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!

Much of the MMO gameplay is not massive

1246710

Comments

  • free2playfree2play Toronto, ONPosts: 1,869Member Uncommon

    Been in EVE systems with 2000+ siding off.

    It aint all that and a bag of chips. Lagg, gank, Lagg. And for the guy about to point out Ti-Di? Don't. Just don't.

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,674Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by free2play

    Been in EVE systems with 2000+ siding off.

    It aint all that and a bag of chips. Lagg, gank, Lagg. And for the guy about to point out Ti-Di? Don't. Just don't.

    I don't think anyone is asking for 2,000 people to regularly be on the screen at once. Is that where you were going with that or did you accidently post to the wrong thread? Looking for the relevance here.

    There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
    "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre

  • RasputinRasputin gnaf, AKPosts: 604Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Rasputin

    Who says, that spawning needs to be at fixed points? Who says that mobs should be incredibly stupid and only walk 10 meters away from their spawn point? What if they spawned randomly and could wander as they liked?

    Whoops, suddenly you don't have groups camping spawn points and therefore no killstealers camping the same groups.

    You will have an open game, and if any killstealing takes place, it will be completely by chance, because two groups happen upon the same mob at the same time. And it will probably be a rare occasion.

     

    Don't be so locked in how you think about MMO's. Noone says they have to be like the EQ-line of clones.

    Not a single one replied to what I quote. Why not? It is an obvious solution. Yes, it is not the EQ-formula, but that is not necessarily what we are discussing, is it?

    So instead of a solution, people want levels and levels of skizofrenic systems, warping reality, so they can save their very narrow type of gameplay? Which is artificial and boring in the first place, and so incredibly outdated and outdone.

    Look forward guys.

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by Rasputin
    Originally posted by Rasputin Who says, that spawning needs to be at fixed points? Who says that mobs should be incredibly stupid and only walk 10 meters away from their spawn point? What if they spawned randomly and could wander as they liked? Whoops, suddenly you don't have groups camping spawn points and therefore no killstealers camping the same groups. You will have an open game, and if any killstealing takes place, it will be completely by chance, because two groups happen upon the same mob at the same time. And it will probably be a rare occasion.   Don't be so locked in how you think about MMO's. Noone says they have to be like the EQ-line of clones.
    Not a single one replied to what I quote. Why not? It is an obvious solution. Yes, it is not the EQ-formula, but that is not necessarily what we are discussing, is it?

    So instead of a solution, people want levels and levels of skizofrenic systems, warping reality, so they can save their very narrow type of gameplay? Which is artificial and boring in the first place, and so incredibly outdated and outdone.

    Look forward guys.




    Some of what you're talking about has already been done and it created other problems. Powerful mobs get kited into areas where weaker players exist and the weaker players just get killed. The benefits of leashing mobs in certain spots outweighed the benefits of letting them just wander around. The other problem with this is that if some players need a particular mob to complete a quest to get a particular resource, it would become very irritating very quickly if they have to search the entire map for that mob. Increase the number of mobs players have to do this with and you increase the dissatisfaction with the game.

    There's a couple problems with random mob spawns. For one, they would be random. If players need a particular type of resource that comes from a particular type of mob, and the mob can spawn randomly anywhere that player is not going to be happy looking over the entire map for that mob. They are going to be really unhappy if every resource that comes from a mob operates the same way. For another, some mobs make sense in some areas, and some mobs don't. You wouldn't spawn lions in the middle of an evil pirate village. It wouldn't make sense. So you could have some randomness in the mob spawns, which might be interesting, but you wouldn't want a completely random process.

