Originally posted by Mystais In today's mmos, character individuality is pretty much just an illusion. All aspects of the game are balanced to the nth degree. Specific weapons and armor are handed out at specific levels and characters can only use weapons made for their level. It's all smoke and mirrors maaan.
Games are all smoke & mirrors to entertain. For example, achievement is an illusion that is carefully controlled.
Originally posted by Mystais In today's mmos, character individuality is pretty much just an illusion. All aspects of the game are balanced to the nth degree. Specific weapons and armor are handed out at specific levels and characters can only use weapons made for their level. It's all smoke and mirrors maaan.
Games are all smoke & mirrors to entertain. For example, achievement is an illusion that is carefully controlled.
Yep, sad. It wasn't always like that. Back in the day you could make a troll mage with high charisma if you wanted, hehe.
Tabletop RPG gaming since Chainmail and D&D was a blue book with some cheap plastic dice and a crayon. MMORPGing since MOOS/MUDS, when forums were just bulletin boards and players actually roleplayed their characters.
Originally posted by Mystais In today's mmos, character individuality is pretty much just an illusion. All aspects of the game are balanced to the nth degree. Specific weapons and armor are handed out at specific levels and characters can only use weapons made for their level. It's all smoke and mirrors maaan.
Games are all smoke & mirrors to entertain. For example, achievement is an illusion that is carefully controlled.
Yep, sad. It wasn't always like that. Back in the day you could make a troll mage with high charisma if you wanted, hehe.
hmm .. it is always like that. Games are always about entertaining you with illusion. Just some are more successful. There is never true achievement by beating pixels. Not compare to real work like scientific discovery anyway.
For me choosing stats would not be fun. How would I know where to allocate it for a perfect skill build? What if I want to change things down the line? It's too many choices and too much stuff I need to know. I don't want to study perfect MMO class design in order to play the game, it's the developer's job to make a class for me that works. I do enjoy having a variety of builds I can spec into and play with but I draw the customization line at forcing me to choose stats each level. That is something I do not want to deal with.
Originally posted by Leiloni For me choosing stats would not be fun. How would I know where to allocate it for a perfect skill build? What if I want to change things down the line? It's too many choices and too much stuff I need to know. I don't want to study perfect MMO class design in order to play the game, it's the developer's job to make a class for me that works. I do enjoy having a variety of builds I can spec into and play with but I draw the customization line at forcing me to choose stats each level. That is something I do not want to deal with.
To me, a fun build system is about:
a) choices of abilities that does different things, not just a point here or there. D3 skills are good examples. PoE skill gems are also good examples (but not the path of passive bonuses). There are of course also hybrids like the TSW system but that one has enough "different abilities" to make it interesting.
b) can respec at anytime, and cheaply. Otherwise, how can i experiment and try new combat style?
Originally posted by iixviiiix Earn some stats when level up and build your character in your own way.Equipment depend on stats. Why they don't allow player to build our character anymore ?I know that there still some game use that system , but why most MMOs out here don't use it ?
On the one hand, developers can give players lots of options, but the players will narrow it down to the best options.
On the other hand, players can find builds that they really liked, but that didn't work nearly as well as the 'best' options. Players would have to choose between playing the way they wanted, or playing using the best options to progress or work in groups.
Having fewer choices with a more set build path, where the play style is the difference and not the performance is a much easier solution than trying to make the more complex builds all comparable performance wise.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
The mroe in depth the character progression the better for me.. Having it dumbed down to no stats and a few skills is a big no no for me.. still i am sure sure some people like it that way..
The early betas for WoW had the ability to freely distribute stats.
But Blizzard removed it when they found a large number of people distributing stats that were worthless to them. Like Priests and Mages putting points into Strength and Agility or Warriors and Rogues putting points into Intelligence.
The early betas for WoW had the ability to freely distribute stats.
But Blizzard removed it when they found a large number of people distributing stats that were worthless to them. Like Priests and Mages putting points into Strength and Agility or Warriors and Rogues putting points into Intelligence.
The real question is whether distributing stats is fun. If there is only one optimal way of doing so, it is NOT fun for me. I would much rather developers spend time to make more skills that does something different.
