Whether an encounter is challenging or not has nothing to do with the death penalty. You can have an encounter so difficult that the group would wipe & wipe and never finish but with a zero death penalty.
If you just want difficulty, cataclysm has upped the difficulty for heroics. MOST pug would not be able to kill all the bosses now. There are two or three encounters that are quite challenging.
Death penalty actually has a LOT to do with challenge.The reason is that if you can die and respawn within seconds,it is like you never die in the game ever.All that happens is you miss a few seconds,that is not a challenge at all.The word challenge can be equated to mean "not to die" and if you do,the penalty makes you have to earn back the right to be where you were before you died.
You have to look at it in a realistic manner.There is no real death in these games,so we should call it ,severely injured.Now if you were severely injured in real life,you would in essence suffer a penalty,that penaly may be lack of arm use,inability to do anything for a long time,so if gaming somehow can mimmick those realistic penalties,it makes it a more meaningful challenge.
To answer the question of "is there a challenging PVE game out there",YES,FFXI is the MOST challenging PVE game to date.Judging by players crying in various games about too hard or takes too much time,i see games for the most case going the opposite direction,so FFXI may retire as the most challenging PVE game ever made.This is bcausee developers are finding more profit in giving players ease of game play,less challenge,less penalty and show them exactly where the quests are.This is where the term "hand holding "came in,this is the trend of gaming right now.
Nah ... you are totally wrong. If you respawn in a few second with with no life .. you are jsut going to die again. Or if everyone die in your group, the encounter is going to reset.
Or some encounter would NOT let you go back if it is still in process.
So NO death penalty, and it has NOTHING to do with the challenge. You always have to restart the encounter if you die.
That is not new. WOW has been doing it for ages and no one can say heroic LK encounter is not challenging, despite the low death penalty.
You are just not familiar with how dead "process" can be done without a big penalty and without reducing challenges.
Whether an encounter is challenging or not has nothing to do with the death penalty. You can have an encounter so difficult that the group would wipe & wipe and never finish but with a zero death penalty.
If you just want difficulty, cataclysm has upped the difficulty for heroics. MOST pug would not be able to kill all the bosses now. There are two or three encounters that are quite challenging.
Death penalty actually has a LOT to do with challenge.The reason is that if you can die and respawn within seconds,it is like you never die in the game ever.All that happens is you miss a few seconds,that is not a challenge at all.The word challenge can be equated to mean "not to die" and if you do,the penalty makes you have to earn back the right to be where you were before you died.
You have to look at it in a realistic manner.There is no real death in these games,so we should call it ,severely injured.Now if you were severely injured in real life,you would in essence suffer a penalty,that penaly may be lack of arm use,inability to do anything for a long time,so if gaming somehow can mimmick those realistic penalties,it makes it a more meaningful challenge.
To answer the question of "is there a challenging PVE game out there",YES,FFXI is the MOST challenging PVE game to date.Judging by players crying in various games about too hard or takes too much time,i see games for the most case going the opposite direction,so FFXI may retire as the most challenging PVE game ever made.This is bcausee developers are finding more profit in giving players ease of game play,less challenge,less penalty and show them exactly where the quests are.This is where the term "hand holding "came in,this is the trend of gaming right now.
Nah ... you are totally wrong. If you respawn in a few second with with no life .. you are jsut going to die again. Or if everyone die in your group, the encounter is going to reset.
Or some encounter would NOT let you go back if it is still in process.
So NO death penalty, and it has NOTHING to do with the challenge. You always have to restart the encounter if you die.
That is not new. WOW has been doing it for ages and no one can say heroic LK encounter is not challenging, despite the low death penalty.
You are just not familiar with how dead "process" can be done without a big penalty and without reducing challenges.
Death penalty does not play a part in the initial challenge. However, if you couldn't do it the first time, what makes you think you can do it when your party is weakened?
@OP: Challenge is what you make of it. For modern twitch-based games (ie. WoW), if an encounter is doable, it is easy. Why? Because there's no significant element of randomness. If there is, it's very simple to react to. If you want an actual 'challenge', I would suggest action, RTS, or FPS MMOs, as those require skill rather than mere algorithms.
True Snoop.. I think a tank running in to a group of mobs with a good chance of dying and LOSING exp like in EQ1..YOU get different game play, and community.. I can guarantee you, if a tank keeps dying and LOSES a level because of some nincumpoop healer, tank starts looking for a new group, healers gets a bad rep and people start playing smarter.. However, I suspect soon as you do that, 20-40% of the player base close up shop and cancel..
You absolutely get different gameplay.
But let's not pretend it's challenge, because it's not. It's just penalty. It happens after the fact.
Challenge is how much skill is required to avoid failure.
Penalty is what happens if you fail.
Challenge exists during the activity. Penalty only happens at the moment of failure -- after the activity.
I see what you're saying and it makes sense in a limited context, but I don't think you're considering the whole package, you're just focusing on encounters. Penalties happen at the moment of failure, but in games that enforce strict death penalties, they also don't just end there.
While it may not be the best term, it's certainly fair to say that games can challenge you in ways beyond combat encounters. For example challenging you to piece together clues to solve a quest rather than simply having you follow a golden trail. Games can challenge your adaptability, teamwork and memory.
