Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 28, 2024, 03:34:36 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Search:     Advanced search
we're back, baby
*
Home Help Search Login Register
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  The Gaming Graveyard  |  MMOG Discussion  |  Topic: Carbine Studios' "Wildstar" 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 ... 20 21 [22] 23 24 ... 98 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Carbine Studios' "Wildstar"  (Read 979257 times)
Draegan
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10043


Reply #735 on: August 09, 2013, 09:00:29 AM

I thought he was spot on. Maybe you're the twat?
Abelian75
Terracotta Army
Posts: 678


Reply #736 on: August 09, 2013, 09:07:26 AM

My assumption is that their rationale with the 40 man raiding is something like:

1) No other MMO since has matched WoW in being as much of a social phenomenon as WoW was
2) Raiding is very arguably the biggest "social" aspect of the game, in that it requires socializing in order to even happen
3) No other MMO since WoW has tried doing 40 man raids, which WoW had when it became a social phenomenon
4) Maybe the bigass raids had something to do with building a weirdly powerful community
5) Or maybe not, but who knows, fuck it, let's try it out.

Probably a massive oversimplification, but for all the shittiness of 40-man raids, I can't honestly say I'm sure they were what caused the server communities to feel so vibrant, especially in early WoW.  They still felt that way for years after the 40-mans stopped, of course, but maybe that was a lingering effect?  I doubt this is the case, but I'm also not certain.  It could be, and I think it's cool that someone is trying it again, because fuck, why not.  God knows nothing else seems to be working, and it isn't MY millions of dollars being invested.

 And yes, I've led a 40-man raid guild that had some fumbling successes in Naxx, and it was painful and I stopped doing anything but 10-man raiding after that.  No way I'm leading that shit again.  I'm still interested to see how it goes in this game.
Abelian75
Terracotta Army
Posts: 678


Reply #737 on: August 09, 2013, 09:30:18 AM

That actually is an interesting experiment in that video, I thought.  It is sort of food for thought that you can literally do everything in the game while contributing nothing and actually having a purely negative effect on your party, without any noticeable consequence.

I mean, come on, I know it's easy to hate on elitism and such, and I tend to find many of the "pretty good" players abhorrent (notably, the really, really good ones tend to be far less assholic), but if you just forget that it's a multiplayer game for a moment, it does raise a few eyebrows that you don't really have any positive or negative consequences for playing poorly or fantastically.
Fabricated
Moderator
Posts: 8978

~Living the Dream~


WWW
Reply #738 on: August 09, 2013, 09:36:35 AM

I thought he was spot on. Maybe you're the twat?
Except there's no actual proof offered that this is what is somehow wrong with WoW? Or that there's even something wrong with a really easy raid mode being completable with complete dead weight, when lots of raid groups did just that in Vanilla, TBC, and WoTLK?

That he actually said that it's not good a bad casual player can say, "Hey, I tried the latest raid [in LFR] it was pretty alright"?

All he proved is that if you really want to try and be worthless in WoW while completing the version of content meant for not good players, you could? Wow, what a fucking shocking revelation. Surely, everyone would come rushing back if we only put a stop to that.

Ahhhh, whatever. This isn't about Wildstar. I just don't know if it's a good idea to openly say you're going to focus dev time on making assets/content for a very small minority of your player population, given you kinda need this thing to make money and NCSoft doesn't have a great history of treating underperforming games well.
« Last Edit: August 09, 2013, 09:40:01 AM by Fabricated »

"The world is populated in the main by people who should not exist." - George Bernard Shaw
Abelian75
Terracotta Army
Posts: 678


Reply #739 on: August 09, 2013, 09:46:41 AM

I mean, you're definitely right that he has no proof of cause and effect with respect to subs, for sure.  But I think if you just look at the experiment as a game design issue, and forget that it's even a multiplayer game, it is sort of interesting to think about.  Presumably games should reward or punish quality of play to SOME extent.

And yes, handwaving away the multiplayer part IS cheating a bit, since it is definitely harder to reward individual quality of play in a coop enviornment, especially a large-scale coop environment (which is why I think the 5-man experiment is probably the most significant part of the experiment).  It's still interesting to think about.
Nebu
Terracotta Army
Posts: 17613


Reply #740 on: August 09, 2013, 09:47:13 AM

Ahhhh, whatever. This isn't about Wildstar. I just don't know if it's a good idea to openly say you're going to focus dev time on making assets/content for a very small minority of your player population, given you kinda need this thing to make money and NCSoft doesn't have a great history of treating underperforming games well.