    The problem with simple solutions is that the problems they address are very complex. You can't just change one thing (random mob spawns) without changing many other things about the game to accommodate that change.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by Banaghran
    Originally posted by lizardbones   Originally posted by Banaghran Originally posted by lizardbones   Originally posted by Rasputin Originally posted by lizardbones   Originally posted by SpectralHunter Originally posted by Cephus404 Originally posted by Magiknight The problems with an open world, ie kill stealing and ninjaing loot, can we dealt with other ways besides instancing. Instancing is for people who want a small game.
    How do you propose to stop it entirely then?  How can it be dealt with so that those who don't want to be around it are never bothered by it again?
    Developers should understand they can never meet the expectations of every player.  It's impossible.  If you try to please everyone, you'll end up pleasing no one.  At best, you can implement mechanisms to deter it but ksing and ninjaing will be around just like there's stealing in real life.   The best that developers can do is to create a game that caters to the type of player they are trying to attract.  For instance, I don't like FFA PvP and wouldn't play a game that has it.  But I wouldn't discourage companies to make them if there's a player base for it.  I most certainly wouldn't demand the company to change it for me.
    Kill stealing can be dealt with by giving any player who hits a mob credit for the kill and making sure that mobs scale with the power of the player so that no player can one shot mobs. Loot stealing can be dealt with by giving each player a separate pile of loot. A player cannot steal another player's loot because they cannot touch or see the other player's loot.  
    Making arbitrarities like that will fragment the world and reality almost as bad as instancing. What is what? What you see is NOT what you get. Reality will be twisted and warped, making a common frame of reference impossible.   It is a terrible solution. Instead take inspiration from the real world and make consequences for bad actions. Make it possible for bad players to be punished, either by the other players or by the system. Or both. Stuffing new fragmentations of reality on top is a poor solution.
    If the real world was such a great place, then people wouldn't be trying to get out of the real world and into virtual ones. If having consequences for "bad" actions was such a great solution in the real world, it would, you know, stop people from engaging in that "bad" behavior. If virtual worlds were real worlds, they wouldn't be called virtual worlds. The goal is to stop a certain behavior, not mimic the real world. If you want to stop a particular behavior in a virtual world, you make it impossible.  
    Tricky, there was a time when everyone kinda expected that this   http://runescape.wikia.com/wiki/Quick_Chat will replace ingame chat. Moreover you have to keep immersion and the "virtual reality" part in mind, handholding and  "no no no, bad boy, you cant do that" that appears in 1+ games tends to be offputting. Flame on! :)
    GW2 is having plenty of success keeping people from harassing, kill stealing and taking loot. So is D3. I haven't heard anyone complaining about not being able to take another player's loot in either game. Neither game has anything close to 'realistic' rules in place. Besides, immersion doesn't mean make a game like the real world, immersion means the player ignores everything outside of the game while they're playing it*. Tetris can be immersive. If being like the real world was a requirement, then no games would be immersive, because none of them would be realistic. In a virtual world, if the goal is to stop a behavior, then you make it impossible. If you don't want people killing certain monsters, they are untouchable. If you don't want people to kill another player and take their gear, other players do not drop their gear when they are killed in PvP. If you don't want kill stealing and loot stealing, then you make it impossible to do so. Whether the things made impossible makes a player feel more or less immersed in the game world depends on whether the player expects to be able to do these things in the game or not. If the player doesn't expect to be able to take another player's loot, when the player can't take another player's loot, they won't think it's odd and they'll continue on their way. If the player doesn't expect to be able to 'tag' a mob before another player can 'tag' the mob, then it won't seem odd that many players can hit and get credit for a mob kill. The players will continue on their merry way. * Technically, it means providing information for a variety of senses at the same time. Having the viewer ignore sensory input outside of the entertainment medium doesn't seem to be part of the definition. This seems weird to me, but it's the result of something being immersive, not what immersive means.  
    Speaking of literary devices of the "fallacy" kind, how did we suddenly arrive at ffa pvp looting?

    Im just saying, that sometimes you just cannot go too far.

    D3 is a good example, do you think the players are overall happyer that they get heaps of useless loot because looting is private and 4 persons get 4x the loot from  a single mob and drops are too common overall ?

    Flame on!

    :)




    In a video game, if the developer doesn't want players doing something, then doing that something is impossible. They don't create a complex set of rules to inhibit the behavior, they just make the behavior impossible. FFA PvP looting is a good example of this because it's very cut and dry. Either developers want to allow the behavior, or they don't. It doesn't have to be FFA PvP body looting, it could be any behavior, such as kill stealing or loot stealing.

    The question asked was, "How do you stop kill stealing and loot stealing?". I answered that question. If you don't want players kill stealing or stealing loot, you make it impossible. If you allow the behavior, but have a complex set of rules to inhibit the behavior, it means you want at least some of the players to kill steal and steal loot.