Originally posted by Smikis well choosing stats would be bad for any mmo balance
tell that to an RPG player
we handled them for ages. yes, you don't get perfect balance.... but hell
name one balanced mmo.
you CAN NOT BALANCE mmos.
pong was balanced.
Stop confusing stricht balance for "good enough" balance which can be achieved. This is of course ignoring purposeful perfect imbalance.
yes, and balance WAS good enough while we played those games with pen and paper. all of a sudden this system is not working anymore? doesn't sound legit to me.
you think we did not pvp? we did. also we had raids and dungeons if you wanna see it this way.
basically the only thing changed is the medium and the audience.
you CAN do stat based games.
you CAN give players a choice.
The problem isn't the devs. It is the players and their complaints. If you put this in, no matter how reasonable you expect the player base to be, they will bitch about it.
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
Hands down Asheron's Call did this better than any MMO so far IMHO. It’s sad, most new MMO's offer lots more eye candy but a lot less customization.
So what if you gimped your character? Start fresh? Live with some of the gimpness? respec. That gimp excuse is kind of lame.
They should make an MMO where you don't get to choose your looks and stats are random. Like real life, lol. OK that would suck but interesting, maybe eventually go to a barber and have "plastic surgery" or styles afterwards. As well you can train and develop skills later on down paths you want.
They should make an MMO where you don't get to choose your looks and stats are random. Like real life, lol. OK that would suck but interesting, maybe eventually go to a barber and have "plastic surgery" or styles afterwards. As well you can train and develop skills later on down paths you want.
Why would i play a game that "sucks"?
I play games to escape from real life, to be entertained, not to enter a world simulation.
If I might put a slightly different spin on the balance answer, I would blame the fact that you have a very limited number of endgames. Because most games have only one or two (raid, pvp) ways to progress at the end of character development, players become more and more focused on min-maxing that endgame. This leads to lower and lower tolerances for imbalance.
(there's a link I'd like to find but can't of an interview with some devs descripting the evolution of player pickiness over time and that from their own internal logs, it was now down to a 1% difference in dps output being the threshhold where parties started booting fellow players for bringing the wrong class/spec/gear to an endgame fight)
If I might put a slightly different spin on the balance answer, I would blame the fact that you have a very limited number of endgames. Because most games have only one or two (raid, pvp) ways to progress at the end of character development, players become more and more focused on min-maxing that endgame. This leads to lower and lower tolerances for imbalance.
(there's a link I'd like to find but can't of an interview with some devs descripting the evolution of player pickiness over time and that from their own internal logs, it was now down to a 1% difference in dps output being the threshhold where parties started booting fellow players for bringing the wrong class/spec/gear to an endgame fight)
Or is it just human nature, that we want the most power (and dps is a good proxy)?
Or is it just human nature, that we want the most power (and dps is a good proxy)?
I think you read my post upside down. I'm not disputing that people focus on min/maxing their power, I'm pointing out that what people will try to min/max depends on what their endgame activity is. And if there is no choice in endgame, there will be no choice in how to min/max for that endgame.
I play lots of eccentric builds. I'm still min/maxing. It's just that I'm minmaxing a game playing out in my imagination that is often not the same game that the devs set out to build.
Originally posted by emperorwings Everyone ends up the same but I always liked being an aoe tank mage even with a 75% magic penalty.
Actually that is not true for all games.
Diablo 3 has pretty good build variety (just for mage, you can have arcane, RM, meteor, disintegration, sleet storm, melee blades and those are just off the top of my head, and not counting variations).
Why? Because you don't choose numbers (which will invariably lead to one optimal solution) but you choose skills that does different things.
And it is just an example, and not the only game that have build variety.
There isn't a good reason for not allowing open character builds. If everyone is given the same parameters then it shouldn't matter. It's more involved to do that though and I think most people don't care about taking that much control of thier character.
AA seems decent at customizing and I think a few others coming out do as well. Will be good to see.