This ^^^  Paelos also said this a few pages back.  It's all about allocation of resources and focus on 40-man raids isn't a good use of resources, particularly when you brag about how hardcore they're going to be.  

My decision to play the game or not won't be made based on there being raids.  I just don't understand the time devoted to them when obviously only a few consumers will ever really enjoy their time in them.

"Always do what is right. It will gratify half of mankind and astound the other."

-  Mark Twain
Typhon
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2493


Reply #741 on: August 09, 2013, 10:24:41 AM

Honestly I thought the exercise pointed out why it would be much easier to make hard but fair five mans then hard but fair 25 or 40 mans.
Ghambit
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5576


Reply #742 on: August 09, 2013, 10:25:18 AM

Any initial resource allocation to 40-mans will likely be minimal at best, just like WoW at release.  What'd we have then, Ony? (if you can even call that a raid really)  IF Wildstar shows signs of doing well, THEN the main dev. team gets to keep their jobs and pop more raids.  This is the way it'd seem to work to me.  Otherwise, you end up with half-assed/rushed/untested attempts at quality raid levels at release.

'Twer me, and I give this advice free of charge; I'd make the 40-mans more interactive with the server.  Allow a raid group to queue for the instance and publicize it to the server in some way; not merely through an LFD tool, but something flashier.  This will provide a bit more of a carrot whilst letting people know your group is gonna try for a clear.  If you need slots filled, people will apply to fill them; assuming you set them as publicly available.

It's not reinventing the fuckin wheel here.  Large scale FPS games have done it that way since Joint Ops.  MMOs dont have to be special snowflakes in those regards even when purely PvE.  And seriously, there's absolutely no reason to complain against making 40-mans a feature in a game; unless your game sux so hard that people really just don't want to eat your shitty content.  Protip: put a tad more effort into making 40-mans accessible.
« Last Edit: August 09, 2013, 10:27:26 AM by Ghambit »

"See, the beauty of webgames is that I can play them on my phone while I'm plowing your mom."  -Samwise
Paelos
Contributor
Posts: 27075

Error 404: Title not found.


Reply #743 on: August 09, 2013, 11:48:31 AM

At release, Wow didn't do much for patches in terms of raid stuff. You had Onyxia and you had MC. That's all people needed because for the most part they were completely cockblocked by resistance gear.

HOWEVER, after about 8 months, they started rolling out a bunch of raiding content.
« Last Edit: August 09, 2013, 11:50:10 AM by Paelos »

CPA, CFO, Sports Fan, Game when I have the time
Nevermore
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4740


Reply #744 on: August 09, 2013, 01:24:09 PM

All I know is that in terms of difficulty, Wrath had the most accessible content and subs were at an all time high.  Then Cataclysm came around with its more difficult content and subs dropped.  It's almost like the 'hardcore' players account for less subs than the casual players.

Over and out.
Nebu
Terracotta Army
Posts: 17613


Reply #745 on: August 09, 2013, 01:26:26 PM

It's almost like the 'hardcore' players account for less subs than the casual players.

Fortunately, they compensate by being the loudest on the forums.  why so serious?

"Always do what is right. It will gratify half of mankind and astound the other."

-  Mark Twain
Ingmar
Terracotta Army
Posts: 19280

Auto Assault Affectionado


Reply #746 on: August 09, 2013, 01:27:38 PM

All I know is that in terms of difficulty, Wrath had the most accessible content and subs were at an all time high.  Then Cataclysm came around with its more difficult content and subs dropped.  It's almost like the 'hardcore' players account for less subs than the casual players.

I think it's hard to draw an absolute correlation there, a lot of things factor into their sub numbers, like when they launched in what market and what other games came out when, etc. Other than "people didn't like Cataclysm in general" I'm not sure there are any really safe conclusions to draw about their content model just based on that one big number.

The Transcendent One: AH... THE ROGUE CONSTRUCT.
Nordom: Sense of closure: imminent.
MediumHigh
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1982


Reply #747 on: August 09, 2013, 01:50:07 PM

Fits my model of how players are incredibly bad at games quite nicely  Ohhhhh, I see.
Paelos
Contributor
Posts: 27075

Error 404: Title not found.


