Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

MMOs can solve the "too easy" "too difficulty" problem with the "monster power level" idea

2

Comments

  • MMOExposedMMOExposed lalal land, DCPosts: 6,255Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by phantomghost

    The thing is you can't give players the choice.  Most people will do whatever is fastest, a lot of people compete in those aspects.

     

    The game needs to be difficult enough on its own that will add length to leveling... the better players (or 1s with more time) will level quicker.  Giving players the choice will not help at all, that is more of a single player game aspect... easy, normal. hard, etc.

    than that clearly show that most of these people on the forum screaming about content being too easy, dont reallhy know what they want.

     

    because even if you give them the option to take the harder gameplay on their own, they wont do it.

     

    thats like a hungry man coming to you saying he hungry, you give him the option to come into your house and eat, or stay outside and not eat..

    but they choose to stay outside and not eat...

    image

  • TamanousTamanous Edmonton, ABPosts: 2,125Member Uncommon

    This is meta-gaming that distracts from mmo immersion. Crap like this is what is ruining mmo's.

     

    Mmo's simply need to become smarter, have better AI and create seemless worlds where mechanics are seen less instead of more options for the players. Perhaps auto-scaling options outside the players control but an mmo world should always be about walking into a situation where the parameters of the encounter are as much of a mystery to the player as possible.

     

    The number rule in traditional rpg's is to ensure the rules are as invisible to the players as possible. Mmo's have long forgot this concept and we get min-max, meta-gaming crap themeparks like we have today. Mmo's should be a place a player logs into that is defined entirely by the developers vision with no catering to the crybabies. You should have control over your own character and that's it.  It should be a harsh and scary place full is mystery and adventure. If you won't want that you can always play Wow and the other clones that have since turned into coddle-fests where if things still get too scary you can sit back and play with your dolls in game too.

    You stay sassy!

  • BanaghranBanaghran HuisoPosts: 869Member
    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    I would argue that the complexity aspects you mention (facing/flanking, cover, attacks of opportunity, weapon speed, weapon reach, balance, stamina, weapon durability/breakage, footing/terrain, encumberance, ammunition count, morale, etc) is independent of the complexity.

    In D3, it has facing (no flanking), weapon speed (certainly), weapon reach (more like different range of attack), weapon durality (yes), terrain (yes) .. you can hide behind stuff, encumberance (no in weight but in inv slots), no in ammunition count.

    Actually i think the stuff you mention is not that interesting. Certainly not as interesting as different combat mechanics (like slow time bubble) like CDs, procs, synergies of skills, monster mechanics (like stuff you need to avoid).

    But once again, these are the basics to make a good combat game. The discussion is about variable difficulty level which can be done in a simple game, as well as a complex one (like D3).

    I would argue the opposite, because the things you write about do not add any complexity in d3 (or most of them), there is the difference, they are just present, nothing more, take durability, are there weapons/items with low durability but higher stats? Weapon reach, are there weapons which have longer reach but other drawbacks? No there are not. Without the problem, the choice, the drawbacks the player has to consider there is simply no complexity.

    Combat intricacies, watching skills light up and pressing them in a specific order and at a specific time might be more interesting to you, but not for everyone. Especially in a game that is less action oriented than a action rpg.

    As for your original point of ending the discussion about being too hard or too easy, yes it will end it, but the problem is a great number of those people arguing about too hard too easy just do so becaus of lack of imagination, they will simply use other words, like dull, stupid, shallow...

    In the end difficulty is just how spicy/hot a game is, the game has to be tasty (fun), if a food is tasty enough, you will eat it even if it is too hot, if it lacks taste, it does not matter how mild it is. Sure you can placate a few people who like to eat cardboard, but only if it is not spicy, but not much more.

    Just look at wow you mention, did lfr help the game in terms of subs, or are just you personally more happy?

    (in b4 "The game is getting old since nov 13, 2008")

    Flame on!

    :)

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by fenistil

    Since that is about instanced gameplay and basically is another way to do difftent "difficluty" instances and many games already have systems in place for that - it is not really something fundamentally new and does not really solve a problem.

    Many people complain about open world difficulty and design changes and not about instances. 

    No. Plenty of people are screaming how EQ raids were "epic" and new MMOs are cake walk. Secondly, even WOW has only 3 raid difficulties. 10 will do a lot more than 3.

