good enough to get into the final, you dont get to race in it.
I made bold the part you overlooked so you might re-think your reply.
Asside from this, since time is not a factor, and casual players are just as skiiled as players who have played for longer, why nerf content for casual players? the casual player can play the same contet over a longer period of time.
The reason for that is that they really nerf the games for bad players. There are both hardcore and casual players that suck but it sounds kinda rude for a company to say that they make the game easier for people that suck.
I actually know some really good casual players in Guildwars, and we all know some people that are constantly logged in but still suck.
Yup I agree, games are nerfed for bad players regardless of wether they are hardcore or casual. It's the lazy players that demand the nerfs (and get labelled casuals when they shouldn't)
There is also the comparison of higher skilled casuals againsty hardcore as an arguement that time served is unfair, but when the players are equally skilled and the game allows content to be played over any time that suits the player then that is not an arguement. it is exactly as you say, bad players.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Correct analogy would be that you would not be allowed on race because you did not train enough, despite you are faster than anyone else.
thats exactly how it does work, if you are not good enough to get into the final, you dont get to race in it.
I made bold the part you overlooked so you might re-think your reply.
No, i just ignored the part that he is faster than everyone that is in the race, you added that to skew the arguement. I was comparing equally skilled people. The part time runner is EQUALLY skilled with the other racers. However the other racers have trained more, they are fitter.
now back to MMORGs, the casual and hardcore players are equally skilled, the casual player CAN extend locks on instances to suit their own playstyles - so again why nerf (hint answer in above posts)
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
your trying to argue, im trying to explain a point. Read my last point, what do you think about the nerfing?
edit i ignored your comment as NOONE disagrees with the point that casual player's can be better than hardcore players, that wasnt what we were discussing.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Originally posted by Bladestrom your trying to argue, im trying to explain a point.
Oh, so when someone points out a flaw in your reasoning, you ignore the points and try to explain it further, despite it does not change anything about the counterpoint made nor your own points?
Why should I (or anyone) respond to any of your points when you just ignore my reply like you did before?
Sorry but this is leading nowhere, it isn't constructive discussion at all.
Companies do it to get, and keep, subscriptions. If you make a game, be sure to cater to only those who group and play 20+ hours a week. I'll play it. You might not be making millions, though...
"Why should I (or anyone) respond to any of your points when you just ignore my reply like you did before?"
My arguement was flawed if they were not equally skilled, you added the comment that they were not equally skilled not me, this is not the point i was trying to make (as per the context of the thread). In any case its no big deal, I have clarified that i intended the comparison to be equally skilled. Feel free to ignore my posts
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Comments
Well, that whole thread is quite pointless.
What I've got from here is that I'm quite correct in my lack of desire to play mmorpgs.
If you do not understand the WHY,then you are not a true gamer that pays attention to what goes in in MMO gaming.
I won't write a book,because most do understand the WHY,so i'll use two examples that is pretty much the same amongst all games.
In games we play the economy is a HUGE factor and being the FIRST to get that new item is a HUGE factor.There is no secret players always spend retarded amounts of game currency on that newest item.So for example you are a hardcore player ,playing 8 hours a day,you are going to be first to have access to attaining the newest items,therefore selling those items at your disposal.You will be able to set the bar and sell them for ridiculous amounts.Once those same rare items are abundant on the server,the value drops quickly.
I will use FFXI as an example now from a crafting perspective.The market is a volatile one in this game and the people that can profit the most are those that are ahead of the pack.To make a profit in many crafts,you have to be many levels above that crafted level to HQ them.This means you make a larger profit and can control the market price.
Example a player that can HQ Sheihi can make 99 with one synth,where as a casual player can only make 33 with one synth.So their cost is more and they are not able to sell and make any profit because the hardcore player can afford to sell cheaper with a profit than the casual can break even.
Once we start talking about pvp and having better gear than the casual it is a no brainer as to the why.
I just wanted to add the analogy used is not a good one.In the work force yo uare being paiud,in gaming we are all paying the same amount.Actually the hardcore is getting the deal,because that type of player is eating up more bandwidth than the casual player.So shoudl soemone costing the developer more money and paying the same be given any benefits?of course not.