Reply #748 on: August 09, 2013, 02:03:12 PM

All I know is that in terms of difficulty, Wrath had the most accessible content and subs were at an all time high.  Then Cataclysm came around with its more difficult content and subs dropped.  It's almost like the 'hardcore' players account for less subs than the casual players.

I think it's hard to draw an absolute correlation there, a lot of things factor into their sub numbers, like when they launched in what market and what other games came out when, etc. Other than "people didn't like Cataclysm in general" I'm not sure there are any really safe conclusions to draw about their content model just based on that one big number.

You've said that before, and were we on some sort of steering committee about the fate of the game and making billion dollar direction decisions, I'd agree. Since it's an internet forum, I feel pretty safe in drawing the conclusion that people liked Wrath because they felt included, progressing, and they were killing stuff they cared about.

CPA, CFO, Sports Fan, Game when I have the time
Threash
Terracotta Army
Posts: 9165


Reply #749 on: August 09, 2013, 02:09:29 PM

At some point you just have to start blaming the game being super old rather than design decisions.

I am the .00000001428%
Abelian75
Terracotta Army
Posts: 678


Reply #750 on: August 09, 2013, 02:27:28 PM

Also, as a counterpoint, Pandaria is far more accessible in terms of raid content than Wrath was (see LFR and the experiment in that video), and subs are falling.

(Yes, the game is also old as hell, which is probably the big cause here)

I think it really is a shame not to actually listen to the problem illustrated in that video.  There are a number of solutions that go in different directions; it doesn't just mean that the solution is harder and less accessible raids.  Like someone was getting at earlier, you can also conclude from that that larger raids aren't a good idea if you want a game where the average person can see all the content, because it necessitates them being so easy as to not even provide any feedback to the player.  Ignore the solution he's proposing and focus on the problem he's illustrating, and I think it's really, really hard to argue that it isn't a broken system.

Basically, I think it illustrates that WoW is trying to do two things at once and thus failing at both of them.  Obviously the narrator wants one of those two things, and you might disagree with his choice, but I think he's right that trying to do both is worse all around than choosing one way or the other.
Lakov_Sanite
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7590


Reply #751 on: August 09, 2013, 02:44:34 PM

Pandaria looks lovely even for a dated games. It's just so TEDIOUS.

~a horrific, dark simulacrum that glares balefully at us, with evil intent.
Nevermore
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4740


Reply #752 on: August 09, 2013, 02:58:19 PM

I think it's hard to draw an absolute correlation there, a lot of things factor into their sub numbers, like when they launched in what market and what other games came out when, etc. Other than "people didn't like Cataclysm in general" I'm not sure there are any really safe conclusions to draw about their content model just based on that one big number.

Rarely is there only one reason why a game loses subs.  I know I had a laundry list of things I didn't like about Cataclysm.  But the discussion had somehow turned to the idea that making content less accessible to the majority of players was somehow good for a game, which is just silly.  I still submit that ratcheting up the difficulty from Wrath to Cataclysm contributed to the loss of subs.

Over and out.
Hoax
Terracotta Army
Posts: 8110

l33t kiddie


Reply #753 on: August 09, 2013, 05:51:45 PM

If you ask me they are going with the 40-man raid as their pinnacle content to go easy on the type of player who is crying about 40-man raids. A super hardcore highest difficulty raid that is designed around 5, 10 or 20 players would lock out people because they just aren't good enough at playing the game.

So if you are Carbine and you've decided that you need to have content that most people can't beat because its good for the health of your playerbase/server communities/whatever you have a choice. You can gateway it the classical MMO way where player skill doesn't matter much just time commitment and willingness to put up with the hurdles of organization and listening to directions etc. Or you could gateway it such that only people who can optimize their dps/healing/tanking and who are playing optimal class/skill combos can beat it.

I would bet a shitton of money that the wailing would be much louder once people actually were playing the game and got to the content if they went the second route and people were finding out that just having the gear and having the free time wasn't enough to get best in slot gear.

A nation consists of its laws. A nation does not consist of its situation at a given time. If an individual's morals are situational, then that individual is without morals. If a nation's laws are situational, that nation has no laws, and soon isn't a nation.
-William Gibson
Draegan
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10043


Reply #754 on: August 09, 2013, 06:17:33 PM

I know you guys like to look at things in a black and white view and then really narrow down into the micro of the argument.

Here's what the devs have said about Wildstar's "elder" game.