Another point regarding PnP balance: Each game had a dynamic balancing agent that could assure that everyone felt useful and had fun. That agent is called the GM. Or more accurately, a skilled GM. They can account for un-optimized characters and make the game fun for all.
0's and 1's can't do that yet...or not very well. EQ1 wasn't balanced very well which led to combos like Erudite Paladin (worst race class combo) to Dark Elf Necros (one of the strongest). This results in mostly optimal builds filtering to the top tiers of play, whilst other combos get left behind and further beg the question why they were even possible to begin with.
Game A (assuming no hard coding on stats' effectiveness)
Level up, get stat points
Put all points on one stat
Get to max level
Go PVP
Use one skill that use that stat specifically
????????????
PROFIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The is the same reason why high end items normally have points divided across several stats, rather than give one big boost to one stats, as well as hard coding on the points effectiveness as the stats goes higher. Most likely game companys know players just wants to play the game and do not want to think. (Last line is said with a thin layer of sarcasm.)
The possibility of the universe collapsing into a singularity is higher than the birth of a perfect MMORPG.
Another point regarding PnP balance: Each game had a dynamic balancing agent that could assure that everyone felt useful and had fun. That agent is called the GM. Or more accurately, a skilled GM. They can account for un-optimized characters and make the game fun for all.
0's and 1's can't do that yet...or not very well. EQ1 wasn't balanced very well which led to combos like Erudite Paladin (worst race class combo) to Dark Elf Necros (one of the strongest). This results in mostly optimal builds filtering to the top tiers of play, whilst other combos get left behind and further beg the question why they were even possible to begin with.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
Earn some stats when level up and build your character in your own way.
Equipment depend on stats.
Why they don't allow player to build our character anymore ?
I know that there still some game use that system , but why most MMOs out here don't use it ?
Depends what MMO you are playing, Age Of Wushu is one such game that allows you to build your character. Seems to me that you really should retitle your thread.
Why don't themepark developers allow us to build our characters anymore.
I think part of it was down to perception. The old PnP crowd was viewed as basement dwelling geeks by many, and by extention so were the old school MMO players. The truth of that perception is irrelevant but in order to popularise MMO's the devs had to remove some of the things that made MMO's appear so geeky.
The easiest way to achieve that was to simplify them. By removing a lot of the options in the character development, like stat point allocation, they removed the necessity of understanding those stats. All that theorycrafting became unimportant and players could just play, rather than have to think.
It also had the added bonus of simplifying the game's development and balancing, so it was win win for the devs. An easier game to develop and it would appeal to a larger audience.
Now I have absolutely no evidence to back this up, it's just an opinion but I think there's more than a little truth in it.
Comments
Games are all smoke & mirrors to entertain. For example, achievement is an illusion that is carefully controlled.
Yep, sad. It wasn't always like that. Back in the day you could make a troll mage with high charisma if you wanted, hehe.
Tabletop RPG gaming since Chainmail and D&D was a blue book with some cheap plastic dice and a crayon. MMORPGing since MOOS/MUDS, when forums were just bulletin boards and players actually roleplayed their characters.
hmm .. it is always like that. Games are always about entertaining you with illusion. Just some are more successful. There is never true achievement by beating pixels. Not compare to real work like scientific discovery anyway.
To me, a fun build system is about:
a) choices of abilities that does different things, not just a point here or there. D3 skills are good examples. PoE skill gems are also good examples (but not the path of passive bonuses). There are of course also hybrids like the TSW system but that one has enough "different abilities" to make it interesting.
b) can respec at anytime, and cheaply. Otherwise, how can i experiment and try new combat style?
On the one hand, developers can give players lots of options, but the players will narrow it down to the best options.
On the other hand, players can find builds that they really liked, but that didn't work nearly as well as the 'best' options. Players would have to choose between playing the way they wanted, or playing using the best options to progress or work in groups.
Having fewer choices with a more set build path, where the play style is the difference and not the performance is a much easier solution than trying to make the more complex builds all comparable performance wise.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
The early betas for WoW had the ability to freely distribute stats.
But Blizzard removed it when they found a large number of people distributing stats that were worthless to them. Like Priests and Mages putting points into Strength and Agility or Warriors and Rogues putting points into Intelligence.
