Howdy, Stranger!

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

Are "Good" and "Bad" Features an Absolute for You?

2»

Comments

  • deniterdeniter Member RarePosts: 1,220
    edited February 13
    deniter said:
    DMKano said:
    The sum is greater than the parts

    For me how the whole game comes together - far more important than individual features.

    I mean some games have all the dream features on paper - but the game itself sucks.

    So features in themselves are far less important than how everything fits and supports overall game design.


    Whilst the sum is definitely greater than the parts, there are features that are guaranteed to cause problems regardless of how the rest of the game is put together. 


    So, for example, if a game uses vertical progression then it is guaranteed to cause power gaps, segregating the community and making grouping harder. It's guaranteed to make 99% of the content obsolete. It's guaranteed to cause balance issues in PvP and make the PvP pretty unbearable for newbies, choking off the lifeblood of the PvP community. 


    That means that for me, as a group-focused, community minded player, vertical progression is a no-go because it is guaranteed to cause me a lot of problems in the long run. It causes me problems in my guild, because I can't group up with everyone. It causes me problems in my raids, because I can't take talented players because their gear isn't good enough. It causes me problems in the wider community, because I can't form pugs and can't recruit people. It causes me problems in PvP, because the newbies have a terrible experience and quit leaving me with a small population. It causes me problems in the game in general, because vertical progression drives players away from the game, reducing revenue and thus reducing development. 
    I see where you come from but there are some problems in your thinking.

    First of all, you assume you're the only player on the server making progress. There should be several thousand other people trying to push forward as much as you do. You only need a very small part of them for group content.

    You also seem to think that you play the game to group up with other people, while the more common way to think is that you group up to play the game. Grouping is the very reason i love this genre but it's only a tool to progress and achieve things in game, not the purpose of the game itself.

    What matters is how the game is designed, how wide are the power gaps and is there any replay value. Content doesn't become obsolete as long as there are new characters progressing through it (that's the reason i dislike those games where you can do everything on one character and don't need alts), and lack of vertical progression makes the game boring very soon.

    I see the perfect MMORPG as an upside down pyramid. In order to progress vertical you also have to do some horizontal progression as well, which grows wider for every step you climb higher. The players that have progressed higher than the rest of folks on your server have more stuff to do before they can step up to next level so the others have more time to catch you up.
    I get your points, but I'm not sure I agree with any of them. 

    In terms of finding groups, my point is that segregation is bad. We know this to be true in real life and we've seen this to be true in MMOs. The only thing that overcomes the negative forces of segregation in MMOs is when each segment is sufficiently large enough (which you allude to). But, that's just bad game design! You should never design a game and mechanics based on a minimum number of players online and in game!

    This is the very reason why MMORPGs are now almost entirely solo until you reach endgame. If you level up with "the pack", then your segment is large enough. But, if you join late then you're fucked. I can't be the only one to have tried leveling an alt 2 years after release, only to find I can never get groups whilst leveling? It happens in every MMO that uses vertical progression. It sucks. 



    On obsolete content....I'm not sure what you're getting at really. When I hit the level cap in an MMO, 99% of the content is obsolete. That's just the way it is. Everything below level cap is no longer worth running, both for rewards (too low), story (already done it), challenge/fun (it's too easy) or experience (I'm already at cap). I can start a new character and replay it, but for my main it is obsolete. Again, this sucks! Why would you design a game where 99% of your content becomes obsolete 5 minutes after experiencing it?! What a waste of time and effort!



    Finally, on horizontal progression becoming boring....that, to me, shows a lack of imagination. I may be wrong, personally I've never played an RPG that only uses horizontal progression so there is a chance that you are correct and that it is too boring. But, I find vertical progression really boring and can only see opportunities with horizontal. Camelot Unchained is going almost entirely horizontal and I can't wait! With vertical progression, seeing bigger numbers is "false" progression because nothing changes. I'm still playing the same way, fights still take the same time, difficulty stays the same....it's dull. The only time I ever feel a sense of progress is when I unlock a new skill, but most of that progression happens early in the leveling process. 

    With horizontal progression being focused on specialising and customising your character, the progression is much more meaningful and personal. The choices you make are more important and, assuming good design, you won't end up like everyone else. 



    There are definitely pit-falls to horizontal progression. If someone happens to find their perfect build / template / style early on in the progression process, keeping them motivated to progress further might be a challenge because they have no reason to progress. My hope would be that a horizontal game could place a much bigger focus on the content, because all content would be relevant (on level) at all times so the designers would have to be much more creative than simply adding bigger numbers. 
    I agree a lot with your concern about the problems in vertical progression and really hope someone finds solutions for them. As i said earlier on this thread it's not the features that are good or bad, it's the design and how the features work together. Both vertical and horizontal progressions are needed but they have to be in balance and tuned correctly. I haven't played a single game where this was done right.