    And of course it is not fundamentally new. SP games have difficulties setting for ages. Sandboxes are not fundamentally new .. they failed many years ago .. but are still being talked about here, aren't they?

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Tamanous

    This is meta-gaming that distracts from mmo immersion. Crap like this is what is ruining mmo's.

     

    Mmo's simply need to become smarter, have better AI and create seemless worlds where mechanics are seen less instead of more options for the players. Perhaps auto-scaling options outside the players control but an mmo world should always be about walking into a situation where the parameters of the encounter are as much of a mystery to the player as possible.

     

    The number rule in traditional rpg's is to ensure the rules are as invisible to the players as possible. Mmo's have long forgot this concept and we get min-max, meta-gaming crap themeparks like we have today. Mmo's should be a place a player logs into that is defined entirely by the developers vision with no catering to the crybabies. You should have control over your own character and that's it.  It should be a harsh and scary place full is mystery and adventure. If you won't want that you can always play Wow and the other clones that have since turned into coddle-fests where if things still get too scary you can sit back and play with your dolls in game too.

    nah ... that is not a good game for many.

    Meta gaming is good .. let people choose how to have fun. You forget that the point of any game is to entertain, and NOT to live in another world where you have little control.

    Ruining MMOs ... making MMOs into better games may save it.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by MMOExposed
    Originally posted by phantomghost

    The thing is you can't give players the choice.  Most people will do whatever is fastest, a lot of people compete in those aspects.

     

    The game needs to be difficult enough on its own that will add length to leveling... the better players (or 1s with more time) will level quicker.  Giving players the choice will not help at all, that is more of a single player game aspect... easy, normal. hard, etc.

    than that clearly show that most of these people on the forum screaming about content being too easy, dont reallhy know what they want.

     

    because even if you give them the option to take the harder gameplay on their own, they wont do it.

     

    thats like a hungry man coming to you saying he hungry, you give him the option to come into your house and eat, or stay outside and not eat..

    but they choose to stay outside and not eat...

    Yeah .. they are not consistent. And it is not just harder gameplay, it has more rewards too.

    Well .. i guess that is their loss. They can scream as they want ... i will be playing D3 1.05 tomorrow.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Banaghran

    Just look at wow you mention, did lfr help the game in terms of subs, or are just you personally more happy?

    Well, MOP gained back 1M subs .. so did LFR help? May be doing LFR prevent faster slide of subs. We will never know. But we do know that LFD is a popular feature. We do know that there are lots of requests for TOR to add LFD in the beginning.

     

     

  • GrumpyMel2GrumpyMel2 Catskills, NYPosts: 1,832Member

    I think the general issue is that you are trying to treat MMO's the same as Single-Player or Co-Op games. For some types of MMO's and some types of players that can work well for others it just won't. In Single Player games, your experience is designed to affect only you. So ratcheting up or down the difficulty makes no difference to anyone elses play. Some MMO's emulate that to a certain degree and some MMO players enjoy that type of game.

    The fundemental disconnect you are having is that certain types of MMO's and certain types of MMO players it's actualy a DESIRABLE design feature that one persons play effects the others. Lets look at it like baseball...

    When you are in a batting cage by yourself you can set the speed of the pitches coming at you to any speed you like. That's fine, because the batting cage is all about you getting the individual experience you want. It's not designed or intended that what you experience effects the guy in the next cage over.

    However, a baseball game is designed and intended as a COMMUNAL EXPERIENCE. That's actualy why some people choose to play it rather then just going to the batting cages....it's all about our play interacting with each other. Even when we are on the same team, I don't want the pitcher throwing you 40 mph pitches because you like easy pitches that you can hit when he's throwing me 85 mph pitches. For me that trivializes our efforts as a team and it also warps the sense of contribution that we both make. I want the pitcher throwing just as hard at you as he does me, because the sense of accomplishment I derive is both us working together as a team to achieve and the sense of individual contribution I made toward that goal.

    If you really don't want to play at that level...that's fine...everyone derives thier entertainment differently....but I really want you going to a less competitive/more casual league rather then cranking the pitch speed down to slow when your at bat on my team.

    That sentiment is even agnostic to the TYPE of difficulty we are talking about....whether it's complexity of the game, sophiistication of mob behavior or raw power level of mobs.