1) 40 Man Raids
2) 20 Man Raids
3) Solo instances that tell the story and lore
4) PVP - battlegrounds, arenas, warplots
5) Heroic Dungeons

Now what you don't seem to remember, forget reading, or never knew is that Carbine plans on nerfing raids as they get older so they become more accessible over time. So if you're the type that things they deserve to see everything just because, even if you're a bad player, then you will get that with Wildstar, you just have to wait a while.
Pennilenko
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3472


Reply #755 on: August 09, 2013, 07:13:42 PM

you just have to wait a while.

Whhhhhaaat...I want it now. why so serious?

"See?  All of you are unique.  And special.  Like fucking snowflakes."  -- Signe
angry.bob
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5442

We're no strangers to love. You know the rules and so do I.


Reply #756 on: August 09, 2013, 07:16:12 PM

So if you're the type that things they deserve to see everything just because, even if you're a bad player, then you will get that with Wildstar, you just have to wait a while.

I deserve to see it because I'm paying the same fucking amount of money for a subscription and if the want to keep getting my money they damn well better spend it developing stuff for me. The days when these games are going to have a subscription base big enough to support development of stuff for the l33t 5% of players who have enough nolife to catass all day in a game are over. There's to many free, niche options for people to go do. That's another reason WoW subs are dropping like a rock. People don't have to put up with their shitty, stupid priorities and design beliefs anymore. So they're going elsewhere.

Also, is telling your smug condescending ass to choke to death on my cock too much of a personal insult to write here?

Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muß man schweigen.
Ginaz
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3534


Reply #757 on: August 09, 2013, 07:21:48 PM

I don't know why everyone has such a hard on for 40 man raids.  They're a pain in the ass to organize and getting people to do what you want is like herding cats.  Just because WoW did it back in the day doesn't mean anyone has to do it ever again.  I don't recall anyone saying "40 man raids, THAT'S why I started playing WoW".  They weren't responsible for the success of WoW.  At all.  People played WoW at release because it was simply better than everything else and didn't kick you in the nuts nearly as much as its competitors like EQ and UO.  
Ginaz
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3534


Reply #758 on: August 09, 2013, 07:23:10 PM



Also, is telling your smug condescending ass to choke to death on my cock too much of a personal insult to write here?

Angry Bob indeed. awesome, for real
Lakov_Sanite
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7590


Reply #759 on: August 09, 2013, 07:54:04 PM



I deserve to see it

The fuck you do.  I pay the same damn $60 for dark souls that other people did, it does not somehow magically entitle me to an easier game if my skills do not match others.


Look I'm all for accessible raids but your money entitles you to the same thing it entitles everyone else to, a chance to play the game.  If you do not LIKE the game or do not have the time nor skill to play as others do well then maybe it's not the game for you.

~a horrific, dark simulacrum that glares balefully at us, with evil intent.
Rasix
Moderator
Posts: 15024

I am the harbinger of your doom!


Reply #760 on: August 09, 2013, 08:02:34 PM

So, are these solo instances the same story you'd be getting from the raids?


The fuck you do.  I pay the same damn $60 for dark souls that other people did, it does not somehow magically entitle me to an easier game if my skills do not match others.


Ohh, please.  Raiding doesn't share the same sort of skill curve (or even type) as Dark Souls.  Let's not pretend you're Billy Badass because you've got a lack of commitments at 8-10pm, 4 nights a week.
« Last Edit: August 09, 2013, 08:07:39 PM by Rasix »

-Rasix
angry.bob
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5442

We're no strangers to love. You know the rules and so do I.


Reply #761 on: August 09, 2013, 08:50:04 PM



I deserve to see it

The fuck you do.  I pay the same damn $60 for dark souls that other people did, it does not somehow magically entitle me to an easier game if my skills do not match others.


Look I'm all for accessible raids but your money entitles you to the same thing it entitles everyone else to, a chance to play the game.  If you do not LIKE the game or do not have the time nor skill to play as others do well then maybe it's not the game for you.

Why are you intentionally misrepresenting what I've been saying. I don't want or need an easier game. I want a game I don't have to raid, or even group to see it. Raidfags seem to think that solo play is easier. It's not, it's much harder. We all know it's harder. There's no one else to save you from your own suck. This shit is easier the more people you bring along. The difficulty with raiding isn't the game, it's about managing people most of the time. I did that more than enough at work. Arranging 2 hours with a group of people to focus on common goals and make shit happen isn't fun. It's not a game. It's a fucking department meeting. I don't want to deal with the shit. I want to log on and kill internet dragons. Or internet orcs. Whatever.