    What i don't agree with is the segregation part. We have now lots of MMOs where people solo play up to max level and then play together the latest group content, usually raids and PvP. The way i see it, this ends up in situation where all the players are heroes and everyone are still nothing. If the progression is designed as i described - wide on the bottom, sharp on the top - there will be only a handful of characters that truly are heroes. That would also regulate the pace the content is consumed and the top players (nothing to do with being elitist) really had to work together to progress further. Not every player has to see everything. It so sad they moved away from this concept and adopted this 'everyone plays' style.

    EDIT: Just wanted to add that this motivates to help other players when you want them to level up to help your progression. No mentoring features or similar BS is needed.
    Post edited by deniter on
  • GorweGorwe Member RarePosts: 4,924
    Amathe said:
    When you make decisions about what games to play (or continue playing), are you guided by a list of personal red lines? For example, naked corpse runs. However you view them, good or bad, do you always love or hate them? Or are they a fit for some games you like but not others. Perhaps it depends on how the feature is implemented?
    I'm only guided by how much fun I have. As for positives / negatives, sure they are absolute. But they can always be fixed. You know?
  • cjmarshcjmarsh Member UncommonPosts: 299
    Gorwe said:
    Amathe said:
    When you make decisions about what games to play (or continue playing), are you guided by a list of personal red lines? For example, naked corpse runs. However you view them, good or bad, do you always love or hate them? Or are they a fit for some games you like but not others. Perhaps it depends on how the feature is implemented?
    I'm only guided by how much fun I have. As for positives / negatives, sure they are absolute. But they can always be fixed. You know?
    No. No, I don't know. In fact, my head hurts now.
    Gorwe
  • GorweGorwe Member RarePosts: 4,924
    cjmarsh said:
    Gorwe said:
    Amathe said:
    When you make decisions about what games to play (or continue playing), are you guided by a list of personal red lines? For example, naked corpse runs. However you view them, good or bad, do you always love or hate them? Or are they a fit for some games you like but not others. Perhaps it depends on how the feature is implemented?
    I'm only guided by how much fun I have. As for positives / negatives, sure they are absolute. But they can always be fixed. You know?
    No. No, I don't know. In fact, my head hurts now.
    Don't worry. It'll pass quickly. ;)
    cjmarsh
  • Flyte27Flyte27 Member RarePosts: 4,564
    I think what is being said is it's difficult to judge fun for a person by specific game mechanics or statistics.  It's a lot of time about those intangibles that are hard to place your finger on.  A game might have the same game mechanics, but if it doesn't have the same spirit or passion (so to speak) then it might feel hollow. 

    It can also be about the community in MMOs.  I enjoyed the way people acted and what they said in older MMOs.  That's not something that can be recaptured I think, but some people may enjoy the new community and how they act.
  • anemoanemo Member UncommonPosts: 1,380
    Sometimes bad features can be "good".   For instance Plantery Interaction Goods stay at a somewhat higher price because it's such a pain to setup.  Which means the people who actually need/want to leverage the system can do so at better rates.   The game is also a little bit richer for having PI in it, even with how forgotten/left-behind it is by the devs.

    Practice doesn't make perfect, practice makes permanent.

    "At one point technology meant making tech that could get to the moon, now it means making tech that could get you a taxi."

  • CryomatrixCryomatrix Member RarePosts: 1,648
    My red lines;

    1) wow clone and theme parkish.
    2) certain developers (ncsoft, nexon, etc)
    3) over sized weapons, school girl skimpy characters, pedo-ish chars, stupid furry animals as chars, anime or similar art styles.

    Green light:
    1) sandboxish
    2) real cash economy
    3) sharp graphics



    Doesnt bother me:
    Cash shop
    Permadeath (path of exile) 
    Having to pay for dlc (as long as it isnt bullshit)

    Cryomatrix
  • AlBQuirkyAlBQuirky Member UncommonPosts: 4,175
    DMKano said:
    The sum is greater than the parts

    For me how the whole game comes together - far more important than individual features.

    I mean some games have all the dream features on paper - but the game itself sucks.

    So features in themselves are far less important than how everything fits and supports overall game design.


    Same for me. I like the contrast between "good" and "bad" features. How they're implemented in the game is what makes the game "good" or "bad" for me. The only exception for me is cash shops. There is NO good implementation of them, in my opinion.

