That is a discussion for the TOR forum. Focus guys...
I might not care much for Cauthon veering the thread offtopic in this particular case, but I care even less for threads being locked for being "offtopic".
Conversation happens. Let it.
Unless things become truly nasty (personal attacks) or overly repetitive, let conversation happen. (Overly repetitive meaning I don't much care to see threads locked just because one single thread exists in some random other part of the site which half the time is less active than the one running here in The Pub.)
That part in parentheses is so true. I am tired of posting in a thread and having it locked cause it was discussed in some subforum of a game I have never even heard of.
Just going for the topic, but overly complicated systems can also hide disappointingly simple solutions in games. I'm tired of seeing this in games. Too many players are in the illusion that complexity makes a complex and deep game - and this is obviously not true.
If I would design a game, I would constantly ask myself if a feature really had any gameplay value or is it just a needless hassle. I'd much rather have a simple, elegant solution.
Yeah, anything which doesn't carry a game forward holds it back.
Ideal game design strives to have as little user-facing complexity as possible while creating something very dynamic and deep. A certain amount of complexity is required to pull this off, but complexity isn't the goal, depth is. Games should be as simple as possible to achieve a deep dynamic, and no simpler (and definitely not more complex.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Just going for the topic, but overly complicated systems can also hide disappointingly simple solutions in games. I'm tired of seeing this in games. Too many players are in the illusion that complexity makes a complex and deep game - and this is obviously not true.
If I would design a game, I would constantly ask myself if a feature really had any gameplay value or is it just a needless hassle. I'd much rather have a simple, elegant solution.
Yeah, anything which doesn't carry a game forward holds it back.
Ideal game design strives to have as little user-facing complexity as possible while creating something very dynamic and deep. A certain amount of complexity is required to pull this off, but complexity isn't the goal, depth is. Games should be as simple as possible to achieve a deep dynamic, and no simpler (and definitely not more complex.)
Ideal game design is not the same as ideal world design though. Ideal world design is more interesting. Furthermore focusing on the game in an MMO is poor planning. Games are designed to end and are based on mastery. Worlds are forever, or at least 5billion years or so, and possess multiple games within them of various types and also possess more long term activities like knowledge based challenges. Worlds possess activities where you can drill down to more complexity in order to spend more time also, as opposed to games.
Ideal game design is not the same as ideal world design though. Ideal world design is more interesting. Furthermore focusing on the game in an MMO is poor planning. Games are designed to end and are based on mastery. Worlds are forever, or at least 5billion years or so, and possess multiple games within them of various types and also possess more long term activities like knowledge based challenges. Worlds possess activities where you can drill down to more complexity in order to spend more time also, as opposed to games.
Worlds definitely aren't forever, as evidenced by most players who start worlds quitting rather early (whereas many more players who start playing a game stay with it longer.)
The entertainment value of both is based on their ability to continually provide interesting decisions. That's where game-focused games have the advantage because that's all they care about: offering interesting decisions. Meanwhile world-focused games make some of their design decisions not because they offer the maximum amount of interesting decisions but because it will make them simulate a world better.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Ideal game design is not the same as ideal world design though. Ideal world design is more interesting. Furthermore focusing on the game in an MMO is poor planning. Games are designed to end and are based on mastery. Worlds are forever, or at least 5billion years or so, and possess multiple games within them of various types and also possess more long term activities like knowledge based challenges. Worlds possess activities where you can drill down to more complexity in order to spend more time also, as opposed to games.
Worlds definitely aren't forever, as evidenced by most players who start worlds quitting rather early (whereas many more players who start playing a game stay with it longer.)
The entertainment value of both is based on their ability to continually provide interesting decisions. That's where game-focused games have the advantage because that's all they care about: offering interesting decisions. Meanwhile world-focused games make some of their design decisions not because they offer the maximum amount of interesting decisions but because it will make them simulate a world better.
That is not true. You are not accounting for obfuscating factors.
The only thing I learned from this post is that I'm going to stop posting my brilliant ideas in the developer's corner where nothing gets seen, nothing much seems to ever happen.
The only thing I learned from this post is that I'm going to stop posting my brilliant ideas in the developer's corner where nothing gets seen, nothing much seems to ever happen.
Dude I actually got a 100 post thread in the DC. But yeah I stopped posting there a while a go. Its better to post here but add some general discussion content so that you don't get moved back to DC. Although occassionally the mods will move one of my threads back there.
Comments
That part in parentheses is so true. I am tired of posting in a thread and having it locked cause it was discussed in some subforum of a game I have never even heard of.
Yeah, anything which doesn't carry a game forward holds it back.
Ideal game design strives to have as little user-facing complexity as possible while creating something very dynamic and deep. A certain amount of complexity is required to pull this off, but complexity isn't the goal, depth is. Games should be as simple as possible to achieve a deep dynamic, and no simpler (and definitely not more complex.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Ideal game design is not the same as ideal world design though. Ideal world design is more interesting. Furthermore focusing on the game in an MMO is poor planning. Games are designed to end and are based on mastery. Worlds are forever, or at least 5billion years or so, and possess multiple games within them of various types and also possess more long term activities like knowledge based challenges. Worlds possess activities where you can drill down to more complexity in order to spend more time also, as opposed to games.
Worlds definitely aren't forever, as evidenced by most players who start worlds quitting rather early (whereas many more players who start playing a game stay with it longer.)
The entertainment value of both is based on their ability to continually provide interesting decisions. That's where game-focused games have the advantage because that's all they care about: offering interesting decisions. Meanwhile world-focused games make some of their design decisions not because they offer the maximum amount of interesting decisions but because it will make them simulate a world better.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
That is not true. You are not accounting for obfuscating factors.
The only thing I learned from this post is that I'm going to stop posting my brilliant ideas in the developer's corner where nothing gets seen, nothing much seems to ever happen.
Dude I actually got a 100 post thread in the DC. But yeah I stopped posting there a while a go. Its better to post here but add some general discussion content so that you don't get moved back to DC. Although occassionally the mods will move one of my threads back there.