Using your same analogy,would be like saying the guy who worked 50 hours should get paid more for the time alone[which is what gaming is doing],but what if he took 50 hours to accomplish what the other person worked to accomplish in 30 hours?I think the boss might be looking to fire that 50 hour employee.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
A 40 hour character is the same as all 40 hour characters.
You can play that 40 hours in one week.
Or, one hour a month, so that it takes 3 and a half years to accumulate 40 hours.
IMO, those characters are EQUAL. They are both 40 hour characters.
On the other hand, some people view online characters, in terms of REAL LIFE TIME.
They expect all real life one month characters to be the same, regardless of time played in the game.
If you played one hour, and I played 120 hours, we should both be the same, because our characters are ONE MONTH OLD IN REAL TIME.
yup agree to the former ^^ the latter cannot work at extreme levels, there is a point where time investiment is required. if a player picks up a game and plays for 30 minutes in a month and another player invest say 60 hours in that same month, you cannot balance this. A good game will apply diminishing returns, but the bottom line is if you invest your real time elsewhere then you cannot have your cake and eat it. And even if you did, you wont enjoy it - its the journey that makes it worth the eating.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
As opposed to all the people making a huge positive impact on the economy by devoting lots of time and effort into video games?
Ouch, that was mean!
I'll have you know that MMORPG players are some of the most incredibly caring and charitable people in the world! Why, they're always buying special mounts so they can donate money to some charitable cause or another.
When people heard that NCSoft would be donating a month of profits to Japan, some people bought THREE accounts.
To be fair to game designers and investors etc, this is just good business sense. The "hardcore" crowd will always be in the minority. If you can appeal to 5000 people paying £10 a month, or 20,000 people paying £10 a month, which one would you go for?
Not arguing the whole casual/hardcore debate either way, but from a purely monetary perspective it makes sense, at least to me.
I think it should be apparant that you can't create a game that satisfies both players.
So you want to max leve in 100 days, regardless of how many hours you play.
Your friend wouldn't get in his 500 days of game play with that game design.
Both of you won't be happy playing the same game.
IMO, there is no way to design the game so taht you can have your max level in 100 days, without impacting your friends game play.
if you can max out in 100 days, so can he. Now his 500 day game is gone.
So I agree with you. there should be different games, for different players.
What is very WRONG, IMO, is when someone insists taht EVERYONE that doesn't like THEIR game is somehow flawed, or "jealous", or "lacks self discipline" or some other negative.
That you should just play the game they way THEY like it, and PRETEND you're playing a different game.
Why can't you play my casual game, and just not buy xp potions? Why can't you play my single player game, and just group if you want to? Why can't you play my non-perma death game, and just delete your character if you die? Why can't you play my non-FFA PvP game, and just flag yourself PvP? What's WRONG with you? Why won't you play MY game the way I like? It must be because you are flawed somehow. If you were not flawed, you would like MY game.
Lol, sorry. That was meant tongue in cheek, honestly!
thinknig about this more, if the arguement is that casuals are just as skilled as players who invest mor time then games like wow should not need to nerf content, all they need to do is allow the game to extend the time at which instances reset to give casuals the bigger real time window. Wow does do this, so why nerf?
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
...
...
...
I'm not advocating your imaginary 'Hit max level in amount of days you own a game' viewpoint. Nobody is.
Nobody.
Anywhere. Or if they are, they're an extreme minority. I'm still not sure where you got your weird idea of who the people disagreeing with you are.
It would be like if I said 'I think there's two kinds of players in the world. People who want games my specific way, and people who think that they should level up in games because of how many times they wet their bed'
I mean, sure, there may be people who think like the latter, but I wouldn't go so far as to characterize everybody who disagrees with me as belonging to the second camp. :P
I do agree with the part that people should have their own types of games.
... but hey, when people with a certain mindset for gameplaying win (The type of people who want to play WoW) and get most games made their way, you sure do hear a lot of complaining from the other people.
I dont like his analogy either. So lets just say someone who works 4-6 hours a day compared to someone who works 8-10 hours a day. If that person who worked less time produced / processed / or basically did the same amount of work or more compared to someone who did 8-10 hours, I would be damn pissed if I didnt get paid as much if not more than the other people.
