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!

Where's the self satisfaction come from all these "Insta-Win"-No-Penalty-For-Death games now?

Zaxx99Zaxx99 Somewhere IN, INPosts: 1,761Member

Okay, first off I dislike griefers as much as any other player.

What I do want is a well-designed AAA mmo title built today that gives us something similar to pre-trammel Ultima Online or Asheron's Call on the Darktide server back in the day. Where players who want to player kill another player risk a bounty on their head or turning red and not being given the luxury of being able to enter towns any longer.

Look at the mainstream mmo games today...

Warrior tough guy foolishly enters a higher level instant dungeon all alone and gets killed within seconds. So he goes and buys a CASH pay-to-win sword and armor and re-enters without leveling up or finding a buddy to help out. Dead again. Rinse and repeat 14 times. The guy is being utterly foolish and using no skill what so ever, no strategy in the constantly spamming the same hot bar spell/attack button over and over.

There is really no way he can survive this instanced dungeon alone unless he levels up or gets help because there really is no skill involved period. But he foolishly re-enters this instance 14 times in a row.

Where is the penalty for being stupid or making a mistake??

Most games today will give this goof ball some experience for failure as well. So eventually he will gain a level and by mashing the same hot bar button 100 times, he will WIN! YAY!

..But my question is Where is the self-satisfaction in THIS??

Not to mention, nobody wants to experience the world built for them anymore. Nobody reads the lore, the quests, or takes time to appreciate the attention to detail in the beautifully designed graphics, the flowing river, or the 100 foot waterfall in the distance. Nobody appreciates the puffy and realistic looking clouds. Its just this silly mentality to "WIN NOW, GET GET GET ME ME ME MORE MORE MORE"

I just don't get it. I haven't understood this for years.

Lets take a popular multi-player game on the consoles to compare. With the consoles, at least people are playing online shooter games and using real skill and fast reflexes to try and out skill, out think, and out-wit other players to win. - I can get this and appreciate it.

So in comparison, where does any self satisfaction come from in these way too easy, never lose anything mmo games? Why even play if there is never a penalty (besides minor exp loss or time) for being stupid or making a dumb mistake?

See, real satisfaction comes from knowing you survived something that was actually a challenge. And with that comes other players. No matter how advanced they might make the AI of mobs in an mmo, it will never be anywhere close to what other players can present.

No death consequence games with no PvP can't possibly offer the racing heart excitement that came with games like Ultima Online back in the late 1990s. By comparison look at most WoW players today. They sit back in their big desk chair and are half asleep, bored to death just mashing the same hot bar keys over and over... Never any real excitment. Nothing to make anyone sweat, or to make their heart beat faster. How is this FUN?!?!

I'd love to have a real conversation and honesty from you players that say you hate PvP games. Have you EVER felt your heart race with excitement in a game without PvP? Yes I know some of these games offer PvP in zones, but even that is just who has the best gear and who mashes the hot bar buttons fastest. The fireballs hit the other player regardless of their movement. There is no way to really dodge, or out manuever the other player. It's stats vs stats, period. The outcome is already per-decided. The same two players fight 100 times, the same player will will 99 or 100 times out of 100 unless some stats change to change that outcome. There just is no skill involved, or sure, a little maybe. Something stupid low like 5% skill and 95% stat based outcomes. Hell rolling dice would be more entertaining because at least then you'd have some level of surprise.

Yes, the graphics are prettier in Rift then they are in Asheron's Call or Ultima Online. I get that! But the depth of the games now is like a front yard mud hole filled with rain water compared to the Pacific ocean when compared against mmo's from 15 years ago, the mmos that paved the way for all these pretty, shiny things we have today.

What's sadder is when anyone even suggests or says that hope a new AAA game offers some PvP with death consequence, that person instantly gets 100 people crying and screaming NOOOO!!! WAAAA!! - like it would be a crime to actually have an all new TRIPLE A MMO TITLE made today that gave us what pre-Trammel Ultima Online offered back in the day. It's like they just want yet another Rift, World of Warcraft, or other overly simple, overly streamlined for the masses mmo. Because the 500 of those now isn't enough. This is what baffles me even more. And if you don't believe what I say in this paragraph just take a look at the few threads where someone 'hoped' Everquest Next would offer some level of challenging PvP in the EQ Next forums.

Anyhow, just my two copper.