    I didn't mind naked corpse runs in EQ (as per the OP's example). It added to the experience for me, giving me an immediate challenge that was unexpected. Crafting in MMOs is pretty hit and miss for me, rarely satisfying. Housing is almost non-existent, like our characters don't need a home base.

    What many call "grind", the infamous "time sink", or "invisible walls" were mostly just poorly implemented features, in my opinion.

    - Al

    Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.
    - FARGIN_WAR

  • AlBQuirkyAlBQuirky Member UncommonPosts: 4,175
    I have never understood people who are adamant about a specific game feature. Pro or Con.
    The only absolute requirement I have is that the game be fun.
    But what makes a game "fun" for you? "Fun" is a useless word.

    - Al

    Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.
    - FARGIN_WAR

  • VrikaVrika Member EpicPosts: 4,860
    edited February 14
    AlBQuirky said:
    I have never understood people who are adamant about a specific game feature. Pro or Con.
    The only absolute requirement I have is that the game be fun.
    But what makes a game "fun" for you? "Fun" is a useless word.
    Fun is a really useful word.

    It's about admitting that you won't know whether a game is good or bad for you this easily. And that this kind of solution, while simple and easy, ultimately would lead you to misjudgements.



    This is not to say that judging by features couldn't work for anyone, but there are a lot of people who have realized it won't work for them.
    Post edited by Vrika on
     
  • cjmarshcjmarsh Member UncommonPosts: 299
    AlBQuirky said:
    I have never understood people who are adamant about a specific game feature. Pro or Con.
    The only absolute requirement I have is that the game be fun.
    But what makes a game "fun" for you? "Fun" is a useless word.
    "Fun" is at the core of game design and the first thing you design around. Mechanics need to be designed with it in mind and features have to be implemented to enhance it. If you don't make it the core of a design then you will end up showing your game to players with all the features and mechanics you've developed, and when they play, all they will say is "This is boring". They may not know why, but they will certainly stop playing shortly after.
  • AlBQuirkyAlBQuirky Member UncommonPosts: 4,175
    edited February 14
    Vrika said:
    AlBQuirky said:
    I have never understood people who are adamant about a specific game feature. Pro or Con.
    The only absolute requirement I have is that the game be fun.
    But what makes a game "fun" for you? "Fun" is a useless word.
    Fun is a really useful word.

    It's about admitting that you won't know whether a game is good or bad for you this easily. And that this kind of solution, while simple and easy, ultimately would lead you to misjudgements.



    This is not to say that judging by features couldn't work for anyone, but there are a lot of people who have realized it won't work for them.
    So if I say a game is "fun", does that mean anything to you? DO "we" define "fun" in the exact same way? The same with "simple and easy." Do we define them the same?

    Fun may be reading a good book, or hiking in the mountains. It all depends on the individual. So when you say, "fun", I have no clue what you mean. I know how *I* define fun, but not you. Thus, "fun" is a useless word, right alongside good/bad or best/worst.

    [edit]
    Is PvP "fun" for you? It's not for me.
    Is crafting "fun" for you? It is for me.
    Do you find RvRvR "more fun" than RvR?
    Do you find exploration "fun?"
    Post edited by AlBQuirky on

    - Al

    Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.
    - FARGIN_WAR

  • AmatheAmathe Member EpicPosts: 3,528
    Fun has a lot to do with where you place the focus for your analysis.

    Take golf for example.

    Is being outside in the sunshine with friends fun?

    Is the game of golf fun in general?

    Is this golf course fun?

    Is this hole fun?

    Is this golf outing fun today?

    Depending on how broad or specific the question, golf may be fun, not fun, or partly fun for the same person. It's a fairly slippery thing to try and measure. 
    AlBQuirky

    EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests

  • AlBQuirkyAlBQuirky Member UncommonPosts: 4,175
    edited February 14
    Amathe said:
    Fun has a lot to do with where you place the focus for your analysis.

    Take golf for example.

    Is being outside in the sunshine with friends fun?

    Is the game of golf fun in general?

    Is this golf course fun?

    Is this hole fun?

    Is this golf outing fun today?

    Depending on how broad or specific the question, golf may be fun, not fun, or partly fun for the same person. It's a fairly slippery thing to try and measure. 
    Exactly! Thus, the word "fun" is useless in describing anything. So saying "I only play games that are fun." is a cop-out and adds nothing to any discussion.
    Post edited by AlBQuirky on

    - Al

    Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.
    - FARGIN_WAR

  • CryomatrixCryomatrix Member RarePosts: 1,648
    Well  fun can be achieved through different methods.

    But it all leads down the same pathway.

    Fun = increased neurotransmitter release to reward center.

    Now whatever leads to that leads to the person describing the experience as fun.

