First off, there is no "shift" away from TV or Movies towards games. Games have been around much longer than TV or movies. Its only been the last half-century that we played them on the TV or a monitor...which, I might add, is far LESS interactive than games used to be.
TV and movies are not losing steam. This may be difficult for some people to fathom, but people have largely just embraced BOTH forms of media. Yes, thats right! You CAN like more than one thing at a time! I know...I know...its a shock. Have a moment to take that all in.
.....
This whole "there can be only one" mentality that many of today's gamers seem to have is part of why the rest of society views us collectively as freaks, shut-ins, and misfits. Its gotten to the point where I'm not even proud to call myself a gamer anymore.
As for skill, flicking cards into a top hat requires skill. Its still largely considered a waste of time. Its lack of productivity that's largely seen to be a waste of time, skill or no skill required. Video games may or may not be productive, depending on your perspective.
Personally, I see entertainment as necessary to maintain one's sainty. Play is a natural need that most, if not all, animals engage in in one form or another. If it entertains, its not a waste of time. What entertains varies on an individual basis.
Got bad news for you friend:
1. A "shift" away from static media towards interactive media is happening
2. You criticize a black-and-white mentality of gamers immediately after making an incorrect black-and-white assumption that by "shift" I somehow meant people are only using one form of entertainment. Oh, the irony.
3. "Shift" by no means implies a single form of entertainment. Shift means shift. Which is what's happening.
You do realize that 8% growth is...wait for it...STILL GROWTH.
A "shift" means moving away from one and to the other. One may be growing faster than another, but both are STILL GROWING. Why? Because people are largely enjoying both mediums. Thats not a shift, thats an expansion of horizons. So yeah, thank you for providing statistics to prove my point.
Personally, I believe the measure of difficulty in anything is that which we impose upon it ourselves.
If we try something for the first time but it's enjoyable to us, then we keep at it with zeal and revel in the accomplishment. If it's distasteful to someone else, then it's chore and painstakingly boring. Same trial.
Discount all the external factors that might affect the exercise, in gaming terms 'bad mechanics', 'lag', etc. and what you're left with is perspective.
A whole other discussion can be made about a game's functionality or lack thereof but that's not the 'here and now'.
The problem with your entire argument over I don't know how many pages and how many threads is that the highlighted statement is SUBJECTIVE.
Here...let me show you why with an example...
My mother-in-law loves to hunt for bargains. She will spend hours and hours shopping to save a few bucks. While her bargain hunting is definitely difficult, I personally hate it. I feel like it's a complete waste of time to spend hours trying to save a few dollars when I could easily earn more by spending the same amount of time working OT. And yet, she really enjoys this, and it is not a waste of time to her.
This is what you aren't getting. YOU are saying that something that YOU don't like is a waste of time simply because YOU don't like it. Yes, you try to use the "majority agrees!" as backing for your argument, but this is bunk. Do the majority of people in the world play the saxophone? Is playing the saxophone a waste of time?
Yes, but you can accept that there's a certain skillful depth to locating bargains, even if you don't like it.
Whereas with arbitrary time-wasting in games (doubling the time wasted by death penalties) no depth is added, only time is lost.
I'm sure you can find examples of people who enjoy spending time in the DMV, or other fruitless time-wasting, but they'll be really damn rare because it's not how the human mind is built. (And in cases where someone enjoys their time being wasted, it's because it's actually doing something for them, like how time at a DMV might be an opportunity someone gets to read.)
Meanwhile with timesinks in games, nothing is accomplished that isn't accomplished better in other ways.
Why are death penalties a waste of time and how do they arbitrarily double the time you "waste?" Isn't the outcome of whether you die or not ultimately decided by the player's actions? Therefore doesn't "skill" act as a major determinator of if you are "set back" by the death penalty? How is this "arbitrary?"
And since the goal of just about any MMORPG is to "get more powerful," this means that your lack of skill, which led you to dying, directly negatively impacted your progress towards reaching your goal of "getting more powerful." Therefore, death penalties make the game more difficult.
