Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Does Sigil Listen to the casual fanbase?
baphamet
Member RarePosts: 3,311
does sigil listen? it seems they do....contrary to what alot of the hardcore's will think, i think this is a good choice if they actually intend on catering to more than just one type of player.
I'm sure some of the hardcore's will complain about this to no end, but oh well i think this is a good choice in the long run (thats if it stays and is actually in at release) 
http://www.vanguardsoh.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1278950#post1278950
originally posted by Aradune Mithara
Let me post some more detail. I can't say a lot, because it's just now going to be tested. So it's not set in stone. But it is our next phase of refining the /con system, the death penalty, etc. based on what we have learned in beta to-date. At the end, Ill also talk more broadly about what kind of game Vanguard is and what were trying to achieve by making it the way we are (of which this next revision of the con system, death penalty, and mobs with varying threat levels is a significant part).So keep in mind that what I'm saying isn't set in stone -- it's just closer to what we will likely ship with, but we still need feedback and we will likely revise things several more times before release. That is, after all, what the beta is for (amongst other things).
Mobs have a Threat Level. They also have a regular level (e.g. their level relative to your level). These are two different attributes, and when you encounter a mob, you are made aware of both via the UI.
This makes it such that we can place mobs of the same level or around the same level in the world that behave differently than one another, require additional (or less tactics) to deal with, have better (or worse AI), drop better loot, are rarer (or more common) etc.
The difficulty of the mob (or encounter, e.g. a group of mobs) is determined by its threat level. Difficulty can mean more HP, more DPS, special abilities, better AI, and can also relate to location, or that it's at the end of a quest or an encounter route, etc. It's up to the designer populating the area.
The death penalty is then also derived by that threat level. We thought originally about making this region based, but doing it by the mob's threat level even gives us more control and also allows players seeking different degrees of risk vs. reward to adventure in the same area if we so choose.
In simple terms, a basic overland mob likely will have a lower threat level and a boss mob at the depths of a dungeon a much higher threat level.
But that is an over simplification. You could certainly find high threat mobs outdoors, for example. And you could also find a lower threat mob in a dungeon. It's really relative to the region you are in, whether its designed for solo/casual, or group/core, or raid, whether it's a boss mob, or a mob at the end of an encounter route, or a quest mob, or just a basic wandering monster.
It's about risk vs. reward.
When you die to a mob, the death penalty is also different depending upon the threat level.
Why are we differentiating between threat level and regular level? Because we want, for example, difficult mobs and even raids in mid level dungeons. And we also want more casual content at higher levels where appropriate. This has always been a goal of Vanguard: that the game isn't all about racing to the end game. That there can be challenge, fun, reward, and a sense of accomplishment at all levels and more players with different playstyles and preferences.
I'm not going to go into details about what death penalty exactly results from what threat level -- again, we are going to be tweaking things, so its premature to post specifics.
But in general, the death penalty can range from a money sink, to some exp lost but able to be regained, to exp lost period, to dropping a corpse with all of your gear but having that gear respawn after X number of hours real time at an Outpost, to a corpse that drops with all of your items that has to be recovered or dragged out by a friend, to even more severe penalties (for example, perhaps a corpse cannot be dragged, or even you have to defeat the mob that killed you in order to have access to your corpse (for example, a giant worm that eats your corpses, and until it dies, there is no corpse to loot)).
(note, yes I said exp loss our plan is still to offer the players the choice of losing exp or gaining exp debt, except at the maximum level, and except where you would lose a level at maximum level, you will likely have a cap on the amount of debt you can rack up as well as some other mechanics working slightly differently. Also, if you have chosen to lose exp but lose so much that you would de-level, the game will likely switch to adding exp debt because level loss would cause many more problems than it would solve given the way advancement, skill and spell acquisition, etc. works in Vanguard).