I feel a death penalty does add to the ways in which games chalenge the player; when death is something you're eager to avoid, you're challenged to play at peak performance and challenged to be aware of your surroundings at all times. You can make a boss fight as hard as you want, but if I only get a slap on the wrist for playing carelessly, the game isn't challenging me not to die. It's like pac-man with infinite lives, everyone will hit the final board soon enough. This is one way in which death penalty adds to the challenge level of a game.
All in all, stiff death penalties do add to the challenge of advancing in a progression given game, whether you see it or not, it has a direct effect. Obviously the extent of this is either magnified or de-emphasized depending upon the game in questions death mechanics and how drastically they hinder progression.
A harsher environment across the spectrum is generally a more challenging environment to succeed in.
True Snoop.. I think a tank running in to a group of mobs with a good chance of dying and LOSING exp like in EQ1..YOU get different game play, and community.. I can guarantee you, if a tank keeps dying and LOSES a level because of some nincumpoop healer, tank starts looking for a new group, healers gets a bad rep and people start playing smarter.. However, I suspect soon as you do that, 20-40% of the player base close up shop and cancel..
You absolutely get different gameplay.
But let's not pretend it's challenge, because it's not. It's just penalty. It happens after the fact.
Challenge is how much skill is required to avoid failure.
Penalty is what happens if you fail.
Challenge exists during the activity. Penalty only happens at the moment of failure -- after the activity.
I see what you're saying and it makes sense in a limited context, but I don't think you're considering the whole package, you're just focusing on encounters. Penalties happen at the moment of failure, but in games that enforce strict death penalties, they also don't just end there.
While it may not be the best term, it's certainly fair to say that games can challenge you in ways beyond combat encounters. For example challenging you to piece together clues to solve a quest rather than simply having you follow a golden trail. Games can challenge your adaptability, teamwork and memory.
I feel a death penalty does add to the ways in which games chalenge the player; when death is something you're eager to avoid, you're challenged to play at peak performance and challenged to be aware of your surroundings at all times. You can make a boss fight as hard as you want, but if I only get a slap on the wrist for playing carelessly, the game isn't challenging me not to die. It's like pac-man with infinite lives, everyone will hit the final board soon enough. This is one way in which death penalty adds to the challenge level of a game.
All in all, stiff death penalties do add to the challenge of advancing in a progression given game, whether you see it or not, it has a direct effect. Obviously the extent of this is either magnified or de-emphasized depending upon the game in questions death mechanics and how drastically they hinder progression.
A harsher environment across the spectrum is generally a more challenging environment to succeed in.
What you're describing isn't challenge though. It's risk.
Risk might inspire adrenaline or influence what tasks you attempt, but it's not challenge.
In Pac-Man if death only resulted in the current board being reset -- but you had infinite lives -- then no, not everyone would be capable of beating the later boards. Many people would become incapable of advancing past a certain point. Until they brought their A Game or learned how to play better, they would stop advancing entirely.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
2) Penalty for Failure (i.e., stinging death penalty)
3) Difficulty of fights and other obstacles
WOW, and WOW clones, only hit #3, and only on occasion.
EQ, DAOC, Shadowbane, UO, AC, and many other GREATS would hit all three.
All it takes to recapture the MMO market is for a new AAA title to come out and hit all three, and from what I can tell most titles in the running are not doing that.
2) Penalty for Failure (i.e., stinging death penalty)
3) Difficulty of fights and other obstacles
WOW, and WOW clones, only hit #3, and only on occasion.
EQ, DAOC, Shadowbane, UO, AC, and many other GREATS would hit all three.
All it takes to recapture the MMO market is for a new AAA title to come out and hit all three, and from what I can tell most titles in the running are not doing that.
amen.
Excellent post, ReallyNow. The only thing I disagree with is that it would recapture the MMO market. It would definitely be a game for the core MMO fanbase (which I am a part of) but I don't think we'll ever see a game have more subscribers than WoW.
"There is as yet insufficient data for a meaningful answer."
2) Penalty for Failure (i.e., stinging death penalty)
3) Difficulty of fights and other obstacles
WOW, and WOW clones, only hit #3, and only on occasion.
EQ, DAOC, Shadowbane, UO, AC, and many other GREATS would hit all three.
All it takes to recapture the MMO market is for a new AAA title to come out and hit all three, and from what I can tell most titles in the running are not doing that.
amen.
Excellent post, ReallyNow. The only thing I disagree with is that it would recapture the MMO market. It would definitely be a game for the core MMO fanbase (which I am a part of) but I don't think we'll ever see a game have more subscribers than WoW.
You don't really want a game to get more subs than WoW anyway.. Any core mmo that can come out and maintain a healthy and growing population while maintaining what 'that audience' wants will be a success. The trouble is getting MMOs off the ground lately, they are all having rough launches or are totally casual..
Currently playing - FF14ARR Previous games - SWG, World of Warcraft, ShadowBane, Warhammer, Age of Conan, Darkfall, Planetside Asheron's Call, Everquest, Everquest 2, Too many.