Why are death penalties a waste of time and how do they arbitrarily double the time you "waste?" Isn't the outcome of whether you die or not ultimately decided by the player's actions? Therefore doesn't "skill" act as a major determinator of if you are "set back" by the death penalty? How is this "arbitrary?"
And since the goal of just about any MMORPG is to "get more powerful," this means that your lack of skill, which led you to dying, directly negatively impacted your progress towards reaching your goal of "getting more powerful." Therefore, death penalties make the game more difficult.
I just realized, is your avatar Tyrion Lannister wearing sunglasses?
You do realize that 8% growth is...wait for it...STILL GROWTH.
A "shift" means moving away from one and to the other. One may be growing faster than another, but both are STILL GROWING. So yeah, thank you for providing statistics to prove my point.
Let's say people spend 50% of their entertainment time watching movies and 50% in games.
Then the games industry grows 264% and movie industry grows 8%
Now how do you think the overall balance of entertainment activities has shifted as a result of this?
Correct: it's a shift towards games, which would now have more than 50% of the entertainment time.
Why not agree with the other poster's valid point about declining theater sales, instead of floundering about on your own?
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
First off, there is no "shift" away from TV or Movies towards games. Games have been around much longer than TV or movies. Its only been the last half-century that we played them on the TV or a monitor...which, I might add, is far LESS interactive than games used to be.
TV and movies are not losing steam. This may be difficult for some people to fathom, but people have largely just embraced BOTH forms of media. Yes, thats right! You CAN like more than one thing at a time! I know...I know...its a shock. Have a moment to take that all in.
.....
This whole "there can be only one" mentality that many of today's gamers seem to have is part of why the rest of society views us collectively as freaks, shut-ins, and misfits. Its gotten to the point where I'm not even proud to call myself a gamer anymore.
As for skill, flicking cards into a top hat requires skill. Its still largely considered a waste of time. Its lack of productivity that's largely seen to be a waste of time, skill or no skill required. Video games may or may not be productive, depending on your perspective.
Personally, I see entertainment as necessary to maintain one's sainty. Play is a natural need that most, if not all, animals engage in in one form or another. If it entertains, its not a waste of time. What entertains varies on an individual basis.
Got bad news for you friend:
1. A "shift" away from static media towards interactive media is happening
2. You criticize a black-and-white mentality of gamers immediately after making an incorrect black-and-white assumption that by "shift" I somehow meant people are only using one form of entertainment. Oh, the irony.
3. "Shift" by no means implies a single form of entertainment. Shift means shift. Which is what's happening.
You do realize that 8% growth is...wait for it...STILL GROWTH.
A "shift" means moving away from one and to the other. One may be growing faster than another, but both are STILL GROWING. Why? Because people are largely enjoying both mediums. So yeah, thank you for providing statistics to prove my point.
Also...
Movies have been around since the early 20th century. They have already reached maximum market penetration (everyone watches movies), so it's not surprising that they aren't growing much because well...where could they possibly grow?
Video games have only been around since the late 20th century, and they are currently in a period of explosive growth. They have yet to reach maximum market penetration, so it's not surprising that they are growing quickly.
The comparison Axe makes is silly. It would be like if I said Darfkall was more popular in WoW during its first week because it grew 1000% while WoW grew only 1%. But this doesn't matter when you look at the fact that Darkfall probably grew from like 1000 players to 10000 players, while WoW grew from 10 million players to 10.01 million players.
Why are death penalties a waste of time and how do they arbitrarily double the time you "waste?" Isn't the outcome of whether you die or not ultimately decided by the player's actions? Therefore doesn't "skill" act as a major determinator of if you are "set back" by the death penalty? How is this "arbitrary?"
And since the goal of just about any MMORPG is to "get more powerful," this means that your lack of skill, which led you to dying, directly negatively impacted your progress towards reaching your goal of "getting more powerful." Therefore, death penalties make the game more difficult.
Failure happened, you died, the reward wasnt gained, and the fight was reset.
Those are the elements required to give a death penalty the meaning it needs in a game. A certain amount of time is used up (the time used in the failed fight) but no more than that.