Anyway, mobs with varying threat levels gives us a lot of flexibility. It allows us to make casual, group, and raid content at all levels. It allows us to make boss mobs that spawn rarely or only spawn at the end of an encounter route (e.g. the Advanced Encounter System, e.g. our answer to Instancing), or part of a quest, or an encounter that involves using multiple spheres to overcome (e.g. inter-sphere dependence). We can make mobs of the same level harder or easier than others of the same level. We can make mobs drop better gear or worse gear even if they are the same level without only having the mob that drops better loot rarer. And we can make the penalty for dying to these mobs variable and relative to the situation.
We've been fans of a dynamic death penalty from day one. This has led some people to assume that we are implementing corpse retrieval in all situations and exactly as it worked in EQ and/or other games. This is *not* the case. We are strong believers that challenge doesn't have to mean tedium. We lead you to corpses via a compass (and perhaps a silvery cord, but that is TBD). We provide horses and other vehicles that are soul bound in which you can store additional sets of gear so we can eliminate (or at least severely reduce) the likelihood of having to do a naked corpse run (as well as promote gear hoarding, which slows down MUDflation, as well as situational gear). So when we talk about CRs, its different than what you may have experienced in the past in particular, if your death results in a CR (and it wont always), the above features make doing that CR a lot easier. So also will some additional death penalty variants Ill talk about in a moment.
So, and to be clear, what I described above re: CRs we've had in beta from virtually the beginning and also in the games FAQ. What Ill talk about next hasnt been covered, however:
We can now create mobs that dont require a CR, or that do, but the corpse eventually repsawns at the nearest Outpost (like graveyards in other games) after a certain number of real time hours or days. Now is the time (beta 3) to take the con system and death penalty to the next stage and make it even more dynamic.
Now, before anyone panics, does this mean we are dumbing down the game? No, I really don't think so. We *are* making deaths from mobs with a lower threat level easier, but then we are also making deaths from mobs with a high threat level as hard or even harder than before. And then we have options in-between. What we are doing is making the game more inclusive and less exclusive players with different playstyles, tolerances, varying contiguous play times, etc. will all have plenty to do, again regardless of their level. No, were still not trying to make a game that is all things to all people, and yes, our primary audience is still the core gamer and we wont make decisions that hurt what makes it attractive to our core audience. But there is a middle-ground we can and are making a game where solo/casual, core, and hard core/raid gamers can co-exist. So while Vanguard is by no means niche, it also isnt going to sacrifice challenge and the feeling of accomplishment that many players crave in order to reach the mainstream; -- we remain confident that Vanguard will attract all different types of players and will arguably be mainstream. Will it be #1? Who knows, but it wont be #10. What it has that makes it different, amongst other things, is content that varies in challenge, difficulty, and risk vs. reward, and this content exists at all levels. That may not appeal to everyone, but were quite sure it will appeal to quire a few. As Ive posted many times, I think a LOT of players want a game like this, both old school MMOG players as well as new players, say for whom FFXI or WoW was their first MMOG.
Mob threat level and varying death penalties *do* add a degree of complexity, but I still think it's consistent and elegant, and I know our UI will make it clear to players what sort of risk they are taking when they decide to take on a mob or encounter. It won't simply be a matter of conning the mob to determine its level relative to yours. And it won't be a simple matter of assuming that if a mob has a special name that it is therefore not only more rare but also has better loot. What it does do is offer us more flexibility when populating areas, both dungeon and overland. And, as I mentioned, it also helps us create more difficult mobs that can be any level, such that you don't have to wait until the end game to experience something exciting and challenging. Likewise, it also allows us to create areas, regardless of level range, that are more casual friendly as well.
Again, bottom line: risk vs. reward. The higher the threat level of the mob, the better the loot you will likely receive if you defeat it, and also the more severe the death penalty if it defeats you. And also, as I mentioned earlier, it gives our designers and populators more options in terms of placing special abilities on mobs, creating situational encounters, etc. In other words, needing to use more tactics, special abilities, situational gear, symbiotic abilities and spells, counter spells, etc. will be tied to the threat level of a mob.