    It wasn't a fallacy, it was an existing example of how developers do things.

    As far as D3 goes, yes, I think players overall are happier because they don't have to worry about their loot getting picked up by strangers. The heaps of useless loot has to do with playing a Diablo game, not private loot piles.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • HedeonHedeon GraestedPosts: 954Member Uncommon

    well as someone who hate shooters, cause I suck at them by now, but truely enjoy playing PS2 with a couple of friends, I absolutely agree that MMOs need to "re-invent" the wheel abit, there need to be features that are created for alot of people, instead of holding on to old idea´s that used to be awesome,  because people were ready to accept the flaws, for the good of the fun they had with "their group"

    also will echo that D3 is doing "modern MMO" right, it is not what I want from a MMO experience, but it is what "most players" want, there is no reason to have a virtual world, when the instanced content and solo quests is what "matters", atleast in D3 you get to see more of the "game world" than any MMO on a daily basis, ofc it is as short lived as any newer MMO...but atleast I ve been entertained enough to play it to the end, something I havent been able to in "real" MMOs since EQ2.

  • CecropiaCecropia Posts: 3,472Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Hedeon

    well as someone who hate shooters, cause I suck at them by now, but truely enjoy playing PS2 with a couple of friends, I absolutely agree that MMOs need to "re-invent" the wheel abit, there need to be features that are created for alot of people, instead of holding on to old idea´s that used to be awesome,  because people were ready to accept the flaws, for the good of the fun they had with "their group"

    also will echo that D3 is doing "modern MMO" right, it is not what I want from a MMO experience, but it is what "most players" want, there is no reason to have a virtual world, when the instanced content and solo quests is what "matters", atleast in D3 you get to see more of the "game world" than any MMO on a daily basis, ofc it is as short lived as any newer MMO...but atleast I ve been entertained enough to play it to the end, something I havent been able to in "real" MMOs since EQ2.

    Ah, you must be confused; mmos are a type of video gaming genre that have no ending. You can leave them and say goodbye, but that's as close as you're going to get to an ending, not including the dreaded game shutdown.

    Also, Diablo 3 is a type of video game that was classified many, many years ago. 'Tis not an mmo of any flavour, I'm afraid. While I'm sure the game appreciates the help you're attempting to supply, all of the work was completed some time ago.

     

    "Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb

  • RasputinRasputin gnaf, AKPosts: 604Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by lizardbones

     


    Originally posted by Rasputin

    Originally posted by Rasputin Who says, that spawning needs to be at fixed points? Who says that mobs should be incredibly stupid and only walk 10 meters away from their spawn point? What if they spawned randomly and could wander as they liked? Whoops, suddenly you don't have groups camping spawn points and therefore no killstealers camping the same groups. You will have an open game, and if any killstealing takes place, it will be completely by chance, because two groups happen upon the same mob at the same time. And it will probably be a rare occasion.   Don't be so locked in how you think about MMO's. Noone says they have to be like the EQ-line of clones.
    Not a single one replied to what I quote. Why not? It is an obvious solution. Yes, it is not the EQ-formula, but that is not necessarily what we are discussing, is it?

     

    So instead of a solution, people want levels and levels of skizofrenic systems, warping reality, so they can save their very narrow type of gameplay? Which is artificial and boring in the first place, and so incredibly outdated and outdone.

    Look forward guys.



    Some of what you're talking about has already been done and it created other problems. Powerful mobs get kited into areas where weaker players exist and the weaker players just get killed. The benefits of leashing mobs in certain spots outweighed the benefits of letting them just wander around. The other problem with this is that if some players need a particular mob to complete a quest to get a particular resource, it would become very irritating very quickly if they have to search the entire map for that mob. Increase the number of mobs players have to do this with and you increase the dissatisfaction with the game.

    There's a couple problems with random mob spawns. For one, they would be random. If players need a particular type of resource that comes from a particular type of mob, and the mob can spawn randomly anywhere that player is not going to be happy looking over the entire map for that mob. They are going to be really unhappy if every resource that comes from a mob operates the same way. For another, some mobs make sense in some areas, and some mobs don't. You wouldn't spawn lions in the middle of an evil pirate village. It wouldn't make sense. So you could have some randomness in the mob spawns, which might be interesting, but you wouldn't want a completely random process.