Whereas in a penalty that involves a lot more time than that, that time didn't need to be used up -- so the timesink is a waste.
Anything which doesn't add to a game design, holds it back.
The designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing left to add, but when there's nothing left to take away.
Adding timesinks arbitrarily is lazy, bad game design.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Why are death penalties a waste of time and how do they arbitrarily double the time you "waste?" Isn't the outcome of whether you die or not ultimately decided by the player's actions? Therefore doesn't "skill" act as a major determinator of if you are "set back" by the death penalty? How is this "arbitrary?"
And since the goal of just about any MMORPG is to "get more powerful," this means that your lack of skill, which led you to dying, directly negatively impacted your progress towards reaching your goal of "getting more powerful." Therefore, death penalties make the game more difficult.
Failure happened, you died, the reward wasnt gained, and the fight was reset.
Those are the elements required to give a death penalty the meaning it needs in a game. A certain amount of time is used up (the time used in the failed fight) but no more than that.
Whereas in a penalty that involves a lot more time than that, that time didn't need to be used up -- so the timesink is a waste.
Anything which doesn't add to a game design, holds it back.
The designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing left to add, but when there's nothing left to take away.
Adding timesinks arbitrarily is lazy, bad game design.
A few things...
First, you do realize that an MMORPG as a whole can be considered a timesink right? Like all the time you spend grinding mobs, or doing the same dungeon or BG over and over again...timesink.
Second, there's that "arbitrary" word again. How is a death penalty arbitrary? It's almost the opposite of arbitrary it is specifically incurred by unskillful play.
Third, here's another perspective for you. When I feel like I have nothing to lose, then I feel like I'm just wasting time because there's no real need to pay attention or be cautious. Therefore, without a death penalty, the entire game is a time sink to me.
Fourth, I know you like to use the word "arbitrary," but ironically, it describes your arguments very well. You are arbitrarily deciding that a death penalty is nothing more than a timesink and predicating your entire argument on that. I mean, "time did not need to be used up" really? How are you deciding this? I could argue that no time in a game needs to be used up.
Finally...I just want to make it clear that I'm not arguing that a harsh death penalty is always better. I'm just arguing that, in the right game, a harsh death penalty can be a very good thing. And you seem to be arguing that a harsh death penalty is always, unequivocably, bad...which is clearly false because there are plenty of games with a harsher death penalty that do quite well (cough...Minecraft...cough).
Why are death penalties a waste of time and how do they arbitrarily double the time you "waste?" Isn't the outcome of whether you die or not ultimately decided by the player's actions? Therefore doesn't "skill" act as a major determinator of if you are "set back" by the death penalty? How is this "arbitrary?"
And since the goal of just about any MMORPG is to "get more powerful," this means that your lack of skill, which led you to dying, directly negatively impacted your progress towards reaching your goal of "getting more powerful." Therefore, death penalties make the game more difficult.
I just realized, is your avatar Tyrion Lannister wearing sunglasses?
Why are death penalties a waste of time and how do they arbitrarily double the time you "waste?" Isn't the outcome of whether you die or not ultimately decided by the player's actions? Therefore doesn't "skill" act as a major determinator of if you are "set back" by the death penalty? How is this "arbitrary?"
And since the goal of just about any MMORPG is to "get more powerful," this means that your lack of skill, which led you to dying, directly negatively impacted your progress towards reaching your goal of "getting more powerful." Therefore, death penalties make the game more difficult.
Failure happened, you died, the reward wasnt gained, and the fight was reset.
Those are the elements required to give a death penalty the meaning it needs in a game. A certain amount of time is used up (the time used in the failed fight) but no more than that.
Whereas in a penalty that involves a lot more time than that, that time didn't need to be used up -- so the timesink is a waste.
Anything which doesn't add to a game design, holds it back.
The designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing left to add, but when there's nothing left to take away.
Adding timesinks arbitrarily is lazy, bad game design.
Its been explained dozens of times by those who prefer death penalties why they actually enjoy them. Explaining it one more time wont really change anything.