- Zaxx

image

«1345

Comments

  • DivonaDivona WellingtonPosts: 175Member

    I don't find having heart beat fast and sweat from thrill is fun, to be honest. It's just too much after come back from work. I enjoy playing game just to relax, and PvP does not give me ability to do that.

    My satisfaction is from doing small things that added up to a bigger things. Collecting new costume for the character, housing items, exploring new areas, crafting items for people in need. At the end I find that I made someone else happy, instead of throw their headphone away, smashing their keyboard and start yell out at the screen like a mad sailor.

  • BoneserinoBoneserino London, ONPosts: 1,623Member Uncommon

    Well even just ignoring your blatant plug for EQ PvP, I see a lot of players these days that just seem so level focused anymore.  If a game has levels, they don't care what content is in the game, there only concern is "What is the fastest way to get to level X ???"   And generally if they aren't getting there fast enough, the game becomes "boring" and they are moving on to the next game.  I see it everywhere in so many players and it gets depressing.  

    People talk about todays players just eating content.  Problem is they consume it like fast food, scarfing it down without taking the time to enjoy it.   And they wonder why they feel unsatisfied after.

    With this kind of mentality in gamers today, its no wonder the type of difficult and challenging games that a minority of players want simply won't get made.   Unfortunately your money is no better than their's and there are much more of them.   And unfortunately the so called hardcores haven't stepped up to support their games either so here we sit in a stalemate with Devs and players.   The next couple years might change things a bit I feel tho.   We will have to see what Archage and EQ turn out to be like and how they are supported by the game community.  That will determine if we start seeing more difficult and challenging MMO's.

    FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!

  • MMORPGRIPMMORPGRIP Canton, OHPosts: 90Member
    Originally posted by zaxtor99

    Okay, first off I dislike griefers as much as any other player.

    What I do want is a well-designed AAA mmo title built today that gives us something similar to pre-trammel Ultima Online or Asheron's Call on the Darktide server back in the day. Where players who want to player kill another player risk a bounty on their head or turning red and not being given the luxury of being able to enter towns any longer.

    Look at the mainstream mmo games today...

    Warrior tough guy foolishly enters a higher level instant dungeon all alone and gets killed within seconds. So he goes and buys a CASH pay-to-win sword and armor and re-enters without leveling up or finding a buddy to help out. Dead again. Rinse and repeat 14 times. The guy is being utterly foolish and using no skill what so ever, no strategy in the constantly spamming the same hot bar spell/attack button over and over.

    There is really no way he can survive this instanced dungeon alone unless he levels up or gets help because there really is no skill involved period. But he foolishly re-enters this instance 14 times in a row.

    Where is the penalty for being stupid or making a mistake??

    Most games today will give this goof ball some experience for failure as well. So eventually he will gain a level and by mashing the same hot bar button 100 times, he will WIN! YAY!

    ..But my question is Where is the self-satisfaction in THIS??

    Not to mention, nobody wants to experience the world built for them anymore. Nobody reads the lore, the quests, or takes time to appreciate the attention to detail in the beautifully designed graphics, the flowing river, or the 100 foot waterfall in the distance. Nobody appreciates the puffy and realistic looking clouds. Its just this silly mentality to "WIN NOW, GET GET GET ME ME ME MORE MORE MORE"

    I just don't get it. I haven't understood this for years.

    Lets take a popular multi-player game on the consoles to compare. With the consoles, at least people are playing online shooter games and using real skill and fast reflexes to try and out skill, out think, and out-wit other players to win. - I can get this and appreciate it.

    So in comparison, where does any self satisfaction come from in these way too easy, never lose anything mmo games? Why even play if there is never a penalty (besides minor exp loss or time) for being stupid or making a dumb mistake?

    See, real satisfaction comes from knowing you survived something that was actually a challenge. And with that comes other players. No matter how advanced they might make the AI of mobs in an mmo, it will never be anywhere close to what other players can present.

    No death consequence games with no PvP can't possibly offer the racing heart excitement that came with games like Ultima Online back in the late 1990s. By comparison look at most WoW players today. They sit back in their big desk chair and are half asleep, bored to death just mashing the same hot bar keys over and over... Never any real excitment. Nothing to make anyone sweat, or to make their heart beat faster. How is this FUN?!?!