Also, your Dark Souls analogy blows shit. Do you need to arrange time to play it with 4 other people or pick a different game? If the answer is yes, then you are allowed to post again. Do you feel that the game should cost the same for you if that when you don't play with 4 other people you're limited to killing the same monster over and over again, or whatever the fuck you do in Dark Souls?  if the answer is no, then you lose and must admit that solo play is not only not easier, it's so hardcore elite that anyone not wanting all content available to solo players is a shriveled turd of a being who actually thinks this shit matters to anyone but them rather than just being something to do an hour or two a night.
« Last Edit: August 09, 2013, 08:52:48 PM by angry.bob »

Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muß man schweigen.
Lakov_Sanite
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7590


Reply #762 on: August 09, 2013, 08:55:03 PM

My analogy was fine, I do not buy games knowing what they are about and expecting them to change just because I gave them money.  I don't presume to know what it is you want but it is not an MMO.

~a horrific, dark simulacrum that glares balefully at us, with evil intent.
MediumHigh
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1982


Reply #763 on: August 09, 2013, 09:01:28 PM

I'm in the camp of "doing 40 man raids aren't difficult but getting 40 players to do the same thing, and savvy enough to minmax when not prompted, is 99.99% of the difficulty". Which is fine, a game is allowed to say fuck you if you can't do that. Raiding was a throw back to the stuff WoW smoothed over during its release. Before WoW leveling was a group activity, classes weren't expected to be self reliant, and you were expected to organize on some level. WoW made solo'ing the "thing" but ultimately went back to the basic tenants of massive online gaming as we understood back than, i.e do big shit with lots of people. Maybe if WoW conditioned its playerbase to group up and be semi-competent at it, they would have a better rate of players willing to do the 40 man content. Or maybe players only like playing with their 2-3 friends at most and there is nothing massive about mmo's to the average player. Maybe they never wanted to do the massive part which is why WoW was initially so popular compared to the iterations of mmo's at the time.
angry.bob
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5442

We're no strangers to love. You know the rules and so do I.


Reply #764 on: August 09, 2013, 09:53:05 PM

My analogy was fine, I do not buy games knowing what they are about and expecting them to change just because I gave them money.  I don't presume to know what it is you want but it is not an MMO.
Your analogy was a complete trainwreck and not only did it not support what you said, it supported me. I'm haven't given Wildstar any money, and I won't if there's a single thing available via raids that isn't available to me soloing as a reskinned item. Giving money to games in the past doesn't really count as their was no other choice available or more often game companies just flat out lied about how solo friendly a game was. Like I said earlier, there are plenty of free to play alternatives that are close enough to what i want. Why would I switch to another game that not only offers me lees of what i want and charges a monthly fee to do it? The genre has changed and Wildstar needs to reexamine their design and adjust to playerbase preferences. That's why I expect them to change or I won't give them money at all.


Or maybe players only like playing with their 2-3 friends at most and there is nothing massive about mmo's to the average player.

Pretty much this, or at least that is my semi-informed belief. Which is pretty much what I'm looking for. It's not like it's a giant mystery why the content becomes more utilized the smaller that groups become. Raid fans like to say it's because that there are too many people who don't want to have to "learn the game", but really it's that people with shit to do in real life don't want to be bothered with the amount of time it takes to form and maintain solid relationships with people they'll never deal with outside a game. The internet got old and so did the novelty of "online only" friends. When this genre first started, the internet was brand new for most people and they were dazzled by it. The people playing the games had a similar background and the populations were much smaller. SO people were a lot more likely to not be complete pieces of shit. Well, now that everyone under the age of 75 is on the internet, we're back to almost everyone acting like assgoblins whenever they can get away with it. People don't want to deal with it during their leisure time. Sorry raid guys, the days of content being for more than a dozen people is over and it isn't coming back. The fact that Wildstar is spending time on it is a pretty huge red flag.

Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muß man schweigen.
Draegan
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10043


Reply #765 on: August 09, 2013, 10:16:12 PM

So if you're the type that things they deserve to see everything just because, even if you're a bad player, then you will get that with Wildstar, you just have to wait a while.

I deserve to see it because I'm paying the same fucking amount of money for a subscription and if the want to keep getting my money they damn well better spend it developing stuff for me. T

Who says they aren't developing shit for you? Maybe you didn't read shit in my post? dumbfuck Poor baby can't play in one little zone and you want to kill yourself. Shame.
Draegan
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10043


Reply #766 on: August 09, 2013, 10:17:30 PM

So, are these solo instances the same story you'd be getting from the raids?