Rift looks like the only game that has potential for meaningful PvE. It seems like a mostly focused PvE game with the standard PvP features. Although it'd be considered the 'WoW Clone' category, It has more in common with EQ2 due to the large ammounts of classes (Even if the soul system allows them to sort of 'merge') and slower paced combat. I've gathered from some forums that it seems to be the place where most of the veteran 'roamers' are going, hopefully it grants what we're looking for.
Rift looks like the only game that has potential for meaningful PvE. It seems like a mostly focused PvE game with the standard PvP features. Although it'd be considered the 'WoW Clone' category, It has more in common with EQ2 due to the large ammounts of classes (Even if the soul system allows them to sort of 'merge') and slower paced combat. I've gathered from some forums that it seems to be the place where most of the veteran 'roamers' are going, hopefully it grants what we're looking for.
Lol, RIFT is the only game with meaningful PVE,get real man,that's just dumb.
Honestly ,go play Vanguard and tell me that RIFT is the only game with meaningful PVE. RIFT PVE is easy mode and unchallenging.
The death penalty is a joke,no xp lost and no corpse runs. The classes in Vanguard make RIFT classes look like a jumble of quickly put together "we don't know what we are" classes.
Vanguard has the best PVE content out their along with EQ2-WOW Rift is no where near these games.
As a matter of fact Vanguard is a group play PVE MMO,you will not get far without a group unless you want a slow grind to level 55 with no rewards.
Crafting is a game in it's self that needs to be levelled up and Diplomacy is the same.
Rift to Vanguard is like chalk and cheeses. As for veteran gamers,many were following RIFT but it turns out RIFT is no where near a classic MMO.
You don't believe me,go download the free trail for Vanguard then come back and tell me RIFT is the only MMO with meaningful PVE.
Rift looks like the only game that has potential for meaningful PvE. It seems like a mostly focused PvE game with the standard PvP features. Although it'd be considered the 'WoW Clone' category, It has more in common with EQ2 due to the large ammounts of classes (Even if the soul system allows them to sort of 'merge') and slower paced combat. I've gathered from some forums that it seems to be the place where most of the veteran 'roamers' are going, hopefully it grants what we're looking for.
Lol, RIFT is the only game with meaningful PVE,get real man,that's just dumb.
Honestly ,go play Vanguard and tell me that RIFT is the only game with meaningful PVE. RIFT PVE is easy mode and unchallenging.
The death penalty is a joke,no xp lost and no corpse runs. The classes in Vanguard make RIFT classes look like a jumble of quickly put together "we don't know what we are" classes.
Vanguard has the best PVE content out their along with EQ2-WOW Rift is no where near these games.
As a matter of fact Vanguard is a group play PVE MMO,you will not get far without a group unless you want a slow grind to level 55 with no rewards.
Crafting is a game in it's self that needs to be levelled up and Diplomacy is the same.
Rift to Vanguard is like chalk and cheeses. As for veteran gamers,many were following RIFT but it turns out RIFT is no where near a classic MMO.
You don't believe me,go download the free trail for Vanguard then come back and tell me RIFT is the only MMO with meaningful PVE.
LMFAO.
Wow, please reread my post and realize you just ranted for like 10 full minutes about something I didn't even say. I was speculating, and the game isn't even out yet.
You're going to need to make it to the "End game" of most mmos to find a challenge, leveling progression generally wont be where the focus of challenges are found in any game.
I just wish Hellgate would come back to us, Borderlands almost replaced it in my heart, but there was nothing to Borderlands in terms of challenge.
2) Penalty for Failure (i.e., stinging death penalty)
3) Difficulty of fights and other obstacles
WOW, and WOW clones, only hit #3, and only on occasion.
EQ, DAOC, Shadowbane, UO, AC, and many other GREATS would hit all three.
All it takes to recapture the MMO market is for a new AAA title to come out and hit all three, and from what I can tell most titles in the running are not doing that.
Vanguard has all 3 just like EQ1-DAOC-SHADOWBANE-UO-AC.
To many people are stuck on the Vanguard of 3.7 years ago but it's not the same buggy mess. As for population ,well Telon server(usa) is alive and kicking with plenty of grouping and guilds.
1) Vanguard Uncertainty...TICK
2) Penalty for failure .. it has xp lost and also corpse runs/tomb runs. Die in that deep dungeon and you don't have invis or a class with invis then you loose that xp for good...TICK.
3) Difficulty of fights and other obstacles, be prepared to need groups at early levels....TICK
No need to wait for a MMO to recapture these features, Vanguard already has.
It just needs a second chance from the MMO community at large,forget SOE and put any hate aside and play the game.
Rift looks like the only game that has potential for meaningful PvE. It seems like a mostly focused PvE game with the standard PvP features. Although it'd be considered the 'WoW Clone' category, It has more in common with EQ2 due to the large ammounts of classes (Even if the soul system allows them to sort of 'merge') and slower paced combat. I've gathered from some forums that it seems to be the place where most of the veteran 'roamers' are going, hopefully it grants what we're looking for.
Lol, RIFT is the only game with meaningful PVE,get real man,that's just dumb.