    I'd love to have a real conversation and honesty from you players that say you hate PvP games. Have you EVER felt your heart race with excitement in a game without PvP? Yes I know some of these games offer PvP in zones, but even that is just who has the best gear and who mashes the hot bar buttons fastest. The fireballs hit the other player regardless of their movement. There is no way to really dodge, or out manuever the other player. It's stats vs stats, period. The outcome is already per-decided. The same two players fight 100 times, the same player will will 99 or 100 times out of 100 unless some stats change to change that outcome. There just is no skill involved, or sure, a little maybe. Something stupid low like 5% skill and 95% stat based outcomes. Hell rolling dice would be more entertaining because at least then you'd have some level of surprise.

    Yes, the graphics are prettier in Rift then they are in Asheron's Call or Ultima Online. I get that! But the depth of the games now is like a front yard mud hole filled with rain water compared to the Pacific ocean when compared against mmo's from 15 years ago, the mmos that paved the way for all these pretty, shiny things we have today.

    What's sadder is when anyone even suggests or says that hope a new AAA game offers some PvP with death consequence, that person instantly gets 100 people crying and screaming NOOOO!!! WAAAA!! - like it would be a crime to actually have an all new TRIPLE A MMO TITLE made today that gave us what pre-Trammel Ultima Online offered back in the day. It's like they just want yet another Rift, World of Warcraft, or other overly simple, overly streamlined for the masses mmo. Because the 500 of those now isn't enough. This is what baffles me even more. And if you don't believe what I say in this paragraph just take a look at the few threads where someone 'hoped' Everquest Next would offer some level of challenging PvP in the EQ Next forums.

    Anyhow, just my two copper.

     

    - Zaxx

    I agree with a lot of what you posted...but I am one of those that doesn't care for PvP a whole lot in an MMORPG. I didn't say hate, just not that fond of it. Sure, I will PvP once in awhile, but really not very often.

    Probably why I don't play any current MMORPG's with heavy PvP, or play them very little come to think of it. Because PvP in today's MMORPG's consists of ganking, zerg groups that grossly outnumber yours, players who pay to win or straight up trash talking foul mouthed bafoons.

    There was a time when the PvE was challenging enough to keep me enthralled for hours a night for years on end. Pulling more than 2 mobs usually meant death. Now...I can rush into a group of 6 mobs or more and waste them in a few button pushes. It bores me to death.

  • Zaxx99Zaxx99 Somewhere IN, INPosts: 1,761Member


    Originally posted by Divona
    I don't find having heart beat fast and sweat from thrill is fun, to be honest. It's just too much after come back from work. I enjoy playing game just to relax, and PvP does not give me ability to do that.My satisfaction is from doing small things that added up to a bigger things. Collecting new costume for the character, housing items, exploring new areas, crafting items for people in need. At the end I find that I made someone else happy, instead of throw their headphone away, smashing their keyboard and start yell out at the screen like a mad sailor.


    And see that's just the thing Divona. I can get that! And respect that. See, in the old school Ultima Online, you could do that. You could take the safety of town and chat with tons of other players and collect materials and be a highly respected blacksmith or tailor that many players looked for to buy their gear. Those player did the PvP battles and took the risks of dangerous dungeons for loot and paid those blacksmiths well. And those blacksmiths and tailors and carpenters in town took great pride in being able to provide other more adventure-thrill seeking players their needed supplies and gear.

    There was a nice balance in old school UO. You didn't have to really risk much, but you did have to play smart and use your head. Even a smith or scroll maker could take pride in their work done and get rich with gold taking the safety of less risky professions.

    I dunno, maybe I'm just too old and don't appreciate all the automation and simplicity of these newer, more popular games.


    - Zaxx

    image

  • DivonaDivona WellingtonPosts: 175Member
    Originally posted by zaxtor99

     


    Originally posted by Divona
    I don't find having heart beat fast and sweat from thrill is fun, to be honest. It's just too much after come back from work. I enjoy playing game just to relax, and PvP does not give me ability to do that.

     

    My satisfaction is from doing small things that added up to a bigger things. Collecting new costume for the character, housing items, exploring new areas, crafting items for people in need. At the end I find that I made someone else happy, instead of throw their headphone away, smashing their keyboard and start yell out at the screen like a mad sailor.


     


    And see that's just the thing Divona. I can get that! And respect that. See, in the old school Ultima Online, you could do that. You could take the safety of town and chat with tons of other players and collect materials and be a highly respected blacksmith or tailor that many players looked for to buy their gear. Those player did the PvP battles and took the risks of dangerous dungeons for loot and paid those blacksmiths well. And those blacksmiths and tailors and carpenters in town took great pride in being able to provide other more adventure-thrill seeking players their needed supplies and gear.

