Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
why do people cry so much over the effects of death
gimmeapenny
Member Posts: 85
Why do people cry about the lose exp, corpse retrieval, and other things that make this game more challenging. I loved this in everquest, i didnt want to die. games like WoW, die, a few bucks cause of repairs? no problem farm for a few hours if i cant afford it. i think not wanting to die makes the game better, maybe its just me. it forces you to be better with your character... also why judge a game your not looking forward to, go to warhammer(i am looking forward to warhammer too actually) or conan...or stay with the one your playing at the moment. hope it delivers on challenges and such, and im hoping crybabies dont cause the creators to make the game player friendly(easy whatever you wanna call it).
also fuck yea for free for all pvp... i miss cutt throat pvp from eq's and eve.
Playing: EVE
and you better care
Comments
Because most ppl remember/have heard horror stories from the EQ1 era of games...naked corpse runs, dieing under Nafgen's toe, ect. What people forget:
1) Sigil has said it isnt going to be like that in this game.
2) While it is certainly frustrating, it is hardship like that that brought the community together.
This is how I see challenge:
Challenge is not:
Grinding for hours to get a exp debth away.
Grinding for hours to get enough gold to do repairs.
Grinding for thousands of hours just to get something.
Challenge is:
Something that takes skill.
Something that you have to master.
Something that requires a little of the thing called a brain. There is nothing more braindead than grinding.
Beating a hard boss, that requires tons of work on strategies, the encounter and the execution, and not tons of work on a deathpenalty from a wipe.
Grinding has nothing to do with challenge. It's just something to feed to braindead zombies with to much time on their hands. Grind is just there when the devs are to clueless to find out something else to make you stay untill the next amount is drawn from your cc.
i agree however, if the content it self is challenging and you die death penalties make it harder to get to your goal witch is leveling up.
this is a level based game, in a level based game death penalties indeed make it more challenging if you are careless and always die.
if there are no death penalties then it doesn't matter if you die, i think if you make a mistake and wipe your group you should be penalized for it.
as far as the actual content being difficult that is something completely different, i would assume they can make the content as difficult as they want and i hope it is really challenging.
but you better get used to time sinks if you like to play mmog's that have subscriptions to play, it is not going to change. they want you to stay playing their game as long as possible so you will keep paying that $15 per month.
I'm not sure what els a game can do to keep you interested for more than a couple months, but by all means show me a game that don't have a grind or a time sink that has a subscription fee.
yes, the death penalties should not be to extreme IMO. i heard a radio interview with April Jones where she talks about this, i guess they are currently working on the death system and they are trying to figure out a happy medium between no death penalty and to extreme of a death penalty.
I love death punishment. It just gives more thrill to the game. It's like playing WoW on PvE server... It's just not fun. No thrill... No fear of some lvl ?? corps camper. And I'm being serius here.
no not in a item-centric game like vanguard, although i did enjoy diablo2's hardcore system where there was permadeath. i think permadeath would be awsome in the right game, just not vanguard.
Actually, this phenomenon might be a direct result of their own playstyle. With no difficulty or risk built into their games, they crank through all the content and reach level 60 in a month, get bored, and are already looking to the market for their next game.
With strong death penalties in hardcore games, people actually have to take it slower, and to think twice about running headlong into that next mob...they actually need to consider their next move, because if they mess up, it MEANS SOMETHING.
Totally agree
Ya heard
To me there are two camps, ones that think skill equals how much time you put into the game, and the other camp that thinks skill equals how well you know your game. Most of us that advocate no death penilty, actually want a harder game. A game where no matter how many times you try, no matter how many hours you spend grinding, if you can not play the game, you never beat that boss.
Those without time, think time not equals skill; those without skill, think time equals skill.
D
People always want it easy.. until they get start get bored because "something is missing".. Without any risk they isnt much fun, just repetitive yawning.
I personally don't care about the death penalty. It can be severe. It can be medium. It can be light. Doesn't matter to me at all. I played EQ back in the day when even beginning characters could lose a level (before they changed it). I have played WoW that has almost no death penalty. None of this makes one game hard and another easy. It's just one thing among many things.
The issue for me is, how fun is the game? EQ is fun. WoW is fun. Will Vanguard be fun? I say no, but not because of the death penalty.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
may i ask why you think eqs combat is fun but you think vanguard's wont? and if it is not the combat what is it? i loved eq1 but lets be honest, the combat was not why it was so fun (at least not for me).
i loved it because it was the first online game i ever played that actually felt like a living breathing world, and i also loved it because of the friends and community i had there.
if i played eq1 just for how fun the combat was i wouldn't have been playing for very long, there were other aspects of the game that made it fun for me it was not the actual combat it self...even though i don't mind slower combat like that, to me thats what most rpg's have always been like.
Death penalties are something that should be taken very seriously in my opinion.
I think <EQ> a noob building a level 1 toon and repeatedly jumping off the kelethin tree houses can be avoided by the right death penalty system.
PvE: first death is a small loss of experience, second death is a moderate size experience loss, so on, each death in am adaquate amount of time should be considered repeated deaths and the experience loss should accumalate as such. If going beyond your current experience the level should be lost, and the experience loss should begin taking away from the previous experience pool. If you are knocked back to level one and continue to die, then it should lead to perma death. Thus the idiot spamming the world with corpses from jumping from the tree houses would be gone. Of course there are holes in this theory as any theory but it is a start.
PvP: Same rules apply as above, if you are a "murderer" and flagged as such however the game may do so, then a death penalty should be increased....such as if you are level 25 and run around killing level 10 players, your death penalty should rise as you are doing so. But! on the other hand, if you are a level 25 player killer and killing fully healther 20+ level player, you should get a bonus along with an added death penalty, perhaps, with every kill you get a strength bonus, etc... Both the "murder rap" and the bonuses would decrease over time as you are inactive <not killing people>.
Not so nice guy!
I disagree! death is completely avoidable for the most part. We just have become so reckless and competetive in gaining levels and loot, that the penalty just didn't out weigh the rewards.
If the penalty for death was increased, I am sure you would slow down and take things a bit easier. It would take you longer to level, but I bet it could be done with little or no deaths.
In EQ2 with the stat tracker I built a monk with the intention of seeing how far I could get with out being killed. The result was level 19 before I decided to risk a group, and the tank decided to pull too much.
I got 19 levels without a single death. It took me 3 weeks of casual gaming time, where as with no concern for death, I could get 1 to 19 in two days of casual play.
Not so nice guy!
may i ask why you think eqs combat is fun but you think vanguard's wont? and if it is not the combat what is it? i loved eq1 but lets be honest, the combat was not why it was so fun (at least not for me).
I will do my best to answer, but it's hard to put into words. I am also giving you the benefit of the doubt that you actually want my opinion, since normally you just flame me lol.
An online game (this one and all of them that I know about) try to be two things : (1) a game and (2) an online world where you feel present in a compelling and interesting place. There can be tension between those two goals. If you put in too much "game" you can lose the feel of the world, and if you put in too much world you can lose the feel of the game. For example, if you have to travel long distances that increaes the feel of being in a realistic world, but if you really aren't accomplishing anything while you do it you lose some gameplay. Likewise, if you find yourself working hard to move an xp bar there is a definite game element to that, but you lose the sense of being in a fantasy setting. Striking a balance between these two goals is the real art of design.
While EQ1 and WoW are very different in many ways, what they have in common, at least for me, is that in both games I enjoy the gameplay while not losing the sense that I am present in a fantasy setting. The balance is struck in an acceptable way. You are gaming but you also feel immersion in that setting. That is what I mean by "fun."
In my opinion, Vanguard fails to strike the balance. Before I explain why, let me point out that a lot of people on these boards knee jerk assume that if you don't like Vanguard you must want some super easy game where everything just falls into your lap. I can't speak for every player but that certainly isn't true for me. I would be perfectly happy playing a game where it took me three or four years to reach max level, and where I never had the best items, etc., so long as it was a fun and compelling journey along the way.
Vanguard is, and this is a key phrase that their own Devs use, an ultra item centric game. It's all about the items, having them or not having them. Now of course, items are important in EQ1 and WoW also, but Vanguard goes beyond that. You don't have a character in Vanguard. You have a clothes hanger. They may as well do away with the face and the hair and the arms and just depict a floating clothes hanger. Your skill doesn't matter. You don't matter. It's every bit 100% totally the sum of your items.
I could never be immersed in such a world. They have taken one aspect of online gaming - the aquisition of items - and elevated it above, and to the exclusion, of almost everything else. To me that is boring as hell.
But that's just the tip of the iceberg. You have to look at why they did that. And once you understand the why you will understand my antipathy for this game. Brad believes (and he believes this because his peer group believes this and he doesn't spend any time around people who don't believe this) that what every player wants is to have better stuff than the next guy. He believes that we all look up to, admire, and aspire to be the guy in the game with the best stuff. It absolutely never occurs to him that many of us don't join guilds like Fires of Heaven because we can't or don't have enough time, but because we don't want to. Vanguard is designed to instill in every player an accute sense of inadequacy and weakness so that they will feel compelled to buy into Brad's ultra item centric view of online gaming, and keep plugging away to get more items.
I see that as unbalanced, in the sense that there is too much emphasis on gameplay mechanics and too little emphasis on the sheer fun of playing a fantasy character in an online adventure setting. When I played EQ1, I was never uber. I never had the best stuff. I couldn't experience all the content. But damn was I having fun! I was having fun because the game allowed me to have fun. My gear, whilst not the greatest, was sufficient for me to have a good time in many compelling and enjoyable zones. I was not relegated to clearing wandering yard trash pawned off as "solo/small group" content because the game simply would not let me enjoy myself until good enough items were aquired.
So that's my main complaint. Vanguard is the Syms meets EQ. 98% of the focus is on dressing up. And as I admit there is some of that in all of these games, Vanguard really is third generation in the sense that it has taken the worst element of online gaming and amplified it beyond all recognition.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
I find myself sticking to eve, lineage2, and hell as I see it now, vangaurd is nothing more than a glorified refitted eq2 game with a different graphics engine and a bit harder grind, and different direction as far as im concerned
3.4ghz Phenom II X4 965, 8GB PC12800 DDR3 GSKILL, EVGA 560GTX 2GB OC, 640GB HD SATA II, BFG 1000WATT PSU. MSI NF980-G65 TRI-SLI MOBO.
let me start by saying...i always want you and other peoples opinion, and i always want a civilized discussion about vanguard.
its just sometimes people post things i feel i must call them out on, and to be honest it seems like alot of things you post are contradictory but those are other topics that we really don't need to get into in this one.
after reading this post you make alot of good points but i still don't see how vanguard is any different than eq1 even in your explanation.
yeah vanguard is all about getting items...so is eq1, the only difference is vanguard is taking it to another level by having multiple sets for different situations.
and eq1's combat was made up of turning on auto attack and forgetting about it, whats fun about that? vanguard is taking it to another level and at least adding more things to the combat other than just turning on auto attack.
i understand if someone doesn't like vanguards style of combat, but to say you think eq1's combat is fun but then say you dont think vanguard will be?
thats a bit weird if you ask me....i think vanguards combat will defiantly be more exiting than eq1's, from what i have seen and read at least.
People don;t hate Death Penalties, They hate Time Sinks.
"Strict" death penalties usually include a pretty hafty time sink, and that is why they don't like them.