Honestly ,go play Vanguard and tell me that RIFT is the only game with meaningful PVE. RIFT PVE is easy mode and unchallenging.
The death penalty is a joke,no xp lost and no corpse runs. The classes in Vanguard make RIFT classes look like a jumble of quickly put together "we don't know what we are" classes.
Vanguard has the best PVE content out their along with EQ2-WOW Rift is no where near these games.
As a matter of fact Vanguard is a group play PVE MMO,you will not get far without a group unless you want a slow grind to level 55 with no rewards.
Crafting is a game in it's self that needs to be levelled up and Diplomacy is the same.
Rift to Vanguard is like chalk and cheeses. As for veteran gamers,many were following RIFT but it turns out RIFT is no where near a classic MMO.
You don't believe me,go download the free trail for Vanguard then come back and tell me RIFT is the only MMO with meaningful PVE.
LMFAO.
Wow, please reread my post and realize you just ranted for like 10 full minutes about something I didn't even say. I was speculating, and the game isn't even out yet.
I read your post and from a a beta weekend tester for RIFT i can tell you that RIFT is nothing like EQ2 for PVE,it's more like
I have to agree with some of the previous posters and say the Vanguard gives quite a challenge to solo and group play. I probably died more in that game than any other game easy.
I still think that Tibia back when I played it in 2002-2004 had the harshest penalties in regards to death both by pvp and pve. You seriously would lose a week maybe 2 of work with a single death in exp/skills...plus your items that would take months to get.
Espically for grouping? I want my death to mean something I am seriously considering eve since my ship can get destroyed, wow when I played questing was to easy. There has got to be a mmorpg that actually is fun and has challenging pve.
Darkfall
______________________________________ Play my entire game FREE if you want
Espically for grouping? I want my death to mean something I am seriously considering eve since my ship can get destroyed, wow when I played questing was to easy. There has got to be a mmorpg that actually is fun and has challenging pve.
Darkfall
Notice the OP mentions PVE,darkfall falls way down the ladder for PVE compared to Vanguard which is a PVE mmo.
Vanguard would fall very short compared to darkfalls PVP as well.
Espically for grouping? I want my death to mean something I am seriously considering eve since my ship can get destroyed, wow when I played questing was to easy. There has got to be a mmorpg that actually is fun and has challenging pve.
Darkfall
Notice the OP mentions PVE,darkfall falls way down the ladder for PVE compared to Vanguard which is a PVE mmo.
Vanguard would fall very short compared to darkfalls PVP as well.
another simple minded "Darkfall = PVP, that means its PVE must suck" post.
no other currently released MMO's PVE AI can compare to Darkfall's. its combat AI is unparalleled so far.
but i supposed standing in one spot watching a 2D hotbar and mashing the keys as they light up which in turn rolls a bunch of virtual dice is much more engaging to you than actually watching a 3D world, moving around it, using its obstacles, constantly dodging and aiming 3D projectiles, fighting monsters that sometimes seem controlled by real humans.
______________________________________ Play my entire game FREE if you want
Espically for grouping? I want my death to mean something I am seriously considering eve since my ship can get destroyed, wow when I played questing was to easy. There has got to be a mmorpg that actually is fun and has challenging pve.
I am creating what will (hopefully) become the first fun, permadeath MMORPG.
Of course, it's not entirely permadeath, it's Risk vs Reward.
Want to Risk nothing? You can, but your reward will be smaller.
1) PvP is instanced or based on zone/area/flag (choice). No FFA PvP outside of choice. No Zerging at all. Balanced populations.
2) Permadeath is not 100% upon death, but 10% or lower. Some areas/dungeons are 0% permadeath (especially newbie friendly ones, honorable PvP instances) while some of the hardest dungeons are 100% permadeath (Legendary Boss Monsters, Horrific Dungeons without mercy, dangerous PvP encounters, etc.) Some Items, Passive Abilities/Traits, and Buffs give a % increase to save upon death.
3) Death is hard to come by, as players have their full hp throughout 5 wound levels (Healthy, Hurt, Wounded, Severely Wounded, Crippled) and player's screens glow Yellow when Wounded, Red when Severely Wounded, and Crippled means 100% focus on needing to get away. Combat is meant to be fast paced, but slow/long. (Champions Online in Beta was VERY fun and VERY fast based and intense, but took forever to kill one character. Something like that would be nice.) but Combat is also going to attempt to pair off individuals in groups, as opposed to the /assist train. We are attempting to punish /assist train "just enough" by combat mechanics to make it much more efficient to pair off and focus on other strategy and tactics than "Zerg the Healer!!"
4) Little to No Healing. Limited Ammunition/Magic Points/Stamina. Combat is more about causing the enemy to retreat than to die in PvP. All PvP is Objective Based. The Support role is about Buffs/Debuffs, Crowd Control, extremely limited healing, and other new methods of support.