Let me know if this makes sense. Other than providing specifics (e.g. threat level X = Y type of death penalty), I will try to answer questions and to provide more clarity in terms of where we are heading with this, how, and why.
Its important that people understand what Vanguard is about and that it is not a hard core only game. As always, the majority of the game is geared towards grouping and the core gamer, but then also has plenty of content for both more casual gamers as well as more hard core gamers. It is also a game where you can log on, regardless of whether you are hard core, core, or casual, and accomplish things and advance your character whether you have only an hour to play or an entire day. Populating the world with mobs with varying threat levels, regardless of actual level, helps us achieve this goal. Having varying degrees of death penalties does also. And then so does having different spheres of advancement (adventuring, crafting, harvesting, and diplomacy).
So does meaningful travel, mechanics that keep groups together (like the Caravan offline travel system), advanced LFG systems that not only help you find other players of a certain level or class, but also more about who that person is in RL, how they play MMOGs, their preferences and dislikes, etc. In-dungeon teleportation like evacs and call to hero type spells allow people to play the game together even if one of them logged on later than his or her friends. The Fellowship system allows players to keep their friends close to their level by sacrificing some of their own exp, even if some of those friends dont play as often. The Veteran system rewards replayability and gives alts a significant but not unbalancing advantage when equipped with higher level gear, assuming you also have another character on the same shard that is as high or higher in level as the gear you are equipping your new character with. Harvesting that can be done alone or in a group gives players more options. Crafting that involves risk vs. reward and tactics allows us to escape the monotony of earlier click-fest mechanics. Diplomacy allows players to advance their character in ways that dont involve combat, allowing us to make faction systems that much more integral to the game as well as reveal story and lore more easily, not to mention more closely resemble quality fantasy literature which is not all about hack-n-slash but that also includes political conflict that isnt always rewarded by who is the more powerful combatant.
Vanguard is the MMOG that many players have been waiting for, the game that is deeper, has more options and freedom of choice, and also more challenge if desired. The ability to customize your character when creating him or her is unparalleled. The number of outfits reflecting the gear you have earned (whether obtained from defeating a mob in battle, or found harvesting deep in a dungeon, or crafted using rare components, or as a reward for a quest or for overcoming a Diplomatic encounter) is also unparalleled.
You can travel just about wherever you wish in a truly seamless word. You can own a ship and sail the seas not on a rail, but wherever you want. You can buy a horse and then equip it with saddlebags for more storage, or better horseshoes such that it will run more quickly. You can even eventually own a flying mount and travel across continents and oceans high above the earth, seeing everything below you and at a distance only restricted by the horsepower of your computer. You can own your own house and decorate it with items not simply bought from a vendor, but with trophies won in battle you can hang the head of a recently slain wyvern on your wall, or place the Troll Kings idol on your table for all visitors to see and appreciate. You can explore vast dungeons along with other players, invite new people into your group as others leave, or observe another group doing battle with a boss mob that you hope one day to defeat yourself. And you can take on a quest or encounter route with your friends in one of these dungeons, not have to worry about other players in the same area interfering with your quest or encounter route, and the boss mob or mobs that spawn when you complete such a quest or encounter route cant be stolen or interfered with at all by other players (unless you decide to ask for help).
Anyway, I know I segued from talking about our next phase of death penalties into a more general description of the game, but I did so to illustrate what kind of game Vanguard is and how it allows you to do and experience things no other MMOG does. And I also again wanted to make the point that challenge, variety, depth, and options equal freedom, not tedium. All of the above does not make Vanguard a hard core or niche game like some have claimed it to be; rather, it offers you a game that is designed and architected to last for years, both from a technological standpoint as well as a gameplay standpoint its about community, multiple ways to advance your character, more options, more challenge if you want it (though you dont have to want it to achieve and to succeed).
Its about freedom.
Comments
-W.