    I think that you are failing to get that because, from my past impressions, you basicaly want to play a single-player,  MOBA or small co-op game that is sheathed in the trappings of an MMO.....and variable difficulty settings work pretty well for that. They really don't for what others are looking at when they think "MMO".

  • Loke666Loke666 MalmöPosts: 17,949Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    Many here complains MMOs are too easy. Many on official MMO forums complains MMOs are too hard  (good example: lots of complains about CATA H dungeons being too difficult and Blizz has to nerf them).

    Obviously you can't please everyone.

    No longer. D3 is going to get a "monster level" system that you can choose a level of difficulty (1-10 monster power level in D3, but obviously can have as many levels as needed in a game) with more rewards at higher difficulty. The highest level is probably impossible for 99.99% of the players.

    It works both in leveling, and end game. This will once and for all, solve the issue. No one can claim the game is too easy, or too hard.

    May be this can be used in MMOs, particularly the leveling part, which a lot here think is too easy.

    It wouldnt work. We are greedy and would play on the highest loot factor. Those who dont beat those dungeons will whine like girls and then quit.

    I mean GW2 put its difficulty into explorable dungeons, the entire open world is easy and still there are loads of complains, "the best loot are in those dungeons" and so on.

    It might just work for D3 (even though I aint betting on it there either) because D3 is actually supposed to be really hard and cateers to different players.

  • TalulaRoseTalulaRose Long Island, NYPosts: 480Member Uncommon

    Games just need to stick to a target audience.

     

    Gamer A wants a game where everything is easy with little effort...play GW2

    Gamer B wants a game where it takes many many months to level to cap....play old school EQ or something akin to that.

    Gamer C wants a game where pvp is the main focus....Eve or GW

     

    Gamers need to stop trying to play games that do not offer them the experience they are looking for.

     Way too much bickering goes on in games where the game tries to be everything to everyone to try and make the almighty dollar.

  • fenistilfenistil GliwicePosts: 3,005Member
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by fenistil

    Since that is about instanced gameplay and basically is another way to do difftent "difficluty" instances and many games already have systems in place for that - it is not really something fundamentally new and does not really solve a problem.

    Many people complain about open world difficulty and design changes and not about instances. 

    No. Plenty of people are screaming how EQ raids were "epic" and new MMOs are cake walk. Secondly, even WOW has only 3 raid difficulties. 10 will do a lot more than 3.

    And of course it is not fundamentally new. SP games have difficulties setting for ages. Sandboxes are not fundamentally new .. they failed many years ago .. but are still being talked about here, aren't they?

    I said many people complain not all people complain about open world.   Besides I was not talking about sandboxes, I was talking about difficulty in open world.   That involve non-sandboxes as well.  Failed?  EVE is going fine. UO was going fine for years. SWG was going fine for ~2 years, until they changed in to themepark , then 90% players left almost overnight. 

    Obviously sandboxes were only mainstream till WoW came.  After WoW did and took mmoprg's to new levels of popularity they became niche in mmoprg's and noone say they did not.  Anyway we don't talk about sandboxes here.

     

    Making 10 and not 3 difficulties 'settings' of instances will do less than do you think imho.

    Still my bottom point was to comment my personal opinion on your propositon.  I don't see any real advantage to be honest.

     

    What would be great is diffrent difficulty servers having whole world and it's instances on other level of difficulty than other servers. 

    Additionally it will be harder and harder for game companies to do 'big huge' mmorpg that will be attractive for many people.  WoW is phenonenon and alot of it's players play because of what they already invested in it and because of it's accumulated amount of content, communities, addons, low system requirements. etc

    If you would create today WoW 2 with today design - most people would blown through it and it would not capitave that big audience.

    If you would create today WoW 2 with vanilla design - most peope would complain about long-levelling, too much group content, "hardcore" gameplay,  not-enough hand-holding, etc

     

    Difftent games for difftent people.  Creating mmoprg's for alot of vrey difftent players is hard and with high-failure rate and that will only get worse. 

     

    People don't want to go on compromises in new games.

  • BanaghranBanaghran HuisoPosts: 869Member
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Banaghran

    Just look at wow you mention, did lfr help the game in terms of subs, or are just you personally more happy?

    Well, MOP gained back 1M subs .. so did LFR help? May be doing LFR prevent faster slide of subs. We will never know. But we do know that LFD is a popular feature. We do know that there are lots of requests for TOR to add LFD in the beginning.