5) Skill Based 2.5D Isometric Game (Similar to Ultima Online's graphics)
Pre-Alpha Screenshot:
If being a developer means being quiet, mature, well-spoken, and disconnected from the community, then by all means do me a favor and believe I'm not one.
starting with EQ2 and WoW all PVE-MMOs made refined and balanced encounters the new holy cow of mmo-development. there is no challenging PVE since these 2 changed game mechanics dramatically. perhaps Vanguard is a bit more challenging but not as the old ones pre 2003.
and regarding RIFT: this game is fully refined. there is no surprise and no challenge. it is horrible easy.
there is a small hope regarding TERA, GW2 and perhaps ArchAge in 2011. but this hope is very small. i doubt they will go back to unrefined encounters, highly specialized and versatile classes with sometimes overpowered and unbalanced skills. and yes, a harsh death penalty helps alot. at least for your adrenaline and concentration.
there are new technologies, which may help, in order to bring the challenging PVE back: a better AI (DF has a bit of it), dynamic events which replace questing and reduce linearity (perhaps GW2, RIFT failed to use it correctly) and combat techniques from shooters (again DF and perhaps TERA will have a bit).
but at the end, they have to stop refining and overbalancing. unfortunately i cant see any upcoming MMO not serving the wimp.
but at the end, they have to stop refining and overbalancing. unfortunately i cant see any upcoming MMO not serving the wimp.
Yeah, problem is that a company almost has to make a game for the stupid, or unskilled. Dont get me wrong im not an uber player , but there are ALOT of people worse off than myself. Market wise however.. in most cases to make money in this industry they need to make games simple and dulled down in order to break even from development, or even keep subs. Aion is a good example, at launch the game was actualy somewhat of a challenge.. but patch after patch made things easier and easier, and now.. well i cant even look at that game.. since 2.0 and so on its just become way too simple for me to enjoy it. not just making encounters easier when they werent even hard to begin with but they also made drops easier to obtain, and made money redicoulsly easy to get.. at one point 10 mil was BIG in aion.. now you can make it in roughly an hour if you know what your doing.. and why did they do that? to keep subs cuz population base was on a huge downhill trip to a whole of spikes..
Anyway i guess my point is, unless every hardcore player would jump to a spesific game, companies cant realy make the game we are looking for because they wouldent make enought o keep it running.. realy out of all the games i see comeing out.. the only game that is realy inovation the mmo design is gw2. while i can only asume most of it will be easy due to the games nature (an everybody mmo) but there are bount to be some intresting things.. ive played guild wars.. and lets say if they can bring those chalenges back, and ad some more intresting twists.. well it will be my holy grail of mmos for the time being. tera looks ok, but its just seems like its going to be another asian grinder with flashy attacks and pvp that will be great untill they ruin it. rift didnt intrest me.. and dont even get me started on swtor.. i bioware and i def like the star wars world.. but i just dont like the direction the game is going.. somthing about it leaves a bad taste in my mouth
starting with EQ2 and WoW all PVE-MMOs made refined and balanced encounters the new holy cow of mmo-development. there is no challenging PVE since these 2 changed game mechanics dramatically. perhaps Vanguard is a bit more challenging but not as the old ones pre 2003.
and regarding RIFT: this game is fully refined. there is no surprise and no challenge. it is horrible easy.
there is a small hope regarding TERA, GW2 and perhaps ArchAge in 2011. but this hope is very small. i doubt they will go back to unrefined encounters, highly specialized and versatile classes with sometimes overpowered and unbalanced skills. and yes, a harsh death penalty helps alot. at least for your adrenaline and concentration.
there are new technologies, which may help, in order to bring the challenging PVE back: a better AI (DF has a bit of it), dynamic events which replace questing and reduce linearity (perhaps GW2, RIFT failed to use it correctly) and combat techniques from shooters (again DF and perhaps TERA will have a bit).
but at the end, they have to stop refining and overbalancing. unfortunately i cant see any upcoming MMO not serving the wimp.
This is like walking up to a car manufacturer and calling them stupid for making Automatic transmission cars.
They're just going to look at you funny, shrug, and drive home in their nice BMWs.
In reality, usability is critical for making products people want and the real frontier worth exploring is how to make products that are both usable and high performance.
In MMORPG terms, that's exactly like how WOW is set up: tons of content for the everyman. Hardmodes/heroics for the skilled. It's the only sane way to make a game imo:
First ensure everyone can join, play, and have fun.
Then, ensure content scales so that as players get better at the game there's always an appropriate challenge that's perfectly suited for them.
Granted the mistake of WOW is in not introducing these difficulty options until pretty dang late in the game. (Although if you're a tank doing groups to level you can dynamically change the difficulty to suit your group's capabilities: you have control over exactly how many mobs you pull at once and that directly changes the difficulty of the dungeon -- and you're rewarded with considerably superior advancement if you pull it off right.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
This is like walking up to a car manufacturer and calling them stupid for making Automatic transmission cars.
i am not against new technologies at all. my only hope for new challenging MMOs is exactly this new technology as i have written above, which allows the devs to make games which are not linear and not fully refined like a hollywood storybook and still accessible enough for the majority of carebearing douchebags. unfortunately RIFT showed how to NOT use a new technology (dynamic events). perhaps GW2 will make it better, we will see.
i dont complain, that they gave us automatic transmission. the problem is, they put us on rails additionally and they replaced the Nürburgring by a circle in a stadium with a roof so everybody feels warm and fluffy.