The new corpse run policy is very similar to Sigil's end game plan where there is content for all playstyles and one particular playstyle is not superior to another or will not result in better loot. The idea of CR's having different penalties is a very nice idea. People that want risk can get it, people that dont want risk can advoid it and people that want a variety depending on their mood will make trhe game at least in theory better for everyone. Normally trying to be all things to everyone and/or listening to casual players and dumbing down a game is not good but in this case it appears like their endgame plan they may be able to appeal to all playstyles without watering fown the game. The only question is like how everything else how well they implement the plan. One of the things I admore about Sigi,l compared to most dev teams, is they are not afraid to admit they are wrong and make changes. The new CR's keeps Sigil's vision of risk vs reward intact.
I love the Worm boss mob example he gave. Its going to be very hard for people to complain about this but I am sure the Sigil haters will be here soon once they think of a few angles.
sorry I have to quote Airplane.
So. . . you can play our game casually. . . but your loot will suck. That's definitely a step in the right direction. However, I think that they'll find that casual gamers WILL try the challenges despite knowing about penalties that are extremely severe. They'll just end up quitting the game when they find that their corpse was eaten by a worm. . . which admititedly is a TON better than having them quit two days after they purchase the game in the very first dungeon. With casual gamers that are really casual and can only play 5-10 hours/week, they might even get the first free month out of them and then have them pay for a second month before they quit.
Very good thinking. . . but it messes up my interest in the game. I am wanting to see if a really hardcore game with all of the old broken mechanics of first-gen MMOs could survive today if the game is good. This will delay my evaluation for a month.
It seems like what people will do is have to use game guides and two-box in order to take on content that has a relative level to their character's group that is large, thus giving them a better shot at getting awesome loot and good xp.
Aradune later clarified this, basically saying this ultra-severe death penalty would be highly unusual, limited to maybe a few top high-end raid mobs, where the only ones facing the challenge would likely have a 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc set of gear in the bank.
It sounds like the typical casual player may occasionally run into the traditional EQ corpse-run when they decide to tackle a tough dungeon with a good group.
Thats not neccessarily the case, all Brad has said is if you want better loot you will have to risk more. Rather the new death penalty appears to be in the same philosphical mode as the endgame content revision made earlier this year where it attempts to give substantial content for every playstyle with little to no playstyle being penalized. Under the new playstyle casual players will have just as much oppurtunity to get good rewards as hardcore players if they are willing to risk more to get more. The death pemnalty system applies to all content not just raid, but single group and solo/casual content. If you want the best gear its a matter of how skilled your group is and how much they are willing to risk not whether they are casual or hardcore players. If somone wants all the best rewards they simply have to play all the content. If they don't want to craft or do casual/solo content they won't get all the best rewards absent trading for it. The same goes is they don't wan't to do diplomacy or raid.
What is interesting about the new death penalty is that it doesn't mean that the harder death penalties are just for raid mobs. Because as we know only a small portion of the best gear will come from raid mobs but rather from all playstyles including diplomacy, crafting and casual/solo content although the focus of the game and the endgame is around single group content. Rather you will be able to get the best gear from single group encounters, raids, solo/casual content, diplomacy, crafting and other avenues. Logically the new death penalty would then apply high threat to those mobs that give the best loot. The harsher death penalty then would apply to some solo/casual content, group content, and raid content and possibly some increased penalty for high end diplomatic and crafting encounters.
I don't see how this can be fairer. If people want to risk more they can get more, if they want to advoid risk they can do so but they will most likley get less, if they want variety based on their mood they can choose whatever risk they want on a particular day. They can also get this low or high risk playing whatever type of content they want to play whether its raid, single group or solo/casual content and possibly diplomacy and crafting.
Vanguard truly is everything for everyone. It is the first game I have seen where its endgame is designed for all playstyles and where there is a well designed risk vs reward system. On paper at least it sounds great. Can they implement all this and make it work? Thats a much bigger question. Kudos to Brad and SIgil for such a novel and well thought design.