    The problem with simple solutions is that the problems they address are very complex. You can't just change one thing (random mob spawns) without changing many other things about the game to accommodate that change.

     

    You are still talking about a leveling system, where just a few levels will result in such a huge power difference, that the players effectively are playing different games.

    An artificial effort to segregate the population and the world, effectively making the amount of interesting players and playarea smaller for each player.

  • RasputinRasputin gnaf, AKPosts: 604Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by lizardbones

     


    Originally posted by Rasputin

    Originally posted by Rasputin Who says, that spawning needs to be at fixed points? Who says that mobs should be incredibly stupid and only walk 10 meters away from their spawn point? What if they spawned randomly and could wander as they liked? Whoops, suddenly you don't have groups camping spawn points and therefore no killstealers camping the same groups. You will have an open game, and if any killstealing takes place, it will be completely by chance, because two groups happen upon the same mob at the same time. And it will probably be a rare occasion.   Don't be so locked in how you think about MMO's. Noone says they have to be like the EQ-line of clones.
    Not a single one replied to what I quote. Why not? It is an obvious solution. Yes, it is not the EQ-formula, but that is not necessarily what we are discussing, is it?

     

    So instead of a solution, people want levels and levels of skizofrenic systems, warping reality, so they can save their very narrow type of gameplay? Which is artificial and boring in the first place, and so incredibly outdated and outdone.

    Look forward guys.



    Some of what you're talking about has already been done and it created other problems. Powerful mobs get kited into areas where weaker players exist and the weaker players just get killed. The benefits of leashing mobs in certain spots outweighed the benefits of letting them just wander around. The other problem with this is that if some players need a particular mob to complete a quest to get a particular resource, it would become very irritating very quickly if they have to search the entire map for that mob. Increase the number of mobs players have to do this with and you increase the dissatisfaction with the game.

    There's a couple problems with random mob spawns. For one, they would be random. If players need a particular type of resource that comes from a particular type of mob, and the mob can spawn randomly anywhere that player is not going to be happy looking over the entire map for that mob. They are going to be really unhappy if every resource that comes from a mob operates the same way. For another, some mobs make sense in some areas, and some mobs don't. You wouldn't spawn lions in the middle of an evil pirate village. It wouldn't make sense. So you could have some randomness in the mob spawns, which might be interesting, but you wouldn't want a completely random process.

    The problem with simple solutions is that the problems they address are very complex. You can't just change one thing (random mob spawns) without changing many other things about the game to accommodate that change.

     

    What do you mean when you say "If players need a particular type of resource that comes from a particular type of mob, and the mob can spawn randomly anywhere..."? Scorpios will still spawn in deserts, right? Cave trolls in hilly or mountainous areas?

    Also, why wouldn't you build the system so cave trolls spawn cave trolls, making certain areas cave troll heavy? That is how the real world would work.

  • RasputinRasputin gnaf, AKPosts: 604Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by lizardbones
    For another, some mobs make sense in some areas, and some mobs don't. You wouldn't spawn lions in the middle of an evil pirate village. It wouldn't make sense.

    Why do you even say this? Do you think I or other readers are idiots? Of course it would not make sense and only an idiot would implement a system like that.

  • BanaghranBanaghran HuisoPosts: 869Member
    Originally posted by lizardbones
    In a video game, if the developer doesn't want players doing something, then doing that something is impossible. They don't create a complex set of rules to inhibit the behavior, they just make the behavior impossible. FFA PvP looting is a good example of this because it's very cut and dry. Either developers want to allow the behavior, or they don't. It doesn't have to be FFA PvP body looting, it could be any behavior, such as kill stealing or loot stealing.

    The question asked was, "How do you stop kill stealing and loot stealing?". I answered that question. If you don't want players kill stealing or stealing loot, you make it impossible. If you allow the behavior, but have a complex set of rules to inhibit the behavior, it means you want at least some of the players to kill steal and steal loot.

    It wasn't a fallacy, it was an existing example of how developers do things.

    As far as D3 goes, yes, I think players overall are happier because they don't have to worry about their loot getting picked up by strangers. The heaps of useless loot has to do with playing a Diablo game, not private loot piles.