    There was a nice balance in old school UO. You didn't have to really risk much, but you did have to play smart and use your head. Even a smith or scroll maker could take pride in their work done and get rich with gold taking the safety of less risky professions.

    I dunno, maybe I'm just too old and don't appreciate all the automation and simplicity of these newer, more popular games.


    - Zaxx

    That's what I very much like so. I find the only crafting and resource gathering game available now that up to the par is EVE Online, but I'm not into the fact that most of the time I see is spaceship. I was so excited with their walking in station thing, but now they put that on hold indefinitely. I can only hope EQ:Next would be more like fantasy version of EVE Online with real character to walk around.

    I'm fine with PvP, but I'm more of a support side toward PvPer to do their thing in combat, rather than me being in the front line.

  • galphargalphar Independence, KYPosts: 65Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Boneserino

    Well even just ignoring your blatant plug for EQ PvP, I see a lot of players these days that just seem so level focused anymore.  If a game has levels, they don't care what content is in the game, there only concern is "What is the fastest way to get to level X ???"   And generally if they aren't getting there fast enough, the game becomes "boring" and they are moving on to the next game.  I see it everywhere in so many players and it gets depressing.  

    People talk about todays players just eating content.  Problem is they consume it like fast food, scarfing it down without taking the time to enjoy it.   And they wonder why they feel unsatisfied after.

    With this kind of mentality in gamers today, its no wonder the type of difficult and challenging games that a minority of players want simply won't get made.   Unfortunately your money is no better than their's and there are much more of them.   And unfortunately the so called hardcores haven't stepped up to support their games either so here we sit in a stalemate with Devs and players.   The next couple years might change things a bit I feel tho.   We will have to see what Archage and EQ turn out to be like and how they are supported by the game community.  That will determine if we start seeing more difficult and challenging MMO's.

    This is why I liked Guild Wars so much and played it for 5+ years. With max level being 20 and most of the content being for level 20 you still had a lot to do after hitting the level cap. And if you got bored doing PvE content you could always just go do Random Arenas, Hall of Heroes, or Guild vs Guild battles in PvP.

    image

  • Zaxx99Zaxx99 Somewhere IN, INPosts: 1,761Member


    Originally posted by MMORPGRIP
    I agree with a lot of what you posted...but I am one of those that doesn't care for PvP a whole lot in an MMORPG. I didn't say hate, just not that fond of it. Sure, I will PvP once in awhile, but really not very often.Probably why I don't play any current MMORPG's with heavy PvP, or play them very little come to think of it. Because PvP in today's MMORPG's consists of ganking, zerg groups that grossly outnumber yours, players who pay to win or straight up trash talking foul mouthed bafoons.There was a time when the PvE was challenging enough to keep me enthralled for hours a night for years on end. Pulling more than 2 mobs usually meant death. Now...I can rush into a group of 6 mobs or more and waste them in a few button pushes. It bores me to death.

    I absolutely understand the ganking and zerging of asshat players as well. I think even though I had that happen all too often, it just inspired me more to play more and get better. It didn't discourage me at all, but rather the opposite. Maybe I wanted revenge. I think a part of me wanted to skill up and do my best to protect other innocent players from such gankers and punks, lol. But yes I can certainly understand that most players probably don't like getting constantly griefed and zerged.

    That's where good game design for a game can come in however. Maybe prevent any player who is damaged by X levels higher or who is outnumbered and hit by multiple gangs from dropping loot. In fact perhaps even have a small chance that would make gankers think before taking such easy prey. Perhaps the worlds gods might grant the griefed player a "Revenge Moment" where he is given god-like powers in such a situation where he could reflect the oncoming damage at him times three at his aggressors. Then HE would be looting them and laughing. A small chance, just big enough odds to at least make gankers think twice about risking their high level gear loss if such odds went against them.

    I dunno. Just a wild thought. But PvP doesnt HAVE to mean "griefers paradise". Just sayin'


    - Zaxx

    image

  • jpnzjpnz SydneyPosts: 3,529Member
    Let me get this straight. You want to get satisfaction from playing a VIDEO GAME?

    Gdemami -
    Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.

  • JhustynJhustyn Lufkin, TXPosts: 109Member

    I totally agree with the OP........but..there are players that prefer a pve only enviroment....with that said and known....If a company is going to release a AAA mmo.....why not just have a pvp server and a pve server?.....How freaking hard is that to do?...Wouldn't that solve most debates with just a simple manner of personal player choice?