Sigil has said for a long time that they don't want to appeal to the masses and that Vanguard will not be a game for everyone. They have said they are fine if people don't like it. Many fans of Vanguard have been worried they will water down the games challenge and compromise the games vision to make the game easier for people. I have to admit when I first read the Worthplaying article I was scared this was the case. But just like the revised endgame content they have found a way to keep the games vision intact, keep the challenge and appeal to people who have different playstyles and wants. In most games there is a conflict between raiders, non raiders and casual/solo players. Their endgame design gives content for all three and access to the best loot for all three. The new death penalty does the same as it reaches out to people with starkly different ideas of what should be an acceptable death penalty and attempts to make everyone happy. I have long argued that a game cannot make everyone happy and keep its soul and vision. The new death penalty and endgame design proves me wrong on both counts.
All this being said making a design that works well and implementing that design are two hugely different challenges. They have a long way to go to prove to me that they can make the design work for both of these innovations. Vanguard is a very ambitious projest with revolutionary and evolutinary game design in almost every area from its combat system, diplomacy system, crafting system to its new death penalty and endgame design. Maybe they are trying to do to much here. I applaud them for the attempt but its asking a lot to do all these ideas well. We may end up with a game like EQ2 with lots of features of which almost all are done poorly or feel mediocre. Given all they are trying to do its much more understandable why the beta will be so long. I just hope they take the time to do all these ideas well and just don't release a game with innovative well designed features but a game that is fun to play.
I saw BMcQ's post over on the official board (where I have been hiding mainly due to the perpetual malcontents like "jonaku" and "dink") and am heartened by Brad's forthcoming nature.
It's looking to me like Vanguard may develop into a game where many players and playstyles merge in a single world.
Although I am not a big one for alts, I think Vanguard may prove to be the enjoyable exception to making alts to take advantage the multiple facets of the game.
Some of my choices might be:
A "group-friendly" alt (Cleric, Disciple) for those days you want to do lots of group activities or raiding.
A "solo-friendly" alt (Ranger, Druid) for days when you want to be off exploring the large, seamless world and perhaps doing some harvesting.
An offensive meleer like a Monk or Rogue.
Another alt to explore the Crafting and/or Diplomacy spheres (maybe a Sorcerer).
Hate to spread myself too thin but the game seems to be shaping up to be both broad and deep.
The newly announced complexity of the death penalty system shows me that they really do intend to make the game accessible to many players and playstyles.
That's a very good thing.
~ Ancient Membership ~
The problem with Sigil is that they will never be able to make a game that is fun for a casual player because they don't know how. Brad believes that the way these games should be made is that a select group of self-styled elite players (the "bleeding edge", he calls them) should have all the fun and all the goodies, and everyone else is merely there to fawn over them and pay Sigil's bills. If anyone other than elite players are having fun and feeling successful, Sigil regards that as poor design and a "dumbed down" game.
So while I nod my head in recognition of the fact that they are - very belatedly - trying to adapt the game to a wider audience, I know they cannot part with certain core beliefs that will make this game a chore for anyone other than people who play 4-10 hours a day, every day of their lives.
This could have been the best game ever. I was looking forward to playing it for many years. What a shame.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
at what point in time did you not think vanguard was going to have the game mechanics it does? what did you expect? they have been talking about "the vision" ever since i started following this game, and it seems that "the vision" is what you don't like.
why did you ever have interest in vanguard in the first place? just curious.
Read this along with the linfo that the Origional Poster gave us.
http://www.vanguardsoh.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1291339#post1291339
If this doesn't settle your fears about the distribution of loot then I don't know what will.
This is the way Vanguard has been described with the forthcoming dynamic death penalty system. Better loot comes from higher risk, and higher risk comes from the "threat level" of the mob and the death penalty associated with it. You can, essentially (and probably will) have a soloable mob (spawned from your quest, and won't spawn if you are too high of a level for it and/or you have too many group members) that is relatively the same Threat Level and will drop comparable loot a raid boss.
The way loot will be distributed is if you only solo or group, you'll have some of the best gear. If you only group or raid, you'll have a different set of some of the best gear. The only way you'll have it all is if you do everything. /shrug.