Suffice to say, you think your opinion is the rule of law. It isn't. You seem to think anything you dont like is arbitrary. It isn't.
So I'm curious. Do you feel that every genre you don't like should not exist as well? Are they "arbitrary" because they dont entertain you? What if your favorite MMO implemented a change that you didn't agree with? Is that suddenly lazy, bad game design?
Death penalties serve a purpose. I find it kind of funny you call them "lazy" as opposed to simply giving you a debuff that lowers attributes for xx minutes. Giving players a reason to be cautious, making sure people don't want to lose...yeah, thats such terrible game design.
You died, now you're useless for 5 minute = Arbitrary timesink
You died, now you have to fight to recover your losses= Still playing the game
When you go broke in Monopoly you dont just sit out 5 turns then come back with $2000, and Monopoly has remained a popular game for nearly a century.
Hm, to be honest, I don't think you CAN make a MMORPG difficult.
Now there are two reasons. First, you *can* base the difficulty of the combat on the player's skills instead of the characters. But first, it would not be a MMORPG anymore, because per definition the strength of a character of a RPG is based on stats and numbers not on the ability of the player, his quick reaction. Second, I assume unless the "player skill" demanded is really something very basic, a lot of MMO fans would not go along with the game. I mean sure TERA and DCU require a bit player skills, but that's only very simplistic, and still by and large based on character stats.
Second, how can you penalize a player for failing? In the end, every single penality is a timesink. You lose money, you lose items, you make a corpse run, whatever it is: in the end of the day in a MMO every penality is time, because time is the only think a MMO *can* penalize. And that doesn't make a thing difficult, it just makes it dull. If you have to re-grind mobs to get money for the repair, if you re-do the same quests over and over to get back to your status - the only difficulty in that is you patience towards repetition. And like it or not, it seems the tolerance of gamers towards hardships as we knew them in Everquest and the like is just long gone.
I don't see a way to make a MMO more difficult. And being slightly handicapped with my left hand I personally do no like games which require too much hand coordiated twitchyness. But that's another thing.
I think this is an important point.
In an RPG we are playing the 'role' of the fantastical hero, we are not actually fantastical heros playing a game.
The 'character' I play, I make powerful. I am not powerful.
Often when games boil the play into who is the quicker button masher, I lose the since that my character is a powerful magic infused warrior. My age, reflexes and eyesite simply won't allow me to compete with a 19 year old.
So when a game is built on 'my' skill (i.e. who can press the buttons in the right order the fastest) I can lose the feeling that the 'character' I've built over several years is a epic hero worthy of a fantasy novel. And that's what I am trying to create, not leet twitch reflexes.
Hm, to be honest, I don't think you CAN make a MMORPG difficult.
Now there are two reasons. First, you *can* base the difficulty of the combat on the player's skills instead of the characters. But first, it would not be a MMORPG anymore, because per definition the strength of a character of a RPG is based on stats and numbers not on the ability of the player, his quick reaction. Second, I assume unless the "player skill" demanded is really something very basic, a lot of MMO fans would not go along with the game. I mean sure TERA and DCU require a bit player skills, but that's only very simplistic, and still by and large based on character stats.
Second, how can you penalize a player for failing? In the end, every single penality is a timesink. You lose money, you lose items, you make a corpse run, whatever it is: in the end of the day in a MMO every penality is time, because time is the only think a MMO *can* penalize. And that doesn't make a thing difficult, it just makes it dull. If you have to re-grind mobs to get money for the repair, if you re-do the same quests over and over to get back to your status - the only difficulty in that is you patience towards repetition. And like it or not, it seems the tolerance of gamers towards hardships as we knew them in Everquest and the like is just long gone.
I don't see a way to make a MMO more difficult. And being slightly handicapped with my left hand I personally do no like games which require too much hand coordiated twitchyness. But that's another thing.
I think this is an important point.
In an RPG we are playing the 'role' of the fantastical hero, we are not actually fantastical heros playing a game.
The 'character' I play, I make powerful. I am not powerful.