I dont know how people tend to spend their time in MMO's they play, but if I know that I have only 4 hours a day to play then I'd be damn sure to put that time to use. Raids generally doesnt take more than 1 to 2 hours now days. Even a casual player can invest enough time to do 1 raid a day and then spend the rest of the time doing something else.
There is only one HARDCORE type of gameplay. Everything else is funneling you into that one type of gameplay. People who arent interested in that will be a casual player of the game. If there were other types of hardcore gameplay, you would have more hardcore players. The game itself makes people hardcore. If they love it, they'll find time to play.
If there is only one type of game, there is only one type of hardcore player.
See you in the dream..
The Fires from heaven, now as cold as ice. A rapid ascension tolls a heavy price.
Neither I say you did. You still seem to miss the point though because
it is not fair and the point of the objection against time constraint related mechanics.
Your analogy is wrong.
Correct analogy would be that you would not be allowed on race because you did not train enough, despite you are faster than anyone else.
tldr:
Stop rewarding players for how much time they spent in the game but how they spend it.
I don't agree. The problem usually is that certain aspects of a game is funnier than the rest. If the entire game is as fun to play it shouldn't matter if you played 100 or 1000 hours of it, you still have a great time.
The MMO devs need to look on all aspects of the game and try to make the less fun better, that way all players can enjoy the games, not only casuals or hardcore.
thats exactly how it does work, if you are not good enough to get into the final, you dont get to race in it. You dont add an extra lane on the track so he can get to race anyway (or indeed make the race half as long to make it easier for you). Asside from this, since time is not a factor, and casual players are just as skiiled as players who have played for longer, why nerf content for casual players? the casual player can play the same contet over a longer period of time.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
Many people have both work and kids, there is no way they can balance in being a hardcore gamer with that.
I agree that some games are fun to play hardcore if you have the time, but you can't assume that all people can take themselves time no matter how much they want to, the world just doesn't work like that (and it probably is a good thing too, the world would collapse because no one worked or did anything besides gaming otherwise).
The reason for that is that they really nerf the games for bad players. There are both hardcore and casual players that suck but it sounds kinda rude for a company to say that they make the game easier for people that suck.
I actually know some really good casual players in Guildwars, and we all know some people that are constantly logged in but still suck.
I made bold the part you overlooked so you might re-think your reply.
Yup I agree, games are nerfed for bad players regardless of wether they are hardcore or casual. It's the lazy players that demand the nerfs (and get labelled casuals when they shouldn't)
There is also the comparison of higher skilled casuals againsty hardcore as an arguement that time served is unfair, but when the players are equally skilled and the game allows content to be played over any time that suits the player then that is not an arguement. it is exactly as you say, bad players.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
No, i just ignored the part that he is faster than everyone that is in the race, you added that to skew the arguement. I was comparing equally skilled people. The part time runner is EQUALLY skilled with the other racers. However the other racers have trained more, they are fitter.
now back to MMORGs, the casual and hardcore players are equally skilled, the casual player CAN extend locks on instances to suit their own playstyles - so again why nerf (hint answer in above posts)
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
If you are intentionally ignoring points people make, I do not understand why are you posting here..
your trying to argue, im trying to explain a point. Read my last point, what do you think about the nerfing?
edit i ignored your comment as NOONE disagrees with the point that casual player's can be better than hardcore players, that wasnt what we were discussing.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
Oh, so when someone points out a flaw in your reasoning, you ignore the points and try to explain it further, despite it does not change anything about the counterpoint made nor your own points?
Why should I (or anyone) respond to any of your points when you just ignore my reply like you did before?
Sorry but this is leading nowhere, it isn't constructive discussion at all.
Companies do it to get, and keep, subscriptions. If you make a game, be sure to cater to only those who group and play 20+ hours a week. I'll play it. You might not be making millions, though...
"Why should I (or anyone) respond to any of your points when you just ignore my reply like you did before?"
My arguement was flawed if they were not equally skilled, you added the comment that they were not equally skilled not me, this is not the point i was trying to make (as per the context of the thread). In any case its no big deal, I have clarified that i intended the comparison to be equally skilled. Feel free to ignore my posts
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D