I really don't see how it is elietist, but even. It's probably the best attempt I've ever heard of to reconcile the casual vs hardcore conflict ever. o.O But even so...WoW has hardcore raiding and 2nd class players who don't raid and don't have anywhere near the best loot =P I guess 6.5 Million subscribers are okay with that.
You're an idiot. Did you even read the info at the top of this thread? That was a post from Brad on the official Vanguard forums. He clearly states that he is making this game fun for the casual player as well as hardcore.
I wish you would just stop talking because you're acting like a friggin troll.
You're an idiot. Did you even read the info at the top of this thread? That was a post from Brad on the official Vanguard forums. He clearly states that he is making this game fun for the casual player as well as hardcore.
I wish you would just stop talking because you're acting like a friggin troll.
Lets be honest...he's "trying" to make the game fun for casuals. Whether it is fun or not has yet to be seen =P
...by me at least...
... LFG Beta 3 invite pls
You're an idiot. Did you even read the info at the top of this thread? That was a post from Brad on the official Vanguard forums. He clearly states that he is making this game fun for the casual player as well as hardcore.
I wish you would just stop talking because you're acting like a friggin troll.
Lets be honest...he's "trying" to make the game fun for casuals. Whether it is fun or not has yet to be seen =P
...by me at least...
... LFG Beta 3 invite pls
I really havent seen anything that is going to make things more fun for the casual or even core player. Yes, some things have been made less tedious, but I really havent seen much fun stuff. It's still all about loot. Not only that You better horde it, for that 2nd, 3rd and 4th sets of armor for the dreded corpse run. That is going to open up the 2ndary markets like nobodies business and those are not casual or core freindly at all. I havent seen much on combat is going to work, if it's going to be tedious 3 minute fights with long amounts of downtime ala EQ. Neither is for the core or casual player. It's tedium, artificial time sinks. Travel is going to be very tedious. High end content=Raiding; only for the hardcore. Sigil just needs to call a spade a spade and go after the hardcore group that really wants this game.
Well, if you read the OP, you'll see that the penalties/rewards will scale depending on what you're doing, and if we all understand it right, Soloing will be similarly as rewarding as raiding.
There's what I don't understand about your post though, you say "all about the loot" but you don't suggest any replacements for the reward system. What type of rewards do you want in an MMO? Most MMOs to date, rewards involve making your character better by either leveling up or raising your "stats" by achieving some goal (i.e. Loot by Quest or Mob Drop). Though, I would say...there seem to be other methods of reward here, including Player Housing...but it may just be me.
Also, if you read there section of "Issues in Previous MMOGs" on their official forums, they talk at length about the pitfalls of games like EQ. They don't believe there should be unnecissary tedium such as standing around waiting for a boat or resting...they think those are times whent he player should be doing something or interacting with the game (Note: There is still some downtime, but nothing like EQ)
Max Level Content = 80% for groups of 1-6
I think you are in error about almost everything you wrote. High end content is not about raiding. Only a small portion of the best gear in the game will come from raiding, just as a small portion willc ome fro solo/casual content, from diplomacy, crafting and siongle group content. The end game is designed to appeal to all play styles not raids, not hardcore, not solo players.
The death penalty is a lot like the endgame content it is designed to appeal to everyone. Mobs will ahve different threat levels. Which basically means some mobs will have higehr riosk and greater penalties. If you want mroe risk you can find it, if you want less risk you can advoid, if you want different risk each yiou can do that. High threat mobs are there for raid players, single group players and solo casual players. It is spread across the board accross all content. There are dungeons for raiders, for single group pkayers and there are solo/casual dungeons. If you want the best loot you have to risk more. If risk less you will most likley get less. What can be fairer than that.
People think Vanguard is only for the hardcore. Its not its designed for all playstyles. Brad has said this time and time again and if you look at the design you will see that he is trying to give every group content. In regards to combat the Book of Oloh (http://www.silkyvenom.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1901) is probably the best source of information, Combat is being designed to require tactics, thought, planning and skill. Where skilled groups of players will fair much betetr than poor groups. They don't want you spamming abuttopn endlessly or just turning on auto attack and getting soem coffee. You can call requiring skill and thought hardcore. I would argue rather it is for expereinced gamers who want a challenge.