I just started playing EVE (2 weeks) , paid for my subscription.
I love the PVE, atleast up till now, it was everything I was looking for. I solo'd for a while ( nearly a week) and then while asking questions in the rookie channel I got picked up by a corp. I haven't looked back since, they've helped me with Ships, Skillbooks, Advice and rookie help, tough missions and gave me a lot of advice on how to rig my ship.
I really love how this game's played out for me till now. You could give it a play.
I do not get why people focus so much on endgame, part of a mmo should be about progress, like gaining new abilities learning a whole new way to play your character, all endgame is getting the next big piece of gear its extremly repetitive and boring, there needs to be more mmorpgs more about the journey. Endgame stays fun for a little while sure but eventually it gets boring there is nothing real new to get.
Comments
Nah ... you are totally wrong. If you respawn in a few second with with no life .. you are jsut going to die again. Or if everyone die in your group, the encounter is going to reset.
Or some encounter would NOT let you go back if it is still in process.
So NO death penalty, and it has NOTHING to do with the challenge. You always have to restart the encounter if you die.
That is not new. WOW has been doing it for ages and no one can say heroic LK encounter is not challenging, despite the low death penalty.
You are just not familiar with how dead "process" can be done without a big penalty and without reducing challenges.
Death penalty does not play a part in the initial challenge. However, if you couldn't do it the first time, what makes you think you can do it when your party is weakened?
@OP: Challenge is what you make of it. For modern twitch-based games (ie. WoW), if an encounter is doable, it is easy. Why? Because there's no significant element of randomness. If there is, it's very simple to react to. If you want an actual 'challenge', I would suggest action, RTS, or FPS MMOs, as those require skill rather than mere algorithms.
I see what you're saying and it makes sense in a limited context, but I don't think you're considering the whole package, you're just focusing on encounters. Penalties happen at the moment of failure, but in games that enforce strict death penalties, they also don't just end there.
While it may not be the best term, it's certainly fair to say that games can challenge you in ways beyond combat encounters. For example challenging you to piece together clues to solve a quest rather than simply having you follow a golden trail. Games can challenge your adaptability, teamwork and memory.
I feel a death penalty does add to the ways in which games chalenge the player; when death is something you're eager to avoid, you're challenged to play at peak performance and challenged to be aware of your surroundings at all times. You can make a boss fight as hard as you want, but if I only get a slap on the wrist for playing carelessly, the game isn't challenging me not to die. It's like pac-man with infinite lives, everyone will hit the final board soon enough. This is one way in which death penalty adds to the challenge level of a game.
All in all, stiff death penalties do add to the challenge of advancing in a progression given game, whether you see it or not, it has a direct effect. Obviously the extent of this is either magnified or de-emphasized depending upon the game in questions death mechanics and how drastically they hinder progression.
A harsher environment across the spectrum is generally a more challenging environment to succeed in.
What you're describing isn't challenge though. It's risk.
Risk might inspire adrenaline or influence what tasks you attempt, but it's not challenge.
In Pac-Man if death only resulted in the current board being reset -- but you had infinite lives -- then no, not everyone would be capable of beating the later boards. Many people would become incapable of advancing past a certain point. Until they brought their A Game or learned how to play better, they would stop advancing entirely.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
amen.
Excellent post, ReallyNow. The only thing I disagree with is that it would recapture the MMO market. It would definitely be a game for the core MMO fanbase (which I am a part of) but I don't think we'll ever see a game have more subscribers than WoW.
"There is as yet insufficient data for a meaningful answer."
You don't really want a game to get more subs than WoW anyway.. Any core mmo that can come out and maintain a healthy and growing population while maintaining what 'that audience' wants will be a success. The trouble is getting MMOs off the ground lately, they are all having rough launches or are totally casual..
Currently playing - FF14ARR
Previous games - SWG, World of Warcraft, ShadowBane, Warhammer, Age of Conan, Darkfall, Planetside Asheron's Call, Everquest, Everquest 2, Too many.
Rift looks like the only game that has potential for meaningful PvE. It seems like a mostly focused PvE game with the standard PvP features. Although it'd be considered the 'WoW Clone' category, It has more in common with EQ2 due to the large ammounts of classes (Even if the soul system allows them to sort of 'merge') and slower paced combat. I've gathered from some forums that it seems to be the place where most of the veteran 'roamers' are going, hopefully it grants what we're looking for.
Lol, RIFT is the only game with meaningful PVE,get real man,that's just dumb.
Honestly ,go play Vanguard and tell me that RIFT is the only game with meaningful PVE. RIFT PVE is easy mode and unchallenging.
The death penalty is a joke,no xp lost and no corpse runs. The classes in Vanguard make RIFT classes look like a jumble of quickly put together "we don't know what we are" classes.
Vanguard has the best PVE content out their along with EQ2-WOW Rift is no where near these games.
As a matter of fact Vanguard is a group play PVE MMO,you will not get far without a group unless you want a slow grind to level 55 with no rewards.
Crafting is a game in it's self that needs to be levelled up and Diplomacy is the same.
Rift to Vanguard is like chalk and cheeses. As for veteran gamers,many were following RIFT but it turns out RIFT is no where near a classic MMO.