Often when games boil the play into who is the quicker button masher, I lose the since that my character is a powerful magic infused warrior. My age, reflexes and eyesite simply won't allow me to compete with a 19 year old.
So when a game is built on 'my' skill (i.e. who can press the buttons in the right order the fastest) I can lose the feeling that the 'character' I've built over several years is a epic hero worthy of a fantasy novel. And that's what I am trying to create, not leet twitch reflexes.
Remember, no disabled person deserves to be good at a role playing game. Because Axehilt doesn't approve. Or any old person. Or any 11 year old.
Its been explained dozens of times by those who prefer death penalties why they actually enjoy them. Explaining it one more time wont really change anything.
Really? Then it should be easy to make them happy. Just have a game that every 5 min, a meteor drops out of the sky randomly and kill the player. Oh, let's tag on a 5 level penalty, strip him naked .. for the death penalty. You don't really need mobs or anything... they can enjoy being death and penalized 100% of the time!
Plus, i won't see them in my game, that is probably a plus for me (and for them, no doubt).
Its been explained dozens of times by those who prefer death penalties why they actually enjoy them. Explaining it one more time wont really change anything.
Really? Then it should be easy to make them happy. Just have a game that every 5 min, a meteor drops out of the sky randomly and kill the player. Oh, let's tag on a 5 level penalty, strip him naked .. for the death penalty. You don't really need mobs or anything... they can enjoy being death and penalized 100% of the time!
Plus, i won't see them in my game, that is probably a plus for me (and for them, no doubt).
Yes Nariusseldon, because dropping random meteors on level 5 players is exactly what we're talking about here. Give me a break. This isn't even in the same ballpark, nay, planet, of death penalty stuff that we are talking about.
Timesinks as artificial way to create longevity and bolster retention (profits) = bad design
Penalties by themselves are not bad and not bad design.
You could go as far to say that penalties are needed in order to give rewards purpose and meaning.
Very few could logically argue against the notion that in order to experience the thrill of victory you have to have known or fear the chill of defeat.
Its been explained dozens of times by those who prefer death penalties why they actually enjoy them. Explaining it one more time wont really change anything.
Really? Then it should be easy to make them happy. Just have a game that every 5 min, a meteor drops out of the sky randomly and kill the player. Oh, let's tag on a 5 level penalty, strip him naked .. for the death penalty. You don't really need mobs or anything... they can enjoy being death and penalized 100% of the time!
Plus, i won't see them in my game, that is probably a plus for me (and for them, no doubt).
While we're at it. Lets remove HP from easy games. Lets just not even make monsters attack anymore! In fact, lets remove the monsters from the equasion altogether, and just have loot spawn on the ground randomly for players to pick up! Let players gain 5 levels for every piece of equipment they pick up. That should make it easy to make people happy, right?
No...not right. See how easy it is to make up ridiculous scenarios like this?
Its been explained dozens of times by those who prefer death penalties why they actually enjoy them. Explaining it one more time wont really change anything.
Really? Then it should be easy to make them happy. Just have a game that every 5 min, a meteor drops out of the sky randomly and kill the player. Oh, let's tag on a 5 level penalty, strip him naked .. for the death penalty. You don't really need mobs or anything... they can enjoy being death and penalized 100% of the time!
Plus, i won't see them in my game, that is probably a plus for me (and for them, no doubt).
While we're at it. Lets remove HP from easy games. Lets just not even make monsters attack anymore! In fact, lets remove the monsters from the equasion altogether, and just have loot spawn on the ground randomly for players to pick up! Let players gain 5 levels for every piece of equipment they pick up. That should make it easy to make people happy, right?
No...not right. See how easy it is to make up ridiculous scenarios like this?
Umm .. there is a difference. No one says an easy game is fun. There are plenty written on how players want *some* challenge .. just not "time sinks" (and i mean difficulty in encounter here).
However you said .. specifically that "those who prefer death penalties". So what is wrong with giving them MORE death penalties? Are you saying they don't actually like dying?
Its been explained dozens of times by those who prefer death penalties why they actually enjoy them. Explaining it one more time wont really change anything.