     

     

    Expansions do that, how the trend will be half a year from realease is important.

    As for the rest, i was not attacking lfr as a lobby concept, but as another difficulty, even if you will again post your usual percentages, my point was that the difficulty is not the main issue.

    Flame on!

    :)

  • negativf4kknegativf4kk WorthingPosts: 377Member Uncommon
    GW2 doing it right now, with their down-lvl idea... lets c how long it will lust?

    <a href="http://www.danasoft.com"><img src="http://www.danasoft.com/sig/499105419258.jpg"; border="0"></a><div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:11px;"><p>Sign by Danasoft - <a href="http://www.danasoft.com">For Backgrounds and Layouts</a></p></div>

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Loke666
    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    Many here complains MMOs are too easy. Many on official MMO forums complains MMOs are too hard  (good example: lots of complains about CATA H dungeons being too difficult and Blizz has to nerf them).

    Obviously you can't please everyone.

    No longer. D3 is going to get a "monster level" system that you can choose a level of difficulty (1-10 monster power level in D3, but obviously can have as many levels as needed in a game) with more rewards at higher difficulty. The highest level is probably impossible for 99.99% of the players.

    It works both in leveling, and end game. This will once and for all, solve the issue. No one can claim the game is too easy, or too hard.

    May be this can be used in MMOs, particularly the leveling part, which a lot here think is too easy.

    It wouldnt work. We are greedy and would play on the highest loot factor. Those who dont beat those dungeons will whine like girls and then quit.

    I mean GW2 put its difficulty into explorable dungeons, the entire open world is easy and still there are loads of complains, "the best loot are in those dungeons" and so on.

    It might just work for D3 (even though I aint betting on it there either) because D3 is actually supposed to be really hard and cateers to different players.

    It *is* working for D3. You choose you level based on how fast you want to kill, balanced with your gear and your desire for the level for drop.

    It went live yesterday and i saw people forming groups at different difficulties.

    Most MMO end game is not that different from D3 anyway. You form a small group and kill stuff in a dungeon for good loot. The whole concept will just apply.

     

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Banaghran
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Banaghran

    Just look at wow you mention, did lfr help the game in terms of subs, or are just you personally more happy?

    Well, MOP gained back 1M subs .. so did LFR help? May be doing LFR prevent faster slide of subs. We will never know. But we do know that LFD is a popular feature. We do know that there are lots of requests for TOR to add LFD in the beginning.

     

     

    Expansions do that, how the trend will be half a year from realease is important.

    As for the rest, i was not attacking lfr as a lobby concept, but as another difficulty, even if you will again post your usual percentages, my point was that the difficulty is not the main issue.

    Flame on!

    :)

    Difficulty certainly was an issue back in the days of sunwell when only 2% can see the dungeon (too difficult for many). And at the same time, people on this forum is claiming EQ is 100x harder and they want that.

     

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by fenistil

    What would be great is diffrent difficulty servers having whole world and it's instances on other level of difficulty than other servers. 

    "it's instances on other level of difficulty than other servers. " .. there is no difference between this and set your difficulty level before you enter the instance. In fact, it has the added advantage that you can change difficulty when you want to.

    Why do it for a whole server when you can do it at the individual level?

     

  • Greymantle4Greymantle4 Posts: 802Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by fenistil
     

    What would be great is diffrent difficulty servers having whole world and it's instances on other level of difficulty than other servers. 

     

    Now this is a great idea that I have wished they would do for quite some time. We have pvp server, rp server, why not difficulty servers. If your going to make me level I need challange to enjoy it not what we have today where the only challange is to guess how  many mouse clicks it takes to get to max level.

    I will give GW2 some credit they have a decent challange for their game as you level depending on what class you play.

  • BanaghranBanaghran HuisoPosts: 869Member
    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    Difficulty certainly was an issue back in the days of sunwell when only 2% can see the dungeon (too difficult for many). And at the same time, people on this forum is claiming EQ is 100x harder and they want that.

     

    Such a big issue that 2 mil more played (and we are back to that old argument).

    The "how many people see the dungeon" is a non-argument, nearly noone ever saw old naxx back in vanilla, too , which did not stop them from playing the game and later visiting naxx in TBC (and still wiping constantly :) ).