You don't believe me,go download the free trail for Vanguard then come back and tell me RIFT is the only MMO with meaningful PVE.
LMFAO.
Wow, please reread my post and realize you just ranted for like 10 full minutes about something I didn't even say. I was speculating, and the game isn't even out yet.
You're going to need to make it to the "End game" of most mmos to find a challenge, leveling progression generally wont be where the focus of challenges are found in any game.
I just wish Hellgate would come back to us, Borderlands almost replaced it in my heart, but there was nothing to Borderlands in terms of challenge.
Vanguard has all 3 just like EQ1-DAOC-SHADOWBANE-UO-AC.
To many people are stuck on the Vanguard of 3.7 years ago but it's not the same buggy mess. As for population ,well Telon server(usa) is alive and kicking with plenty of grouping and guilds.
1) Vanguard Uncertainty...TICK
2) Penalty for failure .. it has xp lost and also corpse runs/tomb runs. Die in that deep dungeon and you don't have invis or a class with invis then you loose that xp for good...TICK.
3) Difficulty of fights and other obstacles, be prepared to need groups at early levels....TICK
No need to wait for a MMO to recapture these features, Vanguard already has.
It just needs a second chance from the MMO community at large,forget SOE and put any hate aside and play the game.
I read your post and from a a beta weekend tester for RIFT i can tell you that RIFT is nothing like EQ2 for PVE,it's more like
http://www.runesofmagic.com/en/index.html
I have to agree with some of the previous posters and say the Vanguard gives quite a challenge to solo and group play. I probably died more in that game than any other game easy.
I still think that Tibia back when I played it in 2002-2004 had the harshest penalties in regards to death both by pvp and pve. You seriously would lose a week maybe 2 of work with a single death in exp/skills...plus your items that would take months to get.
How is the challenge in AION PvE?
Darkfall
______________________________________
Play my entire game FREE if you want
http://PlayRealNotes.com
Notice the OP mentions PVE,darkfall falls way down the ladder for PVE compared to Vanguard which is a PVE mmo.
Vanguard would fall very short compared to darkfalls PVP as well.
another simple minded "Darkfall = PVP, that means its PVE must suck" post.
no other currently released MMO's PVE AI can compare to Darkfall's. its combat AI is unparalleled so far.
but i supposed standing in one spot watching a 2D hotbar and mashing the keys as they light up which in turn rolls a bunch of virtual dice is much more engaging to you than actually watching a 3D world, moving around it, using its obstacles, constantly dodging and aiming 3D projectiles, fighting monsters that sometimes seem controlled by real humans.
______________________________________
Play my entire game FREE if you want
http://PlayRealNotes.com
I am creating what will (hopefully) become the first fun, permadeath MMORPG.
Of course, it's not entirely permadeath, it's Risk vs Reward.
Want to Risk nothing? You can, but your reward will be smaller.
1) PvP is instanced or based on zone/area/flag (choice). No FFA PvP outside of choice. No Zerging at all. Balanced populations.
2) Permadeath is not 100% upon death, but 10% or lower. Some areas/dungeons are 0% permadeath (especially newbie friendly ones, honorable PvP instances) while some of the hardest dungeons are 100% permadeath (Legendary Boss Monsters, Horrific Dungeons without mercy, dangerous PvP encounters, etc.) Some Items, Passive Abilities/Traits, and Buffs give a % increase to save upon death.
3) Death is hard to come by, as players have their full hp throughout 5 wound levels (Healthy, Hurt, Wounded, Severely Wounded, Crippled) and player's screens glow Yellow when Wounded, Red when Severely Wounded, and Crippled means 100% focus on needing to get away. Combat is meant to be fast paced, but slow/long. (Champions Online in Beta was VERY fun and VERY fast based and intense, but took forever to kill one character. Something like that would be nice.) but Combat is also going to attempt to pair off individuals in groups, as opposed to the /assist train. We are attempting to punish /assist train "just enough" by combat mechanics to make it much more efficient to pair off and focus on other strategy and tactics than "Zerg the Healer!!"
4) Little to No Healing. Limited Ammunition/Magic Points/Stamina. Combat is more about causing the enemy to retreat than to die in PvP. All PvP is Objective Based. The Support role is about Buffs/Debuffs, Crowd Control, extremely limited healing, and other new methods of support.
5) Skill Based 2.5D Isometric Game (Similar to Ultima Online's graphics)
Pre-Alpha Screenshot:
If being a developer means being quiet, mature, well-spoken, and disconnected from the community, then by all means do me a favor and believe I'm not one.
starting with EQ2 and WoW all PVE-MMOs made refined and balanced encounters the new holy cow of mmo-development. there is no challenging PVE since these 2 changed game mechanics dramatically. perhaps Vanguard is a bit more challenging but not as the old ones pre 2003.
and regarding RIFT: this game is fully refined. there is no surprise and no challenge. it is horrible easy.
there is a small hope regarding TERA, GW2 and perhaps ArchAge in 2011. but this hope is very small. i doubt they will go back to unrefined encounters, highly specialized and versatile classes with sometimes overpowered and unbalanced skills. and yes, a harsh death penalty helps alot. at least for your adrenaline and concentration.