Raids aren't part of the story line apparently.
Malakili
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10596


Reply #767 on: August 10, 2013, 04:24:06 AM

Am I the only one that thinks content I can not do is kind of interesting?  I have not had time to raid in years, but I like the fact that it exists.  It makes an mmo feel like an mmo when there are large groups out there, whether or not I can join them. 
MediumHigh
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1982


Reply #768 on: August 10, 2013, 06:18:54 AM

My analogy was fine, I do not buy games knowing what they are about and expecting them to change just because I gave them money.  I don't presume to know what it is you want but it is not an MMO.
Your analogy was a complete trainwreck and not only did it not support what you said, it supported me. I'm haven't given Wildstar any money, and I won't if there's a single thing available via raids that isn't available to me soloing as a reskinned item. Giving money to games in the past doesn't really count as their was no other choice available or more often game companies just flat out lied about how solo friendly a game was. Like I said earlier, there are plenty of free to play alternatives that are close enough to what i want. Why would I switch to another game that not only offers me lees of what i want and charges a monthly fee to do it? The genre has changed and Wildstar needs to reexamine their design and adjust to playerbase preferences. That's why I expect them to change or I won't give them money at all.


Or maybe players only like playing with their 2-3 friends at most and there is nothing massive about mmo's to the average player.

Pretty much this, or at least that is my semi-informed belief. Which is pretty much what I'm looking for. It's not like it's a giant mystery why the content becomes more utilized the smaller that groups become. Raid fans like to say it's because that there are too many people who don't want to have to "learn the game", but really it's that people with shit to do in real life don't want to be bothered with the amount of time it takes to form and maintain solid relationships with people they'll never deal with outside a game. The internet got old and so did the novelty of "online only" friends. When this genre first started, the internet was brand new for most people and they were dazzled by it. The people playing the games had a similar background and the populations were much smaller. SO people were a lot more likely to not be complete pieces of shit. Well, now that everyone under the age of 75 is on the internet, we're back to almost everyone acting like assgoblins whenever they can get away with it. People don't want to deal with it during their leisure time. Sorry raid guys, the days of content being for more than a dozen people is over and it isn't coming back. The fact that Wildstar is spending time on it is a pretty huge red flag.

Raids only become an issue when the game is balanced around said encounter. It'll be like "If you only make the top 1000 in pvp on your server only than can you get the easy mode gear that solo's all pve content with dazzling lights of rainbow unicorns." A game deciding, like games have been deciding for years before the shitty sequel era of today, that "you can only be this tall to ride this ride" is perfectly fine. I mean sure games who did this back than relied entirely on a skill ceiling and I'm personally more willing to meet that than say whats required to drag 39 people to an encounter, but its perfectly valid even if I personally have no patience for it.

Though to be honest the general "ceilings" in mmo's are rather shitty. Time and Resources Ceiling is something I generally want to see die. But since that generally is what allows most bad gamers to feel successful in mmo's I generally don't see it dying anytime soon.
« Last Edit: August 10, 2013, 06:20:50 AM by MediumHigh »
Typhon
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2493


Reply #769 on: August 10, 2013, 07:13:27 AM

I'm in the "2 or 3 friends consistently" category.  5 or 6 tops, and never more than a night every two to three weeks.  Would love to be able to do everything with that 2 to 3 core.  Will accept not being able to do everything as long as the core gameplay, "getting levels and loot" is not segregated upon an idea that "What will make our game sticky?!  BIG GROUPS OF FOLKS GETTING TO KNOW AND LOVE EACHOTHERBANDOFBROTHERS EQUALS MONEYHATS!  How do we make bigs groups?  FORCE EM TO PLAY BIG CONTENT!".

Am I the only one that thinks content I can not do is kind of interesting?  I have not had time to raid in years, but I like the fact that it exists.  It makes an mmo feel like an mmo when there are large groups out there, whether or not I can join them. 

Best-case, I'm ambivalent.  Usual case is that the game caters to these folks, and these folks include a subset who are broken and will use that catering in any way possible to be assholes.
Pages: 1 ... 20 21 [22] 23 24 ... 98 Go Up Print 
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  The Gaming Graveyard  |  MMOG Discussion  |  Topic: Carbine Studios' "Wildstar"  
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.10 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC