Locked encounters are an answer to powerleveling as well as kill-stealing. I, for one, welcome the innovation. What do you want to get rid of next? That you have to be grouped with players to buff them? (another answer to powerleveling) *cough*
Wait, I have the perfect game for you. It's called "Everquest", maybe you've heard of it.
Incorrect. Locked encounters are an answer to encounter balance; merely a luxury for the game designers, but no real help to the players. The features you mention are merely side-effects. Desirable to some, odious to others (like myself).
The more player interaction you remove from the game, the more likely it is to stagnant and have less long-term appeal, IMO. Kill-stealing (which, let's face it, happened rarely) and power-leveling were integral player interactions in EQ1.
Most people tend to think of the extremely blatant versions of both of these, then conclude that they need to be abolished. I think of the more common instances of kill-stealing and power-leveling, which were highly desirable: casting a buff on a newbie in need in passing, helping friends defeat a mob that was out of control, donating buffs at the dock, "training" a new friend in playing the game without cheating him out of experience, etc.
The problem power-leveling that supposedly unbalanced the game was really somewhat rare compared to the very frequent instances of what I mentioned above that happened all the time, throughout EQ1. Those things fostered relationships and perhaps even pitted players against each other. Both the good and the bad are wanted for a healthy community.
EDIT: Most of all, though, locked-encounters are contrived. Contrivances break immersion every time.
Originally posted by aeric67 Incorrect. Locked encounters are an answer to encounter balance; merely a luxury for the game designers, but no real help to the players. The features you mention are merely side-effects. Desirable to some, odious to others (like myself).The more player interaction you remove from the game, the more likely it is to stagnant and have less long-term appeal, IMO. Kill-stealing (which, let's face it, happened rarely) and power-leveling were integral player interactions in EQ1. Most people tend to think of the extremely blatant versions of both of these, then conclude that they need to be abolished. I think of the more common instances of kill-stealing and power-leveling, which were highly desirable: casting a buff on a newbie in need in passing, helping friends defeat a mob that was out of control, donating buffs at the dock, "training" a new friend in playing the game without cheating him out of experience, etc.The problem power-leveling that supposedly unbalanced the game was really somewhat rare compared to the very frequent instances of what I mentioned above that happened all the time, throughout EQ1. Those things fostered relationships and perhaps even pitted players against each other. Both the good and the bad are wanted for a healthy community.EDIT: Most of all, though, locked-encounters are contrived. Contrivances break immersion every time.
Disco.
The devs have said a million and one times that locked encounters where so they could balance the 'risk vs reward' of encounters, except I haven't seen much of it. The system doesn't really prevent kill stealing, either. it just makes it easier for someone to leapfrog you to that named mob you were after. And some innovative griefers have taken to tagging named, or quest mobs, and running them to the guards, thus preventing other people from getting the mob.
Comments
Locked encounters are an answer to powerleveling as well as kill-stealing. I, for one, welcome the innovation. What do you want to get rid of next? That you have to be grouped with players to buff them? (another answer to powerleveling) *cough*
Wait, I have the perfect game for you. It's called "Everquest", maybe you've heard of it.
Incorrect. Locked encounters are an answer to encounter balance; merely a luxury for the game designers, but no real help to the players. The features you mention are merely side-effects. Desirable to some, odious to others (like myself).
The more player interaction you remove from the game, the more likely it is to stagnant and have less long-term appeal, IMO. Kill-stealing (which, let's face it, happened rarely) and power-leveling were integral player interactions in EQ1.
Most people tend to think of the extremely blatant versions of both of these, then conclude that they need to be abolished. I think of the more common instances of kill-stealing and power-leveling, which were highly desirable: casting a buff on a newbie in need in passing, helping friends defeat a mob that was out of control, donating buffs at the dock, "training" a new friend in playing the game without cheating him out of experience, etc.
The problem power-leveling that supposedly unbalanced the game was really somewhat rare compared to the very frequent instances of what I mentioned above that happened all the time, throughout EQ1. Those things fostered relationships and perhaps even pitted players against each other. Both the good and the bad are wanted for a healthy community.
EDIT: Most of all, though, locked-encounters are contrived. Contrivances break immersion every time.
Disco.
The devs have said a million and one times that locked encounters where so they could balance the 'risk vs reward' of encounters, except I haven't seen much of it. The system doesn't really prevent kill stealing, either. it just makes it easier for someone to leapfrog you to that named mob you were after. And some innovative griefers have taken to tagging named, or quest mobs, and running them to the guards, thus preventing other people from getting the mob.