You might be right about the travel time but they are alos putting in carvanas to alleviate some of the tedium and downtime. They are are using the travel to isloate people in certain areas to create local population centers. with local economies and to create a sense of community. Will it work? I don't know? Brad has said time and time again if it doesen't work he has a back plan to speed up travel. One of the great things about Sgil is they are willing to admit they are wrong. When something doesn't work they change it. They changed the corpse run system probably ebcause of negative feedback, they have spent over 6 months changinga nd revamping the coprse systems of combat, crafting and diplomacy to make sure they work not onlya s intended but to be fun.
But if you look closely at the design you will see the game is not for one one segment of the population but being designed for all play styles. One would think he hardcore people would be upset about but suprisingly they are the only ones not whining with the excpetion of a few saying the game is being dumbed down but most of them realize providing content for all playstyles is good for everyone. One of the defing parts of Brad's vsiion is creating challenging gameplay without adding unneccessary tedium. Many of the old EQ1 people hate this part about Vanguard. They don't want maps, quest markers above npc heads, modern gameplay mecahanics rather they want EQ1 at release. From everything Brad has said they will be sorely dissapointed. What is amazing to me is there is so much stereoyping and misinformation (like the above post) being broadcast everyday about Vanguard. Vanguard certainly will not be a game for everyone and its fine to dislike it. But what gets me is the people that dislike it generally have no idea what they are talking about.
Zippy - They are attaching the risk level to the loot tables. That means that EVERYONE will want the high risk mobs because they want the high risk loot.
That's not a choice. That's a way to keep from punishing people drastically until they are more invested in the game and thus not to scare people off too early, but they'll still have casual plars that break their keyboards and immediately unsubscribe whenever they face grind.
The entire premise of this. . . attaching high penalties to high risk encounters. . . it's all brainwashing. It is either a challenge or it isn't - regardless of the penalty. However, since they are literally making penalties incremental with the challenge, it will allow them to say that higher challenge = higher penalties without sounding like draconian timesink designers.
But they are still putting the carrot there and they'll still run off people who won't put up with crap like that. It will just take longer because they won't see the grind up front.
After going over and doing a bit of research, I"ll have to agree with both dink and Zippy. According to the new information, dink is correct about loot. You will not get the best loot unless you go after high threat mobs. Now, I guess the question is are high threat mobs going to be able to be tackled by a small group when the drops are level appropreiate? I didnt see this question answered, but I can't see them putting really good stuff on a fairly easy mob, or farming is going ot be rampant. Basically the best stuff will very likely come from raiding. And by looking at the size of the dungeons, it's only going to be uber guilds that are really going to be able much of that for a long time. However I was surprised by the length of the fights in general. According to the silkyvenom source, they were quicker than anything in EQ. Once again, how long it was going to take to gain a level I did not see touched on. The combat system looks quite a bit like DAoC's system however, which I found to be a excellent one. So I also consider that a positive. As for the harding of armor, it's a personaly thing but it's something I really dislike in alot fo MMO's, item greed. This is certainly not unique to Vangaurd, but having your character defined by what he wears to me just sucks. It creates alot of fights, ninja looting, gold farming and bots.
I had my eyes opened a bit, and while I am not convinced that Vangard is going to be that good of a game for a person that only plays 20-30 hours a week, I'll keep a eye on it.
Keep in mind the mobs with the highest threat level with be for all styles of play. There will be highj threat lvl mobs for raiders, high threat lvl mobs for single groups and high threat mobs for solo/casual play. There will be solo/casual dungeons as well as dungeons for all playstyles. But keep in mind the high threat lvl mob will designed to be much harder to kill by the desired group size whether its a solo mob or a raid mob. Although the idea is that mobs will eitehr run away or not drop any loot if you bring to many people. High threat lvl mob simply does not mean for raid play but they are there for all play styles.