The real question is whether distributing stats is fun. If there is only one optimal way of doing so, it is NOT fun for me. I would much rather developers spend time to make more skills that does something different.
The problem isn't the devs. It is the players and their complaints. If you put this in, no matter how reasonable you expect the player base to be, they will bitch about it.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
Hands down Asheron's Call did this better than any MMO so far IMHO. It’s sad, most new MMO's offer lots more eye candy but a lot less customization.
So what if you gimped your character? Start fresh? Live with some of the gimpness? respec. That gimp excuse is kind of lame.
They should make an MMO where you don't get to choose your looks and stats are random. Like real life, lol. OK that would suck but interesting, maybe eventually go to a barber and have "plastic surgery" or styles afterwards. As well you can train and develop skills later on down paths you want.
I digress though sorry.
Z.Why would i play a game that "sucks"?
I play games to escape from real life, to be entertained, not to enter a world simulation.
If I might put a slightly different spin on the balance answer, I would blame the fact that you have a very limited number of endgames. Because most games have only one or two (raid, pvp) ways to progress at the end of character development, players become more and more focused on min-maxing that endgame. This leads to lower and lower tolerances for imbalance.
(there's a link I'd like to find but can't of an interview with some devs descripting the evolution of player pickiness over time and that from their own internal logs, it was now down to a 1% difference in dps output being the threshhold where parties started booting fellow players for bringing the wrong class/spec/gear to an endgame fight)
Because they aren't your characters anymore. You are just renting them until the company decides to tell you to fugg off.
http://www.speedtest.net/result/7300033012
Or is it just human nature, that we want the most power (and dps is a good proxy)?
I think you read my post upside down. I'm not disputing that people focus on min/maxing their power, I'm pointing out that what people will try to min/max depends on what their endgame activity is. And if there is no choice in endgame, there will be no choice in how to min/max for that endgame.
I play lots of eccentric builds. I'm still min/maxing. It's just that I'm minmaxing a game playing out in my imagination that is often not the same game that the devs set out to build.
This isn't a signature, you just think it is.
Actually that is not true for all games.
Diablo 3 has pretty good build variety (just for mage, you can have arcane, RM, meteor, disintegration, sleet storm, melee blades and those are just off the top of my head, and not counting variations).
Why? Because you don't choose numbers (which will invariably lead to one optimal solution) but you choose skills that does different things.
And it is just an example, and not the only game that have build variety.
AA seems decent at customizing and I think a few others coming out do as well. Will be good to see.
Another point regarding PnP balance: Each game had a dynamic balancing agent that could assure that everyone felt useful and had fun. That agent is called the GM. Or more accurately, a skilled GM. They can account for un-optimized characters and make the game fun for all.
0's and 1's can't do that yet...or not very well. EQ1 wasn't balanced very well which led to combos like Erudite Paladin (worst race class combo) to Dark Elf Necros (one of the strongest). This results in mostly optimal builds filtering to the top tiers of play, whilst other combos get left behind and further beg the question why they were even possible to begin with.
I can see where this is going...
Game A (assuming no hard coding on stats' effectiveness)
The possibility of the universe collapsing into a singularity is higher than the birth of a perfect MMORPG.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
Depends what MMO you are playing, Age Of Wushu is one such game that allows you to build your character. Seems to me that you really should retitle your thread.
Why don't themepark developers allow us to build our characters anymore.
I think part of it was down to perception. The old PnP crowd was viewed as basement dwelling geeks by many, and by extention so were the old school MMO players. The truth of that perception is irrelevant but in order to popularise MMO's the devs had to remove some of the things that made MMO's appear so geeky.
The easiest way to achieve that was to simplify them. By removing a lot of the options in the character development, like stat point allocation, they removed the necessity of understanding those stats. All that theorycrafting became unimportant and players could just play, rather than have to think.
It also had the added bonus of simplifying the game's development and balancing, so it was win win for the devs. An easier game to develop and it would appeal to a larger audience.
Now I have absolutely no evidence to back this up, it's just an opinion but I think there's more than a little truth in it.