  • maplestonemaplestone Ottawa, ONPosts: 3,099Member
    Originally posted by zaxtor99

    Have you EVER felt your heart race with excitement in a game without PvP?

    This may be the key point of difference between you and I.  I'm not looking for an adrenaline rush when I play games.  A little tension can be fun, but full-on body shakes?  No thank you, not wanted.

    An adversarial struggle against another player gives me no pleasure, only regret and frustration that we couldn't find a way to peacefully coexist.

  • DMKanoDMKano Gamercentral, AKPosts: 8,559Member Uncommon

    There are many (I'd say majority) of gamers who only play in very short bursts several times a week. They fire up a game and want instant fun for 20-30min.

    A lot of us veteran gamers are used to deep and MMORPGs that take 100s (1000s) of hours to achieve things - we are a minority.

    So nothing wrong with games that cater to a specific gamer. Many of my friends can't stand MMORPG, they dont want to spend any time to learn about class systems or skills, they get overwhelmed by hot bars, skill trees, and the idea that it takes 100s of hours to progress - they don't have the desire to devote that much time to a game.

    So for them there are 100s of actions games like CoD, PS2, Defiance - designed to be played in very small time increments.

    Nothing wrong with this - find a game that suits your needs.

    I personally play a game depending on my mood, if I want something quick - Defiance, if I am going to spend several hours - EQ1, Rift.

    open world PvP - AoC

    Etc.....

    There is so much choice, we are in the golden age of gaming.

     

  • QuizzicalQuizzical Posts: 14,784Member Uncommon

    Have you tried Uncharted Waters Online?  It might be what you're looking for.  Among other things, it features:

    -a well-designed AAA MMORPG from a developer with decades of experience and dozens of successful titles released (though most of its games aren't MMORPGs)

    -the ability to attack other players in non-consensual PVP and steal their stuff under a wide variety of circumstances, but with considerable consequences for the pirate, to the degree that only a handful of players are pirates at any given time

    -several dozen things to level independently and no monolithic character level, set up such that if you focus on grinding any particular thing, you're probably doing it wrong

    -lose an item at random when you die, and potentially something extremely important, so death is very consequential if you're carrying important things (which you often won't be)

    -battles between two given players will have wildly varying stakes and outcomes depending on a variety of factors, rather than the same player winning 99% of the time

  • BoneserinoBoneserino London, ONPosts: 1,623Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Jhustyn

    I totally agree with the OP........but..there are players that prefer a pve only enviroment....with that said and known....If a company is going to release a AAA mmo.....why not just have a pvp server and a pve server?.....How freaking hard is that to do?...Wouldn't that solve most debates with just a simple manner of personal player choice?

    Yea but isn't the problem with separate servers, the fact that the game has to be designed as both PvE and PvP?  And that generally results in PvP being the red headed step child.   Usually becasue Devs figure PvP will be the minority so lets spend the bulk of our design effort on the PvE side.  

    Not such a big deal to us carebears, but the PvP'ers do tend to get their panties in knots when a game is not optomized as a full out, balls to the wall gankfest!

    FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!

  • pfcgriffpfcgriff Fallon, NVPosts: 26Member

    You are quickly forgetting the type of PVP player changed drastically since the old days as well.

    I never played UO but it sounds a lot like SWG in concept. SWG I did play a lot. 

    A touch of background. The people who did PVP (it was Consensual with a 10 or 15 min timer to switch flags.)  There was quite a lot of us at least on my server. Would do server wide events, passing the word person to person that there would be a large battle and we would walk for 10 minutes, to more or less meet in the middle and duke it out. We enjoyed our PVP enough to suffer through that. Death meant a long walk back from the cloner and gear degradation, severe degradation if you had forgotten to store a clone on that planet. 

    We did our PVP, not so we could PAWN NOOBS we did our PVP for the fun of it, for that excitement you referred to. There was little epeen stroking because you were one of 200 people in that battle. There were no Honor points, or anything else to brag about or show off. There were no spoils of war from PVP that I can even recall other than not being dead and having to replace your gear. 

    Today's gamers don't play the game for the fun of it, they do it to level to max, get the cool gear, or brag about their KVD, honor rating or whatever their game has in its place. 

    The points system and tracking of stats killed good fun PVP just for the sake of PVP.