    Cryomatrix 
    AlBQuirky
  • AlBQuirkyAlBQuirky Member UncommonPosts: 4,175
    edited February 14
    Well  fun can be achieved through different methods.

    But it all leads down the same pathway.

    Fun = increased neurotransmitter release to reward center.

    Now whatever leads to that leads to the person describing the experience as fun.

    Cryomatrix 
    Exactly. Yet "fun" says nothing without context, right? What is it that gets those neurotransmitters firing? Different for each person, right?

    [edit]
    What I'm getting at is the OP was curious about what each person thinks is "good" and/or "bad" features in MMOs. Many said how they're implemented, but also gave some examples to give context. @Vrika did not, just saying only "fun" mattered. I was just trying to get them to elaborate on that.
    Post edited by AlBQuirky on

    - Al

    Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.
    - FARGIN_WAR

  • WizardryWizardry Member EpicPosts: 14,310
    Depends on what the good or bad affects in the game.Example if i can't sit down with my character,i really don't care.Sure any added feature might be nice but some are never going to be game breaking.

    However a feature that some consider good that i detest can and will break it for me.I really don't like somersaults in these games,i don't like if every character can fly.Then we have flying mounts,EVERY single last player will want one,so if we are utilizing cash shops,that is a very lame target to gouge money as well ruins the integrity of map design if people can just fly over everything.

    "Instances" often talked about,i much rather have zone lines than instances.One of the reasons is simple,devs usually use instances to create terrible game content,example to stick some Boss at the end of a tunnel to attain some loot.Sorry but i want a rpg experience not a MHW or loot grinder.
    So yeah depending on what area of game design is targeted,it can make it or break it.Lack of in character design and combat design is A BIGGY,i care for a lot more than simply seeing over sized weapons and over sized giant creatures.Game design has to have balance,too much or too little of a thing and the game goes from good to bad.
    AlBQuirky

    Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.

  • WizardryWizardry Member EpicPosts: 14,310
    "Hand holding" features,a HUGE bust for me,treated like a dumb 5 year old kid ,no thanks,i am not playing connect the dots gaming,i prefer to be dropped into a world and play MY GAME.
    AlBQuirky

    Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.

  • VrikaVrika Member EpicPosts: 4,860
    edited February 14
    AlBQuirky said:
    [edit]
    Is PvP "fun" for you? It's not for me.
    Is crafting "fun" for you? It is for me.
    Do you find RvRvR "more fun" than RvR?
    Do you find exploration "fun?"
    I don't know. That would depend on whether I find them fun.

    I guess that would mostly depend on quality and polish of that feature and the overall game, and how well that feature fits within the game. If it's a multiplayer game, then the friends I'm playing with and overall community also matter a lot.

    Fun isn't about feature set of the game, at least not for me.
    Post edited by Vrika on
     
  • cameltosiscameltosis Member EpicPosts: 2,122
    Vrika said:
    AlBQuirky said:
    [edit]
    Is PvP "fun" for you? It's not for me.
    Is crafting "fun" for you? It is for me.
    Do you find RvRvR "more fun" than RvR?
    Do you find exploration "fun?"
    I don't know. That would depend on whether I find them fun.

    I guess that would mostly depend on quality and polish of that feature and the overall game, and how well that feature fits within the game. If it's a multiplayer game, then the friends I'm playing with and overall community also matter a lot.

    Fun isn't about feature set of the game, at least not for me.
    The question and purpose of the thread is to find out if there are any features that form an absolute line in the sand for you. You may be quite open minded and therefore have no absolute lines in the sand, but I expect everyone has a line in the sand. 


    The more easy going you are, the more specific those lines in the sand will become and this thread is about discussing what they are. 


    So, those people in this thread saying "features don't matter, it's all about the fun", well, that's a lie. For example, if a game included a feature that allowed you to rape a child (extreme example), I would hope that the inclusion of that feature would mean you'd never play that game. So, in the more general context, is there a feature you've encountered in the past that would prevent you from playing an MMO in the future? Is there anything so bad that it guarantees you won't be able to enjoy the game?



    AlBQuirky
  • Octagon7711Octagon7711 Member EpicPosts: 7,207
    It's difficult to say.  There may be three things that a game does really well and three things the same game is horrible at doing.  I play for the fun in the three things and curse as well as threaten to quit the game forever when having to do the three badly done things.  Each game is different in that way so the number of things changes.
    “And once the storm is over, you won’t remember how you made it through, how you managed to survive. You won’t even be sure, whether the storm is really over. But one thing is certain. When you come out of the storm, you won’t be the same person who walked in. That’s what this storm’s all about.”  ― Haruki Murakami
Sign In or Register to comment.