     

    Problem is, as im trying to say, that not everything is cut and dry, loot stealing can be loot scavenging if it happens sufficiently long after the kill, kill stealing can be helping if the original combatant is on the verge of dying.

    By your definition, by making everything soulbound, the devs of wow are against you helping your alts, oh, wait, we have heirloom intems...

    Private loot IS part of the problem in D3, much more items are introduced into the game, thus the items have to be more useless, more random, so that not everyone is decked out right away in the best items.

    And pardon me if i take offense in being told that a full stash of yellows that can be only vendored has to do with playing a Diablo game...

    Flame on!

    :)

  • doodphacedoodphace Vancouver, BCPosts: 1,815Member
    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    small group dungeons (like in DDO, WOW, LOTRO, DCUO, .....)

    arena/battleground pvp (some smaller than BF3)

    raids (biggest in WOW is 25 man ... even at 40 man .. it is smaller than BF3 battles)

    and not to mention SINGLE PLAYER quests and daily quests.

    In fact, the only massive part is the city where people wait for their dungeons/pvp to pop .. and that is just a massive lobby with a massive AH.

    So much of the gameplay experience that many players spend most of their time on are not "massive" (like a PS2 hundreds on hundreds battle) in *many* MMOs, may be it is time for MMOs to abandon its roots, and embrace a broader definition. In fact, the texas holden online game i just played is as massive as a MMO. YOu can gamble with 8 people, which has more players than heroic dungeons ... and the lobby is as massive as orgrimmar in WOW.

     

    and not to mention SOLOABLE YET GROUP SUPPORTED quests and daily quests.

    There, corrected that for you.

  • BanaghranBanaghran HuisoPosts: 869Member
    Originally posted by Rasputin
    Originally posted by lizardbones
    For another, some mobs make sense in some areas, and some mobs don't. You wouldn't spawn lions in the middle of an evil pirate village. It wouldn't make sense.

    Why do you even say this? Do you think I or other readers are idiots? Of course it would not make sense and only an idiot would implement a system like that.

    Because he would not have a argument otherwise.

    Its like, dunno, if we started talking about the technical difficulties at the start of wotlk as the biggest argument against instances, ironically creating the EXACT situation the instaces people are afraid of, you are unable to go kill a mob regardless of what you do, because the instance will not spawn.

    Flame on!

    :)

     

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

    D3 is a good example, do you think the players are overall happyer that they get heaps of useless loot because looting is private and 4 persons get 4x the loot from  a single mob and drops are too common overall ?

    Yes. much happier. The QQing would be horrible if someone can ninja my rare 100M legendary drop.

    Plus, the same system is also implemented in LFR in WOW. No more loot ninjaing .. it is a great feature.

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

    Private loot IS part of the problem in D3, much more items are introduced into the game, thus the items have to be more useless, more random, so that not everyone is decked out right away in the best items.

    And pardon me if i take offense in being told that a full stash of yellows that can be only vendored has to do with playing a Diablo game...

    Flame on!

    :)

    So? Dropping 100 yellows and then you get a rare legendary (or 100M worth yellow) is the same as getting a rare raid drop after playing for 50 hours.

    You get a good item every 50 hours of play.

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by Banaghran
    Originally posted by lizardbones In a video game, if the developer doesn't want players doing something, then doing that something is impossible. They don't create a complex set of rules to inhibit the behavior, they just make the behavior impossible. FFA PvP looting is a good example of this because it's very cut and dry. Either developers want to allow the behavior, or they don't. It doesn't have to be FFA PvP body looting, it could be any behavior, such as kill stealing or loot stealing. The question asked was, "How do you stop kill stealing and loot stealing?". I answered that question. If you don't want players kill stealing or stealing loot, you make it impossible. If you allow the behavior, but have a complex set of rules to inhibit the behavior, it means you want at least some of the players to kill steal and steal loot. It wasn't a fallacy, it was an existing example of how developers do things. As far as D3 goes, yes, I think players overall are happier because they don't have to worry about their loot getting picked up by strangers. The heaps of useless loot has to do with playing a Diablo game, not private loot piles.  
    Problem is, as im trying to say, that not everything is cut and dry, loot stealing can be loot scavenging if it happens sufficiently long after the kill, kill stealing can be helping if the original combatant is on the verge of dying.