    The game was simply different back then, you had to be really nolife to not get "lost in the content" for a year, which was certainly no longer true in wotlk, dunno about now, but i doubt past content is as relevant and interesting for new players as it  was back in tbc.

    As for EQ, well, people like different types of difficuly, we argued before so i am under the impression that you like tough scripted encounters and pvping for a world boss or gathering resist gear or consumables as a bore, chore and not difficult. There are people who think the opposite, take scripted encounters as a chore and like the difficulty of getting 150 potions for the raid group or pvping for the boss. (Or i am completely missing the point :) )

    Flame on!

    :)

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Banaghran
    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    Difficulty certainly was an issue back in the days of sunwell when only 2% can see the dungeon (too difficult for many). And at the same time, people on this forum is claiming EQ is 100x harder and they want that.

     

    Such a big issue that 2 mil more played (and we are back to that old argument).

    The "how many people see the dungeon" is a non-argument, nearly noone ever saw old naxx back in vanilla, too , which did not stop them from playing the game and later visiting naxx in TBC (and still wiping constantly :) ).

    Non-argument? Don't you think it is wasteful to put major resources on  content most players never see? I went back to WOW after LFR just beacuse i don't have to keep a raid schedule while seeing the raids.

    The game was simply different back then, you had to be really nolife to not get "lost in the content" for a year, which was certainly no longer true in wotlk, dunno about now, but i doubt past content is as relevant and interesting for new players as it  was back in tbc.

    Past content may not be relevant. But future content is. And Blizz is not going to repeat the mistake of Sunwell again.

    As for EQ, well, people like different types of difficuly, we argued before so i am under the impression that you like tough scripted encounters and pvping for a world boss or gathering resist gear or consumables as a bore, chore and not difficult. There are people who think the opposite, take scripted encounters as a chore and like the difficulty of getting 150 potions for the raid group or pvping for the boss. (Or i am completely missing the point :) )

    Precisely my point. Having a difficulty setting accomodate more. Those who like the touch scripted encounters can have the tough ones with more reward. Those who don't, can play the "easy" version.
     

     

  • dzoni87dzoni87 BelgradePosts: 541Member
    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    Many here complains MMOs are too easy. Many on official MMO forums complains MMOs are too hard  (good example: lots of complains about CATA H dungeons being too difficult and Blizz has to nerf them).

    Obviously you can't please everyone.

    No longer. D3 is going to get a "monster level" system that you can choose a level of difficulty (1-10 monster power level in D3, but obviously can have as many levels as needed in a game) with more rewards at higher difficulty. The highest level is probably impossible for 99.99% of the players.

    It works both in leveling, and end game. This will once and for all, solve the issue. No one can claim the game is too easy, or too hard.

    May be this can be used in MMOs, particularly the leveling part, which a lot here think is too easy.

    Diablo II had /player 1-8 command you know? Or you didnt played it obviously...

    If you didnt, i highly advise you to do so. It is actuall blasphemy to skip first 2 parts and play third straight away image

    Main MMO at the moment: Guild Wars 2
    Waiting for: Pathfinder Online

  • VyntVynt Glendale, CAPosts: 632Member Uncommon

    I never really liked having difficulty settings for a dungeon/instance. It seems the devs can skimp on content that way.

    People progress through the game, and when they get to a couple of raids at the end, they go from easy, gear up, then normal, gear up again, then hard etc. The problem is, we're running the same thing, just a little harder each time. I rather have a couple different raids to do of the same difficulty, then that opens up a few more, then a few more after that.

    Increasing the number of difficulty levels just seems to scream less content to me. People say players are lazy and will take the fastest route in leveling, well devs are lazy too and will do the least amount of work they can these days.

    Devs these days are like "Add in all those little extras that were standard years ago? nah, too much work. We'll convince people they don't need it. Oh, need to make 6 new raids for the expansion? hey lets make 2 and have 4 different settings on each, thats like 8 raids, more content!"

  • BanaghranBanaghran HuisoPosts: 869Member
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Banaghran
    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    Difficulty certainly was an issue back in the days of sunwell when only 2% can see the dungeon (too difficult for many). And at the same time, people on this forum is claiming EQ is 100x harder and they want that.

     

    Such a big issue that 2 mil more played (and we are back to that old argument).

    The "how many people see the dungeon" is a non-argument, nearly noone ever saw old naxx back in vanilla, too , which did not stop them from playing the game and later visiting naxx in TBC (and still wiping constantly :) ).