there are new technologies, which may help, in order to bring the challenging PVE back: a better AI (DF has a bit of it), dynamic events which replace questing and reduce linearity (perhaps GW2, RIFT failed to use it correctly) and combat techniques from shooters (again DF and perhaps TERA will have a bit).
but at the end, they have to stop refining and overbalancing. unfortunately i cant see any upcoming MMO not serving the wimp.
played: Everquest I (6 years), EVE (3 years)
months: EQII, Vanguard, Siedler Online, SWTOR, Guild Wars 2
weeks: WoW, Shaiya, Darkfall, Florensia, Entropia, Aion, Lotro, Fallen Earth, Uncharted Waters
days: DDO, RoM, FFXIV, STO, Atlantica, PotBS, Maestia, WAR, AoC, Gods&Heroes, Cultures, RIFT, Forsaken World, Allodds
Yeah, problem is that a company almost has to make a game for the stupid, or unskilled. Dont get me wrong im not an uber player , but there are ALOT of people worse off than myself. Market wise however.. in most cases to make money in this industry they need to make games simple and dulled down in order to break even from development, or even keep subs. Aion is a good example, at launch the game was actualy somewhat of a challenge.. but patch after patch made things easier and easier, and now.. well i cant even look at that game.. since 2.0 and so on its just become way too simple for me to enjoy it. not just making encounters easier when they werent even hard to begin with but they also made drops easier to obtain, and made money redicoulsly easy to get.. at one point 10 mil was BIG in aion.. now you can make it in roughly an hour if you know what your doing.. and why did they do that? to keep subs cuz population base was on a huge downhill trip to a whole of spikes..
Anyway i guess my point is, unless every hardcore player would jump to a spesific game, companies cant realy make the game we are looking for because they wouldent make enought o keep it running.. realy out of all the games i see comeing out.. the only game that is realy inovation the mmo design is gw2. while i can only asume most of it will be easy due to the games nature (an everybody mmo) but there are bount to be some intresting things.. ive played guild wars.. and lets say if they can bring those chalenges back, and ad some more intresting twists.. well it will be my holy grail of mmos for the time being. tera looks ok, but its just seems like its going to be another asian grinder with flashy attacks and pvp that will be great untill they ruin it. rift didnt intrest me.. and dont even get me started on swtor.. i
bioware and i def like the star wars world.. but i just dont like the direction the game is going.. somthing about it leaves a bad taste in my mouth
This is like walking up to a car manufacturer and calling them stupid for making Automatic transmission cars.
They're just going to look at you funny, shrug, and drive home in their nice BMWs.
In reality, usability is critical for making products people want and the real frontier worth exploring is how to make products that are both usable and high performance.
In MMORPG terms, that's exactly like how WOW is set up: tons of content for the everyman. Hardmodes/heroics for the skilled. It's the only sane way to make a game imo:
First ensure everyone can join, play, and have fun.
Then, ensure content scales so that as players get better at the game there's always an appropriate challenge that's perfectly suited for them.
Granted the mistake of WOW is in not introducing these difficulty options until pretty dang late in the game. (Although if you're a tank doing groups to level you can dynamically change the difficulty to suit your group's capabilities: you have control over exactly how many mobs you pull at once and that directly changes the difficulty of the dungeon -- and you're rewarded with considerably superior advancement if you pull it off right.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
i am not against new technologies at all. my only hope for new challenging MMOs is exactly this new technology as i have written above, which allows the devs to make games which are not linear and not fully refined like a hollywood storybook and still accessible enough for the majority of carebearing douchebags. unfortunately RIFT showed how to NOT use a new technology (dynamic events). perhaps GW2 will make it better, we will see.
i dont complain, that they gave us automatic transmission. the problem is, they put us on rails additionally and they replaced the Nürburgring by a circle in a stadium with a roof so everybody feels warm and fluffy.
played: Everquest I (6 years), EVE (3 years)
months: EQII, Vanguard, Siedler Online, SWTOR, Guild Wars 2
weeks: WoW, Shaiya, Darkfall, Florensia, Entropia, Aion, Lotro, Fallen Earth, Uncharted Waters
days: DDO, RoM, FFXIV, STO, Atlantica, PotBS, Maestia, WAR, AoC, Gods&Heroes, Cultures, RIFT, Forsaken World, Allodds
I just started playing EVE (2 weeks) , paid for my subscription.
I love the PVE, atleast up till now, it was everything I was looking for. I solo'd for a while ( nearly a week) and then while asking questions in the rookie channel I got picked up by a corp. I haven't looked back since, they've helped me with Ships, Skillbooks, Advice and rookie help, tough missions and gave me a lot of advice on how to rig my ship.
I really love how this game's played out for me till now. You could give it a play.
I do not get why people focus so much on endgame, part of a mmo should be about progress, like gaining new abilities learning a whole new way to play your character, all endgame is getting the next big piece of gear its extremly repetitive and boring, there needs to be more mmorpgs more about the journey. Endgame stays fun for a little while sure but eventually it gets boring there is nothing real new to get.