    By your definition, by making everything soulbound, the devs of wow are against you helping your alts, oh, wait, we have heirloom intems...

    Private loot IS part of the problem in D3, much more items are introduced into the game, thus the items have to be more useless, more random, so that not everyone is decked out right away in the best items.

    And pardon me if i take offense in being told that a full stash of yellows that can be only vendored has to do with playing a Diablo game...

    Flame on!

    :)




    For the person who asked the question, it is that cut and dry. How do you stop loot stealing and kill stealing? That was the question that was asked. That was the question I answered.

    You're arguing whether or not making certain activities impossible is the right thing to do. That's a different question, one that I didn't answer.

    If D3 did not have private loot stashes you'd still have piles of useless gear because that's how they designed the game. I read the developer blog that explained how there was going to be tons of gear. Players are supposed to choose which gear to pick up and which gear to leave. Private gear drops are a response to a specific issue and do exactly what they are intended to do. They don't have anything to do with how much gear each player has in their inventory. They also don't have anything to do with how much gear that gets dropped from each mob or how useful the gear drops are.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by Rasputin

    Originally posted by lizardbones For another, some mobs make sense in some areas, and some mobs don't. You wouldn't spawn lions in the middle of an evil pirate village. It wouldn't make sense.
    Why do you even say this? Do you think I or other readers are idiots? Of course it would not make sense and only an idiot would implement a system like that.

    What I said was in response to what was posted. The post said to have random mob sACpawns. If you're controlling the mob spawns so that lions don't spawn in the middle of a pirate village they aren't random. If the post wasn't supposed to read, "random spawns", then it shouldn't have said, "random spawns" and should have clearly stated what was meant.

    ** edit **
    Also, I need a name for the technique of picking out one sentence so that anyone reading the post cannot read the posts in context. Anyone have any suggestions?

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • TamanousTamanous Edmonton, ABPosts: 2,126Member Uncommon

    There is more than one type of mmo.

     

    GET OVER IT! Move on and live life.

     

    There are a shyte ton of mmos out there now and it would be plain stupid to have the all the same. So many on these boards sound as if they want only one type of mmo ...  a massive open world sandbox which would be the only fitting description of an mmo to them. 

     

    Yet hardly anyone actually plays sandbox mmos.

     

    Stop being ignorant and look at what is out there, what differences there are and what is to come.

     

    All I see now are cry babies whining about the need for more sandbox style mmos yet when you ask them if they play one now they say "no" and "but if my old mmo wasn't shut down because only 14 players played it I'd still be in a sandbox game!1!eleven!"

     

    Bunch of hypocrites.

    You stay sassy!

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

    Private loot IS part of the problem in D3, much more items are introduced into the game, thus the items have to be more useless, more random, so that not everyone is decked out right away in the best items.

    And pardon me if i take offense in being told that a full stash of yellows that can be only vendored has to do with playing a Diablo game...

    Flame on!

    :)

    So? Dropping 100 yellows and then you get a rare legendary (or 100M worth yellow) is the same as getting a rare raid drop after playing for 50 hours.

    You get a good item every 50 hours of play.

    But you dont. The legendary is worth <1m in most cases and my definition of good is much broader than "100m item".

    Even in raids you see good drops very often, they are just not for your class, or you have stronger ones.

    You maybe get a item every 50 hours you might want to wear, if you would not have already something better bought from the ah, or you would be a different class.

    Which is extremely low.

    Flame on!

    :)

  • BanaghranBanaghran HuisoPosts: 869Member
    Originally posted by lizardbones

     

    For the person who asked the question, it is that cut and dry. How do you stop loot stealing and kill stealing? That was the question that was asked. That was the question I answered.

    You're arguing whether or not making certain activities impossible is the right thing to do. That's a different question, one that I didn't answer.

    If D3 did not have private loot stashes you'd still have piles of useless gear because that's how they designed the game. I read the developer blog that explained how there was going to be tons of gear. Players are supposed to choose which gear to pick up and which gear to leave. Private gear drops are a response to a specific issue and do exactly what they are intended to do. They don't have anything to do with how much gear each player has in their inventory. They also don't have anything to do with how much gear that gets dropped from each mob or how useful the gear drops are.

     

    And what is the merit of offering half-assed solutions? That you feel as clever as most of the beancounters who design mmos these days?