    Non-argument? Don't you think it is wasteful to put major resources on  content most players never see? I went back to WOW after LFR just beacuse i don't have to keep a raid schedule while seeing the raids.

    The game was simply different back then, you had to be really nolife to not get "lost in the content" for a year, which was certainly no longer true in wotlk, dunno about now, but i doubt past content is as relevant and interesting for new players as it  was back in tbc.

    Past content may not be relevant. But future content is. And Blizz is not going to repeat the mistake of Sunwell again.

    As for EQ, well, people like different types of difficuly, we argued before so i am under the impression that you like tough scripted encounters and pvping for a world boss or gathering resist gear or consumables as a bore, chore and not difficult. There are people who think the opposite, take scripted encounters as a chore and like the difficulty of getting 150 potions for the raid group or pvping for the boss. (Or i am completely missing the point :) )

    Precisely my point. Having a difficulty setting accomodate more. Those who like the touch scripted encounters can have the tough ones with more reward. Those who don't, can play the "easy" version.
     

     

    Where is it written they will never see it? And wasteful compared to what? Attempts of too strict balance? Coping with the fallout of random system changes? Atleast if you make a dungeon or raid, two years from now a newbie will look at it and say "whoa, cool", but noone will go "whoa, cool, if i had a completely different skillset i would be now within 5% dps of Joe over there".

    As for "raid shedule", most "normal" people can happily organize their time around a weekly poker/bowling/<insert something here> night and a saturday cable movie premiere, why is it so hard to have two raid nights?

    As for Sunwell, you would have to prove that it was a mistake first.

    As for EQ, it is precisely NOT your point, your point is to sell people who like apple pies cherry pies for half the price instead of apple pies.

    Flame on!

    :)

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by dzoni87
    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    Many here complains MMOs are too easy. Many on official MMO forums complains MMOs are too hard  (good example: lots of complains about CATA H dungeons being too difficult and Blizz has to nerf them).

    Obviously you can't please everyone.

    No longer. D3 is going to get a "monster level" system that you can choose a level of difficulty (1-10 monster power level in D3, but obviously can have as many levels as needed in a game) with more rewards at higher difficulty. The highest level is probably impossible for 99.99% of the players.

    It works both in leveling, and end game. This will once and for all, solve the issue. No one can claim the game is too easy, or too hard.

    May be this can be used in MMOs, particularly the leveling part, which a lot here think is too easy.

    Diablo II had /player 1-8 command you know? Or you didnt played it obviously...

    If you didnt, i highly advise you to do so. It is actuall blasphemy to skip first 2 parts and play third straight away image

    Yes i know that. But the /player 1-8 command is not a "formal" feature. And even the blues admits that monster level is inspired by the /player command.

    And my points are the same whether you are talking about /player 1-8 or MP 1-10 ... a feature that MMOs can adopt.

  • fenistilfenistil GliwicePosts: 3,005Member
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by fenistil

    What would be great is diffrent difficulty servers having whole world and it's instances on other level of difficulty than other servers. 

    "it's instances on other level of difficulty than other servers. " .. there is no difference between this and set your difficulty level before you enter the instance. In fact, it has the added advantage that you can change difficulty when you want to.

    Why do it for a whole server when you can do it at the individual level?

     

    Because I prefer mmorpg's as virtual worlds and changing difficluty in instances on the fly break it.  There is also impact on playerbase and how game is played but that's other matter I don't want to dig deeper into. 

    Basically I personally consider immersion, community, interdependability and cohesion as much more important than conveniance.

     

    Of course I don't advocate my solutions as dominant in genre or ones that would fit every single mmorpg because they would not considering how difftent conceptually those games are.  

    Every single of your proposal on this forums and every mine proposal can be back-tracked to basic reasons how we play mmorpg's and what is our 'fun' in them. Whole decision tree starts to being difftent there at very bottom.

  • sekuharadaioosekuharadaioo OsakaPosts: 22Member

    MMO stands for Massvie Multiplayer Online (Game). So I dont really think D3 a MMO game. D3 can be quite boring due to the lack of game content. 

    For a "real" MMO, some difficulty options can be good, just dont make them too many.

    Games currently playing:
    ------------------------
    Pro Evolution Soccer
    World of Warcraft
    Light of Nova
    League of Legends

2
Sign In or Register to comment.