    This is why I like Planetside 2 so much. It tracks the KVD but it doesn't mean anything. The majority of the people with really high ones are Liberator(Bomber) Farmers and everyone knows they have very little impact on the actual battles. Other than more points to unlock abilities and weapons your level means nothing. There is no death penalty to speak of and the fights are silly fun because of it.  

    Pretty sure I rambled like an old man talking about the good old days, but I think i got the point across.

     

     

     

     

    image
  • AxehiltAxehilt San Francisco, CAPosts: 8,753Member Uncommon
    • Challenge is the amount of skill required to avoid failing an encounter.
    • Penalty is what happens if you fail.
    So the satisfaction comes from realizing that only the challenge portion matters.  Any penalty beyond a reset of the encounter is excessive and doesn't add to satisfaction at all -- it just adds to the pain of playing.
     
    Only the definition of challenge involves skill.  Penalty doesn't involve skill at all.
     
    Are you going to imply that hyper-difficult games like I Wanna Be The Guy are not satisfying to beat, just because death is an instant reset?  That's silly.
     
    The impressiveness (and therefore satisfaction) of an accomplishment in a game is determined by how hard it was, not how much you risked.

    "Joe stated his case logically and passionately, but his perceived effeminate voice only drew big gales of stupid laughter..." -Idiocracy
    "There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance." -Socrates

  • Zaxx99Zaxx99 Somewhere IN, INPosts: 1,761Member


    Originally posted by Axehilt
    The impressiveness (and therefore satisfaction) of an accomplishment in a game is determined by how hard it was, not how much you risked.

    While I can agree with some of what you say, this statement is absolutely silly itself.

    Reward should be completely based on the amount of RISK taken.

    No risk? No reward! ..And THAT is the problem I see with mmorpgs today. It's wayyy too much reward for absolutely no risk what-so-ever. That is why I called it "insta-win" in the title of my thread.

    IMO, you only get truly excited about gaining a potential reward when there is some level of risk involved. And that reward should be balanced VS the amount of risk taken.

    Let me explain...

    I want to take my melee warrior into a new unknown dungeon. I don't know what lies in there, but I have heard at the end of it is a nice reward, a vast chest of treasure and gold.

    If I die, my warrior will fall and leave everything on the corpse. Let's also say that the mobs here are smart enough to take valuable treasure off of my corpse and it will stay on them until they are slayed and looted by a player.

    So... as I search through my bank box, I realize I have 12,000 gold. I also only have a tattered leather armor set that isn't worth much money. My sword isn't the best. So if I go like this, I will take a bigger risk of getting killed, but my risk of loss isn't as high. I could however choose to use most of 12k gold to buy a very nice armor set and a much better magical sword. If I do this, I would likely have less risk of death, but I would obviously be risking almost everything in my bank box.

    This is the type of risk vs reward I speak of that is vacant in most of todays mmorpg games. This is the type of decisions that make that journey into that dungeon all the more 'edge of your seat'. Again, this is just my opinion - But hopefully you catch my drift and understand what I mean by RISK vs REWARD.


    - Zaxx

    image

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Posts: 5,316Member Uncommon

    1.  What game rewards you for failing a dungeon?  I've never seen one.  You get experience for beating the mobs you encounter, thats it.

    The only exception is a battleground which is not a dungeon.

    2.  Why on earth makes you think they are playing a game for a sense of self-satisfaction.

    That is certainly not why I play. 

    IMO any sense of self-satisfaction from a virtual world is false.  There is just enjoyment.

    edit - in regards to risk vs reward, sorry I agree with Axe.  The risk is not the issue, the reward is for beating the encounter.  The more difficult the encounter, the greater the reward.

    Quit worrying about other players in a game and just play.

  • XthosXthos Columbus, OHPosts: 2,628Member
    Originally posted by jpnz
    Let me get this straight. You want to get satisfaction from playing a VIDEO GAME?

    I would hope so, if it hurt when you played, you may have problems.

     

  • dontadowdontadow Detroit, MIPosts: 1,044Member Common

    I would prefer instead of concentrating on death penalities, which don't exist in any other genre, just make games harder with stronger consequences for losing (not just losing one fight).  I would love a game where every quest, dungeon had a lose condition.  

    In guild wars 1, the lose condition was immediate and effectvve you had to start every phase of the quest over.  I was free to do other quests but I had lose the time and items needed for the previous quest. That made it satisfying when i beat a quest. 