Really? Then it should be easy to make them happy. Just have a game that every 5 min, a meteor drops out of the sky randomly and kill the player. Oh, let's tag on a 5 level penalty, strip him naked .. for the death penalty. You don't really need mobs or anything... they can enjoy being death and penalized 100% of the time!
Plus, i won't see them in my game, that is probably a plus for me (and for them, no doubt).
While we're at it. Lets remove HP from easy games. Lets just not even make monsters attack anymore! In fact, lets remove the monsters from the equasion altogether, and just have loot spawn on the ground randomly for players to pick up! Let players gain 5 levels for every piece of equipment they pick up. That should make it easy to make people happy, right?
No...not right. See how easy it is to make up ridiculous scenarios like this?
Umm .. there is a difference. No one says an easy game is fun. There are plenty written on how players want *some* challenge .. just not "time sinks" (and i mean difficulty in encounter here).
However you said .. specifically that "those who prefer death penalties". So what is wrong with giving them MORE death penalties? Are you saying they don't actually like dying?
And how does what I said not present an extreme and utterly ridiculous over-the-top solution for people who don't like death penalties?
If someone were to say to you "I like cake", would you suggest they eat only cake, and eat it every 5 minutes? Would you suggest they integrate all their other daily vitamins into cake form? Bacon cake for protein? Spinach cake for vitamins? Flax seed cake for fiber?
Tipping to the ridiculous and extreme as a last resort does not a good argument make.
Very few could logically argue against the notion that in order to experience the thrill of victory you have to have known or fear the chill of defeat.
Very few could logically argue against the notion that in order to experience the thrill of victory you have to have known or fear the chill of defeat.
Some here will do just that.
I will say this about real life. The extreme cost for moderate reward is the reason I perfer to avoid real life.
if my games become extreemly risky for the time i have put into them I will instead get a part time job.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Very few could logically argue against the notion that in order to experience the thrill of victory you have to have known or fear the chill of defeat.
Some here will do just that.
I will say this about real life. The extreme cost for moderate reward is the reason I perfer to avoid real life.
if my games become extreemly risky for the time i have put into them I will instead get a part time job.
Very few could logically argue against the notion that in order to experience the thrill of victory you have to have known or fear the chill of defeat.
Some here will do just that.
I will say this about real life. The extreme cost for moderate reward is the reason I perfer to avoid real life.
if my games become extreemly risky for the time i have put into them I will instead get a part time job.
And overall, that may be a good thing .
I absolutely agree to you guys. However even though thousands of people play all types of games, it will all come down to what we call player preferences
Its been explained dozens of times by those who prefer death penalties why they actually enjoy them. Explaining it one more time wont really change anything.
Really? Then it should be easy to make them happy. Just have a game that every 5 min, a meteor drops out of the sky randomly and kill the player. Oh, let's tag on a 5 level penalty, strip him naked .. for the death penalty. You don't really need mobs or anything... they can enjoy being death and penalized 100% of the time!
Plus, i won't see them in my game, that is probably a plus for me (and for them, no doubt).
While we're at it. Lets remove HP from easy games. Lets just not even make monsters attack anymore! In fact, lets remove the monsters from the equasion altogether, and just have loot spawn on the ground randomly for players to pick up! Let players gain 5 levels for every piece of equipment they pick up. That should make it easy to make people happy, right?
No...not right. See how easy it is to make up ridiculous scenarios like this?
I'm going to start development on a game just like that. A game that is impossible to lose (only a step or two away from what we have today) even if you try. I'm going to be a multi-millionaire. I might add a cash shop too so players can buy clown shoes, sombreros, artificial dog shit, dashboard dice and other equally useful items. Can anybody recommend a title?
There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own. -- Herman Melville
Comments
You do realize that 8% growth is...wait for it...STILL GROWTH.
A "shift" means moving away from one and to the other. One may be growing faster than another, but both are STILL GROWING. Why? Because people are largely enjoying both mediums. Thats not a shift, thats an expansion of horizons. So yeah, thank you for providing statistics to prove my point.
Personally, I believe the measure of difficulty in anything is that which we impose upon it ourselves.
If we try something for the first time but it's enjoyable to us, then we keep at it with zeal and revel in the accomplishment. If it's distasteful to someone else, then it's chore and painstakingly boring. Same trial.
Discount all the external factors that might affect the exercise, in gaming terms 'bad mechanics', 'lag', etc. and what you're left with is perspective.
A whole other discussion can be made about a game's functionality or lack thereof but that's not the 'here and now'.
Why are death penalties a waste of time and how do they arbitrarily double the time you "waste?" Isn't the outcome of whether you die or not ultimately decided by the player's actions? Therefore doesn't "skill" act as a major determinator of if you are "set back" by the death penalty? How is this "arbitrary?"
And since the goal of just about any MMORPG is to "get more powerful," this means that your lack of skill, which led you to dying, directly negatively impacted your progress towards reaching your goal of "getting more powerful." Therefore, death penalties make the game more difficult.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
I just realized, is your avatar Tyrion Lannister wearing sunglasses?
Let's say people spend 50% of their entertainment time watching movies and 50% in games.
Then the games industry grows 264% and movie industry grows 8%
Now how do you think the overall balance of entertainment activities has shifted as a result of this?
Correct: it's a shift towards games, which would now have more than 50% of the entertainment time.
Why not agree with the other poster's valid point about declining theater sales, instead of floundering about on your own?
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Also...
Movies have been around since the early 20th century. They have already reached maximum market penetration (everyone watches movies), so it's not surprising that they aren't growing much because well...where could they possibly grow?
Video games have only been around since the late 20th century, and they are currently in a period of explosive growth. They have yet to reach maximum market penetration, so it's not surprising that they are growing quickly.
The comparison Axe makes is silly. It would be like if I said Darfkall was more popular in WoW during its first week because it grew 1000% while WoW grew only 1%. But this doesn't matter when you look at the fact that Darkfall probably grew from like 1000 players to 10000 players, while WoW grew from 10 million players to 10.01 million players.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
Failure happened, you died, the reward wasnt gained, and the fight was reset.
Those are the elements required to give a death penalty the meaning it needs in a game. A certain amount of time is used up (the time used in the failed fight) but no more than that.
Whereas in a penalty that involves a lot more time than that, that time didn't need to be used up -- so the timesink is a waste.
Anything which doesn't add to a game design, holds it back.
The designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing left to add, but when there's nothing left to take away.
Adding timesinks arbitrarily is lazy, bad game design.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
A few things...
First, you do realize that an MMORPG as a whole can be considered a timesink right? Like all the time you spend grinding mobs, or doing the same dungeon or BG over and over again...timesink.
Second, there's that "arbitrary" word again. How is a death penalty arbitrary? It's almost the opposite of arbitrary it is specifically incurred by unskillful play.
Third, here's another perspective for you. When I feel like I have nothing to lose, then I feel like I'm just wasting time because there's no real need to pay attention or be cautious. Therefore, without a death penalty, the entire game is a time sink to me.
Fourth, I know you like to use the word "arbitrary," but ironically, it describes your arguments very well. You are arbitrarily deciding that a death penalty is nothing more than a timesink and predicating your entire argument on that. I mean, "time did not need to be used up" really? How are you deciding this? I could argue that no time in a game needs to be used up.
Finally...I just want to make it clear that I'm not arguing that a harsh death penalty is always better. I'm just arguing that, in the right game, a harsh death penalty can be a very good thing. And you seem to be arguing that a harsh death penalty is always, unequivocably, bad...which is clearly false because there are plenty of games with a harsher death penalty that do quite well (cough...Minecraft...cough).
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
LOL, indeed it is
!
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
Its been explained dozens of times by those who prefer death penalties why they actually enjoy them. Explaining it one more time wont really change anything.
Suffice to say, you think your opinion is the rule of law. It isn't. You seem to think anything you dont like is arbitrary. It isn't.
So I'm curious. Do you feel that every genre you don't like should not exist as well? Are they "arbitrary" because they dont entertain you? What if your favorite MMO implemented a change that you didn't agree with? Is that suddenly lazy, bad game design?
Death penalties serve a purpose. I find it kind of funny you call them "lazy" as opposed to simply giving you a debuff that lowers attributes for xx minutes. Giving players a reason to be cautious, making sure people don't want to lose...yeah, thats such terrible game design.
You died, now you're useless for 5 minute = Arbitrary timesink
You died, now you have to fight to recover your losses = Still playing the game
When you go broke in Monopoly you dont just sit out 5 turns then come back with $2000, and Monopoly has remained a popular game for nearly a century.
I think this is an important point.
In an RPG we are playing the 'role' of the fantastical hero, we are not actually fantastical heros playing a game.
The 'character' I play, I make powerful. I am not powerful.
Often when games boil the play into who is the quicker button masher, I lose the since that my character is a powerful magic infused warrior. My age, reflexes and eyesite simply won't allow me to compete with a 19 year old.
So when a game is built on 'my' skill (i.e. who can press the buttons in the right order the fastest) I can lose the feeling that the 'character' I've built over several years is a epic hero worthy of a fantasy novel. And that's what I am trying to create, not leet twitch reflexes.
Remember, no disabled person deserves to be good at a role playing game. Because Axehilt doesn't approve. Or any old person. Or any 11 year old.
Really? Then it should be easy to make them happy. Just have a game that every 5 min, a meteor drops out of the sky randomly and kill the player. Oh, let's tag on a 5 level penalty, strip him naked .. for the death penalty. You don't really need mobs or anything... they can enjoy being death and penalized 100% of the time!
Plus, i won't see them in my game, that is probably a plus for me (and for them, no doubt).
There is a really, really big difference between time sinks and penalties.
Yes Nariusseldon, because dropping random meteors on level 5 players is exactly what we're talking about here. Give me a break. This isn't even in the same ballpark, nay, planet, of death penalty stuff that we are talking about.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
Timesinks as penalties = bad design
Timesinks as artificial way to create longevity and bolster retention (profits) = bad design
Penalties by themselves are not bad and not bad design.
You could go as far to say that penalties are needed in order to give rewards purpose and meaning.
Very few could logically argue against the notion that in order to experience the thrill of victory you have to have known or fear the chill of defeat.
While we're at it. Lets remove HP from easy games. Lets just not even make monsters attack anymore! In fact, lets remove the monsters from the equasion altogether, and just have loot spawn on the ground randomly for players to pick up! Let players gain 5 levels for every piece of equipment they pick up. That should make it easy to make people happy, right?
No...not right. See how easy it is to make up ridiculous scenarios like this?
Valid? An 8% increase is not a decline. Not sure how else that can be explained to you
Umm .. there is a difference. No one says an easy game is fun. There are plenty written on how players want *some* challenge .. just not "time sinks" (and i mean difficulty in encounter here).
However you said .. specifically that "those who prefer death penalties". So what is wrong with giving them MORE death penalties? Are you saying they don't actually like dying?
And how does what I said not present an extreme and utterly ridiculous over-the-top solution for people who don't like death penalties?
If someone were to say to you "I like cake", would you suggest they eat only cake, and eat it every 5 minutes? Would you suggest they integrate all their other daily vitamins into cake form? Bacon cake for protein? Spinach cake for vitamins? Flax seed cake for fiber?
Tipping to the ridiculous and extreme as a last resort does not a good argument make.
Some here will do just that.I will say this about real life. The extreme cost for moderate reward is the reason I perfer to avoid real life.
if my games become extreemly risky for the time i have put into them I will instead get a part time job.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
And overall, that may be a good thing
.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
I absolutely agree to you guys. However even though thousands of people play all types of games, it will all come down to what we call player preferences
tumblr and frameless shower doors hub.
I'm going to start development on a game just like that. A game that is impossible to lose (only a step or two away from what we have today) even if you try. I'm going to be a multi-millionaire. I might add a cash shop too so players can buy clown shoes, sombreros, artificial dog shit, dashboard dice and other equally useful items. Can anybody recommend a title?
There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own.
-- Herman Melville