    As far as d3, you didnt say "diablo 3", you said "diablo game", which might be all the same for you, but it is not for me. Fair enough?

    The developer blog you mention also completely evades the question of overall loot quality (if it is the post i think it is), all it says is "herp derp, if you buy good stuff, you will have to grind more to get upgrades", which is completely different from answering "why drop so many rares if only one of 1000 would be worn by ANYONE?".

    Flame on!

    :)

  • HedeonHedeon GraestedPosts: 954Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Cecropia
    Originally posted by Hedeon

    well as someone who hate shooters, cause I suck at them by now, but truely enjoy playing PS2 with a couple of friends, I absolutely agree that MMOs need to "re-invent" the wheel abit, there need to be features that are created for alot of people, instead of holding on to old idea´s that used to be awesome,  because people were ready to accept the flaws, for the good of the fun they had with "their group"

    also will echo that D3 is doing "modern MMO" right, it is not what I want from a MMO experience, but it is what "most players" want, there is no reason to have a virtual world, when the instanced content and solo quests is what "matters", atleast in D3 you get to see more of the "game world" than any MMO on a daily basis, ofc it is as short lived as any newer MMO...but atleast I ve been entertained enough to play it to the end, something I havent been able to in "real" MMOs since EQ2.

    Ah, you must be confused; mmos are a type of video gaming genre that have no ending. You can leave them and say goodbye, but that's as close as you're going to get to an ending, not including the dreaded game shutdown.

    Also, Diablo 3 is a type of video game that was classified many, many years ago. 'Tis not an mmo of any flavour, I'm afraid. While I'm sure the game appreciates the help you're attempting to supply, all of the work was completed some time ago.

     

    well I am talking about what is popular, which would be "themepark MMOs", and they absolutely have an ending, the company behind the game may release an expansion, but I would expect D3 to get one or 2 of those as well, depending how well they sell, the same goes for MMOs they get expansions as long as they sell, but when the last dragon or what type of monter there is in your MMO is beaten, it absolutely is game over, ofc you can choose to replay the diffrent instances, but it is the end of the game.

    you can look at PS2, it doesnt have an end, but then Id argue that there just aint a game, in the game world at all - I do enjoy the huge battles mind you, it is not to really critizise PS2, but imo it is a game world where there is no real game inside of it, if there were no other players, there wouldnt really be anything to do, but it is smart really, real massive gameplay...

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by Banaghran
    Originally posted by lizardbones   For the person who asked the question, it is that cut and dry. How do you stop loot stealing and kill stealing? That was the question that was asked. That was the question I answered. You're arguing whether or not making certain activities impossible is the right thing to do. That's a different question, one that I didn't answer. If D3 did not have private loot stashes you'd still have piles of useless gear because that's how they designed the game. I read the developer blog that explained how there was going to be tons of gear. Players are supposed to choose which gear to pick up and which gear to leave. Private gear drops are a response to a specific issue and do exactly what they are intended to do. They don't have anything to do with how much gear each player has in their inventory. They also don't have anything to do with how much gear that gets dropped from each mob or how useful the gear drops are.  
    And what is the merit of offering half-assed solutions? That you feel as clever as most of the beancounters who design mmos these days?

    As far as d3, you didnt say "diablo 3", you said "diablo game", which might be all the same for you, but it is not for me. Fair enough?

    The developer blog you mention also completely evades the question of overall loot quality (if it is the post i think it is), all it says is "herp derp, if you buy good stuff, you will have to grind more to get upgrades", which is completely different from answering "why drop so many rares if only one of 1000 would be worn by ANYONE?".

    Flame on!

    :)




    I gave a solution to the questions asked*. They weren't even new solutions. They are solutions that are already implemented in running games, and they are games that are doing well for themselves. The solutions work as intended.

    None of the issues you've mentioned concerning Diablo (any version) has anything to do with private loot. The amount of loot, the randomization of loot and the loot itemization are all issues that exist with and without private loot piles and are all issues that are addressed separately from private loot piles.

    * How do you stop kill stealing and loot stealing in an open world game? The answer is that if you don't want players to do something, you don't allow them to do something. If you don't want players to steal kills or loot, you don't allow them to do it.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • BanaghranBanaghran HuisoPosts: 869Member
    Originally posted by lizardbones

    I gave a solution to the questions asked*. They weren't even new solutions. They are solutions that are already implemented in running games, and they are games that are doing well for themselves. The solutions work as intended.

    None of the issues you've mentioned concerning Diablo (any version) has anything to do with private loot. The amount of loot, the randomization of loot and the loot itemization are all issues that exist with and without private loot piles and are all issues that are addressed separately from private loot piles.

    * How do you stop kill stealing and loot stealing in an open world game? The answer is that if you don't want players to do something, you don't allow them to do something. If you don't want players to steal kills or loot, you don't allow them to do it.

     

    You will remember that i replyed to your "they will make it impossible" statement.

    Which your original suggestions were themselves far from.

    Well, if you want to argue that a feature that increases the amount of loot has no effect on the amount of loot, then be my guest, i will stay back here, at the edge of insanity, making the occasional step back and forth as usual :)

    Flame on!

    :)

     

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

    Private loot IS part of the problem in D3, much more items are introduced into the game, thus the items have to be more useless, more random, so that not everyone is decked out right away in the best items.

    And pardon me if i take offense in being told that a full stash of yellows that can be only vendored has to do with playing a Diablo game...

    Flame on!

    :)

    So? Dropping 100 yellows and then you get a rare legendary (or 100M worth yellow) is the same as getting a rare raid drop after playing for 50 hours.

    You get a good item every 50 hours of play.

    But you dont. The legendary is worth <1m in most cases and my definition of good is much broader than "100m item".

    Even in raids you see good drops very often, they are just not for your class, or you have stronger ones.

    You maybe get a item every 50 hours you might want to wear, if you would not have already something better bought from the ah, or you would be a different class.

    Which is extremely low.

    Flame on!

    :)

    So in any case, you get a good upgrade every 50 hours or so (depending on your gear level, of course .. it is faster when you have little stuff) ... whether it is a 100M item that you can cash in to get something good on the AH, or a good item drop (which i have done both).

    I thought people are for slower progression. YOu really want a good drop every hour? Think about the horrible gear inflation if that is teh case.

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by Banaghran
    Originally posted by lizardbones I gave a solution to the questions asked*. They weren't even new solutions. They are solutions that are already implemented in running games, and they are games that are doing well for themselves. The solutions work as intended. None of the issues you've mentioned concerning Diablo (any version) has anything to do with private loot. The amount of loot, the randomization of loot and the loot itemization are all issues that exist with and without private loot piles and are all issues that are addressed separately from private loot piles. * How do you stop kill stealing and loot stealing in an open world game? The answer is that if you don't want players to do something, you don't allow them to do something. If you don't want players to steal kills or loot, you don't allow them to do it.  
    You will remember that i replyed to your "they will make it impossible" statement.

    Which your original suggestions were themselves far from.

    Well, if you want to argue that a feature that increases the amount of loot has no effect on the amount of loot, then be my guest, i will stay back here, at the edge of insanity, making the occasional step back and forth as usual :)

    Flame on!

    :)

     




    Your response was that I made half @ssed suggestions. While that is technically a response, it's really short on details.

    Private loot piles don't increase or decrease the amount of loot. The developer decides how much loot drops. If Blizzard wanted less loot to drop in D3, then less loot would drop in D3. They aren't limited by having private loot piles. Because, you know, they determine everything that happens.

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but kill stealing is when a player A needs mob X and player B tags or kills mob X before player A can tag or kill them, yes? So if player A can hit mob X after player B has hit mob X, and both players get credit for the kill, then that makes kill stealing pretty impossible, yes? If you scale the damage done to the mob based on the player level, rather than the mob level, then it becomes even harder for player B to kill a mob before player A has a change to hit it...player B can no longer one shot mobs that player A needs.

    Loot stealing is when player A kills mob X, and some loot drops, then player B comes along and takes the loot. Well, if the loot pile belongs to player A, and player B can't see or touch it, then player B stealing player A's loot is not impossible, yes?

    These are solutions that have been implemented in other games already. They address the issues of kill stealing and loot stealing. I didn't suggest them because I made them up myself, I suggested them because developers have already done these things, and they worked as intended.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

Sign In or Register to comment.