  • dontadowdontadow Detroit, MIPosts: 1,044Member Common
    Originally posted by zaxtor99

     


    Originally posted by Axehilt
    The impressiveness (and therefore satisfaction) of an accomplishment in a game is determined by how hard it was, not how much you risked.

     

    While I can agree with some of what you say, this statement is absolutely silly itself.

    Reward should be completely based on the amount of RISK taken.

    No risk? No reward! ..And THAT is the problem I see with mmorpgs today. It's wayyy too much reward for absolutely no risk what-so-ever. That is why I called it "insta-win" in the title of my thread.

    IMO, you only get truly excited about gaining a potential reward when there is some level of risk involved. And that reward should be balanced VS the amount of risk taken.

    Let me explain...

    I want to take my melee warrior into a new unknown dungeon. I don't know what lies in there, but I have heard at the end of it is a nice reward, a vast chest of treasure and gold.

    If I die, my warrior will fall and leave everything on the corpse. Let's also say that the mobs here are smart enough to take valuable treasure off of my corpse and it will stay on them until they are slayed and looted by a player.

    So... as I search through my bank box, I realize I have 12,000 gold. I also only have a tattered leather armor set that isn't worth much money. My sword isn't the best. So if I go like this, I will take a bigger risk of getting killed, but my risk of loss isn't as high. I could however choose to use most of 12k gold to buy a very nice armor set and a much better magical sword. If I do this, I would likely have less risk of death, but I would obviously be risking almost everything in my bank box.

    This is the type of risk vs reward I speak of that is vacant in most of todays mmorpg games. This is the type of decisions that make that journey into that dungeon all the more 'edge of your seat'. Again, this is just my opinion - But hopefully you catch my drift and understand what I mean by RISK vs REWARD.


    - Zaxx

    That type of risk doesn't exist in any game sans dark souls or the such. Even in tabletop dnd, you are allowed to roll up another character at the same or 1 level below and are given money equal to a character of that level. 

  • Zaxx99Zaxx99 Somewhere IN, INPosts: 1,761Member


    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    1.  What game rewards you for failing a dungeon?  I've never seen one.  You get experience for beating the mobs you encounter, thats it.

    Without risking anything, without any experience loss, without any loot loss, without any stats penalty, then that in itself is a reward for failing. And when I say no loss of anything I mean none or very little.

    People in real life generally don't do stupid things because there is a real risk involved. You don't go up an punch your boss when he makes you mad because you could get fired, get a lawsuit, etc (RISK). People don't walk into a bank demanding all their money (REWARD) because the RISK is too great for most people.

    In today's mmo games, in that bank scenario, the player is allowed to try and hold up the bank going for the reward with no risk. If he fails, he simply gets spawned back outside the bank and go go right back in and try again. And again. And again until he gets all the reward with minimal or no risk.

    I'm starting to think I could explain this with endless examples but some people just will never understand. :-/

    And don't even tell me games don't equal real life or a real bank robbery. Of course I know that. I'm merely making a point to try and make that light turn on.


    - Zaxx

    image

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Posts: 5,316Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by zaxtor99

     


    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    1.  What game rewards you for failing a dungeon?  I've never seen one.  You get experience for beating the mobs you encounter, thats it.


     

    Without risking anything, without any experience loss, without any loot loss, without any stats penalty, then that in itself is a reward for failing. And when I say no loss of anything I mean none or very little.

    People in real life generally don't do stupid things because there is a real risk involved. You don't go up an punch your boss when he makes you mad because you could get fired, get a lawsuit, etc (RISK). People don't walk into a bank demanding all their money (REWARD) because the RISK is too great for most people.

    In today's mmo games, in that bank scenario, the player is allowed to try and hold up the bank going for the reward with no risk. If he fails, he simply gets spawned back outside the bank and go go right back in and try again. And again. And again until he gets all the reward with minimal or no risk.

    I'm starting to think I could explain this with endless examples but some people just will never understand. :-/

    And don't even tell me games don't equal real life or a real bank robbery. Of course I know that. I'm merely making a point to try and make that light turn on.


    - Zaxx

     Totally disagree.  There is a difference, a significant difference between taking something away (risk), giving something (reward) and not doing anything.

    At the very least that person is losing time, which is pretty damn precious even in hobbies. 

    If that person fails at the bank they need to at the very least go and do some portion again, they did not gain anything and lost time.