Althouigh it has not been said I would guess there will be similar high threat mobs or high threat encounters for diplomats and crafters as crafters and diplomats will also be a source of the best loot.
Rather than conflicting with their loot plan of the best loot for all play styles their new death penalty just compliments it as it adheres to the same philosphical principles that all play styles should be rewarded and encouragedbut with a focus on single group play above all else.
I just love when people talk about rewards based on risk. Risk my rosy red ass. There is nothing you can or will lose in any fight that can't be replaced by the investment of some time or the payment of some gold. Raiders act like they are really fighting these monsters. It's as if they think that if they fight a dragon, that they stand some chance of actually being physically injured. Omg! It's a cartoon dragon! I'm at RISK!
Risk is a euphemism for more time. So when you say you are awarding something based on greater risk, what you are really saying is you are awarding something to people who play for more time (or who are at least willing to).
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
Thats actually incorrect to a certain extent. The high threat mobs will be for all play styles raid, single group and solo/casual. Beating these mobs will not neccessarily be based on time but on you and/or your groups skill level. One of the ways to get some of the best gear will be long time contingous quests. Some of which will be broken up into short segments and some quests which may require longer single time investments. In regards to those quests you would be right that the best gear would be a product of time played rather than player skill. But in regards to the high threat mobs they are not designed for large time investements but rather for increased difficulty in winning the fight. One would expect that some of these mobs will be unkillable by many groups of the required size. Not because of lack of time but because of the lack of player skill. Now if your equating risk with the idea that failing will require more time to get your corpse back then you may indeed be right. As the penalty to a players time in recovering his items on high threat mobs will be greater than on low risk mobs. But isn't that the same for any penalty. A loss in gold is essentially a pemalty to the time to make it back as is a loss in expereince.
I understand and respect the opinion that someone may not want a substantial death penalty that stings. In that case maybe Vanguard may not be the game for you or maybe it would be if your willing to accept smaller returns for less risk. While Vnaguard's design is an attempt to appease and make all play styles happy. It certainly is not the game for everyone nor should it be. What do I object to is people putting down people who do not like the game simply because its not their style of play or the opposite where people try to engage in the same insults to people who want a game with a more difficult challenge. regardless I hope we all get to the play the type of games we want to play. I hope Vanguard turns out well and the otehr games in development do so. We would all benefit by these games all being well done.
agreed, unfortunately alot of people feel the need to bash the games that don't fit their play style..... witch is something i will never understand.
although i know alot of people were or are fans of vanguard and other games and have legitimate reasons for their negative opinions or outlook on a game.
it is the people that complain that it is not casual enough or they are just griping about the game mechanics that they don't like when there are plenty of other games in development or released with the mechanics that fit their play styles.
i wish everyone shared your attitude zippy, but i know it will never happen....people will never be happy it seems.
agreed, unfortunately alot of people feel the need to bash the games that don't fit their play style..... witch is something i will never understand.
although i know alot of people were or are fans of vanguard and other games and have legitimate reasons for their negative opinions or outlook on a game.
it is the people that complain that it is not casual enough or they are just griping about the game mechanics that they don't like when there are plenty of other games in development or released with the mechanics that fit their play styles.
i wish everyone shared your attitude zippy, but i know it will never happen....people will never be happy it seems.
I hope Vanguard is a good game too. However, we only have two really accessible MMOs out right now and both of them are super popular, but they are also better made than the low accessability games from previous generations. My bet is that Vanguard will do poorly even if it is a great game (in gameplay) do to the low accessability.
So Vanguard had my interest more as a test of game mechanics than as a game. As they make it more accessible, it becomes less of an experiment. . . and that annoys me.
However, it becomes more compelling as a game to PLAY, and that excites me.
But thats just an awkward look at games.
Siehst du mich
Erkennst du mich
Ganz tief in meinem Herz
ist noch ein Platz f?r dich
Ich suche dich
Ich sehne mich
nach dem was ich geliebt hab
doch ich find es nicht