    Quit worrying about other players in a game and just play.

  • AxehiltAxehilt San Francisco, CAPosts: 8,753Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by zaxtor99

    While I can agree with some of what you say, this statement is absolutely silly itself.

    Reward should be completely based on the amount of RISK taken.

    No risk? No reward! ..And THAT is the problem I see with mmorpgs today. It's wayyy too much reward for absolutely no risk what-so-ever. That is why I called it "insta-win" in the title of my thread.

    IMO, you only get truly excited about gaining a potential reward when there is some level of risk involved. And that reward should be balanced VS the amount of risk taken.

    Let me explain...

    I want to take my melee warrior into a new unknown dungeon. I don't know what lies in there, but I have heard at the end of it is a nice reward, a vast chest of treasure and gold.

    If I die, my warrior will fall and leave everything on the corpse. Let's also say that the mobs here are smart enough to take valuable treasure off of my corpse and it will stay on them until they are slayed and looted by a player.

    So... as I search through my bank box, I realize I have 12,000 gold. I also only have a tattered leather armor set that isn't worth much money. My sword isn't the best. So if I go like this, I will take a bigger risk of getting killed, but my risk of loss isn't as high. I could however choose to use most of 12k gold to buy a very nice armor set and a much better magical sword. If I do this, I would likely have less risk of death, but I would obviously be risking almost everything in my bank box.

    This is the type of risk vs reward I speak of that is vacant in most of todays mmorpg games. This is the type of decisions that make that journey into that dungeon all the more 'edge of your seat'. Again, this is just my opinion - But hopefully you catch my drift and understand what I mean by RISK vs REWARD.


    - Zaxx

    Part of the point of gaming is to provide an environment which is fundamentally free (or light) on risk, so you can master patterns which (in some cases) are relevant to real life.  And sure, one pattern some people find interesting is risk management (gambling.)  But it's flat out wrong to imply that's the only way games can be satisfying to players.

    Risk vs. reward is satisfying to some, but challenge vs. reward is satisfying to everyone (although the "sweet spot of challenge" for any given player can vary significantly.)  Risk management is simply one subset of types of challenges.

    "Insta-win" makes little sense, even as useless hyperbole goes.  The win isn't automatic -- you need to be skilled to beat a challenge.  The win isn't instant -- you need to be skilled for a duration (because rarely are challenges completed instantly; typically they involve repeated skill checks, like having to avoid standing in the fire multiple times in a fight, in order to ensure the player was being skilled to win, not just that they randomly stumbled upon victory.)

    It's tragic to hear that you only enjoy gambling-based games (because it deprives you of a ton of really fun gaming experiences.), but you probably understand that you're in the minority and that most players are more interested in the challenge than the suffering

    "Joe stated his case logically and passionately, but his perceived effeminate voice only drew big gales of stupid laughter..." -Idiocracy
    "There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance." -Socrates

  • Zaxx99Zaxx99 Somewhere IN, INPosts: 1,761Member


    Originally posted by dontadow
    That type of risk doesn't exist in any game sans dark souls or the such. Even in tabletop dnd, you are allowed to roll up another character at the same or 1 level below and are given money equal to a character of that level. 

    Oh but it do exist and existed so well back in the early years of Ultima Online (like before 2001) and on the Darktide server of Asheron's Call when it had a thriving population. And that's what made those games so much more engaging and fun that what we have today. That is my point. That's also why a game like Dark Souls that you mention stands out so well, besides the overall quality of the game as well.

    - Zaxx

    image

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Posts: 5,316Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by zaxtor99

     


    Originally posted by dontadow
    That type of risk doesn't exist in any game sans dark souls or the such. Even in tabletop dnd, you are allowed to roll up another character at the same or 1 level below and are given money equal to a character of that level. 

     

    Oh but it do exist and existed so well back in the early years of Ultima Online (like before 2001) and on the Darktide server of Asheron's Call when it had a thriving population. And that's what made those games so much more engaging and fun that what we have today. That is my point. That's also why a game like Dark Souls that you mention stands out so well, besides the overall quality of the game as well.

     

    - Zaxx

     While I have not played those games so can't comment on it.

    However in other games that had risk, IMO it was not the risk that made the game good but other elements.  Rather that game was good in spite of those risks. 

    edit - now that I think about it some of those other elements were likely me, I was different back then.

    Quit worrying about other players in a game and just play.

«1345
Sign In or Register to comment.